I have a small recording studio in my house; granted modern technology puts the ability to record caterwauling at arms length for everyone, and YouTube has proven that. My studio is admittedly modest on the recording side and enviable on the post-production side; which is ironic because I tend to enjoy simpler, more acoustic or “unplugged” tracks. That is not to say, however, that I don’t still enjoy some fantastically over-produced studio material.
The music industry certainly isn’t a new one, and there was definitely money to be made selling albums in the pre-digital era, as demonstrated by the Beatles. In more recent times, you can’t deny that acts like the Spice Girls and T-Pain have been successful, but they could never have existed in the 60′s. Partly because their particular style and sound would have offended even more people, but mainly because they can’t actually sing. These, and many other, acts can only exist through the use of modern digital tools. And yet, these kinds of acts make millions, even billions, so somebody must be listening.
Which do you prefer? Tinker with it less, and present it warts and all; or produce it to perceived perfection?
["User Input" is the AtomicToasters Question of the Day™ asking you, the teeming millions, to answer our pressing questions.]