"economy" of noise - tapes

[Andrew McIntosh]

Personally, at this point, investment and revenue is something I don't want to be concerned anymore, that's why I am only just releasing my own projects on my own label in cheap diy ways (bulk tapes and xeroxed covers), and I am not selling anything, rather trades or gifts...

This is something I agree with. Since we're all getting nostalgic about "the good old days" it's worth remembering that tapes were neither mass consumer products or "fetish" items, they were a simple expedience that was within the means of whoever used them. A means to an ends. Any fancy-schmancy packaging was more at the whim of whoever was putting the tape together - there were plenty of simple, utilitarian covers on tapes. This isn't just the Industrial scene, during the 1980's and '90's there were loads of people making their own sounds. Industrial just overlapped with it. The home taping movement was huge.

Now, of course, everyone looks back on those days with some hue of romanticism and these days tapes are mass consumer products or fetish items (no difference). They've become means in themselves. Redundant means, too. If I buy a tape it isn't an endorsement of the physical media, it's because I want the sounds on it. Put that stuff online and you can keep the tapes, I'll get the download.

The only exceptions to that I can think of are what Manuel's already stated, or using tapes in a kind of clandestine way, ie leaving them around public places for the curious to pick up. Something like that, something either personal or creative. But tapes for the sake of tapes, pointless.

[ImpulsyStetoskopu]

My assumption is that painting is still work of art, even if it never leaves painters studio? Same as noise created, is noise despite not for audience. I have tons of recordings which never have been meant for "audience". At least not as-it-is. It's creation has not happened in intent to communicate with audience. However, irrelevant in this discussion and never-ending topic in art history anyways...

I have got different look at this problem. But yes, this isn't good place and time for exploration this case at this moment.

Original opening post, was not meant as coherent opening. Just some random thoughts and hitting enter to get topic started. One shouldn't get stuck on words like "economy"  (= production, distribution, or trade, and consumption of goods and services by different agents in a given geographical location. Which could mean simply two guys trading noise tapes). Calculations of financial matters is not complaint that there is no profit margin, but hoping to indicate that I don't blame labels for asking price they do as this is what it can cost so they (or we) don't put 10,- to tape out of greed, but perhaps simply out of necessity. Money itself is not so crucial issue, as it has hardly ever been in "underground" and should be even less.

I could ask: is there any method/way for better integration our circles? I guess that only total consolidation can save this "economy of noise - tapes (CDs, LPs etc.)". I suppose that your SPECIAL INTERESTS is the last place where people with similar taste and expectations, can exchange, not only info about news, but, first of all, its thoughts, ideas and concepts. If this place dies there will not set up a new one so active... I don't see, at this moment, younger people/generations who have got power and so big passion... So, if our music/art wants to survive, there is need to change many things, mentality (of artists, publishers and receivers) and system of distribution....

[manuelM]

Now, of course, everyone looks back on those days with some hue of romanticism and these days tapes are mass consumer products or fetish items (no difference). They've become means in themselves. Redundant means, too. If I buy a tape it isn't an endorsement of the physical media, it's because I want the sounds on it. Put that stuff online and you can keep the tapes, I'll get the download.

Well, I don't really feel cassettes are that kind of mass consumer items nowadays... maybe it was even more like that in the past, nowadays they have become a rarity item and therefore their price has increased... I used to press some runs in Tapeline in the past (2009-2011) and I didn't felt happy with the result of doing it it at all, the whole investement was around 4.50 Euro per copy at the end, that was actually a flat rate with no profit when I was willing to sell them for 5 Euro, at that point a tape costing 6 Euro was considered expensive from the consumer view, and we're talking of 1 Euro of a pro-dubbed tape! by the way the pro-dubbing process wasn't all gold... I notice I can make better dubs with new technics decks on bulk TDK or Saehan tapes... why then the hassle? for the proffessional aesthetic? fuck it! I believe it is all about the sounds... or at least it should be...
Anyway when I play the role of a consumer I can understand a tape costing 6 or 7 Euro, no big deal, maybe because I experienced the problem from the inside... but maybe who doesn't know this economical issues that close might see frustrating that tapes are in few years increasing that much their price from 4 to 7 Euro.

What you mention about the internet, well, this internet spreading is more a hassle for me than keep doing things the way I am used to... and not only because of that.. also I want to think that sounds get better on a tape...

[Andrew McIntosh]

Well, I don't really feel cassettes are that kind of mass consumer items nowadays...

I didn't mean in the general sense of the word, I meant in terms of the "economics" of the Noise/etc. scene. In this little world, tapes very much are mass consumer items. Have a look in the new releases section of this forum.

[Zeno Marx]

also I want to think that sounds get better on a tape...

How can a tape sound better than the digital master file?  Different, probably.  "better"?  Not likely.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

also I want to think that sounds get better on a tape...

How can a tape sound better than the digital master file?  Different, probably.  "better"?  Not likely.

Well... It's matter of semantics. If you consider better in similar way as clarity of high resolution digital photo vs. optical photograph on film. Yes, seemingly. Latest states of development and least affected to anomalies that distort it somehow.. But still, in case of art or creative work, so many people suddenly don't consider it better, as those are not the qualities that are used in measuring. It's been laughed by industry professionals how decades were spent to best clarity sharpness and exact colors and still vast amounts of people like it better with vintage tweaking colors/blurs that appears better to them.

Better meaning, not latest technical developments, but something more appropriate. I mean, Special Interests issues 1-... was it 8 included "tape noise" article. You could compile few dozens artists explain their view why tape is better or The best. As method of making and as method of publishing.

This is one of the things what I referred when I earlier said, that tape is not just niche curiosity, but relevant format. All one needs to do, is basically get tapes and find out. What I mean, is basically that every tape you get, sounds vastly better than digital online samples. This has been discussed with some people before, that it is kind of foolish to put 5 minutes sample track online, made of digital file, if the tape you will get, sound will be different. That being better. For noise at least. Of course going down to quality of dubbing, quality of tape and type of material.

Of course one can say that the lossless file made of that particular tape, is just as good. I'm fine with that. But a lot of modern stuff where it all operates on digital environment, being released on tape, may be the first and only step where material gains actual punch, loudness and saturation. Melts into solid noise brutality instead of layers of tinny compromises. That said, tape doesn't sound mandatory. It seems more like "mastering tool", just like driving things through tube-preamps or such. Not being mandatory, but still being simplest way to make noise sound better if you don't have other means to do it in process of making.

I could ask: is there any method/way for better integration our circles? I guess that only total consolidation can save this "economy of noise - tapes (CDs, LPs etc.)". I suppose that your SPECIAL INTERESTS is the last place where people with similar taste and expectations, can exchange, not only info about news, but, first of all, its thoughts, ideas and concepts. If this place dies there will not set up a new one so active... I don't see, at this moment, younger people/generations who have got power and so big passion... So, if our music/art wants to survive, there is need to change many things, mentality (of artists, publishers and receivers) and system of distribution....

There is no one coherent idea where "scene should go". It's just chaos of multiple ideas that exists. Not everybody needs to change. Even if we'd see 3-5 good noise labels operate little bit more like Sound of Pig, MSNP, Open Wound, RRR, and couple more distributors who don't give up in front of "lack of demand", it could be good.

Special Interests was started when I thought that forum before was becoming sucky. Everybody keeps saying forums are dead, but I doubt anytime soon. There had been some attempts to take down SI forum this year, but was solved. At least for me, this is one of the main places to find about new & old releases. And I'm glad to pay the bills if it helps networking. Labels/traders/bands whatever and offer other platform than for example facebook/discogs..

[Andrew McIntosh]

also I want to think that sounds get better on a tape...

How can a tape sound better than the digital master file?  Different, probably.  "better"?  Not likely.

I believe the emphasis should be on "I want to think". I understand Mikko's point but it's all subjective. It's not impossible for pristine wave files to still convey a warm, rugged, even filthy sound, and it's certainly not impossible for tapes to betray the original files. Personal case in point - Kevlar's "Criteria", on tape, I found somewhat lacklustre compared to previous releases, whereas the same material on dvd the material jumped out at me more, soundwise, and made more sense. I don't doubt for a second for others it would be the other way around.

[Duality]

also I want to think that sounds get better on a tape...

How can a tape sound better than the digital master file?  Different, probably.  "better"?  Not likely.

I believe the emphasis should be on "I want to think". I understand Mikko's point but it's all subjective. It's not impossible for pristine wave files to still convey a warm, rugged, even filthy sound, and it's certainly not impossible for tapes to betray the original files. Personal case in point - Kevlar's "Criteria", on tape, I found somewhat lacklustre compared to previous releases, whereas the same material on dvd the material jumped out at me more, soundwise, and made more sense. I don't doubt for a second for others it would be the other way around.

I think its also a matter of certain sounds. Some releases, that are more dirty and raw, sound better on tape whereas more clean and constructed releases sound better on cd/LP. For example, I can't imagine listening to IRM on tape but I'd rather listen to XE on tape than cd.

[Theodore]

It has to do with what someone asks from the sound / music and even that it's not the same for every genre. For example, i definetely believe harsh noise sounds better on tape than digital. More natural to me. Probably it has to do with that Mikko wrote about the sounds melt together. Also when i listen to harsh noise it's not fidelity / clarity i seek for, come on ! I can't say the same for other genres like ambient or techno related.

Even if we accept generally tape doesn't sound perfect [Sure, it doesn't] , was / is / will be the cheapest medium. Easier to produce / buy. So valuable for both artists / labels and consumers sides. And please don't tell me about digital downloads being even cheaper / free. They are a dangerous convenience. Even though i am new here, i bet this forum wouldn't exist if it was all about digital downloads. I bet sales of a physical release going down when download is available, unless it's a "big name" or "fetish item" [Judging from my personal consumer behaviour. I might be wrong]. And i am quite sure if ever physical dies, gradually the genres of our interest here will die too.

- Or in terms of producing it's the CD cheaper ? I have no idea. Judging by the selling prices it's not and now i m wondering why. To me CD looks far cheaper than a tape as material, as producing hours, as producing equipment needed. -

[Goat93]

- Or in terms of producing it's the CD cheaper ? I have no idea. Judging by the selling prices it's not and now i m wondering why. To me CD looks far cheaper than a tape as material, as producing hours, as producing equipment needed. -

In Low runs, Tape is a Lot cheaper than CD.

[Theodore]

In Low runs, Tape is a Lot cheaper than CD.

Yes, after my previous post i searched the web and read few things about the glass master proccess. Makes sense now.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

also I want to think that sounds get better on a tape...

How can a tape sound better than the digital master file?  Different, probably.  "better"?  Not likely.

I believe the emphasis should be on "I want to think". I understand Mikko's point but it's all subjective. It's not impossible for pristine wave files to still convey a warm, rugged, even filthy sound, and it's certainly not impossible for tapes to betray the original files. Personal case in point - Kevlar's "Criteria", on tape, I found somewhat lacklustre compared to previous releases, whereas the same material on dvd the material jumped out at me more, soundwise, and made more sense. I don't doubt for a second for others it would be the other way around.

Of course wav file can sound anything, as it is matter what you put on computer. It can already have all the characteristics what are benefits of tape as they are utilized in making the music. For example achieved in process of recording on tape in first place, or used in mastering process. What I remember from Kevlar talking about their methods of recording, they go through long process of processing sound through various equipment, with clear intent and precision. It's not like kaos-pad line-in to computer.

As mentioned, I see some artists appear quite clueless or not caring of fine detail, and tape simply made/make their stuff sound much better than basically all the stuff what is on CD or file. It's not that tape would be mandatory or only way. Simply that it was one of easiest way to achieve certain things in music or noise, that you didn't need some guy who has mastering tools, effects and knowledge or vision, but it happens almost by accident. Simply by turning recording input a notch louder, hah..

[Zeno Marx]

digital master file

I want to be clear about this.  I meant sounds recorded digitally; the source, master files being digital.  Unless they've specifically been EQed/mastered for a particular non-digital format, I'm skeptical of them sounding better on an analog format.  If you're throwing the same master at LP/tape/CD, then better isn't likely.  Subjective?  Yes.  Of course, the artist could intend on the degradation of dubbing to cassette to be the last in their processing.  Personally, I think that would be silly, but it's a possibility.  I'd still prefer to hear the digital master in that instance.  Getting sidetracked.  Sorry.

[Jaakko V.]

digital master file

I want to be clear about this.  I meant sounds recorded digitally; the source, master files being digital.  Unless they've specifically been EQed/mastered for a particular non-digital format, I'm skeptical of them sounding better on an analog format.  If you're throwing the same master at LP/tape/CD, then better isn't likely.  Subjective?  Yes.  Of course, the artist could intend on the degradation of dubbing to cassette to be the last in their processing.  Personally, I think that would be silly, but it's a possibility.  I'd still prefer to hear the digital master in that instance.  Getting sidetracked.  Sorry.

I get the idea and agree with it that tape can sound better. Specifically in cases where the original master doesn't sound powerful enough (in the case of harsh noise for example). The same can happen with vinyl - the minor distortions etc. can in some cases make it better than CD.

It's a risky thing to count on, though. Too many variables in the equation if one considers the case from the point of view of sound. I'd say CD/digital is much better for delivering the sound as intended. Working with tape when mastering and transferring the positive aspects of tape to digital would probably be the best solution in many cases. Simply for the reason that people often have so shitty sound systems. The CD option may still sound alright, even if the final result varies of course from home to home, but considering the quality of players people use to listen to their tapes nowadays... Jesus Christ. The variables expand. Ideally everyone would be using Nakamichi or whatever, but surprisingly many use some shitty boomboxes or crappy old Walkmans connected to their stereo systems, heh! In that case all equing or whatever can be thrown out of window.

[SinkSlopProcessing]

It's a risky thing to count on, though. Too many variables in the equation if one considers the case from the point of view of sound. I'd say CD/digital is much better for delivering the sound as intended. Working with tape when mastering and transferring the positive aspects of tape to digital would probably be the best solution in many cases. Simply for the reason that people often have so shitty sound systems. The CD option may still sound alright, even if the final result varies of course from home to home, but considering the quality of players people use to listen to their tapes nowadays... Jesus Christ. The variables expand. Ideally everyone would be using Nakamichi or whatever, but surprisingly many use some shitty boomboxes or crappy old Walkmans connected to their stereo systems, heh! In that case all equing or whatever can be thrown out of window.

Agree completely. But we can sit here and debate sound quality all day long, while the real problem is that CDs aren't selling in this community anymore (or in any music genre for that matter). Any future physical releases I do are going to have to be on tape because of this hatred of CDs that's cropped up. Several distributors I've spoken to have refused to carry even replicated CDs anymore, and I can't really blame them because they just don't sell as well as tapes. I do enjoy tapes, more so these days than ever. But I do often feel like I'm being forced into it, which is ironic for a medium that's supposed to be about being democratic and accessible. On that note, CD-Rs are are generally cheaper per unit than cassettes for small runs, and a burner costs $30 or less now. Plus most people probably already have a device in their house that plays CDs - no need to buy any new equipment! So is it really about affordability and accessibility? Or is it about fashion?

Now, of course, everyone looks back on those days with some hue of romanticism and these days tapes are mass consumer products or fetish items (no difference). They've become means in themselves. Redundant means, too. If I buy a tape it isn't an endorsement of the physical media, it's because I want the sounds on it. Put that stuff online and you can keep the tapes, I'll get the download.

The problem with digital (and the main advantage with physical) is that there is no way to sell digital files without signing your rights away to your own work. Any hosting site you sell through essentially owns your work - full stop. (I recall our past discussion about bandcamp in particular). Physical is literally the only way to retain the rights to your own work. Which is a sad state of affairs, and one that I don't wish to support. For all my grumbling about the tape thing above, I'd sooner buy (and have gladly bought) numerous tapes directly from an artist, rather than ever give more money to companies trying their damnedest to trample on artists' rights.