Print

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

[wwittman]

I don't know, Jeff...

I still don't think most people BENEFIT from spending 2 days on high hats.

It obviously works for Mutt.
But not for most.









steely dan drools

[Fibes]

wwittman wrote on Wed, 23 August 2006 12:53

I still don't think most people BENEFIT from spending 2 days on high hats.

That sounds uncomfortable no matter what way you slice it.


It has always seemed to me that the faster we get to point A the more likely the artist will blow the roof off. If I was after ersatz perfection I'd move to LA and get into plastic surgery. Even then you don't spen two days on an asscheek.

[compasspnt]

wwittman wrote on Wed, 23 August 2006 12:53

I still don't think most people BENEFIT from spending 2 days on high hats. It obviously works for Mutt. But not for most.

This is precisely the point.  It sounds like an easy concept to grasp, but it takes so much to execute it properly, and few are actually able to do it with taste, perfection and class.

This ability is truly what separates the boys from the men from the gods.


On the Steely Dan front:

Several years ago I was meeting an appointment with Bob Ludwig as we were about to master one of the ZZ Top albums.  Just finishing with Bob was the production and engineering team for SD, doing their then-newest album.

When they saw that my mixes were on analogue 1/2", they asked if I had tracked on analogue 2".  When I answered in the affirmative, the reply was, "So you're still recording on compressors; hah!"

[McAllister]

Quote:

"So you're still recording on compressors; hah!"

That's pretty funny.

M

[Brian Kehew]

1- I commend you for "working on" your skills. Amen - we all still learn, and to know you want to get better/higher/farther is a great drive to have!

2- As a FORMER Mutt Lange fan, I think the records he made after Highway to Hell sound like doodoo... I don't think his approach works myself.

3 - I'd stay away from Steely Day asa guide. They DO focus on the "little picture" view - arrangements and details of sound quality, while forgetting that they're going to put terrible singer on top of it all!

4 - MANY times, mixing is only difficult because the tracks are not cut/arranged well. It IS a secret of good world-class mixing to start with better (perfect?) tracks. So maybe when someone hears S Dan or AC/DC or whatever - they are hearing well-recorded, well played insstruments and voices. So - do you feel your mixing is better, equal, or worse than the quality of tracks you are dealing with?

[maxim]

it sounds obvious, but it helps to, actually, SEE the big picture

the better you can see it, the easier it is to put into practice

the more often you do it, the easier it gets

but, to me, the absence of the big picture is a real reason why most art sucks (i mean, do you, really, think that ricky is going to keep that number for longer than 10 secs?)

[stevieeastend]

I am feeling that my mixing is equal than the quality of the tracks I am working with but worse than the quality of my arrangements.

One of my recent production (12 songs kind of indie rock) has been (re)mixed by well established guys in the U.S.

After listening and comparing to my mixes I can say that I like mine better in terms of how the arrangements translate in the mix. The songs felt more natural to me, it has this certain flow you get when the arrangement is right but....

In terms of EQ and dynamic I have to say that these guys showed me how my tracks could sound best. Snare is definitely more punchy, bass and bass drum jumping out of the speakers and stuff, which made people notice, "ahh these guys really rock"...

I could imagine that a combination of both would represent the "big picture" with all the little details for this project. Neither me nor them would be able to translate both in the mix.

Although this project will never get any big as a decent production brings out the (real) quality of a singer and the songs, which is good but not great. But who knows..

cheers
steveeastend

[feedback loop]

While I have no first hand knowledge of the Steely Dan situation (although I knew William Burroughs who created the name) I was an eyewitness to some of the recording nonsense that occurred during the late 70s - early 80s with several wildly successful recording acts that went through a Steely Dan "little picture" phase.  Maybe Mutt is the exception but based on what I observed, the one day on a floor tom business was always motivated by insecurity not creative genius.  Some of what I saw in those days was painful to watch.  

[compasspnt]

fbaugher wrote on Wed, 23 August 2006 18:05

...based on what I observed, the one day on a floor tom business was always motivated by insecurity not creative genius.  Some of what I saw in those days was painful to watch.

Indeed.

99% of the time this method leans more towards The Troggs type of outcome, rather than something that benefits from the modus operandi (or some might even say modus vivendi).

Again, this is where the true "Big Picture" element comes into play.

Without proper knowledge of that BP, the small things do tend to be painful wanking, borne of insecurity.

[feedback loop]

compasspnt wrote on Wed, 23 August 2006 15:59

fbaugher wrote on Wed, 23 August 2006 18:05 ...based on what I observed, the one day on a floor tom business was always motivated by insecurity not creative genius.  Some of what I saw in those days was painful to watch. Indeed. 99% of the time this method leans more towards The Troggs type of outcome, rather than something that benefits from the modus operandi (or some might even say modus vivendi). Again, this is where the true "Big Picture" element comes into play. Without proper knowledge of that BP, the small things do tend to be painful wanking, borne of insecurity.

It depends on what you mean by "big picture."  In one case of extreme painful wanking, the big picture was that a R&R Hall of Fame level artist who had lost creative focus was facing being dumped by his label if his next album didn't produce some hits.  The level of angst and micro-management bullshit was unbelievable.  So when talking about big pictures it's important for the younger guys to understand the "big picture" isn't always confined to the song level. This was a case of big picture/little picture meltdown.  

[maxdimario]

If you have a very clear idea of what you're after before you start to record, it's likely that by keeping that idea in mind you will get close enough so that imperfections don't matter. The mistakes may eventually become part of the solution. You constantly adapt and re-interpret the recording during the process so that it represents the original vision.

I liken it to having to chat up a girl, you don't have to speak in perfect syntax but you do have to make a clear impression without falling into confusion when she throws a curve at you, or setting up the wrong mood or argument.. blowing it in other words..

I prefer the type of recording where there is a 'spiritual' meaning that jumps out at you, the kind of recording that is a representation or result of something in the artist and producer's heads BEFORE the record button is pushed, not necessarily a SOUND.

in the end, as a listener you CAN tell the difference.

the big picture implies that you be doing the track for some actual purpose other than just getting it down on a master.

[cerberus]

Fibes wrote on Wed, 23 August 2006 14:14

wwittman wrote on Wed, 23 August 2006 12:53 I still don't think most people BENEFIT from spending 2 days on high hats. That sounds uncomfortable no matter what way you slice it. It has always seemed to me that the faster we get to point A the more likely the artist will blow the roof off. If I was after ersatz perfection I'd move to LA and get into plastic surgery. Even then you don't spen two days on an asscheek.

i did not mean to suggest it as a default working method. but would someone please recount how al green cut a hundred re-takes for "let's stay together"?  that story always inspires me.  

jeff dinces

[compasspnt]

Not sure what you mean by "a hundred retakes" story, but I can assure you that on those early Al Green recordings, the vocals were punched and punched and punched.

Often times single words or even syllables.

So much so that if you listen carefully (try this in "Tired Of Being Alone" for instance) you can hear that many breaths are missing because of the overlaps.

This  in my mind lead to a heightened sense of excitement in the delivery.

[wwittman]

Brian is right in almost everything there...
and I think because he gets to remix so many classic recordings, he KNOWS that the sound is there on the tape more often than not.

It doesn't take genius mixing.

mixing, as a concept is overrated, although i'm always happy to do it for way too much money.

(as my friend Will Lee says "it would be my financial pleasure...")


on the Mutt thing (again), I think he was very influenced by Chapman (at least he told Mike that, once, and it makes sense)

He can pay attention to the small details BECAUSE he has the big picture so etched into his brain.

That's the OPPOSITE of the kind of compulsive, A-D-D, thing where the little things become so distracting that you cannot get BY them and on to the big picture.


It's always a good idea to remind yourself who you are making the records for.
Sure, it's for you, but it's MORE for the audience who really couldn't care less about the little noise in bar 326 or the way the high hat sounds.

where I disagree with Brian is that I think Mutt still makes exceptional records.
Always classy, incredibly clear and effective... not always of music that I love, but always VERY well made.

an interesting Steely Dan aside (an oxymoron, I know) is that despite the "recording on 24 compressors" remark, Fagen did an interview recently where he extolled the virtues of analogue sound and said it was really Becker and Nichols who were the anal digital guys. He and Elliot liked the analogue.

who knew?

perhaps he's trying to put the anal back in analogue.

[cerberus]

chrisj wrote on Tue, 22 August 2006 21:27

If you can wave a conductor's baton (or any 14 inch stick) steadily to the music without thwacking it like a drum- there is groove. If you can't, there isn't. (groove is the main 'big picture' thing I'm struggling with-

listening to your latest imp mix, it would seem that you are not struggling with groove any more.

some VERY respected mix engineers have posted in this thread, but i was able to apply your tip immediately when i was mixing the same imp track (j. hall's forum).  i find metal/heavy/dense guitar music can have "symphonic" qualities. your idea gave me a clue about how to approach more than ten separate heavily distorted guitar tracks.

as soon as i assumed a "conductor's posture", i found myself not only more sensitized to rhythm and groove <<6/8 timing, muchos fun!>>, but also "orchestral balance" in terms of frequency, dynamics, and imaging.

late last week i found myself suddenly recalling some disjointed details from a zappa show i saw in 1982. now i realize why: he was conducting (with baton) during most of the set.

Quote:

but it's kind of funny

hmmmmmm... how about opera?  


jeff dinces