Bill Bottrell interview

[Charlie_M]

TapeOp # 59. Interesting story. Not so much about gear or even about technique really - more about the guy's journey, paying dues up front, and what that was like as the industry has evolved. Doesn't really say much about where he thinks things are going now but I thought a lot of the stuff he's talking about applies no matter what.

What I got from it was:

1. You have to really break your balls in the beginning to prove yourself if you want to get anywhere.
2. Even after you do that and put yourself totally out there and pour yourself into it, understand that the progress of your career is going to be slow.
3. It's worth it.

True of most careers I think (certainly has been true of mine in a completely unrelated field). It's not a path I'm going to follow at this late stage, but I thought it was a good read, and worth recommending as perspective and food for thought on the whole thing (back issues are around $5 IIRC).

edit: almost forgot to mention that he spoke a lot about the trend toward people editing the crap out of stuff trying to get everything perfect... his argument was that there really is no place for that in rock and roll. I think he was saying "balance" ... yes it should be tight but if you're obsessing over getting the performance perfect you run the risk of ruining the rock and roll vibe. Interesting point of view coming from an apparently pretty accomplished guy.

Charlie

[brandondrury]

These old timers are on to something! When I go back and listen to recordings I've done, the best ones have almost always been live with flaws.

I think there is a mentality that goes into making a "perfect" recording. It makes a person scared. Instead of being on the offensive of creating a killer record, you get on the defensive thinking you may mess up. This kills music!

Having the balls to not give a shit is a huge part of the process. I find that most people who are worried about perfection are obsessiong about "perfection" because they are insecure. Just make a song and shut up!

Brandon

[Charlie_M]

Agree. To this day most of my favorite rock albums have been live albums.

To my mind, a perfect example is Song Remains the Same. For all the sloppiness and errors on that record, it's brilliant. I remember hearing (or reading?) and interview with one of the band members (probably Page but can't remember for sure) who characterized that album as very "honest". I thought that fit, and I thought it took balls to say.

That album was kind of a "point in time" thing though. I doubt that it would sell worth beans if it were released today. Which makes it no less great, but still something to keep in mind. The reason I think it wouldn't sell though is not that it was sloppy in some places, the reason is that the songs that made that album great tended to be long. I think an 11 minute song has been the kiss of death for a long time (which by the way is why Tool's 3rd eye stood out in my mind for its time... now there's a more recent example of an album oozing with vibe IMHO.. but even that is starting to be a historical statement now!).

Charlie

[brandondrury]

I like where this discussion is going. Let's take it over to the The Song Length Thread