terminal-boredom.com

Terminal Boardumb => Music Shit => Pop Punk => Topic started by: DJ Rick on September 22, 2009, 11:26:10 AM

Title: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: DJ Rick on September 22, 2009, 11:26:10 AM: Quote from: Acapulco on September 22, 2009, 09:48:05 AM
[Re: TNV's Paisley Reich... The noise on that record -- its "lo-fidelity" -- seemed to me to be not so much a cosmetic cover for the songs but an integral part of them and the sense of urgency I was picking up from the recordings. Which is how it should be, I think. On Rep's stuff, the recording itself becomes part of the music, not just a means of conveying it.

This is a great point about Paisley Reich, and a point that could also apply to Eat Skull's Wild & Inside.

You know that this lo-fi trend is real when I'm hearing 18-year-old frosh at UC Davis who got straight A's in Anyburb High School in the San Joaquin Valley geeking out about so-and-so's new album saying "OH, IT'S SO GREAT....IT'S JUST SO FUCKED UP SOUNDING!!!" It sounds like me and my friends 15 years ago talking about everything on Rip Off, Radio X, Repent, etc. And how much (or how little) of that stuff do I still wanna listen to (Don't give me a list, garage turkey! (I have my own list))?

Hence, my class instructs the new volunteer/DJ trainees to more carefully consider lo-fi for its results rather than its popularity at the moment. Surely, the more these bands reach neophytic youth looking for the next "it" thing, the more we'll hear bands rush to record a mess of songs, and while some cool accidents may occur, the middle mass morass of mediocre songs with submediocre recordings will have their culprits begging for our mercy..."IT'S LO-FI, MAN...WHAT DO YOU EXPECT?!?!"

It's inevitable because it's part of the stylistic streamlining and homogeneity that pervades once a word or phrase becomes recognized as a genre. The kids who start a band who wanna sound like TNV won't know about Mike Rep's influence on their heroes. They're more likely to draw parallels to Pavement because of the label affiliation.

Paisley Reich and Wild & Inside set the bar for the so-called "new lo-fi" as far as I'm concerned. Those are some songs that are brilliant, but also enhanced by how they were recorded.

So, what else do we think is exemplary of "lo-fi" at its best? And what's a disgrace?
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Jared on September 22, 2009, 11:39:17 AM: At its best? Home Blitz singles, 'Eusa Kills', Screamin'Mee-Mees. Disgrace? Wavves.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: chrizow on September 22, 2009, 11:42:49 AM: ideal: "hairdryer peace" = new lo-fi production style used to achieve supremely psychedelic ends.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: DJ Rick on September 22, 2009, 11:52:21 AM: Yes, yes....great examples!

The new Little Claw, too.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Mitch on September 22, 2009, 11:52:43 AM: I'd like to think that all the bands mentioned thus far care way more about writing good songs than they do about how much hiss and warble they can cram in there. With examples like The Hospitals and Home Blitz, it would certainly appear that way...
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: tina on September 22, 2009, 11:54:41 AM: Wait a minute- this isn't Lo-Fi, this is FRIENDROCK
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: vint on September 22, 2009, 12:16:49 PM: Lo-fi is the ultimate in suckness. As much as I love Eat Skull, every time I try to play something off their records when I'm DJ'ing, it sounds like complete ass because it's all tinny and shit. For some reason, it sounds great at home on the stereo, but it won't pump through a bar's PA right. Still, they're not a band I would classify as "lo-fi" because for me, it's really incidental. It's just that they recorded on a four track, because like a lot of people I know, they're just broke, scummy punks who would rather spend the change in their pocket on a forty then put it in a jar so they can someday afford to go into a studio. It's a DIY mentality.

However, there are plenty of bands out there who should considered lo-fi because that's the defining aspect of their music. That's all it is. It's not punk. It's not well written enough to be pop music. It's simply "lo-fi" and that is stupid.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: neighborhoodwatch on September 22, 2009, 12:20:59 PM: getting a good recording out of a 4 track isnt that hard. well, as long as you dont mind fucking around for a while with mic placement and whatnot. ive gotten some fucking great drum sounds out of this shitty tascam i had before i smashed it
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: vint on September 22, 2009, 12:29:40 PM: To expand on my last post. Growing up, playing in hardcore bands, we always recorded on a four track, not because any of us listened to Sebedoh or something, but because it's what we were afforded access too. We never thought of or called ourselves "lo-fi hardcore." We always tried to get the best recordings we could out of the machines, and when they sounded like absolute shit, we'd be bummed out and try again.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Vince Clortho Keymaster of Gozac on September 22, 2009, 12:34:49 PM: The last time I recorded something in an expensive studio (which was actually not that long ago) the results ended up sounding a lot like Hole. Not sure if that is a good or a bad thing.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: TTT on September 22, 2009, 12:38:22 PM: I see the argument trending toward "Lo-Fi versus Songwriting" and to me, now maybe songwriting is another way of saying this, but to me it's "Lo-Fi versus REAL INTENTIONS AND/OR BALLS/GRIT". I think the only thing that can ever escape evil is REAL BALLS. REAL INTENTIONS. You can't make that a trend. and I sincerely think that real nuts, not SHOW OFF nuts and STUPID RAGE ( fuck that), but REAL FEELING is too transcendant to ever get captured.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Vince Clortho Keymaster of Gozac on September 22, 2009, 12:39:19 PM: Quote from: Vince Clortho Keymaster of Gozac on September 22, 2009, 12:34:49 PM
The last time I recorded something in an expensive studio (which was actually not that long ago) the results ended up sounding a lot like Hole. Not sure if that is a good or a bad thing.

Also, that was recorded on the same console that some of the tracks off of Fleetwood Mac's Rumors were recorded on. REAL TALK.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Whet Bull on September 22, 2009, 12:41:57 PM: I second Hairdryer Peace and Little Claw's recent singles. In both cases I hear the artists working with and around the limitations of inexpensive, consumer-grade equipment and making the most of them. And what I like about the result is that the recordings acknowledge the process of production, remind you that you're listening to an electronic recording -- a product of ovedubbing, fucking around with microphones and tape and all kinds of mediations -- rather than a document of a live performance.

You can look at this as a purely aesthetic decision but it can also be a way of demystifying the recording process. Of course, "low fidelity" also has a way of creating an aura of mystery or "authenticity" around otherwise ordinary, pedestrian performances.

As a listener, I like records that were made on inexpensive equipment because the texture is familiar to me and I can imagine how those records were made. This is especially true of "basement rock" stuff like the Mee-Mee's or Twinkeyz, or early '90s bedroom bands like Sebadoh, where you can hear the sound of somebody's living room and of crickets outside and so on.

As a musician, I mistrust pro studios because I don't know how to use them. Recording on 4-track or 8-track gives me greater control over what the tapes will sound like. If part of that means having to deal limitations like tape hiss, well, I try to integrate the tape hiss into the recording so that it, too, is part of a conscious process rather than a "problem" or accident.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Whet Bull on September 22, 2009, 12:49:01 PM: Forgot to state the obvious: Kevin's records are good examples of music that makes the most of the limitations of inexpensive equipment. The ambience of Cleaning the Mirror would be very hard to attain in a pro studio. The way those songs were arranged, the little sonic details that you can hear on the record, were clearly a result of economic factors, but they're by no means accidental.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Whet Bull on September 22, 2009, 12:53:08 PM: Shit, "Street Fighting Man" and a good chunk of the guitar tracks on Beggars Banquet are good examples of how consumer-grade equipment can be used to successfully create an aesthetic effect. Lots of Fleetwood Mac's Tusk, too. In those cases, the musicians had the means to record in expensive studios and chose not too, for reasons that had nothing to do with indie-rock cachet.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: spitting contest on September 22, 2009, 01:09:42 PM: success in "lofi" seems like its about the balancing acts between self-awareness/authenticity and ability/inability more than it is about the actual songwriting.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: vulture on September 22, 2009, 01:21:43 PM: Lo-fi as an ideal? Whats that, sweatpants? I dont have a problem with it as long as its in line with what Acapulco is saying. More like making the most out of limited equipment/money instead of "Lets intentionally sound shitty to cover up our crappy songs". Really lo-fi shouldnt be a genre at all.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: denkinger on September 22, 2009, 01:26:10 PM: Quote
As much as I love Eat Skull, every time I try to play something off their records when I'm DJ'ing, it sounds like complete ass because it's all tinny and shit. For some reason, it sounds great at home on the stereo, but it won't pump through a bar's PA right.

This is very true, it all turns to gravel sliding down an aluminium chute into a coffee can. Most lo-fi stuff has zero bottom end as well, and if it is present it lacks real THUMP, it's more akin to soggy cardboard. Never DJ this stuff personally.

Lo-fi is not a genre, it's merely a recording style. It doesn't supercede whatever is being recorded: rock, psych, drone, etc.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Vince Clortho Keymaster of Gozac on September 22, 2009, 01:31:07 PM: Quote from: denkinger on September 22, 2009, 01:26:10 PM
Quote
As much as I love Eat Skull, every time I try to play something off their records when I'm DJ'ing, it sounds like complete ass because it's all tinny and shit. For some reason, it sounds great at home on the stereo, but it won't pump through a bar's PA right.

This is very true, it all turns to gravel sliding down an aluminium chute into a coffee can. Most lo-fi stuff has zero bottom end as well, and if it is present it lacks real THUMP, it's more akin to soggy cardboard. Never DJ this stuff personally.

Lo-fi is not a genre, it's merely a recording style. It doesn't supercede whatever is being recorded: rock, psych, drone, etc.

If Eat Skull were recorded properly they'd sound like Live Skull.

Also RE: bottom end - I can't get my Tascam 8-track recorder to have any high end at all. Everything sounds like it is buried under pillows whenever I play it back.

Time to go back to Lindsay Buckingham's console I guess.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: goneoffdatlean on September 22, 2009, 01:44:45 PM: On the Tascam, when you record the guitars, you gotta crank the treble EQ all the way up to give it bite.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: DANGERTERRORHORROR on September 22, 2009, 01:48:29 PM: I think the 90s Radio X etc. stuff is interesting as kind of a reaction to where garage punk went in the 80s -- "clean" and "60s studio style." I find it harder to return to say the Brood than the Brentwoods no matter how shitty the latter is for the sake of being shitty.

One time Darin Rafaelli was playing a Vulcaneers record he put out for me and, although it sounded like a cellphone speaker at max volume, he kept remarking about how "you can hear everything!" and "it's so perfectly balanced!" Funny.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: cracker on September 22, 2009, 01:58:54 PM: http://vimeo.com/6042451 (http://vimeo.com/6042451)
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: TTT on September 22, 2009, 02:36:03 PM: I dont think lo-fi ever was or is a genre. But if we cant all exhaust the fuck out of it on a messageboard then what the fuck are we gonna do on here?
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Damn on September 22, 2009, 02:53:29 PM: "lo-fi vs. songwriting" is a pretty dumb way of discuss "now" bands, their plusses and downsides and their place in history. besides i think that talking about "thee lo-fi" is difficult because most bands are neither lo- nor hi-fi but somewhere in between. also childish, a guy that's never mentioned here when it comes to this aesthetic but fuck it he's a dirty 90er, once said when asked about his "raw/dirty/whatev" sound, that he just wants to sound exciting. THAT's PRETTY MUCH IT!
i just love it when guitar, bass, drums, voice have a certain area where they can blend into each other and you have this fucking 5-headed monster that purely consists of super cool frequencies. if it's done by the mayyors, happens during a sic alps song or is served in form of mono-60s-girl-group-lala doesn't matter. it's all pretty damn fine with me.

plus i don't see a lot of these new bands live. i live in a city that doesn't book that stuff (cologne sucks major indie dongs), the bands don't really have much money etc. so for me it was always more like "why does that band even play live?" because what's on the record always counted more for me as a recipient. and if you sound live just like some transparent shadow of your recorded sounds then, well, i would question that way of presenting your music.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: TTT on September 22, 2009, 02:55:09 PM: best shit = lo-fi records on hi-fi systems. to get the purity. haha! i see it actually on some levels because many lo-fi records utilize a supreme level of craft on em, and i understand its just the limitations of the gear budget yada yada yada. but still, on another level this is like a scientist assembling a lab to build a test-tube shit. scientist, its a shit. just give your lab assistant some fritos and move. its a tough debate this one. it boils down to pretty much what you just referenced childish sayin. just do stuff pretty much. on both ends....writer and listener. if it excites you great! SCIENCE! OH THE FUCKING SCIENCE!
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: vint on September 22, 2009, 03:01:41 PM: Quote from: Damn on September 22, 2009, 02:53:29 PM
the bands don't really have much money etc. so for me it was always more like "why does that band even play live?" because what's on the record always counted more for me as a recipient. and if you sound live just like some transparent shadow of your recorded sounds then, well, i would question that way of presenting your music.

You'd be quite wrong to assume that all the new bands in the states making "lo-fi" music are poverty stricken or working class kids.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: philthyrex on September 22, 2009, 03:09:24 PM: Times New Viking and Eat Skull really never set my pants ablaze, I can dig it but Sic Alps are more my cup of tea, it's not hi-fi but care was put in to getting sounds, the same as with the recording of "Hairdryer Peace", which I don't completely love. I feel like the TNV records are dependent on their in-the red recording technique, without it would the songs hold up? Maybe. For something like the first High Rise record the over the top distortion feels like a much more organic aesthetic than running a pop song through a distortion pedal. High Rise are balls out extreme wailing all about distortion. Pop songs through a distortion pedal could maybe define the Ramones, although they neglected to put the drums and vocals though it as well. Take away the Ramones distortion, and you'll still have good songs. The NoBunny tape, and some of the Bobby Ubangi stuff sound like that. TMV songs would be a lot less palatable around these parts sans distortion; kinda whiny, indie, emo even? I'll admit to liking some of that stuff, and I like TNV, I'm just not sure they even exist without someone pushing the levels on the board too far.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Damn on September 22, 2009, 03:18:33 PM: Quote from: philthyrex on September 22, 2009, 03:09:24 PM
Times New Viking and Eat Skull really never set my pants ablaze, I can dig it but Sic Alps are more my cup of tea, it's not hi-fi but care was put in to getting sounds, the same as with the recording of "Hairdryer Peace", which I don't completely love. I feel like the TNV records are dependent on their in-the red recording technique, without it would the songs hold up? Maybe. For something like the first High Rise record the over the top distortion feels like a much more organic aesthetic than running a pop song through a distortion pedal. High Rise are balls out extreme wailing all about distortion. Pop songs through a distortion pedal could maybe define the Ramones, although they neglected to put the drums and vocals though it as well. Take away the Ramones distortion, and you'll still have good songs. The NoBunny tape, and some of the Bobby Ubangi stuff sound like that. TMV songs would be a lot less palatable around these parts sans distortion; kinda whiny, indie, emo even? I'll admit to liking some of that stuff, and I like TNV, I'm just not sure they even exist without someone pushing the levels on the board too far.

there were some live recordings of them that one could download for free. maybe from this year's sxsw. don't know where it was. it certainly didn't sound like emo. "indie" isn't a genre for me so i don't know how that's supposed to sound like. it was okay.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: baloneysandwich on September 22, 2009, 03:30:55 PM: The difference between a lo-fi and a blown out recording is also something that gets overlooked/confused a lot. Something can be lo-fi without having the the levels pushed into the red and getting that really... well, blown out sound, which seems to me is what's in vogue at the moment, as opposed to just lo-fi. Anyone who's used a 4-track knows that if you don't want to sound like TNV you don't have to, just keep the levels out of the red.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: TTT on September 22, 2009, 03:59:25 PM: yeah but most times its both.

blown out because people try to saturate a sound card like a reel or a tape. they usually get shit right there thats pretty much unworkable on the input off the bat. but why stop there? lets add a compressor to every track. after all we have "as many of them as our computer's processor power will allow" since its the plug-in age, that should fix it. but even if they didnt fuck it up there, say they got clean levels, they do when they take it all and do their mix "near the red", completely ignoring that amastering engineer can jack the overall level later cleaner than they could ever do. so they sum the whole fucking mix together with the faders loud on every track between -2dB to +3dB levels. Effectively blowing the shit out of the summing bus making a 2-track that sounds like a sick fart blowing out capn crunch. sometimes both. its totally fucked up. people who record like this need casette 4-tracks. you cant saturate a digit nigga!

lo-fi because kids get garageband and dont know how to record and/or mix worth a shit. so they mix it badly.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: bradx on September 22, 2009, 04:01:35 PM: another stupid lo-fi thread.

congratulations.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: SSR on September 22, 2009, 05:19:28 PM: There is lo-fi as a means to an end, which is fine. It is just another tool in creating songs, just like a guitar or a reverb tank. Then there is Lo-Fi as the goal, which generally sucks. Also seeking to make lo-fi some "ideal" or movement is lame. It grafts onto a recording technique a set of ideological rules and is a fast track to creating another stupid genre ghetto. Of course, those who subscribe to Lo-Fi the Sound or Lo-Fi the Ideal are usually the people who make the most uninteresting shit music. I really doubt that Adam or Daniel had any inkling that they were doing something Lo Fi when recording Hospitals or Home Blitz. I really do think that shitty side band of Woods, the one that starts with a M-, were doing everything to make their record sound Lo Fi, which is one reason why that record and that band sucks shit.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Whet Bull on September 22, 2009, 05:31:48 PM: [lo-fi] college rock [/lo-fi]
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: vint on September 22, 2009, 05:38:05 PM: I believe Meneguar were the precursor band to Woods and they just kinda fell by the wayside as Woods started doing more. I could be wrong.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: SSR on September 22, 2009, 07:09:39 PM: Quote from: kevin on September 22, 2009, 05:38:05 PM
I believe Meneguar were the precursor band to Woods and they just kinda fell by the wayside as Woods started doing more. I could be wrong.

whatever, that album is pretentious crap
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: MZITF on September 22, 2009, 07:23:33 PM: Guys, I didn't realize Lo-Fi was so new.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: SSR on September 22, 2009, 07:27:38 PM: Lo-Fi is a new Pitchfork creation
lo-fi is at least as old some dude on the delta pounding an accoustic guitar
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: MZITF on September 22, 2009, 07:31:17 PM: Hey, I am a guy with a lot of questions, but I don't have very many answers. Maybe I could get some answers?

A game like... Is It Low Fidelity, Or Is It Blown Out?

My Bloody Valentine - Low Fi - Or Blown Out?

The Drifters - Low Fi - Or Blown Out?

Home Blitz - Low Fi - Or Blown Out?

The New Shakirah - Low Fi - Or Blown Out?

A YouTube video for reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aEW_Z5Va5s
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: akpasta on September 22, 2009, 07:46:46 PM: To me, "lo fi / blown out" has always just been a way of adding a layer of abstraction to the content of the music. Sometimes when you've got a killer pop song, if you bury some of the hooks just below a surface of noise or whatever kind of abstraction, the listener strains to grab the melodies and they'll have have more effect. If you're really good at it, people will subconsciously grab the hooks, and keep coming back for more, until the third or fourth listen when they can pick out exactly what's going on--- maybe even with headphones.

The mistake people make is when they call something that's just arranged well with lots of noise and distortion "lo fi." Just cause it's not obvious and clean doesn't make it 'lo fi.' That's why some of those earlier Eat Skull tracks ("Seing Things," "Punk Trips," and a couple of the songs on Wild and Inside) so good; they are brilliant pop songs that don't reveal themselves as such on the first listen.

It's just like Phil Spector having five guitars play one thing in the same room as four pianos playing the same thing. All the sounds double on each other and create half-tones or other distortions of the actual sound, and it creates a certain 'noise' or odd fidelity---- as in, not "clean." Trendhoppers tend to simply label this arrangement/production style "lo fi."

It's all about abstraction.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: jordivision on September 22, 2009, 07:52:10 PM: one of my highest aspirations remains to record a pop punk album under a pseudonym lo fi with screen printed covers and become e-bay rich
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: bruce on September 22, 2009, 07:59:14 PM: i was just listening to the new magic kids and thought of the barbara's - lo - fi? sounds like it was recorded at a roller rink, but still awesome songs
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: SSR on September 22, 2009, 08:15:42 PM: worst thread ever
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: TTT on September 23, 2009, 08:17:20 AM: Lo-Fi is a state of mind

(http://science.kukuchew.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/skull-taking-drug-opiate-addiction.jpg)
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Damn on September 24, 2009, 07:52:18 AM: Quote from: SSR on September 22, 2009, 08:15:42 PM
worst thread ever

gotta get the shit outta the system...

well, as i haven't mentioned any band yet who would fit in the category we are looking for i'll do it now:

desperate bicycles are thee most obviousest.

early half japanese.

now: Los Llamarada

and say what you will but we are talking about IfuckingDEAL so get your petty opinion outta the room: Skaters and everything side
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: sarim on September 24, 2009, 09:33:28 AM: (http://www.randomfunnypicture.com/pictures/1114gross-guy-puke.jpg)
"can we go home now?"
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Damn on September 24, 2009, 10:15:29 AM: Quote from: sarim on September 24, 2009, 09:33:28 AM
(http://www.randomfunnypicture.com/pictures/1114gross-guy-puke.jpg)
"can we go home now?"

please xerox and repost!
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: vulture on September 25, 2009, 08:16:02 AM: Let's try something different. Name bands with glossy/polished records that would have been improved by using lo-fi recording. Example: if Nirvana or the Foo Fighters had sounded more lo-fi/diy basement, indie snobs would be fawning over it nowadays.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: neighborhoodwatch on September 25, 2009, 12:13:28 PM: dont people fawn over nirvana anyway?
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: vint on September 25, 2009, 01:51:29 PM: Of course, anyone approximately my age who doesn't like Nirvana is a fucking poser, and probably got into punk in college or something.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: sarim on September 25, 2009, 02:15:51 PM: i would say that i like about 5 nirvana songs. i used to enjoy them all. where does this put me???
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: vint on September 25, 2009, 02:37:37 PM: Quote from: sarim on September 25, 2009, 02:15:51 PM
i would say that i like about 5 nirvana songs. i used to enjoy them all. where does this put me???

about eight years younger than me.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: vulture on September 25, 2009, 05:59:45 PM: Quote from: neighborhoodwatch on September 25, 2009, 12:13:28 PM
dont people fawn over nirvana anyway?
Not really. Alot of indie snobs hate on em. That was an example anyways. I really couldnt immediately think of other overly glossy pop punk/alternative/whatever bands that would have benefitted from using lo-fi recording.
Here we go, I got one:
Weezer would have been alot better sounding if they didnt pile on the gloss(sorry Ric Ocasek fans) and went with a rougher edged sound. I might have even liked them. They might not be as huge and rich either, but I wouldnt change the channel when they come on the radio either. They might not have even been on the radio for that matter.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: TTT on September 26, 2009, 07:52:36 PM: So many of these early/mid-nineties bands could've used a good de-greaser to strip off the silly sheen producers wiped all over their faces. I think one that sticks out big time is Superdrag. Just because it's candy-coated pop writing doesn't mean you need an additional candy layer. I think some dirt on the candy might complement it better. Definitely Weezer. I think all I need to say here actually is "Dear You". Although Jawbreaker songs by that point might not have been able to be done any other way. 24 Hour Revenge Therapy is pretty sweet. I dont care what anybody says about that. If you dont like that album I just feel like you are off in space or you just dont like saying you like anything by Jawbreaker or something. Not liking that album is retarded.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Jared on September 26, 2009, 08:18:26 PM: Quote from: H.I. McDunnough on September 25, 2009, 08:16:02 AM
Let's try something different. Name bands with glossy/polished records that would have been improved by using lo-fi recording. Example: if Nirvana or the Foo Fighters had sounded more lo-fi/diy basement, indie snobs would be fawning over it nowadays.

The only Nirvana record that isn't lo-fi, technically, is 'Nevermind'. Obviously compared to shit like Times New Viking and Psychedelic Horseshit, they all sound over-produced, but most of 'em are still pretty raw compared to, say, Stone Temple Pilots or Pearl Jam. I mean wasn't Steve Albini once considered "the King of Lo-fi" or some such bullshit?

Also, the first Foo Fighters album was a home-recorded Dave Grohl solo record and has a couple really rad songs on it in "Weenie Beenie" and "Watershed". Sure it was produced a bit more after the recording was done, but it's still a lot more raw than today's Arcade Fire and Modest Mouse records.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Scrod Prickknee on September 27, 2009, 05:17:31 AM: Albini was never considered lo-fi, his tag was analogue adherent/resistant to digital.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: TTT on September 27, 2009, 07:58:47 AM: Albini is the archetype of the hi-fi purist actually. He views himself as a technician. He hates colored preamps, hates EQs, and HATES compressors. His entire recording philosophy revolves around making a pure document of exactly what is happening. It's just the bands that dictate what it sounds like. Because Albini is just taking sonic photos of it.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: SteveBeat on September 28, 2009, 06:37:53 AM: i don't like nirvana except for like four songs
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: doctordenim on September 28, 2009, 09:05:07 AM: Quote from: Jefferson Joplin on September 22, 2009, 04:01:35 PM
another stupid lo-fi thread.

congratulations.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Isleptinthearcade on November 10, 2009, 07:51:11 PM: fuck lo-fi, gothwave up in this bitch
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: DJ Rick on November 11, 2009, 12:55:30 AM: Quote from: DJ Rick on September 22, 2009, 11:26:10 AM
Quote from: Acapulco on September 22, 2009, 09:48:05 AM
[Re: TNV's Paisley Reich... The noise on that record -- its "lo-fidelity" -- seemed to me to be not so much a cosmetic cover for the songs but an integral part of them and the sense of urgency I was picking up from the recordings. Which is how it should be, I think. On Rep's stuff, the recording itself becomes part of the music, not just a means of conveying it.

So, what else do we think is exemplary of "lo-fi" at its best? And what's a disgrace?

This wasn't meant to become a stupid thread about how lo-fi is becoming a genre ghetto, and whether that's cool or not. It was meant to gather thoughts about what records were examples of music which were excellent either despite or because of their limitations (or conscious choices even). And what records are worse because of it. If it's the worst thread ever, it's because you took the discussion somewhere other than where it was supposed to go.

Everyone knows that the best threads are endless cavalcades of gifs and funny freaky photos. The next best threads are basically lists of things. So list some bands that made good on the potential of some very modest or outmoded equipment or falling in love with the first take or some other example of finely fucked.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: bradx on November 11, 2009, 12:57:18 AM: LSOK
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: DJ Rick on November 11, 2009, 01:05:49 AM: Weren't they on the cover of MRR?

How about that first Go Nuts 7" with the cover of "Transfusion" on it?

Drunks With Guns Second Verses...isn't it just so perfectly nasty-sounding?

Rusted Shut?

Another thing that this thread is not about is whether Eat Skull's latest album sounds good while DJing at a bar? That's still in the tip-top faves of the year, but that's no record to play at a bar....WTF, man??? Listen to it at home. I'm trying to imagine the kinda bar where Wild & Inside would be appropriate....can't think of such a place.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Eurotrash on November 11, 2009, 03:39:59 AM: Quote from: Vince Clortho Keymaster of Gozac on September 22, 2009, 01:31:07 PM
Also RE: bottom end - I can't get my Tascam 8-track recorder to have any high end at all. Everything sounds like it is buried under pillows whenever I play it back.

Clean up the tapeheads & avoid recording trebly stuff on track 1 & 8. Save those for kickdrum & bass.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: vint on November 11, 2009, 04:51:02 AM: Quote from: DJ Rick on November 11, 2009, 01:05:49 AM
Another thing that this thread is not about is whether Eat Skull's latest album sounds good while DJing at a bar? That's still in the tip-top faves of the year, but that's no record to play at a bar....WTF, man??? Listen to it at home. I'm trying to imagine the kinda bar where Wild & Inside would be appropriate....can't think of such a place.

Enid's in Brooklyn. When I was first asked to DJ there the bartender there asked me specifically to play stuff like Psychedelic Horseshit etc... Nobody else in NY was spinning that stuff regularly. It went over pretty well there. This is the same kind of bar that has patrons that would compliment me non-stop when I'd play Little Claw's album during the lunch rush.

Before I started DJing that night it was DJ'd by a guy that only played obscure black metal. Now it's DJ'd by Harry (Almost Ready, World's Lousy).

It's New York, man!

p.s. Threads have lives of their own and it's a cunt hair from impossible to dictate which direction they'll take.

(http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u267/aceglitters/navigation/Weed-420/Animation16_288x288.gif)
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: DJ Rick on November 11, 2009, 11:24:05 AM: Quote from: kevin on November 11, 2009, 04:51:02 AM
p.s. Threads have lives of their own and it's a cunt hair from impossible to dictate which direction they'll take.

Well I'm back in this thread, and I say it goes back on the rails. I'll be back to check.

I guess it's nice to know that there's such a bar where you can spin that stuff.

You should try the 2nd No Doctors album and especially "Campaign Special" or "Sharkskin Blues".
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: bradx on November 11, 2009, 01:39:19 PM: Quote from: Eurotrash on November 11, 2009, 03:39:59 AM
Quote from: Vince Clortho Keymaster of Gozac on September 22, 2009, 01:31:07 PM
Also RE: bottom end - I can't get my Tascam 8-track recorder to have any high end at all. Everything sounds like it is buried under pillows whenever I play it back.

Clean up the tapeheads & avoid recording trebly stuff on track 1 & 8. Save those for kickdrum & bass.
demagnetize the heads too.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Whet Bull on November 11, 2009, 06:44:33 PM: Quote from: DJ Rick on November 11, 2009, 11:24:05 AM

You should try the 2nd No Doctors album and especially "Campaign Special" or "Sharkskin Blues".

(http://www.musiccataloger.com/images/SPIN%20DOCTORS%20-%20TURN%20IT%20UPSIDE%20DOWN%20-%20CD_LG.JPG)

Exactly. The second one is def. the one with the best songs.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: DJ Rick on November 11, 2009, 06:47:55 PM: Haha! But that's a matter for another thread, Pulcdawg.

Keep it true, man.

My thread/My rules.
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Whet Bull on November 11, 2009, 07:27:38 PM: Censorship is Unamerikkkcan, DJ RicKKK!
(http://www.tvgasm.com/shows/images/tvgasm/nycprep/season1/episode2/cryptkeeper.jpg)
(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)
(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)
(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)
(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)(http://idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/08/littlemiss.jpg)
(http://inspectorgadget.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/g201.jpg)
Censorship is Unamerikkkcan, DJ RicKKK!
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: bradx on November 12, 2009, 12:26:51 AM: LAST SONS
Title: Re: LO-FI as an Ideal and not an Excuse
Post by: Whet Bull on November 12, 2009, 06:52:45 AM: (Love ya, Rick!)