Augmenting the Feeble Groans Of Hopeful Teenagers (aka Signal Processing)

Written by

RCA Studio circa 1964. Ed Begley resists adjusting the controls.

Download an eight-page article, again from ‘Easy Guide To Stereo Hi-Fi,’ on the subject of ‘Where did they hang your ears,’ circa 1964 (no author attributed).

DOWNLOAD: HangYrEars_1964

Written for the layperson, this article offers an account of how audio fidelity (both the recording and user-playback spheres) had apparently achieved such high quality that the question of ‘what IS the best way to make this recording’ had at last supplanted the earlier question of ‘how do we make this sound life-like AT ALL?’ It then discusses the varying approaches to microphone technique as practiced by some of the leading record labels of the day. The piece is only concerned with classical and concert music; pop (no mention of rock) is mentioned only briefly, and then in the most condescending possible manner. In describing how various unnamed audio-processing techniques (we can safely assume these to consist of equalization, multi-mic techniques, and compression) can be used to allow the listener to “hear everything,” the author goes on to say:

If this doesn’t just say-it-all (re: rock music/recording history), I don’t know what does. From (EQ+Compression+Slapback) to (doubletracking+delay+chorusing) to (DAW editing+Autotune), the kids are still want sex appeal, some of them benefit from augmenting, and they’re sure as shit still hopeful (re: wanting-you-to-want-me).

Comments

4 responses to “Augmenting the Feeble Groans Of Hopeful Teenagers (aka Signal Processing)”

09/03/2012

Buster

Thanks for this – really enjoying your posts!

Reply
09/03/2012

Bafflegab

The old electronics magazines were written by nerdos who hated pop music in general and generally put in such slams. They’re dead now, so it doesn’t matter.

It was the 70s before anything besides classical, easy listening or show tunes or the more respectable kinds of jazz were even considered music by the hi-fi writers in the hi-fi magazines, let alone the electronics ones, and by 1968 or so they were wholly different.

Reply
09/05/2012

Carl

That’s so rich! – to use an expression of the time. The author must have been moonlighting from his day gig writing PR or trade magazine pieces. Pop isn’t the only thing he denigrates. Those poor bridge players – that’s code for “ladies” who of course would not want manly music to intrude on their gossip and girl-talk. I hope that’s dead now, but I’m not so sure.

Reply
09/12/2012

Larry The Chassis Guy

I hate to break it to y’all but women have different taste in music than men most of the time. My wife likes Neil Diamond, the Carpenters, stuff like that. I like 70s Rolling Stones, Who, Kinks, that kind of stuff. We’re both stuck in the past but it’s a different past. The girls I saw at Stones concerts in ’77 are dead or look older than Betty White now.

I’m talking to a couple of young guys the other day. They want to find girls that like the same music they do. I don’t care what that is, that’s not a reason to pick someone for any long term relationship. See, there has to be one JANE and one TARZAN.

You know, I’ve met both Liza Minnelli and Chrissie Hynde. I like Pretenders music way better than I like “The Trolley Song” or whatever foof it is Liza sings. But even aside from her militant vegetarianism and my propensity for whacking and stacking wild game, plus good old steaks, pork ribs and chicken from the store, I know that if Miss Christine and I had to be in a room together one of us would wind up going out the window within 24 hours. And since I’m 6’4″ and can bench 300 lbs, I’m guessing it would not be me. Liza, on the other hand, I think once we got certain boundaries straight between us we would be okay. She has her music, I have mine, and that’s OK.

Reply