This video was exactly what I was looking for: a brief but insightful overview to give some context to modern music production! Thanks so much for making this!!
From the very first second until the last one I froze with dropped jaw in complete amazement, without moving away from the screen. To say that it was super interesting is to say nowhere near enough. Thank you! I will watch it again.
Thabk you so much for this comprehensive summary. I found it very useful for an essay I'm writing about the history of mixing consoles. You've got a new subscriber
Great video! The focus you had on really the essential developments that were going on helped o understand what was important. And what the mindset of producers and developers was like given the possibilities of their time. I would LOVE to see a video about the development of daws and digital plugins specifically. On what kind of underlaying design are they built? What part of that design is in the spirit of analog recording, what are the advantages of digital audio that digital software can exploit? Why do people love about digital emulations of analog gear, what is the relation of analog and digital tools in a modern studio?
Thanks for doing this video it was really insightful. I'm a bit curious about what sources you had that gave you all this information. Would be grateful if you could share. Cheers!
He failed to mention the phonautograph, a contraption that came before and functions similarly to the phonograph, with the difference being that instead of cutting a groove which can play back sound it instead recorded soundwaves onto paper via soot on the end of a needle which obviously couldnt be played back, this could be considered the *true* start to the audio recording timeline.
@@SPIREDOCKLATERRA Thanks for bringing that up. I'm not trying to pick on which device was the true start of recording, was just curious about the sources for the information he brought up. What sources do you have? It seems to be a pretty undocumented topic, or I'm just not looking hard enough...
I’ve become pretty obsessed with no - hit wonder obscure bands of the mid 60s, mainly North American bands who were trying to be The Rolling Stones, The Kinks, etc. Typically from small towns but of course also metros lol. Any niche of a genre has plenty of duds, but the good examples of this are really raw and wild-sounding, like, EVEN BETTER than 70s punk rock, which is where I come from, lol. Googling the subject of what a typical mom and pop studio in Burfurd, Nebraska, the types of studios these bands used, I’m curious about what tape machines, what mixers, what mics, what outboard gear etc one would typically find in the studio where Booger and The Mugwumps (fictional for effect lol) of Grudsville, TX recorded their rude and crude, rebellious 2-chord songs. This specific info is weirdly elusive. I figured if anyone knew more details re this than I seem to be able to uncover online, it would be you. Thx tons, should you bother to respond, lol. Great post. I can’t get enough of this kind of stuff; good one.
It would really help if you dated the time frame when the new technology was introduced. What decade did the LP recording was available? Same thing with the 45s and Tape magnetic recording?
The LP and the 45 were designed to replace 78s. The 45, developed by RCA, could be sold either individually or as part of a multidisk set in a binder, called an album (just like 78s). However the 45 was smaller and more rugged than a 78. One new feature of the 45, facilitated by the large center hole, was the automatic disk changer, which allowed you to stack several 45s on the player so that they would play without intervention. RCA said "now you can listen to an entire album of 45s in whatever order you prefer." Meanwhile, Columbia's replacement for 78s was the LP. With the LP, you could get an entire album on one disk. Not to be outdone by RCA, Columbia made an automatic LP changer which had a clamping arm to keep the stack of small-center-hole-disks stacked on the changer spindle.. Before long the familiar marketing of using 45s for single releases and LPs for album releases emerged, at which point both manufacturers started producing both 45s and LPs.
Jack Mullen brought Magnetophon recorders and reels of tape back from Germany with the intent of interesting an American company to commercialize the technology. He found a company in Redwood City, run by a Russian immigrant, who was in the business of building fractional horsepower electric motors. However, they needed money, which is where Bing Crosby came in. He commissioned the first Ampex tape machines. He took one to his friend Les Paul, who ended up ordering more Ampex machines. Ampex was not the only company interested in tape, there were Magnecord and Crown.
l have a question for pro-producers: at what point in time recording became as good sounding as today? speaking strictly form john doe's public ears, one can tell the difference in the recording quality in any album from, say, Queen and the latest Metallica. There's simply superiority in sound quality. Everything mainstream today sounds phenomenal. But so was anything made 20 years ago, not so 40 years ago though. After 30 years of listening to a thousand styles, l've been trying to pinpoint that one recording(s) which anyone can honestly say sounds fantastic. l would go to to Nirvana's Nevermind for instance. Was 1991 the year recording quality took the huge leap?
LA2A's and Fairchild 660's are NOT EQ... had to shut it off at that point... why would you do this? Are you practicing sounding like you know what you're talking about? Is that what this is?
This video was exactly what I was looking for: a brief but insightful overview to give some context to modern music production! Thanks so much for making this!!
It is also fascinating to read about Claude Shannon's conception and development of amplification at Bell Labs in the 1940s
This was absolutely the best informational video on the history of multi track recording And the most comprehensive thank you excellent job
From the very first second until the last one I froze with dropped jaw in complete amazement, without moving away from the screen. To say that it was super interesting is to say nowhere near enough. Thank you! I will watch it again.
This was very educational but at the same time very easy to uderstand. Thank you
Thabk you so much for this comprehensive summary. I found it very useful for an essay I'm writing about the history of mixing consoles. You've got a new subscriber
Great video! The focus you had on really the essential developments that were going on helped o understand what was important. And what the mindset of producers and developers was like given the possibilities of their time.
I would LOVE to see a video about the development of daws and digital plugins specifically. On what kind of underlaying design are they built? What part of that design is in the spirit of analog recording, what are the advantages of digital audio that digital software can exploit? Why do people love about digital emulations of analog gear, what is the relation of analog and digital tools in a modern studio?
Thanks for doing this video it was really insightful. I'm a bit curious about what sources you had that gave you all this information. Would be grateful if you could share. Cheers!
He failed to mention the phonautograph, a contraption that came before and functions similarly to the phonograph, with the difference being that instead of cutting a groove which can play back sound it instead recorded soundwaves onto paper via soot on the end of a needle which obviously couldnt be played back, this could be considered the *true* start to the audio recording timeline.
@@SPIREDOCKLATERRA Thanks for bringing that up. I'm not trying to pick on which device was the true start of recording, was just curious about the sources for the information he brought up. What sources do you have? It seems to be a pretty undocumented topic, or I'm just not looking hard enough...
I’ve become pretty obsessed with no - hit wonder obscure bands of the mid 60s, mainly North American bands who were trying to be The Rolling Stones, The Kinks, etc. Typically from small towns but of course also metros lol. Any niche of a genre has plenty of duds, but the good examples of this are really raw and wild-sounding, like, EVEN BETTER than 70s punk rock, which is where I come from, lol.
Googling the subject of what a typical mom and pop studio in Burfurd, Nebraska, the types of studios these bands used, I’m curious about what tape machines, what mixers, what mics, what outboard gear etc one would typically find in the studio where Booger and The Mugwumps (fictional for effect lol) of Grudsville, TX recorded their rude and crude, rebellious 2-chord songs. This specific info is weirdly elusive.
I figured if anyone knew more details re this than I seem to be able to uncover online, it would be you. Thx tons, should you bother to respond, lol.
Great post. I can’t get enough of this kind of stuff; good one.
Very nice presentation. A +
Good overview. Thanks for putting this together.
Thank you so much for creating and sharing this video. I really respect it.
Great straight forward explanation!!
It would really help if you dated the time frame when the new technology was introduced. What decade did the LP recording was available? Same thing with the 45s and Tape magnetic recording?
Its called a “45” because its spins at 45rpm, not because you can get 45 mins on it
He’s referring to the LP (12”) format, since each LP then could hold approx 23 minutes of audio on each side when it was first released.
Thankyou this was really good for my revision!
Pretty cohesive review
Thank you
Great video! Thanks a lot
The LP and the 45 were designed to replace 78s. The 45, developed by RCA, could be sold either individually or as part of a multidisk set in a binder, called an album (just like 78s). However the 45 was smaller and more rugged than a 78. One new feature of the 45, facilitated by the large center hole, was the automatic disk changer, which allowed you to stack several 45s on the player so that they would play without intervention. RCA said "now you can listen to an entire album of 45s in whatever order you prefer."
Meanwhile, Columbia's replacement for 78s was the LP. With the LP, you could get an entire album on one disk. Not to be outdone by RCA, Columbia made an automatic LP changer which had a clamping arm to keep the stack of small-center-hole-disks stacked on the changer spindle.. Before long the familiar marketing of using 45s for single releases and LPs for album releases emerged, at which point both manufacturers started producing both 45s and LPs.
Jack Mullen brought Magnetophon recorders and reels of tape back from Germany with the intent of interesting an American company to commercialize the technology. He found a company in Redwood City, run by a Russian immigrant, who was in the business of building fractional horsepower electric motors. However, they needed money, which is where Bing Crosby came in. He commissioned the first Ampex tape machines. He took one to his friend Les Paul, who ended up ordering more Ampex machines.
Ampex was not the only company interested in tape, there were Magnecord and Crown.
Very interesting and useful stuff thank you :)
17:03 multitrack analog tape recording 18:42 Studer J37 4-track 1" tape Beatles EMI
Very informative thank you!
Thanks!
Nice presentation n quite informative 👍🏻🤓
Dude, you are the entire source for my computer hardware project. Thank you so much
I didn't quite understand how the playback process worked on the cylinder. what did you mean by "cranking it back"?
theres a crank on the side you turn while you record and when you finish you turn it the other way
This is great!! Thanks!!
@24:24 i bought the zip disk drive at that moment..it was for the mpc2000 drum machine
Context, Perspective and History
The best ways to fully understand your craft and industry. Thank you sir🎧🎶💪🏾🦾💃💯
really good presentation
where are the songs from the early DAWs?
I believe melon collie was one of the earliest rock albums that used pro tools
Very interesting.
thx bra
This looks and sounds like a college presentation delivered by Hero Hei
l have a question for pro-producers: at what point in time recording became as good sounding as today? speaking strictly form john doe's public ears, one can tell the difference in the recording quality in any album from, say, Queen and the latest Metallica. There's simply superiority in sound quality. Everything mainstream today sounds phenomenal. But so was anything made 20 years ago, not so 40 years ago though. After 30 years of listening to a thousand styles, l've been trying to pinpoint that one recording(s) which anyone can honestly say sounds fantastic. l would go to to Nirvana's Nevermind for instance. Was 1991 the year recording quality took the huge leap?
dark side of the moon is 50 years old and sounds brand new. i'd say abbey road marked the start of modern recording quality
Computers themselves are side effects of the scientific calculator. All the inventors wanted was something that can number crunch and run simulations.
17:03 is where it starts for my course
freakin Doctor Watson over here
For some reason, records made after WWI really suck compared to WWII and before recordings.
15-20 min? I watch lectures in excess of 40 hours.
Is it true that the Beatles recorded their first song on a piece of wet toilet paper?
LA2A's and Fairchild 660's are NOT EQ... had to shut it off at that point... why would you do this?
Are you practicing sounding like you know what you're talking about? Is that what this is?
The Workshop Studio lol
Chill
But he never said they are eqs.. He said they are compressor/limitors which is very true... What he told as eq was the pulteq1
Angey
you talk too much
ha
Not really