BBC Radiophonic Workshop
Archived7 replies · 563 views
Nick King wrote: Mute releases a couple of BBC Radiophonic Workshop CD's on Monday - details here.
(Probably only of interest to Steve, but just in case anyone else is interested)?
Already have a 3 or 4 CD set somewhere. Some of it's wonderful, some of it is really painful, but all of it is gobsmacking by it's sheer existence, in the case of the tape pieces (like a certain well know tune related to my nool persona), and their intelligence and complexity in the case of the synth stuff. What luxury to have EMS at your beck and call....."yeah we like this putney thing.....could you do us one with 12 oscillators that takes up half a room, thanks awfully chaps."
Had a massive row with a mate of mine who works in TV sound (moonlights on camera, UTV's cheaper than Factory). I expressed my yearning to make music of the ilk of Deliah's tape pieces. He merely said "you know how to use an edit block and a blade, even if you are a cack handed cunt, buy half a dozen Revoxes[1] and a box of 456 and STFU!" (the toe-rag even picked up a chinagraph that I used to do channel strips on me mixer (I still did sound all the time at this time) and wagged it at me (Chinagraph pencils, for those not cogescent of such matters, can write on almost any surface, even glass, so are the chosen medium for marking tape edits, and caking tape transports in clay). However, I conjected that the method was irrelevent, that a modern sampler retriggering the same note/sound 10 times was precisely the same as Deliah sticking ten copies of a piece of tape containing said note/sound together. Rather I suggested that "the sound" of the BBCRW was in the equipment itself, it's shortcomings and quirks. I further opined that were I to apply said techniques using modern tape, machines, mixers and EQ's, it would still sound modern and lack the very sound I sought.
I dunno what any of you folks (those who are still reading) think to that point, but I hold to it. I mean, I have a sampled Melotron that was made by literally playing each note-tape in from a tape machine and assigning it to a key. It sounds JUST as haunting as the real thing, all despite there being no tapes being dragged past heads each time a key is pressed, the only differences are that it's not accompanied by the sound of a 19th century loom, that it can sustain indefinitely without breaking, and that it does not require a rebuilt from old washing machine and hoover parts three time weekly.... but I die-cress, as is my way.
Even ignoring mechanical machine instruments and tape compostions. Compare the sound of a Fairlight, or some of the crappy samplers Orbital (think, main riff in Chime and that weird loop after it on the album), or The Prodigy (Think, all of Charlie), compared to a nice shiny Akai S-whatever, which basically reproduces what you give it in substantially better than CD quality. While it loses nothing of the source sound, it ADDS nothing either, and I think that while such things have millions of uses, it's sad that one cannot easily obtain a modern machine with the same oddnesses of earlier ones. Some will tell you.....turn the settings down on the shiny shiny modern kit so they match the piece of shit you're so in love with. That is bollox of the highest order. I have an ensoniq mirage, and setting a Cubase based sampler (My Akai lives elsewhere, not seen the fucker in 5 years) to the same bitrate and sample rate, not only fails to sound like the mirage, but in fact sounds, well, fucking shite, somewhere between a bad video game and the sort of noises that make even his hardcore fans skip tracks on Aphex Twin albums. The Mirage has a beautiful digitally controlled analogue filter that breathes so much life into sounds it's unbelieveable......it also does party tricks.....set the resonance too high, play no notes and wait about 2 seconds and it does HUGE self oscilation sweeps that end in enormous clangorous bass drones....it sounds EXACTLY like the creature's "footsteps" in Forbidden Planet.
Anyway, two more things before I STFU.
What say you lot? Can old smelly kit sound better or is it just rose tinted headphones? Would you agree that as things progress, they do not necessarily improve, merely change...eg... samplers gain accuracy and lost "Life"? A fiver says Leady wont be in to yell "my simmonds beats the pish outta that Vdrum shite"
The mate who sparked my little rant here never did get the idea, which is odd as his kit includes....a Gibson SG, an EH Big Muff, a couple of Orange amps and an HH 50 Watt combo with a spring reverb.....yup....all hot from Frankfurt 2008.
OK, THREE things.....it says much of the numbnuts I had to work with last night, that I have come here[2] seeking intelligent debate, and someone to listen to a thought I may have that's more intellectual than "wow, nice tits"
[1] Surely "Revoxen"?
[2] I mean H E R E!???!!!
got to agree with you doc, you've got to use a bit of old and new, or a lot of old and new if you've won the lottery!
Sample rates don't tell the whole story, the ad/da converters and filters add a lot to the overall sound.
Every now and then I get all nostalgic and think I'd love an old 16 or 24 track tape, analog desk and real outboard gear, rather than everything in the box as it is now, but then I remember the wire looms, hiss, crackling pots, soldering, stripping down the old desk and cleaning all the connections, the amount of room needed and most importantly the fact that i paid a fortune for an allen & heath 24-8-8-2 desk and couldn't even sell it, I had to give it away just so I didn't have to lug it about when I moved house, at least a computer is easier to get rid of when it's redundant.
that cress must be over dyed by now.
The CD's sound like they might be good, so long as it's early stuff, anything past 1980 is going to be shite, everything out of there sounded the same, listen to the themes from bergerac and ello ello, too similar by far
Flying Teapot wrote: Did they use Synthi A's Doc?
On the original doctor who theme, the used nothing more than oscilators to create a note and tape to put all the notes together in the correct tune/tempo and meter, absolutely miraculous considering what they had, and it was all done by a woman who the bbc wouldn't make head of department because she was a woman, and therefore (according to the bbc) couldn't cope with the pressure!
BTW Steve, you've probably already seen this site, but if not, have a look at this: http://www.btinternet.com/~roger.beckwith/bh/menu.htm
my SIMMONSsounds better than tha......
analogue RULES!!!!!, 192 khz 24 bit pro tools is good, but it imparts no magic, sorcery or stuff to recordings, tape saturation is warm gooey lovlyness, harmonic distorion of valve gear will always sound "better" than transistors, even vitual modeling in the wrong hands doesnt do it for me, give me clavia over roland any day.
(crawls back under rock after removing clever hat)
Old Lead Foot wrote: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr08/articles/radiophonic.htm
I was going to link to that, but wasn't sure if non subscribers would see it.
I could easily end up getting into a "if I won the lottery, my dream set up would be..." but it would bore the arse off everyone.
but if you're of the same opinion have a look at the second hand stuff on this site: http://www.proaudioeurope.com/3/home
