i tend to have a sort of love / hate relationship with my recordings so i apologize if i contradict myself. i'm proud of them, but embarrassed of them at the same time. like when you're a kid and you've done something wrong, but you're excited about the attention. that smug steve urkel smirk. how does writing emotionally honest, but lo-fi, abrasive, and frequently roughly performed songs jive with working in theatre where everything is about perfection and precision, not spontenaety and personal expression? the same reviews that praise my sound design and composition in theatre for being clever and meticulous tend to dismiss my own music for being rough and erratically produced. and it takes all i have not to e-mail reviewers and say "come on! look at the context. i don't have any money. of course it's all lo-fi. i record in apartments and basements. of course it's rough. you gotta lay your takes down quick so you don't piss off the neighbors."
for the past month or so i've been revisiting my backlog and trying to actually organize and archive it all for once. every few years i say i'm going to do it, get started, get distracted, and end up leaving it half done and as a result even more disorganized then when i started. i'm pretty close to done right now, so i have hope that this will be the one. we'll see. but it's been more than a little educational to actually listen to these songs again, some for the first time in 5 years. i find the ones i'd forgotten about - cut from a project, or just never finished - are the ones that hold up the best. the ones that i've held up as "important" to my life tend to be the ones with groan-worthy lyrics and out of tune vocals. mistakes all over the place, and generally incompetent production. but that doesn't make them bad necessarily. silent orbit's eps now sound silly, given how far my abilities as a producer have evolved, but they were a product of their moment. i still get e-mails from people who fondly remember those records. and as rough as they are, they still really resonate i think. but lo-fi music often holds up better in retrospect. i mean, let's be honest. does anyone actually like husker du now who wasn't around back in the day? and as much as i worship lou barlow, some of his stuff is just terrible. malkmus is the exception. the higher the production values his albums have, usually the worse they are.
ultimately lo-fi is about immediacy. it's not about sitting in the studio and trying to perfect the sound with take after take. it's not about creating something who's sound will hold up through "the ages." it's trying to get the take that feels the best and just capture a moment in time. it's about saying "look how much i was able to do with nothing!" not trying to ape the sounds of studios with a hundred times your budget. because that's just not interesting for me. in my "day job," i write music that gets poured over. analyzed. rehearsed. discussed. broken-down. injected, detected, neglected, and selected. i lose sleep about noise floor. and complain endlessly about not being given the right microphones and speakers to work with. and a lot of people in the theatre world don't even know i've recorded albums and play shows every week. and when they find out they always ask "why didn't you tell me? i would have come to your shows!" and i always shrug and say "you didn't ask." but really i just don't want them to know that at heart i don't care about using the "right" microphone. i think rehearsals are boring. i'd much rather get something that feels emotionally genuine than is technically acurate. and yeah, it's great to have a hi-fi recording of an emotional performance if you've got the resources, but sometimes a little bit of noise and distortion gives a recording character.