By J.J. Blair | Wed, 01 Dec 2010
For more than four decades, Pete Townshend has stood at
the epicenter of one of the most influential rock acts of all
time—The Who. Here, EQ looks back on our August 2007
interview, in which Townshend shares insights on the role
of artist as producer.
EQ: You were one of the first recording artists to have a
home studio. How difficult was that to achieve back then?
Townshend: It wasn’t until I got to my apartment on Wardour
Street in early 1967 that I found a place where I
could make as much noise as I liked. It was a commercial
room, so the buildings around it were empty at night, when
I did most of my work. It was here I got my first mixer—a
little filmmaker’s Uher—and a Grampian spring reverb. A
little later in this same room, I supplemented my Vortexion
machines [that ran at 7.5 ips] with two Revox G37s. These
ran at 15 ips, and they sounded superb. I had no idea at
the time about aligning them, and just experimented with
different types of tape to get the best sound.
Do you have any advice for the people who have
decided to forego the use of professional studios
and make their records at home?
Tricky question. It would be wrong to generalize; everyone
works in his or her own way. I would say try to keep your
recording system as simple as you can. Don’t be tempted
by software upgrades if you are in the middle of a project
that is going well. Wait for the break. If you can, start with
something—whether acoustic or sampled or synthetic—that
inspires you, and stay close to that first inspiration and
make the process about honoring it. Something happens
at point zero in the creative process that is special, and is
easily muddied by process or self-indulgence. On the
other hand, you have to enjoy the process, so if getting it
muddy makes you happy, go for it. We all enjoy our own
demos more than anyone else on the planet…because we
were there throughout the whole process.
You have made some of the most adventurous production
decisions in rock. Do you feel that putting
off decisions and throwing the kitchen sink at a
song’s production can be beneficial or detrimental?
The dual role of artist and producer could be a tricky one.
If you’ve recorded at home, maybe it demonstrates humility
to allow dramatic adjustments to be made later on. On the
other hand, if you are a hot-shot, big-name producer, it
might be that you know the record company is going to
want some other hot shot to remix your mixes. Pro Tools
makes all of this possible, and natural. However, I think
better music is made in layers, when musical decisions are
made as you go along. How can you, for example, add a
cello part to a song that really blends when you know that
someone further down the line could completely change
the backing track underneath it and put it out as a solo
cello record? That’s an extreme example, but musicians
like to listen to what is there and work with it or against it.
They work with what they have. Even so, great records
have been made in so many different ways; it’s tempting to
preach one method, but that would be Luddism.