R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: artists vs. engineers  (Read 1001 times)

mogwailoveyou

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 147
artists vs. engineers
« on: September 15, 2004, 05:50:09 pm »

I was reading j's post on technique and it got me thinking about a similar subject. How much of an album is the engineer/producer/sound team's making versus the artist's. It's amazing how much of a difference it can make with some artists (elliott smith for example) and how little it can effect others (centro-matic sounds like centro-matic on their personal 4track songs and their well produced songs.) Just curious on what you think and also wondering about some bands that you think are defined moreso by their recording style than their content.
Logged
mogwai love you and need you

NelsonL

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1233
Re: artists vs. engineers
« Reply #1 on: September 15, 2004, 06:23:20 pm »

I know I have a tendency to give too much credit to the recordist.  Good bands have vision, and shape there records not only through performance but by who they decide to work with, and how they approach recording.

Some folks have a more transparent impact on the bands they work with, other folks tend to have a certain sonic imprint that they leave on things.

If the artist makes this decision intelligently (or even not) then they've done far more to influence the direction of the record than is accomplished by picking out pres and mics-- and I think those are important choices too.

Granted, a lot of musicians don't know anything about recording. But some of the good ones can hear what's going on regardless of their lack of technical knowledge. Isn't that part of what DIY is all about?  
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up