By Any Means Necessary?

[SkidMarkJohnson]

I make no bones about it, I have no shame when it comes to the finished product on a recording. Do I cut and paste? Yes. Do I micro edit, adding or deleting or processing individual notes? Yes. Do I sometimes use virtual software amps? Yes. Do I keep files of previously recorded solos and use them on other songs? Yes. Will I then pitch shift sections or the entire solo if it's in the wrong key? Yes again. Will I loop a 10 second section for 15 minutes just to make sure I have a good take? Yes, Yes a thousand times YES!

Does anybody else here work this way or am I just a mutant? 8^P

[Paul Marossy]

I'm old school. I sit down at my multi-track and start recording, no cutting and pasting for me! I just play it until I get a good take, which is usually by the third time. One reason for that is that I really don't know how to do any of that cut and paste stuff. But I'm not on ProTools or anything like that, either...

[Laughinglarry]

Technology has progressed to the point that someone that can't sing a note will sound like a million bucks. There's no reason that a guitarist shouldn't employ whatever technology is at their disposal. That being said, while I applaud your dedication to perfection, I don't do any editing whatsoever. I use Roland VS-880 hard disk recorders, and they certainly can do cut/ copy and paste, but I haven't attempted to utilize those abilities.

I genuinely enjoy the challenge of crafting guitar parts that will serve as my "legacy". I'm not much of a guitarist, but every solo that I've committed to a recording has been all me, in the moment. (I actually would have more use for copy and paste in my rhythm parts; it sucks to go take after take trying to nail and maintain a vibe, just because of a single screw-up somewhere.)

Someday I'm likely to adopt a ProTools rig as part of my home-studio space. I wouldn't be surprised if I didn't start employing some editing techniques given a more intuitive interface. But in the meantime, I'll just consider you a mutant...

;^)

[Paul Marossy]

"it sucks to go take after take trying to nail and maintain a vibe, just because of a single screw-up somewhere."

Yeah, I feel the same way. Sometimes I'll just leave the boo boo in the tune because I doubt that I can recapture the moment and the vibe I had going. I think it makes for more honest music, too.

[SkidMarkJohnson]

I knew it! I am a mutant! But that's OK I grew up liking the X-Men and they're all mutants too. The reason I started playing guitar, I started late at 21, was that I wanted to hear music that I wasn't hearing anywhere else. I'd hear a song and think "Yeah I like this little part of the song, but I don't like that part of the song." I figured that the only way I could hear a song where I liked all the parts in it was to make music I liked myself. That way I would be able to do music where I liked ALL the parts and entire songs would be wonderful from beginning to end. Boy was I naive!

Without writing a book about it when I was in college I was a Photography Major. What was my specialty? Photo-retouching! Do I see a theme here? With music or art it was never about reality. That's why I play electric music, to create the illusions. It's more entertaining to see a thousand still images flip past your eye and call it a movie than to see a single image and imagine there's motion.

In passing, don't believe the hype on Pro Tools. I've used it and not used it and nobody can tell what recording software or recording techniques you used if the finished song is great.

[Paul Marossy]

I don't think you're a mutant, I think me and Larry are just old school musicians doing things the traditional way. Technology has birthed some cool innovations, but I think people rely on that too much these days, over being able to actually go into a "studio" and lay something down without doing cutting and pasting to make a "perfect" recording. How do you recreate perfect in the real world anyway?

[YL West]

I think that recording and performing are 2 separate artforms. In a recording (unless otherwise suggested or implied) the idea is to create as perfect a musical vision as possible. Thats why all of those tools have been created. Do you think "Dark Side of the Moon" was a first take? I use editing tools to throw "polish" on my recordings... I've cut and pasted a head or progression simply because one pass was better than another... I've altered note pitches... Again, a recording, released CD, or produced work is created in a realm where I think we should take advantage of the tools at our disposal.

Now live or improv material is another story. A recording of this material should be stated as such and is expected to be a picture if instantaneous creation OR replication of a tune. Again, Pink Floyd toured with a dozen extra musicians to recreate the sonic depth of their music.

Certainly PF shouldn't be considered an omprovising band, but they contain many elements key to both a great recording and great live performance, plus are recognizable and accepted by many musicians...

I'll keep talking if you want to keep listening....

YL

[Paul Marossy]

You make some good points, YL West. I'm sure that most of the popular songs that we all know were rarely a first take in the studio. But I still feel that the tools available today can be a big crutch for musicians and/or it lowers the standard of musicianship, generally speaking.

"Oh that's OK, you screwed up. We'll just paste in part of this solo into that solo and fix it". So what happens when you have to play this solo live, and people are expecting to hear what they hear on the CD, and you couldn't even get it right in the studio? If you don't possess the talent/ability in the studio, you certainly won't have it when you're playing live in front of a group of people. I'm just thinking about this in the context of popular music out there. I don't think the level of musicianship these days is what is used to because people can now be lazy because of all of these "tools".

[Laughinglarry]

I think you need to rethink your definition of "musician" Paul. There's quite a bit of music being made without ANYONE actually playing a note. Believe me, there is a different set of skills and talents needed even just to cut and paste something together so that it's cohesive, and hopefully musical. (By the same token, there's been a lot of "music" made by real musicians that's pretty much crap - wouldn't you agree?)

YL is right, DSOTM was most definitely not a single take. By the same token, Alan Parsons didn't have today's editing capabilities when that record was made.

I took Electronic Music classes at FSU in '83, and I learned to splice tape and edit together "musical" passages. I also got to learn synthesis on a modular Moog from the '60's! Knowing how, when, where and why to use the tools at our disposal increases the ability of a "musician" to convey their message.

I can see someone who's spent years practicing their craft (ala Eric Johnson) dissing a "virtuoso" perrformance from a guy that can barely play. By the same token, Eric Johnson obsesses over tone and accuracy, and yet I can assure you that HE uses these editing capabilities.

And (even though I know this is an EXTREME example) what about Jason Becker's current music? He was once a brilliant, virtuosic guitarist who was physically disabled. Now he can only move his eyes, yet because of the current technology he's writing and MAKING music again. Go ahead, call him a cheater.

I'm a libertarian, I say "Do whatever makes you happy, so long as you're not hurting someone else (unless that makes them happy!)".

[YL West]

I certainly agree, Paul, that it doesn't take a talented musician to make "music" these days. Its actually quite sad. I guess I'm fore-going those who are just creating music with being musical or playing an istrument or knowing what harmony or melody are...

Its shaky ground...

I'm not sure we can define what is ir isn't "real" music created by a "musician".

I actually started off being a DJ (all that scratching and mixing and stuff) and found some good creativity in the upper eschelon of "turntablists". If you don't believe me check out DJ QBert. At the same time, mixing and making beats on a sampler wasn't cutting it for me so I bought a bass....things kinda snowballed from there...

A little off track...If you are playing an instrument and editing it in a way that you can't reproduce, then you are asking for trouble in a live setting. But if your intention is just to give somebody something to listen to then it shouldn;t be faulted.

With the editing I do, I just consider it polish. I probably can't play quite that cleanly or even make it through a song without a mistake live, but I wouldn't put a key element of the song on a recording that didn't come from my hands to my instrument. Or edit a solo in such a way that there would be no way for me to come close to it onstage. For my music, its jazz...so I don;t ever expect myself to play anything but the heads the same way. As for the chorus, comping and soloing, I want to try something new if I'm playing live or with friends.

I think it comes down to the type of music and the audiences expectations (if any). In Jazz if you played the same exact solo as on the CD, I would be disappointed...I already own that CD and can hear it any time. In Rock the audience wants something familiar. Things are generally close to the recording, but you're expected to be drunk so a few clams are just fine. In classical, if you didn't play exactly what the composer wrote on the page somebody is probably pissed and talking about it right now. Hip-Hop, R&B, Pop- these genres seem to want carbon copies of the original performance with slight ly more "hype" or something like that. A lot of times for those genres its more the "show" in a live performance.

What were we talking about again?

Tools=OK (as long as its accepted in the genre)
Editing= Recording tool
OverProducing= pop music
Pop Music= money

Not so logical captain....

[Paul Marossy]

Yeah, I guess the term "musician" means something different today than it did 20-30 years ago. I'm not trying to invalidate anyone or anything like that. I guess I don't agree with the philosophy behind this new era of recording.

For me, I'm the same whether in "the studio" or playing "live" in terms of working thru a piece of music from beginning to end. I am actually more comfortable being in front of just my digital multi-track and I usually play worse than I normally do in front of an audience. I don't like performance very much at all. But it also depends on the context, and if I am playing someone else's music or my own.

[SkidMarkJohnson]

Maybe we're comparing apples to donuts here. Personally I don't think recording techniques have fundamentally changed since the advent of multi-track recording when it became possible for musicians to record parts individually.

For the clarity I'll confine this to improvised music. To me improvising is about spontaneous expression and exploration. I don't know exactly what route I'll take from point A to point B. It's very difficult to achieve any kind of degree of spontaneity on a recorded piece of music where I am the composer, arranger, guitarist, bassist, keyboardist and sound engineer. If I had a crack team of musicians and a sound engineer that I trusted and all I had to do was play the guitar things would be different. But considering that my current recording space is shared with a '79 Toyota, that's not going to happen. The kind of looseness that I strive for can only be achieved artificially. It's a recording not a performance. I'm creating a musical work not capturing a moment in time. Most of my music will never be played with a group in real time.

With that being said Improv 3:16 was a spontaneous improvisation between me and a piano player. That captures a moment in time that will never be repeated either. I love performing live much more than recording but just don't have the opportunity very often.

[YL West]

This is like an actually discussion with multiple viewpoints and participants. Is this where we do that?

It all comes down to your needs and your defition of your art for you. I applaud Paul in his effort to give the truest sense of performance in recording. I applaud SkidMark for taking all of the pieces floating in space and putting them into his own 3 dimensional puzzle. I even applaud Larry who can't seem to get it through his head that he's a great guitarist whether he cuts and pastes or not.

Back to the DJing days. This guy won the DiscoMixChampionship when he did a hand stand on his turntable and spun around at 33 1/3 rpms....Qbert (who then came in 2nd) said very matter of factly "but its music....how does that sound to a blind man?"

The point being, unless its overly blatent, we could all record in our particular fashions and I doubt the first, second or third thing going through anyone's head will be "was that a cut and paste edit". ITS MUSIC. If you enjoy making it its wonderful. If someone else enjoys it or, better yet, gets a particular emotion or feeling from it, EVEN BETTER.

How ever you all do it, just keep on doing it.