Recording Studio versus Live Shows - Nov 14, 2008
Experts crack me up. Really, they do. Each one is absolutely convinced that he (or she) is right, and everyone who disagrees is deluded. For instance, within the last week I have seen two “experts” from the music industry expounding on the best way to get your promo pack opened by whoever you’re sending to, i.e. record companies, booking agencies, etc. One was a video, the other an article on a web site. Expert Number One says you need to use “props” to drive home your uniqueness: put a tiny toy race car in the package with a card that says “Race to the top of the charts with our band!” Expert Number Two says never use gimmicks like that; serious music industry people aren’t fooled by this type of stuff, they just want the facts.
And on & on it goes: Expert Number One says “Put your whole life on the web! Video tape & blog about everything! It’s Web Two Point Oh!” Expert Number Two says “Don’t put everything you do on the web! Maintain an air of mystery. Use Web Two Point Oh to interact with your fans just enough to get them hooked.” Expert Number One: “Look & act totally outrageous! Be so unique that everyone notices you!” Expert Number Two: “Look and talk like your fans! Show them that you are just like them!”
I see this conflicting information & I want to shout “JUST SHUT UP!!!” These so-called experts are just offering up their opinions, and like everyone else, they can find rationalizations & justifications that they think “proves” they are right. And it’s not just music industry types, I’m using those as examples because they tie in to what I really wanted to talk about, and I promise - I will get to that in just a minute. Anyway, experts in politics, the economy, religion, sports, computers, car maintenance, parenting, sex and more all offer conflicting advice. And they all crack me up because of the conviction they have that their theory is right and everyone else is misguided or maybe even stupid. Don’t get me wrong, I think we are all entitled to an opinion, and that we should have strength in our convictions. I just want to see more of these “experts” admit that their advice may not work for everyone; that there are other approaches that have yielded good results. You know: YMMV, right? (For the utterly out-of-the-loop, that means Your Mileage May Vary.)
What set this whole rant in motion was one of the music industry “experts” (of course) who cautioned his readers about working in the recording studio. He said don’t record anything that you can’t reproduce when you play live. He said don’t get carried away with over-dubbing, adding special audio effects, adding strange instrumentation, and other studio “magic.” He very bluntly said it’s bad, period. “Just don’t do it,” was his final word. And why did this get me so fumed? Because he did not qualify his statements at all. To say that no one should ever do that in the studio is to limit artistic creativity. If no one ever recorded things they could not duplicate fairly accurately live we would not have had amazing albums from artists like the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, the Moody Blues, Queen and others. (Yeah, yeah, I know these are all artists from the old days, that’s only the tip of the iceberg, you know better examples of current artists, that’s just all I can come up with right this second!)
Now, if the “expert” would have offered something like this, I might not have been so ticked: “If you are recording a demo designed to get you live shows, don’t record anything you can’t duplicate during a performance.” Or this: “When you record a CD try to make most of the songs easy to duplicate live and limit the number of the ‘artsy’ tracks.” Do you see the difference? To me, these examples just make more sense; they qualify the advice. Of course, that’s just my opinion.
So that’s what set me on this path to what I actually wanted to talk about today: my approach to making recordings. Once upon a time, I too, felt that the studio was simply a place you went to create an audio record of what your band sounded like when you were at a gig. I essentially looked down on bands that released records that did not sound remotely like their live shows. But over time change crept in, probably due to the amount of time I was actually getting to spend in recording studios. Eventually I came to regard the recording studio as an art form in itself. Think of it this way: painting and sculpting are two different art forms, but sometimes the subject can be the same, and work well in both mediums. Let’s say Abe Lincoln is the subject; you could recognize him just as well in a painting as in a sculpture. Obviously, you would be able to tell which is a painting & which is a sculpture, but you would also know that the subject is the same: Abe Lincoln. Some songs are like that, they transcend the medium. But some work really well in one form, but not the other. A drawing or painting by M. C. Escher probably could not be made
into a sculpture, for instance. (Although people have tried! But the results only resemble the original Escher from one very narrow perspective, and just don’t capture the magic of the original, in my opinion!)
So now I approach the studio differently. I record some songs pretty much the way you’ll hear them at my concerts, and others are treated as creations meant only for your enjoyment at home, or in your car, or on headphones at the gym, whatever. Some of my songs may never be heard during a concert, some others you might hear an arrangement that’s aimed at optimizing the concert experience, therefore noticeably different than the CD version. And still others will sound just like the recorded form. This is very much like the philosophy that Jimi Hendrix had about concerts & studio recordings.
Like many guitarists, Jimi had a huge influence on me. For me, it was more of a mind-set influence than technique or sound. So many guitarists are after the exact sound of Jimi, or they try to mimic his playing, but as great as all that was, that’s not what I think he would have wanted. I feel that Jimi wanted us to break out of conventional thinking, to experiment with sounds & arrangements, to express our deepest feelings through our music without confining ourselves to preconceived ideas of what music is. (And, yes, I have snagged some playing technique from Jimi, as well.) So if perhaps the most influential guitarist of our time can treat songs differently in the studio and in concert, I guess I will take a shot at it, too. To use the earlier simile, Jimi could “paint” and “sculpt” with equal skill, and I hope to hone my talents in both mediums as well.
Now, all this is not to say that artists should use studio trickery to compensate for the inability to play your instrument. I have strong opinions about that, which I will save for the next installment. Right now, I have to get back into the studio & work on a song. Thanks so much for taking the time to read this fairly long blog!
Clark
