# Man Of La Mancha...

- Site: Analog Industries
- Author: Chris Randall
- Date: 2013-06-29
- URL: https://analogindustries.com/2013/06/man-of-la-mancha/

![Man Of La Mancha...](https://analogindustries.com/images/blog/Data-Garden-Natlab-Opstelling-19581.jpg)

Okay, here's the deal: I'm not a millionaire. Or even a ten-thousandaire. But I was always told "dream big!" And I _do_ have a big dream. I've had this dream for a while, but I've only told two people about it, because I thought it sounded kind of stupid. They didn't laugh in my face when I told them, so maybe it's not a stupid dream after all.

Here's the thing: I would like to (re)create a late-50s / early-60s tape-based electronic music studio (of the sort used by Stockhausen, Varese, Schaeffer, Dissevelt, Dockstader, et al) that was completely free for interested parties to use. My thinking here is that a facility like that is not a whole lot of use to a single person, but wouldn't it be interesting if, say, Richard Devine or Alessandro Cortini or other current experimental electronic musicians had access to a vintage electronic music studio? What would they make, bringing today's musical vernacular to that context? I think that's music worth hearing, honestly.

I have a firm idea of what equipment such a studio would have, and I have a good working knowledge of how that equipment is used. But I have no idea how to bring it about other than throwing a shit ton of money at it. My dream precludes financial renumeration (it would be fiscally impossible to make such a facility actually turn a profit, of course) so I would operate it on the following basis: if you have musical credibility in our peer group (and since it's not a terribly large group, that isn't even really a judgement call) and you can get yourself here and put yourself up and pay the expenses (tape ain't cheap), schedule permitting, it's yours to use as you see fit.

Okay, maybe it isn't silly. It would be tough to pull off, though. Go ahead. Have at it. Laugh and laugh. In the meantime, here's some vintage e-music studio porn:

![Man Of La Mancha...](https://analogindustries.com/images/blog/machine-pierre-schaeffer2.jpg)

## Comments (51)

**shamann** (2013-06-29):

I don't think it's ridiculous. Could be a cool thing. Would it all need to be vintage gear? I could see cost/sourcing/maintaining has potential to be a nightmare.

I realize the irony in saying it given recent posts, but crowdfunding might be a viable option to get it started. The Save The Tank guy raised $40k to, uh, save the tank, and granola drum circles in highly reverberant spaces has to be as niche of a music genre as retro experimental radio studio. Otherwise, various local/state/national/corporate arts grants might be worth pursuing. Seems likely there are groups around that support such endeavours if it's operated as a non-profit museum.

**bongo_x** (2013-06-29):

It's an intriguing idea and it seems like there should be some way to do it.

Maybe you put it together for a limited amount of time, even months or a year, invite a bunch of great musicians to each make a track, and make a album or box set out of the tracks then break up the studio. The gimmick is everyone uses the exact same gear and studio.

Of course you need to do this with someone else's money, as all records should be made.

Would the gear you're thinking about really cost that much though?

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-29):

The gear wouldn't be that much (hours and hours on eBay and Soundbroker and its European analogs would be the main investment, not money as such), but actually having somewhere to put it is another story entirely.

Or to put it another way, my wife is very forbearing; I regularly test the limits of that forbearance. I know her breaking point, and "a clone of Stockhausen's studio c. 1958 in our guest bedroom" is well past it.

So we're talking commercial real estate rental, electricity, interwebs, security, and a build-out. Luckily, this sort of thing doesn't need an air-tight good sounding live room or a 32-channel API console. It is a fairly inexpensive operation, as such things go. And commercial real estate is very cheap to lease here.

It's still a big project, even with that. My back-of-the-napkin scribblings show about $100K for the basic build-out and operational budget for a year. That would give me a year to figure out how to make it make money to keep itself alive. I will state here and now that selling records and studio time, both of which I have _extensive_ experience with, are really super-duper stupid things to depend on for income.

-CR

**Duke Fame** (2013-06-29):

What about a Rolling truck Stones thing? Wouldn't that increase the appeal to a potential user if it was mobile and could be, for example, wheeled to LA for a month-long project? The cons that I can see of such a thing would be size limitation and possible fragility of the equipment.

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-29):

Also, "weaksauce" and "I'm not a trucker" plus "I have a career and stuff" are considerations. Considering I have to do all the hard shit, I think getting on a plane is a pretty small price to pay for the use of the space.

In any case, I actually spent the evening just randomly pricing things out, and I think a really good set of gear acquired, and a year's rent paid on a Grand Ave. space, can be had for significantly less than $100K. Less than half that, in fact. I didn't realize mastering decks were so cheap now. It looks like an MTR-10 with a 1/4" stereo headstack goes for around $700 these days. I also have an idea to have it make money. Maybe not enough to support itself, but enough to at least pay the rent.

-CR

**obscurerobot** (2013-06-30):

I like the idea of a studio like this existing.

I think you've indirectly identified one of the major problems, though. From what I've read of the early tape music work, it often took months to produce a few minutes of music. So the big question is - how is anyone ever going to be able to afford the time, much less the room and board, to make use of this studio?

**kcrosley** (2013-06-30):

Hmm... Would this be organized as a non-profit? Surely I'm not the only person who shares this passion and who could benefit from a charitable deduction? (Actually, I'm not so sure I'm not alone on this. But, well, here I am, eh?)

**TZ** (2013-06-30):

I like the idea very much. A mixture between the Raymond Scott studio and for example this one: http://www.drowninginbrown.com/dib_studio.htm

If everything is record ready it shouldn't take up much time. Except tape config and after you did a few times it goes pretty fast.

Will you have some sort of digital multitrack (maybe hardware to stay linear) to dump tape tracks?

btw: The daft punk article in SOS from this month is a nice read regarding their purity in recording onto tape.

**mitchell** (2013-06-30):

It seems you're mainly discussing getting it operational, but here's another thing: how many musicians (in our peer group or not) are really capable of utilizing this kind of thing? Like most of us, I can program a mean analog synth, run Logic, set up a mic, etc., but my real life hands-on experience with tape machines is like, a worn out Dokken cassette and a lot of poorly executed jams on a four-track machine. Note that I didn't mention a razor blade. Or the math involved in converting music notation (BTW, what's that?) into sliced up chunks of tape. Which I've never attempted to slice. Or tape back together. How many of us have even owned a reel-to-reel machine? Et cetera, et cetera.

It's a still a pretty rad idea though.

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-30):

Well, regarding the time, it's worth mentioning that those guys spent months because they were inventing the methods we use now. Those methods are already invented. Plus we have access to technologies that many of them couldn't even imagine. I don't see any particular reason to do destructive bounces or edits on the master when we have Ableton Live. There's "a cool way to come up with sounds" and then there's "spending time needlessly simply for the purpose of anachronism."

Another thing they didn't have: chromatic digital tuners. Think about _that_ time saver. The first Peterson strobe tuner didn't come out until 1967.

In any case, these guys weren't too particular about sourcing sound, and I don't think forcing the artist to create melody lines by splicing together tones from an HP 202c would be inspirational so much as really irritating. I'd certainly have those tools available, in their original form, as they're fairly easy to find, but it's important to remember that a Euro-Rack synth is basically a miniature form of those very tools, and we might as well utilize it if it is available to us. Plus it is a familiar palette to most current e-music artists.

But in any event, studio ops (me, of course, and whomever else wants to learn it and hang out) that know the methods of the Old School, and can suggest them at appropriate points and actually do the work (like a real live recording engineer, even in this modern age we live in) would grease the skids.

-CR

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-30):

As an addendum, this sort of thing really isn't that complex, if you know the methodology. Check this video out for a quick example of pure tape music writing with just a tone generator, a shortwave, and three decks.

http://vimeo.com/53891959

-CR

**xmodz** (2013-06-30):

Sounds like it could be a cool location to hold a synth meetup, an educational workshop/classes, or even a small demonstration/performance.

**bcomnes** (2013-06-30):

Hey Chris

Read the history of the SF Tape Music Center at http://www.mills.edu/campus_life/center_for_contemporary_music/archives.php

SUbotnick and others put together just such a lab that you want with shared access but it looked like it only lasted 5 years before the "tape center" evolved into something else. The group/organization exists today and they sponsor performances but I wonder if any vetige of the old lab exists?

**darklordjames** (2013-06-30):

It sounds to me like you found your Kickstarter. It's even the kind of project that Kickstarter was originally intended to fund.

**noisetheorem** (2013-06-30):

Here is an idea: run it as kind of a museum, and look for some grant money and donations. I am certain there are guys with too much money and a love for electronic music who would help in that regard (and you could probably find most of them in the Buchla section of muffwiggler).

I'm not rich, but I'd kick in a few bucks. I'd value this more than I do NPR and I give them $120 a year (and you don't even need to send me a tote bag).

**pepezabala** (2013-06-30):

yip, grant money. or partner with a university. there should be funds at european art schools and universities that can help you making it real. maybe you should make it aprojet first. Get grant money to rebuild stockhausen's studio from 1958 for an exhibit, and then take all the stuff and "put it into storage" somewhere close to where you live.

**DGillespie** (2013-06-30):

Yeah, I think you should be looking for a university to partner with. Honestly, I wonder if you couldn't piece the whole thing together from stuff I've seen sitting in the back of classrooms at the Columbia Computer Music Center - http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/about/

It is an obvious Kickstarter, but I bet there are several universities out there with the correct gear sitting around gathering dust while kids take Ableton classes or whatever.

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-30):

My major hurdle here would be that I know exactly zero about academia. Or making 501(c)(3) corporations. S-Corp? Done it half a dozen times? C-Corp? That too. But the other flavors, I just don't even... But that's what lawyers and accountants are for, and that brings us back full circle.

In any event, let's have a checklist of what such a facility would offer:

1. The obvious main function: being a free-to-use electronic music recording studio, with a heavy bias to the tape arts, but utilizing modern technology where not doing so would just be makework, and not bring anything to the process.

2. The obvious secondary function: performance space for the above.

3. A place for clinics (Ableton User Group meetings, etc.)

4. An art gallery. The location I'm thinking of is on the 1st/3rd Friday route, albeit an area secondary to the main route (Grand Ave, around the Pie Factory, for the locals), and while this may not mean a lot in other cities, it is a _very_ big deal here. Phoenix's First Friday is by far the largest in the country, and regularly draws 50K people, who are all predisposed to interesting things. Many businesses on the 1st Friday route do 100% of their commerce that one day a month, and aren't even open the rest of the month.

5. And this is in no way important to the discussion, but I just thought I'd add it: a place to put my coin-op arcade games. Or to put it another way, it would fulfill the same function for musicians that the VFW or Eagles Lodge fulfills to old guys: a place to hang out and bullshit.

Anyhow, I'm just spitballing here. I believe the idea is feasible. It wouldn't make anyone rich in dollars, but could conceivably be a good addition to the musical culture of this city, such as it is, and provide a valuable resource to people around the country and/or world.

-CR

**Mr. B** (2013-06-30):

I think it's both crazy and an excellent idea. For whatever it's worth, you can put me in the column for those who'd be willing to donate or support a kick-starter style campaign. The one caveat is that my support would not quite reach the level of "guy who hangs out in Buchla section of muffwiggler" due to the confines of circumstance.

**obscurerobot** (2013-06-30):

You can solve the academia problem by finding a good grant writer who has experience with academic grants in the arts. "Grant Writer" is a fairly common job description in the nonprofit world, they live and die based on their ability to secure institutional funding.

Creating a 501(c)3 is more complex than just creating a corporation. You have to form your entity first, and then convince the IRS to accept your status as a nonprofit. This may or may not be hard to do for a music studio. I've heard that umbrella organizations exist that allow you to work within their 501(c)3 status. I have no idea how legitimate these are, or what the costs are. But it would probably be worth checking out.

**MikeF** (2013-06-30):

To me this sounds as useful as bringing back the horse and buggy. Call me crazy but if I wanted to do musique concrete, I'd do it in a DAW. However, I am sure I am missing the point of the whole thing which would be nothing new.

My suggestion is to contact the Red Bull Music Academy for corporate sponsorship. They have had Q&A's with so many obscure / experimental musicians that they just might consider something like this. $100K would be nothing for them.

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-30):

One thing I know about you from your many comments here, Mike, is that you have a difficult time seeing potential. I only note that because I'm the opposite: I have a difficult time seeing the pragmatic actuality, and _only_ think in terms of potential. This facet of my personality is, in fact, the reason I make a pretty good living doing what I do.

But, the flip side is when I see a comment like yours, I'm like "doesn't he see...?" And I don't particularly know how to answer it other than to just say "trust me."

That aside, that's an excellent suggestion. I used to have a very good relationship with the Red Bull people; perhaps it is time to rekindle it.

-CR

**bongo_x** (2013-06-30):

I'm somewhere in between in that I don't understand the point if you're going to use DAW's as part of the process. Why not just fire up Berna then and save a lot of money?

http://www.giorgiosancristoforo.net/softwares/berna/

Otherwise it seems like you'd be feeding some oscillators into the DAW, making samples and chopping them up. Which everyone could do at home, and does. At what point are you saying "that's a hardware job and that's a software job"? It seems to me what's unique in the old stuff is inseparable from the tedious methodology.

**huggie** (2013-06-30):

There use to be a studio that I used here in Auckland, New Zealand with many of the old bits of gear needed for that kind of music creation. Unfortunately he has moved down country and now it is a 4 hour round trip to visit him! I used his gorgeous 1960s Ampex Valve 1/2 inch 2 track a few times. Here it is: http://ekadek.com/?page_id=21

He is very capable technician specialising in valve and tape gear. In fact he makes amazing custom built mixers, tape delays, spring verbs, plate verbs, compressors and eqs, from old designs. All point to point valve devices that sound amazing!

My guess is if you want this kind of studio you need to have someone like this to help make it possible.

Check out the massive magnetic delay unit he has. He calls it Ray the delay :

http://ekadek.com/?page_id=22

- Hugo

**MikeF** (2013-06-30):

I didn't realize that I posted enough comments here that anyone would be able to form an impression of my personality. I am just playing devil's advocate. If all 30 people are in agreement on a topic, I tend to take the other side just to add some balance. I think it's healthy to have dissenting opinions in any discussion. I actually can see the value of getting away from computers for a while just because it forces you to work and think in a different way.

In any case, ignore my wet blanket contrariness and get in touch with Red Bull and get the ball rolling!

personality

Have I posted that many comments that you have formed of my personality?

**metaphysician** (2013-06-30):

bongo does bring up a good point, Chris, and you yourself have really enjoyed/been challenged by using things like that Roland computer requiring a fair amount of tedious setup/configuration, as well as other things of that sort. i do tend to think the process is part of the challenge or mystique. i mean, if Xenakis did 'Concrete-PH' in MaxMSP instead of by splicing hundreds of tape chiclets of burning charcoal together, i'd be less inclined to be impressed.

nonetheless i think it's a great idea. i certainly went to college where they had an old TEAC 4 track reel to reel plus an Ampex 300 30 ips 1/2 track and a couple of others available, so i experienced the workflow before MIDI and computers. i totally sucked at splicing so i'd be less inclined towards that thing personally, but allowing a space where older and newer workflows could combine in creative and unforseen ways could be beneficial. for example, i bet the Berna app doesn't allow you to play with the tape rewinding speed on those virtual tape machines ala Dissevelt. having the physical thing there before can present you with a lot of options you might not know you had if you'd only experienced the virtual/digital version.

anyway i'm in full support of the project, and will give what i can. and 501 c3's are not a big deal to apply for, though it does take time and paperwork. as a first step you can pretty easily be sponsored by another non-profit as an umbrella organization. something like Joel Chadabe's EMF might be a place to start, but i'm sure there are many others dedicated to experimental electronic arts.

best of luck and keep me in the loop as to developments!

**MikeF** (2013-06-30):

Whoops, I rewrote my comment and accidentally left over some fragments. It should have ended on "rolling!"

**Jinsai** (2013-06-30):

Seems like an interesting Kickstarter project. Perhaps you could get a grant from CCRMA, Dartmouth, Mills, or one of the other American universities with electronic music programs.

However, as someone who studied electro-acoustic music for many years, under some of the people who were students of Stockhausen, Varese, Cage, etc. I have to say they'd probably be the first to embrace digital recording.

Splicing tape is a pain in the ass. I'd much rather drag waveforms on a screen. It would be nice to have that stuff around, but I'd almost see it as a "colonial Williamsburg" thing than useful tools.

I do love the idea of a non-pretentious, affordable desert studio space for the creation of non-oontz-oontz electronic music. [insert something about Steve Roach here].

**mitchell** (2013-06-30):

Like Mike (heheh), maybe I'm not really "seeing the potential", because I can be that way. if I walked into a room full of vintage tape music techno, cool retro gadget part of me would be as excited as any of us. But if you're gonna use a Eurorack oscillator instead of an HP test oscillator (and I can't think of a reason not to), plugged into a digital tuner and record/splice/edit in Live (or some other DAW, which again is a far better idea to me), then how exactly does this "electronic music studio" differ from the one I'm currently typing on? It sounds like what you have left over is tape machines that you might use for echo or mixdown. And perhaps a fun, but relatively unused room full of antiquated gear that most people won't be bothered with.

Don't get me wrong- one would definitely make a different kind of music with a pile of test oscillators, spring reverbs, razor blades and tape machines than they would with Live, even if you attempted to apply the now-arbitrary constraints of "strict" musique concrete tape music. I'm sure most AI readers are familiar with the BBC Radiophonic compilations, which are filled with the sound of hacked-up tape melodies. It's certainly a unique and awesome sound that would be almost impossible to replicate in a modern DAW... to me that's the only really good reason for this kind of place, but I'm not sure most would go to the trouble (or have the skillset to). I don't have that kind patience, and I'm a pretty tedious fellow.

**Tom Whitwell** (2013-07-01):

Chris, this is definitely the most exciting idea I've heard for a long time, let me know if there is any way at all that I can help.

Anyone who has used Berna for any amount of time knows that the point/click interface is frustrating, but the process is very inspiring. That's probably why Giorgio Sancristoforo, who coded Berna, now uses a Buchla modular and tape http://vimeo.com/15257590

I've watched that Mr Müller video so many times, so inspiring.

As well as a working studio space, you'd also be building a creative hub in your city, the kind of place that will change hundreds of lives for the better. If I didn't live 5,000 miles away, I'd offer to come and help you paint the place.

**boobs** (2013-07-03):

re: Audio Playground/Joseph Rivers - i met him when i lived in orlando. nice guy. the studio was a very large collection of vintage synths + traditional recording studio.

he rented synths to clients in the studio. he would give tours now and then and chat about the synths and studio but wasn't really a classic EM studio of the tape music era... though probably could do some of that if configured.

there was/is? a large web presence and he did have some cool things on the site like guis of the synths and soem drum machines w/samples etc i haven't looked in a long time though.

**ToneHead** (2013-07-03):

jwcase: >"I eschew the "blending the new tools with the old" philosophy. this is what every studio in the universe is marketing right now. inserting, or modeling/ sampling old kit for its "punch" or "warmth" to mitigate "sterile" DAW output"

I agree with you there, I didn't really intend to suggest that CR cater to that commonplace approach, but rather assemble sort of "CR's Cabinet of Musical Curiosities", applying his particular taste in gear to assemble a minimal but effective studio that also serves as a sort of electronic music shrine / meeting place. (At least that seemed to be the general direction I interpreted from his comments.) A Eurorack could work well in that context. Alternately he could focus on just classic tape techniques, which would certainly simplify the agenda from a gear selection standpoint.

**nathanjc** (2013-07-04):

"...and out of the ashes an analog industry will arise."

this is a really interesting debate. do we a: limit ourselves to what was available in the era of said equipment and implant a modern understanding/approach to its practice?, or b: incorporate not only modern techniques but technologies as well? the later stance does raise the question of what was missed in the development of technologies that lead to the DAW in laptops.

since this thread began i have been on the fence, and i still am- i think. the romantic part of me would like the more pure approach, but the rational side asks: "what would that gain? why limit? granular synthesis is a ****ing pain in the *** on tape!"

i feel that if something were to be designed with a conscience towards the historical element, we can not deny the evolutionary reality- otherwise we would be debating the difference between a tapedeck and notation.

i know that this is an awesome idea and is something that should be extended beyond a single thread, and hopefully will result in a place and practice. but, i have to ask "did digital kill something?"

**analog monster** (2013-07-04):

I'm only 25, young and new(ish) to the industry. I have never heard R2R tape directly from the machine - I mean I listen to subotnick, stockhausen and carlos for example, but they are all digital rips. In fact I have never even seen a maintained machine, but plenty sat rotting in the corner. I'm in the final year of a UK university degree and talking to my peers Its fair to say that's the norm. Some of the younger ones haven't even seen a cassette tape before!

Where I am unusual is my dedication to hardware. Not necessarily analog, although a lot is. I collect unusual devices, devices that didn't sell well because they had horrible interfaces. I don't see it as a problem, I see it as a rewarding challenge. And challenges also lead to more happy accidents than easy things do.

I have had many arguments with people who do not seem to understand that easier does not mean better - some of the best music has been made under the duress of limitations. But with the power of today's technology available to us, it take a certain kind of person to self impose limitation.

Personally I would love to get involved with a project like this. Sadly I'm UK based so I don't think that's going to happen. But I believe you will easily get enough like minded individuals together, just look at the hackspace craze going on around the world. Build it and they will come!

**Chris Randall** (2013-07-04):

I was at an e-music producer's get-together last night, and I had a little booth with a MacBook Pro running Live 9, an Analog Four, and an original Oberheim SEM.

A kid in his early 20s came up to me and said "so you're the owner of Audio Damage?" I reply "co-owner." He goes "cool. Did you make these VSTs?"

He's pointing at the Analog Four and SEM.

This serves to illuminate analog monster's point. I think, in our comfortable environment here and with our like-minded peers, we have zero fucking idea how little the average "kids today" know about this world. At this get-together, 100% of the producers use Live 9 on MacBooks with a little USB interface. And that's it. That's their sum total of their experience with music gear _AT ALL_. This is true for the vast majority of people making electronic music these days.

Something to ponder. Whether it's good or bad is a subjective opinion. I submit that it is bad. The gear becomes a funnel, and the narrow end is where the music comes out.

-CR

**MikeF** (2013-07-04):

Stockhausen: "And when I compose in electronic timbres, then I have my own timbre-scales, and actually I have a hundred degrees of dynamics in the studio when I work with ProTools."

http://www.stockhausen.org/stockhausen%20_by_david_paul.html

**Chris Randall** (2013-07-04):

And your point is?

-CR

**MikeF** (2013-07-04):

My point is that analog monster cites Subotnick, Stockhausen, and Carlos as tape musicians. The reality is all three embraced the current tools of the day including digital recording. A while ago, I attended a Subotnick concert which he performed with just a Mac and mouse.

Having said that, I think when we moved from analog to digital, we lost the benefits of dedicated controls specific to each piece of gear. It is frustrating to have the power of a DAW trapped behind a screen with only a mouse or a generic controller like Novation which I find even more frustrating.

**ToneHead** (2013-07-04):

kleenex=paper tissue

VST=synthesizer

ToneHead=Rip Van Winkle

Jeez that "kid in his early 20s" anecdote made me feel ancient ... (I had to reread it because I first thought you said "kid in his early 2s")

That loss of history is why your dream, however you might choose to pursue it, is valuable. It reminds me of classical musicians who pursue authentic instruments and performance styles, not because you can really recreate how Bach or Mozart did it, but because it's important that folks remember that it was once done differently, if only to illuminate something about how it is now done.

But given that "authenticity" in such things is always illusory, personally I don't mind the admixture of techniques and styles. That's what creates new culture. Potential is the other side of the coin of limitation.

**ToneHead** (2013-07-04):

Also wanted to note that the nathanjc comment "granular synthesis is a ****ing pain in the *** on tape!" was brilliant.

The first time I tried granular was by crafting a bunch of grains in Turbosynth, then loading them into an Ensoniq sampler, and sending it 500-1000 MIDI notes per second. Needless to say, the banshee shriek of an Ensoniq crashing beats granular synthesis any day of the week. Wish I'd been rolling tape.

But now that I know that all my old man stories sound like "I VST'd a VST to another VST, then VST'd the bejeesus out of it , sonny!", I can safely STFU.

**bongo_x** (2013-07-04):

I don't think the debate is whether analog is better than digital, or what the pioneers would be doing now. Complete side issues. I'm sure Picasso would be using computers, so what? It's irrelevant. If you want to paint and set up a painting studio it would be silly to set up a room with computers (and whatever software those people use) because it's easier and you can do effects in the computer you can't do with paint. That's missing the point.

**Snufkin** (2013-07-05):

Hi Chris, while I think a late 50s experimental studio would be cool I am not sure it needs to be on such a large scale, I have had a long time interest in radiophonic/concrete/experimental/early electronic music since a young age I have studies the setups in many of the european studios and a few american ones as well as reading many early books on the set up and construction of such spaces and instruments and have accumulated what I think equates to a fairly well appointed studio in miniature in my room, I firstly acquired a four track reel to reel and various other small reel to reels to experiment with echos and loops as well as recording, I then assembled a small test equipment 'modular synth' comprising of only lab equipment with BNC I/O comprising of two function generators, a fixed filter bank, a burst generator, a modular pulse generator, a noise generator a diy ring modulator, a diy passive sub mixer and a spring reverb unit, I then collected various trashy mics and am beginning to record direct to 4 track, This is a very versatile system for interesting rhythmic sync sounds and sweeps, and each piece of equipment was under £40 some like the filter bank was £5, although all this only inhabits a small area of my tiny living space I feel it approximates well the most basic techniques of these kinds of studios, I also run a eurorack modular and many later synths effects and acoustic instruments alongside eventually I will build some valve pre and eq stuff but for now I'm not sure what more I would need for this type of studio?

**I Dream Of Wires** (2013-07-05):

There was a studio/project like this in Amsterdam, the Center for Electronic Music (CEM). In the early 2000s they put out a series of 12"s that were the result of giving contemporary electronica producers free access to the studio - the Vynalogica series:

http://www.discogs.com/label/Vynalogica

It wasn't actually aiming to be a "late-50s / early-60s tape-based electronic music studio" -- Instead it was just a studio that housed a lot of vintage electronic instruments and modulars, which at the time were not something that a lot of electronic musicians had access to. Anyway, I am just pointing this out if you want to look at it as a comparable case study - I know someone who worked there at the time and curated the Vynalogica series - might be worthwhile to ask him about it. Unfortunately though, it seems that the CEM is now closed!

**TimeSpace** (2013-07-05):

Longtime fan, reader, and lurker here. I think it's a fantastic idea and I'm working on building out a medium scale studio with a semi-similar focus in Brooklyn (tentatively called "Time Space"). It's going to be less of a pure academic studio and more of something like the control/synth room at Soma Studios in Chicago, meets Richard Devine's home studio, meets the Experimental Television Center. It'll consist of a quiet and well treated/proportioned room, lots of eurorack (video modules too), some unusual/not unusual synths, a flexible Cadac J-Type console, some cool outboard, Barefoot monitors, 2trk 1/4" Ampex 440, maybe another higher track count tape machine in the future, etc. I've been working on it for a little over two years and looking to open in early Spring 14. It's going to be as affordable as I can keep it, probably about $30 an hour plus a membership plan (once I figure out what makes sense). There will also be some space to hold workshops and meet ups if people are interested. I have my doubts that it'll work out, but I'm stupid/delusional enough to try and luckily had some scratch to get it started.

Your dream studio would be amazing and was sort of where I started off with my own concept! I made a semi-conscious decision to make it a tiny bit more "friendly"/Full of Techno to please future potential users (aka laptop tweenz) who might be turned off by a more "academic" studio with half a dozen tape machines, but I wish I didn't have to. There should be a place like you describe in every town. The more the better!

Like others have said the best way to go about funding is probably Kickstarter and institutional grants. I didn't go this route, because I felt like I could initially get it off the ground and felt a little shady trying to crowdfund something more commercial, but I might pursue morphing into a non-profit residency if it's a total commercial failure (not that I expect to make much of anything). Forming a 501c3 does seem like a bit of a pain in the ass as far as the board, documentation, etc. An LLC is what I've settled on for now, since it's so straightforward.

It sounds like you've thought about the biggest hurdle which is real estate, but Phoenix is a hell of a lot cheaper than Brooklyn (which is pure real estate insanity at this point). Here in NY I would say get a long and affordable lease or try to buy a space, but there is probably a lot less risk that you'll have huge rent increases or get booted to make room for a frozen yogurt shop, luxury condo, or Hollister in Phoenix.

Another piece of big advice is quadruple vet any contractor you might hire or just DIY what you want to build. The whole process has sucked my will to live (especially dealing with the city DOB) and bank account. At this point I really wish I had just DIYed it and hired individual trades people to help. It would of taken just as long and been half as expensive.

I don't know if it was mentioned, but one problem that could arise with a more heavily tape oriented space could be tape ceasing to exist or getting stupidly expensive in the future. There will probably always be some small niche producer, but who knows. Probably not a big concern right now, since there still seems to be a market.

Best of luck if you decide to go for it! I'll definitely contribute to a Kickstarter campaign. Let me know if you have any questions, but you and everyone else here probably have pursuing something like this more figured out than I do!

**TomE** (2013-07-06):

I'm not that into the idea for a couple reasons, although this is just one person's feeling and everybody else should just keep on rolling:

1. The original facilities were built to be state of the art. Creating a replica of old state of the art seems a little pointless, when you could be creating the next thing. It doesn't relate to the spirit of the people involved who pioneered, not looking back.

Being somebody that had to work with tape because that was the best/only way, the idea of working with tape because people once did it can only be a re-enactment. So it becomes like a model farm for city kids to see cows being milked.

2. I think you should always have a need first and then fill it. So buying gear happens organically, not buying the gear then finding ways to use it. If there was a known project going on that needed tape - then get tape. The danger is the replica 60s studio is going to encourage a bunch of replica 60s music.

I have something similar going on for a video studio, but in this case the gear is the only unit still remaining and so it's a matter of preservation - do it or it's gone forever. Is that the case here? All this gear will need constant servicing, or it will fall out of service.

I know a guy who has set up a non profit based around telecommunications preservation and can put you in touch if that helps.

**stevehumbert** (2013-07-06):

Certainly the original users of such studios were true pioneers, but isn't a closer analogy of what CR is suggesting akin to giving a great electric guitarist an acoustic guitar for the very first time?

There are lots of things you can't do with an acoustic, but it makes you rethink how your music will work with a different set of constraints. One of the most common topics on this blog relates to self-imposed restraints; this studio seems to me to be a embodiment of that concept.

And cool, icy cool. I can see the demotivational poster now; "A free 50's style electronic music studio, used by talented people, in an Airstream. Your argument is beyond invalid, we simply cannot see or hear it in the glare and noise of our awesome."

Something like that...

**Chris Randall** (2013-07-06):

Yes, that exactly.

Or to put it another way, here's a copy of Live 9 and Komplete Ultimate 9, which is demonstrably about 3,000,000 times the sound-manipulating capability of the Philips studio. Make me a hit, because you obviously have the tools.

Oh, wait. You're uninspired by the Scarbee Funk Guitarist sample set? Sorry. Didn't realize context was that important. My bad.

-CR

**atlastop** (2013-07-08):

Tools are tools. Good music gets made on everything and anything. But some things are much more fun play with!

To those that say 'this isn't forward looking', 'the pioneers wouldn't use this today' etc. The past is a vast resource for exploring the future. In fact one could say the future is just the past with modifications... but I'm not quite old enough to be THAT grumpy.

Or maybe this studio is just taking the analog retro wave to an extreme?

I'd really like to hear what Boards of Canada could do in this kinda studio. But I think that their studio probably looks a lot like the above pic already.

**hamdust** (2013-07-10):

everything jwcase said.

fuck all that 'blending old and new'.

aside from a computer/daw there should be nothing post-moon landing in there.

**In Black** (2013-07-15):

Is a Kickstarter or anything of the sort being considered? I'd definitely donate. It'll be the Veronica Mars movie of synth-junkies.

**Automatic Gainsay** (2013-07-15):

Hi, Chris.

This is what the New BBC Radiophonic Workshop SHOULD have been. I endorse this idea with all of my heart.

Yes, computers are superawesome... but it is axiomatic: convenience and creativity are inversely proportional.

I would love to be involved with this. I am an electronic music historian, vintage technologist, composer, synthesist, and the archive and education specialist at a very-well-known foundation associated with a synth pioneer. Let me know how I can help.