A New Recording & Mastering Studio in Baltimore
In General
All-Wave Recording
Producer, musician and analog fundamentalist Steve Albini (Big Black, Rapeman, Shellac) and Kim Deal (The Pixies, The Breeders) have been busy constructing an all-analog concept of recording music: The All-Wave Recording Movement.
Their creed is loosely stated as “everything should be an analog sound recording of someone playing or singing, rather than using a computer to generate or digitally manipulate sounds separated from the dimension of time in which they were performed.” Basically, to record All Wave one must use no computers, no MIDI, no samplers, no digital recording, no auto-tuning, or any other mainstays of contemporary production.
The 2008 Breeders album Mountain Battles was recorded using the All-Wave philosophy, and Deal designed a logo (above) to be voluntarily used (like the Parental Advisory stickers of the ’80s) if one chooses to record their record in this way. (I assume she used an X-Acto knife and tape to create the logo.) The goal, Steve Albini writes, is to create a movement that is “at least as significant as the Ska revival, or perhaps the WNBA.”
Wow.
I believe analog recording is a great tool. It’s tried and true. There are many tools I utilize in the analog world. When it suits the project. The hole in the nostalgic all-analog concept is that it only applies to the rock genre, which is what Albini typically records. Steve is not only talking about eliminating digital recording techniques but composition and instrumentation tools as well, which have long been a part of other genres outside of rock. It’s elitist and narrow-minded to imply that music can’t be created with a computer.
The second issue here is that there are those who follow Albini like he is an engineer-god and will take this to mean that all other methods of recording are inferior and the only correct way to record is with an all-analog method. Yet this is far from the truth. There are many possibilities and permutations when it comes to choosing equipment and techniques.
When analog tape first appeared on the commercial market after WWII, people scoffed at it, saying that direct-to-vinyl was the only real way to record. And the same thing happened in the ’80s when digital recording first came to the forefront. History repeats itself. Luckily most formats and technologies only improve with time. Vinyl is still a wonderful and viable format. It is not the only format.
So my question to Albini and Deal would be this: Is technology that is 70 years old really a factor in making a record sound good? It’s one thing to be a purist (ahem: obsessive-compulsive) in your methodology, but to believe that the methodology above all else is a factor in creating a superior sound is another. I just haven’t found this to be the case.
Otherwise, why stop at tape? Let’s make all future music using dijeridoos and wax cylinders. I mean, really, tape is far too clean sounding. I need the grainy artifacts of carved wax to forge true music.
Seriously though, like analog tape recording, other methods of recording seem to sneak their way back in to the main stream. For a while 12bit samplers were all producers had. 16bit came and now we’re well past 24bit. But there are many producers who now strive to have that crunchy 12bit drum sound. Which leads me to believe that at some point in time, Alesis ADAT’s will be sought after for their distinct 16bit sound. It’s all about finding the sound that works for a particular project at a particular time. Analog fundamentalism is just an exercise in intellectual masturbation.
That said, Albini and Deal have constructed an interesting concept for capturing music. All analog. Go for it! Maybe for your next record you should try it. Break out that old 4-track or the Tascam 388 8-track. But let’s not stop there. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid. Recording in analog isn’t the only way to record and I hope home recordists get this and pass it on. After all, the digital revolution has only made music production and recording more accessible for more people, just like the 4-track did in the ’70s and ’80s.
Just keep hitting record, with what ever you have, no matter what good ol’ grumpy Albini has to say.
August 18th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
I’m down w/ Albini & Deal’s aesthethic, but I agree with you: there’s a time, place, context, etc. for everything.
Like Marshall McLuhan says, “The Medium is the Message.” But I don’t only want one message.
So, with the realization that this is effectively a fringe movement that may produce some interesting stuff, have at it. Part of the joy of artificial limitations is that they get you to think outside the box. If something good and new comes out of it, awesome.
In the meantime, my Line 6 Pod going through Cakewalk is the only recording rig I’ve got.
And hey, TMBG did some awesome wax cylinder recordings at the Edison Museum about 8 years back! Super analog lives on!
August 19th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Heh, so capturing sound by moving around particles on magnetic tape isn’t an example of “sounds separated from the dimension of time in which they were performed.”
Or is it just the digital manipulation part that’s important? Vs. electronic manipulation? Or maybe he’s just using his fingers on the flanges and setting up delay loops and such?
I do love the sound of analog, but shit, if we rebuffed every new technology that popped up and facilitated creative endeavors, we’d still be painting cave walls with ferrous mud and banging sticks on logs.
August 20th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
have two major problems with steve albini:
1. his profession to not be a producer and to only “capture” the artist’s performance. that’s an admirable goal. however, i personally feel he has one of the most obvious sonic footprints of all time. i can usually spot an albini production by the time the song hits the first chorus.
now, personally, my goal as a “producer” is to help the band acheive the recording they envision in their head. sometimes that means polishing things more than i’d like, and while i recognize some of my sonic footprints, i’d like to think no two projects i do sound similar. can’t say that about albini.
2. the idea that analog is the only way to record is ridiculous. you can use any number of digital recording formats to capture a project. the point of recording, or so i thought, is to capture a performance. who cares what you use to capture it? granted, analog has its qualities, and it is very pleasing. however, it definitely has its limitations (noise floor, tape wear, etc)- and so does digital, obviously- but to me the big thing is affordability. i can have a band buy two hard drives for a total of $250, and we have our master and a back-up. can’t do that with analog. and i can work on editing or quick overdubs at home on my computer, instead of needing a tape machine.
do people overuse pro tools and make things sound fake, yes? do they have to? no. i’ve made plenty of perfectly “natural” recordings on pro tools where i didn’t tune vocals or chop drums. it’s very do-able, especially with sampling rates being what they are. albini’s gripes really should be directed at people who he feels “abuse” pro tools, not the software itself.
so basically, i agree with your take on it.
oh, and i have a third beef with albini:
3. he’s awfully self-righteous.
August 23rd, 2008 at 8:22 pm
I’ve heard of this “analog” recording technique. It sounds like you’re holding on to a mystic old religion that has no place in our digital world. Pro Tools is the future my friend. Digidesign for LIFE.
Just kidding, I’m all about the 2″ tape machine. Everyone knows calibrating tape machines with tones is one of the most beautiful and organic things a audio engineer can do.