• Please note that Audiokarma will be offline briefly for updates early on Monday morning, September 28th.

Listening the way the artist intended

An endless debate that has no meaning. It makes no difference if you have a lo-fi, mid-fi or hi-Fi. If a person is enjoying the music the artist created on the system they have. Then that is all that matters. why ask a question that has no answer
 
Very often, the artist is the very last person or people who get to decide “as it was intended.”

When I read that, I can only wonder if those saying that have spent any time recording in a studio or in the business in any capacity.

I know someone — a name many of you would recognize who broke down and cried when he heard the final mix.

The producer, A&R staff, management, etc., etc. all have input. Rare is when someone is ushered into a studio and told to just have at it.

Arguments erupt, compromises made, artists made to knuckle under or else.

And is every band always in perfect harmonious agreement themselves?

And what about when the studio musicians are brought in over the band members? Tracks can be and are often replaced entirely. Whose artistic intent are we to consider?

Ever do any recording? Producer tell you not to play something but do this instead, twiddle the knobs on your amp and make it sound like crap and then use a solo you didn’t like at all?

And you listen back and think, dang, why does it sound like that?

This is a business and again, “as the artist intended” is often the very last consideration.

So why worry about something that doesn’t always exist anyway?
 
And what about when the studio musicians are brought in over the band members?
And these days, it's quite likely that it will be a music "programmer" who will cut and paste in all of the backup instrumentation using "canned" sounds as well as process the vocalist to desired results, thereby making the whole process streamlined and controllable by the overseeing music producers and executives. Now it becomes more like manufacturing a product in a factory.
 
I think this’ll be my last post in this thread, as this horse is looking pretty dead, but I seem to remember from “back in the day” when artists had contracts with record companies that required a certain number of albums within the period of the contract. Many, if not most, artists were so glad to finish an album and get the record company “ off their back” that they didn’t care what the album sounded like.
 
I learned of a musician who had all of his tracks replaced by a studio musician. On his solo album.

This was done after hours at the direction of the producer with a prominent name in his genre.

Hilariously, the musician was said to be thrilled, commenting on how great the final product was.

I suppose you could say that it was indeed in this case, as the artist intended.
 
I listen as I like, not as the artist would like, I don't agree with this term (as the artist wanted). I believe that only at a live performance without an amplification system can you say that you are listening as the artist wanted, otherwise there are infinite variables.
So the artist did not have a microphone to sing through? Maybe Opera is the only type of music I have seen that the vocalist did not use amplification. Sorry if my interpretation of your comment was taken wrong
 
I find all of it fascinating, the bands I love, rock, heavy metal, punk would prefer live. Newer pop bands can't do live outside of running and dancing. As far as equipment, Henry Rollins and Frank Sinatra are the only two, off the top of my head, musicians with world-class audio systems I've seen over the last 30 years. The rest had normal stuff we call mid-level now (going by the dozens of photos online). In the late 70's to the early 90's, bands lived with recording boomboxes and Walkmans to store ideas.
 
I'm pretty sure that about half the music in my collection was written, or performed, or recorded, or produced by musicians and technicians that were completely wasted on booze or junk or grass or E or LSD or 'shrooms, etc. You're damn right that I am listening as the artist intended!
 
I wrote in another post here that the artist is recorded on ..........something, run through a huge box with a thousand sliders worked by a random engineer, then recorded on....something, played by a buyer on.....something...... through .....something with no tone controls, on his speakers, listened to with his ears. And he knows he is hearing exactly what the artist intended because he can't change the tone???
 
Back
Top Bottom