Categories
Uncategorized

Time (part one)

Have you ever entered a long-abandoned space; a time capsule?

Not like a cave or a forest or a wood; those are natural places which exist independent of any time-keeping, in a vast seamless stretch.

I am referring instead to places touched and crafted by humanity, once; and then left, sealed up, like a pharaoh’s tomb.  How do you think Howard Carter felt when he first entered King Tut’s tomb? What do we feel when we enter these ancient spaces?

They are filled with unfamiliar objects, layers of dust (matter once organized and differentiated, now becoming undifferentiated), and what else?  Ghosts?  What is a ‘ghost’ if not the /voice/ of a departed individual that still /speaks/ to us through the discourse established by their abandoned objects/spaces?

Our bodies can move freely through the three dimensions of space, unless shackled by disease or coercive force; but most people intuitively feel that we cannot move freely through time.  This restriction on controlled movement through time is tolerated, at best, and suffered deeply at worst.  Most feel that we move forward through time, at a rate that does seem to vary with activity and age; but backward through time?  Can we access the past?  Do we ever feel that we are using the force of a prior moment?

The future holds possibilities, certainly; but the past does as well.  Just as we can chose our current actions from a certain set of possible actions, and therefore chose our futures to a degree, we can also chose our pasts.  We can chose which elements of the past we incorporate into our lives.  There is an essential difference, for instance, between filling your air/space/life with the music of Led Zeppelin and the Beatles vs filling your life with the music of Jim Ford and Pearls Before Swine.  While Led Zeppelin and the Beatles are certainly two of the finest musical groups to ever make a record, the great success that they experienced ensures that they will become part of the fabric of all subsequent musical culture.  They are already baked-in, as it were, to 99% of rock music that you might experience on any radio station or television show today.  This does not make them bad: but it does make them inevitable.  Experiencing the legacy of Zeppelin and the Beatles is not a choice; it is mandatory.  On the other hand, when we chose to heavily involve ourselves with forgotten, cast-off bits of history, we can actively re-shape our own contemporary reality.  Obscurity, as a preference, is not simply motivated by a supposed hierarchy of accessibility or a badge of time-spent-in-the-trenches; when we engage ourselves with the entombed, the brilliant-but-dead-end bits of history, aren’t we really crafting a unique present moment for ourselves?

 

The films of Quentin Tarantino are often described as post-modern because he mixes cultural signifiers of many different eras and subcultures in a non-heirachical way in order to arrive at a new and unique meaning.  Consider Samuel Jackson’s character in the clip above: The suit of a jazz musician from the 50s; jheri curl hairdo from the 80s; the highly charged speech patterns of the 60s civil rights movement; driving the 1970s sedan.  What year is it again?  Tarantino is making films for a wide audience, so none of these are particularly obscure references in and of themselves; he wants to entertain you, not send you to Google after the movie to look up what the hell was going on.  But the overall affect is still achieved through a kind of time-play.  This demonstrates that yes the past, as well as the future,  holds immense expressive possibilities.

When we’re working in the studio, and we record a vocalist with an ancient microphone, what exactly are we doing?  What effect are we creating?  It’s not likely that we’re trying to trick anyone into thinking that this pop song was recorded in 1932.  We’re generally not even trying to reference the historical period 1932 via the recording.  But we do have the potential to build a new space that exists along a different axis entirely.  Not a past-plus-present but a denial or refutation of single-vector linear time.  I don’t think this actually happens very often; we can use all sorts of audio equipment from the entire 100-year history of recording technology and still easily end up with ‘just a pop song,’ be it a genius one or a terrible one.  But there is real possibility in this.

If you are reading this website right now, you are probably involved in the recording of music in some way.  You probably own or admire antique or ‘vintage’ recording equipment, and use it in your work.  Why do you do it?  What is the benefit for you? What expressive power does it have?  Are you taking full advantage of those possibilities?

 

5 replies on “Time (part one)”

I don’t use a lot of vintage recording equipment in my sound recording but I do have a couple pieces of really ancient test equipment I use pretty routinely, to wit, old Hewlett Packard tube AC and DC vtvm’s, audio generators and a sixties Nixie tube Motorola frequency counter. Yes, I also have modern ones. The old ones are faster and easier to use for some tasks.

When I go home, I listen to the radio over old radios. I have a few consumer regular old radios, but I do most of my serious AM listening on an old aircraft ADF originally powered by a dynamotor. I replaced it by two Vicor potted brick switchers-one to turn 140-160 vdc (the line voltage rectified and filtered) into 12.6 vdc and a second one to give 300 vdc for B+.

I found a pile of old training filmstrips and accompanying LP spoken word training records for a now long defunct dime store chain at a yard sale the other day. I have listened to the records: it’s spooky to think that the announcer is now probably long dead, and the concerns he voices now long irrelevant.

Think about the entire lives people put into the success of that company. Now does it matter in the least?

Old industrial and commercial material like this is a window into then that feature films can’t provide. They weren’t there to entertain but to get a certain job done, many times a job that no longer exists.

All my recording gear is still vintage. Still love it, still making great music. It’s an odd mix of TEAC/TASCAM (80-8, A3440), Revox (A77, B77-HS) and Ampex (602, 350) gear, with a TEAC Model 5 console, Crown D75 monitor amps pushing Klipsch La Scala monitors, and a bunch of signal processors I made from DIY articles gleaned from magazines from the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. The Putnam-style mic preamp is amazing.

About 60 microphones, all of them 1960s and 1970s-era: Reslo Celeste, Shure 300, AKG D200E, Altec condensers, Nakamichi CM1000 system, and an ugly ElectroVoice 644 as some of the less-mainstream.

Think of it as a museum that makes music.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.