Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jetbase]

bernardo, don't forget that getting good sounds & good headphone mixes, etc, takes time. the time you spend getting it right in the first place is time you save later trying to make things fit, re-doing bad performances & mixing. the best tip is to stay focused & don't stand around smoking a joint   . having said that, i have spent some time exploring recording (more specifically, micing) techniques that are quick to setup & tweak & sound good pretty much straight away (and, of course, work together). i now use these techniques for when bands, due to budget, need quick setup time. another tip is, to have mics on stands, plugged in, live & ready to go before the band gets there.

cheers,
glenn

[cenafria]

jetbase wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 02:58

another tip is, to have mics on stands, plugged in, live & ready to go before the band gets there. cheers, glenn

I find this hard to do if I don't know how the kick drum or the cymbals sound, for example.

[CHANCE]

When talking setup time, that can be taken two ways, band set up, and studio set up. I usually let a group take as long as they want to set up. Usually they won't waste time, as they want to get track'in. I don't charge for this. The clock starts when I open the mic cabinet and do MY set up

[Daniel Asti]

I'm always involved in the setup no matter what size of band. I like to see how they setup and help them out in placement. I try and make them feel as comfortable as possible. I find even the best studio musicians can use encouragement and guidance within environment.

That being said it takes about 30 minutes to 1 hour to get a five peice setup.  I like to have them pick about 3 different parts to the track we are recording so I can get a sense of dynamics and a sense of their comfort. I always have someone assisting and giving me feedback. It sure is easy to miss something with that many people and the last thing you need is to be doing things over and over especially if you got a good take but scewed it up.

I really like to work with the artist to get them the absolute best quality sound for monitoring and hopefully that plays to their strengths. The mood is so important and the right energy is crucial. For me it has to be loose but professional... and you have to be honest and to the point with musicians

[Guthrie Saunders]

archtop wrote on Thu, 04 May 2006 15:36

1/2 hour,  1 hour tops.

no way, impossible!!  A half hour, c'mon. It takes a half hour just to get the band in the builing and set up.

[cenafria]

Guthrie Saunders wrote on Sun, 21 May 2006 03:41

archtop wrote on Thu, 04 May 2006 15:36 1/2 hour,  1 hour tops. no way, impossible!!  A half hour, c'mon. It takes a half hour just to get the band in the builing and set up.

I too expressed surprise.

Half an hour from the moment the doorbell rings to the moment you hit the record button to do the first take... Um, wow!

[archtop]

I have a modest shop and poor clients, they don't have the luxury ($) of "lets try this mic --lets try that mic" not to mention my mic locker will only allow so much of that. My board pre's are what we use.

It doesn't take long to set up a mic.

If you've done this a while you'll know about where the trim is gonna need to be
after hearing how loud the particular instrument is, a quick adjust while he's playing, have him smack you a hard one to make sure there's no peak lights
and it's dialed.

I''ve been a live guy for decades as well. Last six years, the typical 3 bands a night, so I need to have them ready in fifteen minutes (getting one band off, one band on and mic'ed, usually 6-8 mics for drums) (I quit the gig last month, and man am I happy to have my nights back )

Meanwhile back at the studio--

My mic's are left on the stands with cables attached.

Sure I could screw around and take longer, but the band sounds like they are gonna sound, no matter how long I take.

Sure I've had a few sessions where we take a couple hours getting set-up, but only when they feel like that's what THEY want to do.

Normally things are mic'ed and patched in a half hour, I'll usually get the guitar and bass rigs mic'ed/di'ed while the drummer is setting up, but the mics for him are already to go, just need to be placed, I tend to do alot of stuff the same way, like
the drum room snake shows up (normalled) on the first 9 channels of the board.
I like to use my better DA on the drums so I leave them patched, and I have some templates made that correlate to these settings/patches.

I don't believe in having the guy give me 50 kick drum hits to E.Q. it.
maybe 5 or 10 to get in the ball park and see whats up, but he's gonna hit it way different when the band starts, and E.Q.ing individual instruments without the whole
band can lead you down the wrong road sometimes as well.

So I get 'em set-up fast, track a minute or so of everybody, make needed tweeks
adjust the headphones, get crackin'.

This is not about me, this is about them.
And I try to make it as fun and as good sounding with what they have, as it can be.


One hour of kick drum hits is a big mood killer if you ask me.

They feel good when we've only been at it two hours and we already have stuff tracked.


Majority of my work is young hard Rockers tracked live, with vocals and guitar solos
overdubbed later.

Every young band learns so much from having their cd to listen to for months.

Being quick and saving them money allows them to come back in a few months
and do another and learn some more, rinse/repeat.

I also find it kind of pretentious young bands that are not on any radar anywhere
going in to world class studios and spending thousands on a few songs, unless their pockets are really deep, and even then it smells wrong to me.

Providing the engineer is qualified, and the gear is not sub-par, they are going to sound like they sound, no matter where they go.

I'm sure it's a hoot goin' to big fancy studios, and spending lots of time doing it.

I bet it's also fun chartering a jet for yourself.
The question is;  Can you afford it?


Thanks for asking

[tom eaton]

archtop wrote on Sun, 21 May 2006 13:16

Providing the engineer is qualified, and the gear is not sub-par, they are going to sound like they sound, no matter where they go.

I have to disagree there... the more "qualified" the engineer the more likely that the band will sound different.  Most of us (when not doing jazz or classical) try to get the sound of the group to be "better" than it is in the room.  That means making mic choices, preamp choices, converter choices, cable choices, etc. to get the sound we believe will best suit the project.  Given that everyone has their own idea of what "better" is, you're very likely to find that the more experience and gear choices the engineer has at their disposal, the greater the sonic possibilities.

Albini hates 57s, some folks swear by them, some people use their Mackie preamps for everything, others mix and match APIs, Neves, Millennias and what have you.  The sound of any band is what is chosen to be presented to the listening public... and the choices made along the way have everything to do with that.

And then we can talk about instruments available at the studio... guitars, amps, pianos, organs, things that are available at the studio can be easily integrated into the tracking sessions...and can dramatically change the sound of a song, or even the feel of a record.  Simply swapping out an old Gibson off the wall for the new Martin the guitar player walked in with will make a huge vibe difference.

My typical setup time runs 1 1/2 to 2 hours, depends mostly on how motivated the artists are to get to work.  Maintainance issues can make setup take forever. Why do people not notice rattles, buzzes, squeaks and hums until they're paying to record them?  It's seems like sometimes the first time people ever listen to the sounds they're making is on playback!

When the option exists to load in the night before, it's always a nice thing.  It's so nice to walk in to the studio in the morning and have everything already sussed out and ready to roll.

-tom

[archtop]

A players technique has more to do with his sound than gear choices.



Obviously 12 string VS 6 string, and wide open drums VS dead drums, flat wound VS round wound are huge differences, I'm talking about capturing THE band as they are, not producing the band. Having him play a different guitar is a production idea. (Sometimes a good easy one too)

I did say "qualified" engineer.

[wwittman]

archtop wrote on Sun, 21 May 2006 13:16

Providing the engineer is qualified, and the gear is not sub-par, they are going to sound like they sound, no matter where they go.

depends how you define "sub par" doesn't it?

there is always a better sounding room and better monitoring and better engineers.

yes, there is a point of diminishing returns... but that doesn't mean there's "no point" in going to a great studio.

great studios are often capable of great recordings that are not possible elsewhere.

no one said it's MORE important than how the band plays or sounds on their own... but that doesn't mean it's not at ALL important.

[wwittman]

archtop wrote on Mon, 22 May 2006 13:26

Obviously 12 string VS 6 string, and wide open drums VS dead drums, flat wound VS round wound are huge differences, I'm talking about capturing THE band as they are, not producing the band. Having him play a different guitar is a production idea. (Sometimes a good easy one too) I did say "qualified" engineer.

okay, the band walks in the control rom for the playback and the the singer says to the guitar player "man, that guitar sound really thin and small".
"well, you know, it's my guitar, it's not the greatest guitar in the world"

then they look at you, the "qualified engineer", and say: "Hey, can we try that old GIbson on the wall?"

so, you say:
"no, I can't let you... that would be a PRODUCTION decision and I read on the internet that I'm not suposed to make PRODUCTION decisions... this crappy sound you're getting is how you really SOUND, and I'm doing you a favour by showing you. Of course there are things other people might do to try to make you sound better than you REALLY ARE, but I can't do that. It would be WRONG. Trying to give you a recording that sounds better than you do just left alone would be wasting your money."

you and I have a very different view of "qualified engineer"

I've never had a band say "Hey, Nigel sounds better than he ever did before on the drums! I don't know how you did it but Stop it!"

[archtop]

Hold on now WW.

You guys are taking this a bit far out of context.

If dude says I'm so in love with my guitar sound, I'll try to roll with it and (try) to not let my idea of a good guitar sound interfere.

But if he said what do you think of my guitar sound ?
thats entirely different.

But I do try to have their vision in mind, and not mine.
Even then I have to bite my tounge alot.


And yes there are tons of (production type things) that get done by me because alot of the young bands just don't know about, and there is no producer.

And I've also been talking about usually young, green, in-experienced, no so good
players, Neve or Mackie aint gonna make much of a difference if the cat sucks.

Great room is not gonna fix bad music. No matter how great the room.
No matter how awesome the engineering is.

[Invisible Member]

I've seen Richard work live gigs and I can say for a fact his work ethic and speed in which he gets the jobs done is astounding to watch if not inspiring. I've also heard his studio work on bands we've both worked on over the last few years so I'm familiar with the clients and their budgets. Ive also worked in shops where a day was reserved for just the drums.

Maybe the point was over looked that depending on the market and budget kids won't have the experience to tell the difference between a Mackie and a Behringer let alone a Neve to an an SSL.

Trying to convince inexperienced ears to spend more money on things they can't hear is lying selling Fairys to children. Whether you hear a difference isn't the issue.

Major Label methods do not (always) translate to Indie/Demo budgets.



To alot of bands who play for 8 months to a year just to be able to get into a studio they just want you to capture the essence of them as a band. Time is money and two hours of setting up drums really make poor people uptight. Sure if the band has deep pockets and gobs of time, even the most amateur enthusiest would fiddle about looking for that hair raising "tone euhporia".  You can get 98 percent of the way there by avoiding the excursions into trying every available option in your chain. In the "up and coming" environment it's just not practical to do anymore. When the band gets signed then you can fiddle about with other people's money as much as you like.  As Ive gotten older I moved away from trying to engineer to please myself with other bands music, but really trying to please the band in fulfilling their objective. Depending on the market, the objective might be slightly different. But one thing for sure, your not serving the client when you serve yourself. Too much time in the studio make's you forget the band's perspective and you drift into thinking the engineer is the most important part of the band...



In my spare time Ive even taken the approach in timing how long it takes to set up really crappy drums and then develop ways to improve. I bought a $350 kit made in China to experiment on. Your assistants are like a pit crew, they need to train for the wreck.

Dang!  I think Albini might be rubbin off on me

Obviously if the band doesn't like what you've done the gears change.

Dogma has no place in Art  

[archtop]

wwittman wrote on Mon, 22 May 2006 11:44

"no, I can't let you... that would be a PRODUCTION decision and I read on the internet that I'm not suposed to make PRODUCTION decisions...

nice

[electrical]

wwittman wrote on Mon, 22 May 2006 14:44

then they look at you, the "qualified engineer", and say: "Hey, can we try that old GIbson on the wall?" so, you say: "no, I can't let you... that would be a PRODUCTION decision and I read on the internet that I'm not suposed to make PRODUCTION decisions... this crappy sound you're getting is how you really SOUND, and I'm doing you a favour by showing you. Of course there are things other people might do to try to make you sound better than you REALLY ARE, but I can't do that. It would be WRONG. Trying to give you a recording that sounds better than you do just left alone would be wasting your money."

Only some crazy idiot type would say that, or pretend that there is  anyone who would. What you're describing is some kind of pathology, not a real production phlosophy.

I, and anyone else who wasn't a crazy idiot would say, "sure, you can try that guitar if you want. Here, I'll get it down for you." What are you getting at, besides being cranky and weird?