There’s no denying the advances in recording technology in the last 50 years. What we have to work with now is, on the whole, better, smaller, cheaper. For those of us trying to get tracks down in the 70s and 80s, looking at the vast array on offer today makes us wish we’d had this equipment then. However, spend some time listening to tracks recorded in the 70s and 80s, even further back, and they often exhibit a quality that belies the limitations of the equipment. It leaves one asking; “Has recording quality really improved in the last 50 years?”

The Evolution of Recording Technology

I was in the gym and had found a Classic Rock playlist to push me to 5K. I shuffle them to ensure I’m not too bored and like the surprise of unexpected songs. The first one to play was Barracuda by Heart (1977), I had to look to see who it was. It bore little musical resemblance to the M.O.R 80s sound that Heart are much more known for. This song rocks and even more the snare sounds fantastic.

When musos often cite great recordings they tend to use examples like Steely Dan, but when you start to explore the mainstream recordings of the period, there are plenty of examples of incredible quality, such as the vocal on Hey Jude (1968) or Go Your Own Way (1976). Or the backing vocals on Take It Easy (1972), or Bohemian Rhapsody (1974). I could cite examples of drums, keyboards, guitars, or in fact entire orchestras from the period, Kashmir (1975), for example.

The late 20th century saw the apex of analogue technology, with recording studios boasting massive mixing consoles and tape machines that were as temperamental as they were beloved. These were the tools that captured the sounds of a generation, encoding them onto a physical medium that would age, degrade, and imbue the music with a certain warmth over time.

The digital revolution, heralded by the arrival of the compact disc in the early 1980s, promised clarity, permanence, and convenience. As DAWs became the norm in the late '90s and early 2000s, the process of recording, editing, and mixing underwent a seismic shift. Suddenly, engineers had the ability to manipulate audio with precision previously unimaginable, from auto tuning pitch imperfections to layering hundreds of tracks without generational loss.

Beyond the Binary of Analogue and Digital

However, the essence of this article is not to rehash the analogue versus digital debate—a conversation that, while valuable, often oversimplifies the nuanced reality of recording quality. Instead, let's explore the advancements that have unequivocally improved the recording process, while considering the nuances that define what we consider "high quality" in the context of recorded sound.

Noise levels, dynamic range, and frequency response are the three pillars upon which the technical quality of a recording often rests. Modern equipment, with its low noise floor and vast headroom, allows for recordings that can capture the faintest whisper to the loudest explosion, all within the same track. Frequency response has similarly benefited from digital precision, offering a wider spectrum of sound that can be captured and reproduced.

Yet, these technical capabilities raise a pertinent question: Does the ability to record with such clarity and range automatically translate to a better listening experience? Herein lies the crux of the matter. The quality of a recording is not solely defined by its technical specifications but also by the intention and skill behind its creation.

The People Behind the Console

The transition to digital has democratised music production (a term I hate to use, but a well used trope will have to suffice), enabling anyone to create high-quality recordings in home studios, theoretically. This shift has led to an explosion of creativity and diversity in the music industry, with genres and artists emerging that might have remained unheard in the era of big studios and bigger budgets.

However, this accessibility has also led to a saturation of the market with recordings that, in some cases are no better, if not worse quality than those made 50 years ago. I want to be clear, this is not a ‘songs ain’t what they used to be’ or ‘it’s all beats and Autotune’ moment, this is a, the technical quality of the recording is often no better.

And here comes the rub. Irrespective of the fact that we’ve gone from a car to a rocket ship, figuratively speaking, with the gear we now have, the artistry of recording—understanding how to capture the essence of a performance, the atmosphere of a space, or the emotion behind a note—is not inherent in the equipment used but in the person using it. In the hands of a skilled engineer, even the most basic setup can produce recordings of remarkable quality. Conversely, the most advanced technology can fall short if used without intention and understanding. It's the human touch, the decisions made in the moment, and the understanding of how to bring out the best in a performance that truly define the quality of a recording.

Yes, it’s that truism, even if a cliche, it’s the ears not the gear. And comparing recordings made now with those made years ago, shows that to be true.

The Role of Engineers and Producers

The unsung heroes in the pursuit of recording quality are undoubtedly the audio engineers and producers, people who went before us like George Martin, Al Schmitt, Tom Dowd, et al. These masters bridged the gap between the technical and the artistic, using their tools to sculpt soundscapes that brought the artist's vision to life.

As technology has evolved, so too have the skills required to excel in this field. Modern producers must be as comfortable with software as their predecessors were with hardware, blending traditional audio engineering principles with the endless possibilities offered by digital tools. Yet, regardless of the era, the core of their role remains the same: to serve the music and realise the artist’s intent.

The evolution of recording technology over the past five decades has undeniably expanded the horizons of what's possible in music production. From the tangible warmth of analogue to the crisp precision of digital, plug-ins, or unlimited track count, each advancement has offered new tools to capture the essence of sound. However, the enduring lesson of this journey is not just about the equipment or technology itself, but about the individuals who wield these tools with artistry and vision.

The fact that some of the most revered recordings in history were made over half a century ago, with what would now be considered primitive equipment, is a testament to the critical role of the audio engineer and producer. Take a moment to listen to ‘In the Wee Small Hours of the Morning’ by Sinatra (1965), recorded before most of us were born - it could have been recorded yesterday.  These individuals did not merely operate gear; they sculpted sound, working within the constraints of their era to create audio experiences that continue to resonate with listeners today, in short, they worked bloody miracles.

I know many debates are taking place about the future of our industry with the advent of AI. I read comments daily, which whilst at first glance, may seem to be about technology, what they are really about is the fear of losing one’s job to technology. It’s not a new debate, it’s been going on for hundreds of years as new technologies threaten to replace farmers, factory workers, and now, audio engineers.

When I listen to the records made over 50 years ago it gives me an assurance. However good the technology is, and the promise it makes, the most critical component in the creation of enduring, impactful music is, and always will be, the individuals who guide the process. Their skills, insights, and creativity are the indispensable factors that elevate a piece of music from merely being heard to being truly felt, reminding us that at the heart of every great recording lies the human touch.

Image: Capricorn Studios in Macon, Georgia - COURTESY OF MERCER UNIVERSITY