DOES SOFTWARE MAKE US LAZY? The “Good” Old Days! • 09.29.08
![]() |
It may come as a surprise to many that there was a time when home recording was almost impossible.
When Cubase was a twinkle in some lunatic scientist’s brain, Richard Nixon was still a wannabe and Sarah Palin wasn’t even a twinkle in her Daddy’s eye!. But there is something to be said about what the pre-technology days gave us - the techniques it tuaght, the discipline it engendered in how we use the wonderful technology we have today. |
I’m NOT a grandpa and I’m NOT talking about the “good old days” when times were hard but life was good. (Note that one for a Country song lyric).
I am talking about the days when I had hair down to my shoulders …. I had hair, come to think of it …. when the Beatles were charting and the Stones were rolling rather than rolling-in-it.
My kid brother and I could write music, sing well, and play too. He could make a collection of cardboard boxes sound like an acceptable drum kit. But recording one live take of two guitars and two voices was limiting. My brother won’t mind me saying that he couldn’t do the Don Henley thing - play those “drums” AND sing at the same time.
We needed more. The first step up came with the purchase of a tiny cassette tape machine - a Phillips 3302 to be precise. It came with a tiny plastic mic, no mains, no power supply (buy an adapter separately) and the sound quality wasn’t great. If you used it for any length of time, the “drive belt” - a glorified rubber band which transferred power from the tiny motor to the capstans - would stretch. Wow and flutter become a huge problem.
Songs in E would dip alarming, as low as C and then rise equally dramatically to F or above and all of this repeatedly giving the impression that the music was being played on a roller coaster or a storm-bound ship. We must have spent a relative fortune replacing those drive belts.
But we had a method of recording and we soon began to explore the possibility of “double tracking” - laying down a backing track and then putting another take on top of it. With no way to split the four tracks on the tape, or the input to them, this meant more expense, and a second, identical machine.






