@@rhettsycoplando4064 And they don't sound the same, and if you think so, you haven't spent much time in either. It's not a "better" sound to many, but it's certainly a different one.

Glad I'm not the only one who thought of that! Goddamn those half-Japanese girls, you know?

I noticed that as well

I remember that. Big black was also what made me really appreciate Steve Albini. For me, i feel sonically drawn to Alan Parsons and Tom Dowd with some Flemming Rasmussen and Steve thrown in, as different as they are. Spritually I'm Steve Albini all the fucking way.

roland is the man

looks like old skins

You can also use tea towels.

It's a Hameg HM203 Oscilloscope.

Looks like a Studer A800 to me.

Perry M. Anderson holy fuck , thank you

do it

Here’s hoping you have the money

Just a 12 bar blues riff I use for sound check.

@Soul Slip That's a little scary.

This is bogus and you don’t know what you’re talking about. Have you ever actually heard properly gain-staged recordings to tape? As in not saturated. That’s the kind of recording albini does. Albini’s recording style would sound like albinis recording even if he were using digital gear. Because it’s not about the gear but the mic placement and skill in faithfully reproducing the sound in the room. Albini doesn’t even use much gear to treat channels and the gear he does use, he uses because it is transparent and doesn’t color the sound. If you knew more about him, you’d know that one of the biggest impacts on his sound is the fact that he uses digital delays to phase-align microphones to a millisecond level. In doing this, that channel’s entire signal is converted to digital (to be delayed by a few milliseconds), then back to analog, and then captured to tape. There are no ways to delay a signal that precisely (with high fidelity) in the analog domain. He has no problem with that conversion to digital (and back again) because he doesn’t feel digital is any kind of compromise. I promise you, you’d hear that channel and go on and on about how it has the “analog magic”-because your ears are not competent like his; that signal WAS actually *entirely* converted to digital when it was delayed. His recordings are full of channels like that. You think it’s the magic of “analog gear” giving that sound, but actually it’s just his skill and knowledge being applied to a surgical set of tools, some of which ARE digital. He phase-aligns microphones because he wants the recording to sound like what a listener hears sitting and listening to a band. Sound takes time to travel. A listener sitting in the audience hears the music a few milliseconds after it’s actually produced from the source. His main technique is to align all the phases of the microphones such that the close-mics are coherent with the distance mics that capture ambience. In this way, a faithful reproduction of the listener’s perspective is captured in a domain that can be played back. He doesn’t use digital to RECORD because he feels it is not an archival-grade medium. Tape, he says, is future-proof. The same cannot be said for software formats. That’s literally it. He wants to make recordings of sessions that can be brought back a hundred years from now, because he feels it is the engineer’s obligation to capture the artist’s music in a “permanent” sense. Data can be overwritten, corrupted, rendered unreadable or obsolete by simple technological changes; there are dozens of digital formats going back decades that can’t be recalled today because the software they used doesn’t exist/is incompatible today. Albini doesn’t use digital because he wants to avoid that. Recordings “back in the day” sounded better because bands actually rehearsed together and people could play their instruments as a band more coherently. Also, there was less of a reliance on click tracks, and the BPM “breathed” and fluctuated more naturally, giving a natural excitement. Nowadays, bands come into the studio with half-written songs that are barely practiced, use the DAW to fix every mistake of their poor playing, and have the whole thing locked to a fixed, robotic BPM. Then they process the shit out of it to try to add excitement. But garbage in produces garbage out. Digital (with good converters, good preamps and proper gain-staging) sounds AT LEAST as good as tape, and arguably better in some circumstances since there is zero compromise in capturing the entire frequency spectrum. Recording to tape entails certain equalization limitations. Sub bass, for example, eats up a lot of headroom on tape, leading to distortion. Naive people like you hear that distortion and find it pleasing, which is what you think you like about tape. But it’s a gimmicky special effect, and doesn’t truly represent the sound of the band in the room. That goes against albinis philosophy. So he uses tape with very conservative gain settings specifically to AVOID distortions. He wants the most transparent sound he can get, without compromising on the archival-grade capturing. His recordings (that you care about) sound so good because the band is good, their playing is good and the songs are good, and they are recorded by a skilled technician who doesn’t get in the way or leave his own fingerprint. He has thousands of recordings you don’t care about because the bands are nothing special... they’re recorded *just as competently* as the stuff that you think “has the magic”. It’s not the recording you’re liking or disliking, it’s the band. Whatever the band sounds like, that’s what albini is capturing. Watch some interviews with him and learn about his approach to recording. He doesn’t see himself as a producer or even a craftsman, merely a skilled *technician*. I’ve studied him a lot. I’m completely right. Practice your instruments or your recording techniques and get over this naive “magic” bullshit. Rehearse with your band, or record a band that has rehearsed well. Processing and capturing will not *add* any magic that isn’t there to begin with. The only *magic* there is in the actual performances; whether or not they hold your interest and attention.

You would be surprised how clean tape can sound. Albini sticks with tape partly because it's what he knows but mostly for archival reasons.

@@ElMoShApPiNeSs if it's so clean then go digital. And that's ridiculous... Digital is clearly better for archiving.

@@shoeengine1161 I don't think you actually read my whole comment nor did you watch the whole video.

@@shoeengine1161 ...archival reasons. Digital formats and playback machines are still not standardized the way tape is. Sessions from 2000 will be difficult resurrect. In Utero by Nirvana? Steve just loaded the master tape up, read his notes from the session, and remixed in 2013(?). He's said the instant the archival flaws in digital are solved, he'd transition. It's a very unique and honest perspective.

@@limen5442 well don't get me wrong. I actually am for using tape. I just think it's kinda weird to act like digital isn't better based only logistics and nothing to do with sound. I would argue the opposite. But on second thought..... I can understand it. But I would definitely be backing all those reels up to digital just in case. I was messing with a studer a80 recently and I don't understand how people say it doesn't color the sound. It absolutely does. The bottom end in digital really lacks..... And that's coming from someone who grew up on the sound of analog and spent the better part of twenty years trying to recreate the subtleties. I shifted to an analog based setup in the last year and while the difference is subtle.... For someone searching for the subtle differences.... That little bit makes a universe of difference. Recreating it on digital feels like turning around on an interstate because you missed your exit.

doublestrokeroll That's an obvious statement...

Doesn't seem to be with the way people seem to think anything digital is automatically going to make their music "sterile". And it's amazing how many people don't understand that all that "warmth" they claim to love about analog, is compression. Tape is a compressed format. Vinyl is a compressed medium. When you put music onto vinyl you are losing dynamic range when compared to good quality digital recordings. When you record a master onto tape you have LESS dynamic range than recording digital. Those are facts. I like the "warmth" of analog too, but that comes from it's limitations. Not because it's "better". Yet you'll hear people claim that analog is "more dynamic"......Total nonsense. If someone likes the warmth of analog compression better then fine....I even agree....but don't lie and say it's more dynamic. That is simply an objectively false statement. There is virtually no noise floor with digital. And that's pretty amazing.

What the fuck are you talking about? Who gives a shit about analog to digital? That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about direct digital recording. Obviously if you're going to analog first you will have the compression of the source tape and thus that will transfer to your digital....duh!... I'm talking recording directly into Pro Tools. No analog at any stage. No fucking way any reel to reel has a greater dynamic range than direct digital recording.

doublestrokeroll its gonna be okay man

Not true. The biggest names including Slash and Sheryl Crow only record to analog tape. All of Slash and The Conspirators music is recorded on tape. Not everyone wants digital. Vacuum tubes won't go away, and neither will analog recording.

That’s a lie. Tapes still being made.

if you are going to record analogue you need to mix analogue otherwise you lose information when you convert back to analogue

That's your opinion. Steve Albini seems to like them though.

You could not be more wrong. They are awesome. Let’s hear your super sweet band then, chicken dick

LOL (chicken dick!!)

Lol absolutely not

The irony is that if his vocals were tuned, you’d say it’s brilliant

@@dougleydoritenever go anywhere near a studio lmao

@@Dragonflyer74 are you implying that most commercially successful music on all levels, isn’t tuned?

@@dougleydorite are you implying that the vast majority of commercially successful music isn’t garbage?

To be fair I'm not that good at guitar hahahah

I think your comment sums up why you'll never be as great as someone like Albini.

@@perrym.anderson178 Minimalism works super well if you have a knack for it! I liked the song anyway.