R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => R/E/P Saloon => Topic started by: arconaut on December 08, 2010, 10:54:55 pm

Title: Multrack Masters
Post by: arconaut on December 08, 2010, 10:54:55 pm

http://www.studiomultitracks.com

Where is all this stuff coming from? Is it because of the Rock Band video games? I do find it fascinating but when people are registering domain names to host this stuff (though it's all youtube videos) seems to me that it's getting out of hand.
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Barry Hufker on December 09, 2010, 01:02:29 pm
I don't know if it's legal and I can't imagine the commercial impact, but from an educational standpoint it's a great teaching tool for both music and technology...

Barry

Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Jay Kadis on December 09, 2010, 01:18:01 pm
Great.  Now my students won't be satisfied just to mix MY old crap for practice.
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Nick Sevilla on December 10, 2010, 11:06:59 am
These all sound like safety prints of the final mixes.

Probably done onto a 8 track digital machine, or similar. At least the more modern ones.

I wonder who has their hands on this (record label workers...?)

I found that of the 100% of the albums that I worked on, 100% of them were leaked onto the internet by someone working inside the record label.

Yet no one ever pointed the finger at them. The labels were usually the ones pointing fingers at anyone NOT working directly for them.

Hypocrisy at its finest.
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: compasspnt on December 10, 2010, 09:24:44 pm
More proof that all multitracks should be destroyed by the originator once they are satisfied with the mixes.
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: arconaut on December 10, 2010, 09:56:01 pm

I figured these were all coming from tunes that were being digitized for the purpose of mixing for video games or remixes. I love hearing these things, I hope that doesn't make me a hypocrite. But at the same time, I'm not downloading them. I always thought that not talking about who was in your studio (if it was sensitive) as well as only having access to multitracks when you were actually working with them and keeping these multis and all mixes "private" all added to the mystique and cool factor of working in a studio.

Where I work (NYU) we give our students an assignment of trying to recreate a well-known recording. We've had some amazing ones (two students did a bang-up job on "tomorrow never knows," which just floored me). Last year, some students had a copy of the multitrack for "What's Going On" and I thought it gave them an advantage. Turns out, they lost the forest for the trees because they lost sight of the big picture, the final mix. So go figure.
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: ssltech on December 11, 2010, 12:25:12 pm
Actually, the source of several of these has been discussed before on PSW... -The Stevie Wonder Superstition, Queen Bohemian Rhapsody, along with several tuens from the Doobie Brothers' and Marvin Gaye apparently all were disseminated via bit torrent sites, or whatever Napster-like tendrils.

I remember postulating my view that -while it can be educational and instructive to examine the multitracks ALONG WITH THE COMPLETED MIX- as an insight to lots of things like balance methods, tricks, and all sorts of other stuff like control room leakage, and how the significant-versus-insignificant balance plays out.  -But that it also allows some people to 'play' at having 'power' which is somewhat beyond their entitlement insofar as their experience allows.

The Marvin Gaye, Stevie Wonder etc have been out for several years; this is simply a slight agglomeration and -sadly in my view- just spreads this even further.

For so many of these sessions, the MAGIC was what was happening AT THE TIME, and even the same people wouldn't produce the SAME magic at a later date, so the point of playing with these multitracks, and trying to 'improve' upon original mixes (which I hear CONSTANTLY discussed among the younger breed of 'new' engineers) by using modern tools and available technology (think beat-detective, auto-tune, and their like) would -in most cases- be like trying to 'improve' on the Mona Lisa because we have modern paints which are smoother and easier to work with the brush...

I mean... Imagine how much 'Better' the Beatles would sound with Melodyne and beat-detective.

That's why this ready availability and Wikileak-like 'sharing' crushes our souls, little by little.

Keith
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: arconaut on December 11, 2010, 01:59:36 pm
But  those didn't come from bit torrent sites, that was just the distribution. I'm saying the people who are the source of these things aren't really respecting "the magic."
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: compasspnt on December 11, 2010, 03:01:31 pm
ssltech wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 12:25

That's why this ready availability and Wikileak-like 'sharing' crushes our souls, little by little.


Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Tidewater on December 11, 2010, 05:18:28 pm
ssltech wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 12:25



Imagine how much 'Better' the Beatles would sound with Melodyne and beat-detective.


Keith



Ok. Eleanor Rigby needs drums.

I have mixed a few versions of Killer Queen, but the billing never goes through. By the way, that was some miserable tracking.
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Nick Sevilla on December 11, 2010, 09:23:45 pm
ssltech wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 09:25

Actually, the source of several of these has been discussed before on PSW... -The Stevie Wonder Superstition, Queen Bohemian Rhapsody, along with several tuens from the Doobie Brothers' and Marvin Gaye apparently all were disseminated via bit torrent sites, or whatever Napster-like tendrils.

I remember postulating my view that -while it can be educational and instructive to examine the multitracks ALONG WITH THE COMPLETED MIX- as an insight to lots of things like balance methods, tricks, and all sorts of other stuff like control room leakage, and how the significant-versus-insignificant balance plays out.  -But that it also allows some people to 'play' at having 'power' which is somewhat beyond their entitlement insofar as their experience allows.

The Marvin Gaye, Stevie Wonder etc have been out for several years; this is simply a slight agglomeration and -sadly in my view- just spreads this even further.

For so many of these sessions, the MAGIC was what was happening AT THE TIME, and even the same people wouldn't produce the SAME magic at a later date, so the point of playing with these multitracks, and trying to 'improve' upon original mixes (which I hear CONSTANTLY discussed among the younger breed of 'new' engineers) by using modern tools and available technology (think beat-detective, auto-tune, and their like) would -in most cases- be like trying to 'improve' on the Mona Lisa because we have modern paints which are smoother and easier to work with the brush...

I mean... Imagine how much 'Better' the Beatles would sound with Melodyne and beat-detective.

That's why this ready availability and Wikileak-like 'sharing' crushes our souls, little by little.

Keith


Yes, they were disseminated on those services.

But the question remains :

WHO PUT THEM UP THERE?

Someone had to digitize and upload them for the first time.

Now, if we know who has those masters... then that entity was responsible for the dissemination of that content. I still state it is record label employees, for the most part. Who else would have access to the master tapes? I know of no record engineer who would do this.

Cheers
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: bblackwood on December 11, 2010, 10:05:02 pm
I'm probably in the minority, but once it hit me that I was listening to illegal stuff, akin to stealing a song, imo, I stopped. Refuse to listen to them now.

Hard to argue against music theft (illegal downloads) if I'm being hypocritical.
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Tidewater on December 11, 2010, 10:34:23 pm
Yeah, ok .. granted. It's kind of fun though.   Rolling Eyes
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: compasspnt on December 11, 2010, 10:47:23 pm
bblackwood wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 22:05

Refuse to listen to them...



I'm with you.

Years ago I had the two Marvin tunes, but actually working on them (NO, IT WAS ABSOLUTELY NOT ME WHO LET THEM GET OUT!!), and it was really fun listening to them in that way.

But many people (with good intention) have sent me the illicit masters of things like Sgt. Pepper, Queen, etc...I have never listened to them...it is wrong.

Just can't do it.
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Tidewater on December 12, 2010, 12:01:24 am
Well, I do own the rights to play the only one I have.. or had.

I had Killer Queen. I remixed it like the original without bass as a joke on a friend. I told him his system wasn't playing bass back... ok. Was hilarious. He's a bass player.. ya know.

Other than that, it was very interesting to have the components of something I am familiar with.

(yes terry made me feel guilty.. brad has to work harder to make me feel guilty)
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Samc on December 12, 2010, 11:08:31 am
Barry Hufker wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 18:02

I don't know if it's legal and I can't imagine the commercial impact, but from an educational standpoint it's a great teaching tool for both music and technology...

How so?  
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Barry Hufker on December 12, 2010, 11:25:13 pm
It is like an autopsy or forensic anthropology.  My students and I can dissect a recording, analyze each part, hear what was sung/played and then see how it assembles back into the whole.

For instance, John Lennon's vocal on Revolution is full of half-finished/off-tempo phrases.  How much of that was on purpose I'll never know but subtle parts are revealed.  Also I was amazed to hear Paul McCartney's bass part laid out so clearly to hear every note and nuance.  On Beat It, Eddie Van Halen's guitar part is revealed to the point of hearing punch-ins.  Hearing this track revealed a new dimension of the song to me and is a great study in musical arrangement.

It is a bit like seeing the artist's brush stroke if it were a canvas or when scientists use x-rays to see what is below the paint.

Like all tools, having access to the multi-track masters isn't evil in and of itself, it is what is done with that access.  My goal is education.

Barry

Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: bblackwood on December 13, 2010, 09:05:17 am
Barry Hufker wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 22:25

Like all tools, having access to the multi-track masters isn't evil in and of itself, it is what is done with that access.  My goal is education.

I dunno, if you're not granted permission by the art's owner (license), I say it's no different than stealing music.

What you're doing with it is great - far better than most - but that doesn't make it right, imo.
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: ssltech on December 13, 2010, 10:38:40 am
Samc wrote

Barry Hufker wrote

I don't know if it's legal and I can't imagine the commercial impact, but from an educational standpoint it's a great teaching tool for both music and technology...

How so?


ssltech wrote

...it can be educational and instructive to examine the multitracks ALONG WITH THE COMPLETED MIX- as an insight to lots of things like balance methods, tricks, and all sorts of other stuff like control room leakage, and how the significant-versus-insignificant balance plays out.


Barry Hufker wrote

It is like an autopsy or forensic anthropology.  My students and I can dissect a recording, analyze each part, hear what was sung/played and then see how it assembles back into the whole.


This is the ONE use which I can see. -It's very helpful to use this sort of demonstration to show a student who obsesses over every slight 'unintended' sound which may creep into a microphone... or perhaps dozens of other common 'logical assumptions' (...if reducing bleed between drum mics to get some usable separation between mic channels is 'good', then surely using all manner of screens, mic shields and maybe recording the cymbals at a later time would logically be 'better', no?) and -WHEN USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE FINAL MIX- I frequently find it illuminating and instructive.

However...

My employer (an employer not unlike Barry's) has in place a policy of absolutely ZERO tolerance for pirated or copyright-infringing software on ANY work computer, network or system. With this in mind, I have advised anyone who's been brought to my attention as considering teaching using these multitracks that in the absence of permission to use these for teaching purposes, that anyone using multitracks which they don't OWN the rights to MIGHT be viewed (following a strict interpretation) be in technical breach of their contract... and at my employer this is automatic dismissal if ANY report is made.  (This is necessary because we work closely with several companies who are vulnerable to software and IP theft, and so we CANNOT be seen as tolerating or 'turning a blind eye/deaf ear'.)

Educational? -Absolutely. -I would recommend seeking permission however, to keep everything above board. -The old truism that "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission" isn't good enough for my conscience.

I'm not really trying to preach here, just share how I myself view it.

Keith
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Barry Hufker on December 13, 2010, 11:34:47 am
First, let me quickly say I am not offended that someone says it's stealing.  Standing up to say the moral thing is important and I support that.

Second, let me quickly say I am not sure using these samples is either immoral or unethical.  How can I say this?  Well it may be rationalizing but I'm going to let the copyright holder and youtube deal with that issue.  As they are videos on youtube's site, they are published for viewing and use by the public.  This is youtube's view.  And their view goes on to be, the videos will be removed when they are asked by the copyright holder.  When this happens the issue is resolved, as is any moral, ethical, legal question about them.

I have not copied the videos, nor have I used them in class (as of yet -- and wouldn't until next semester at the earliest).  I will continue to ponder the questions/points which you guys have raised.  I don't consider myself to have stolen anything because I have not copied anything.  In class, we could just view the videos online.  As an analogy, I don't have to own the Mona Lisa to enjoy it or to use it for teaching art.

I'm not looking to profit financially from the videos, although one could say that I am because I'm being paid to teach and the videos would be part of that, but I don't think that argument holds much weight. In a sense - and maybe too broad a sense - I think the videos fall into "fair use" for education.

As I've said, I have a while to ponder this.  I am a strong opponent to illegal copying of software/music.  Why I think this is somehow different is something I'll have to work out in my mind.  It may be the issue is resolved by others before then.

Barry
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: ssltech on December 13, 2010, 03:49:37 pm
That's a perfectly equable and even-keeled way to look at it, I feel.

In fact 'Fair Use' under US copyright law has exceptions for teaching... but I'm not sure of the details or ins & outs, so I can neither advise nor rely upon any aspect of that approach.

As I mentioned, I'm not trying to 'preach' in particular; -rather I'm concerned that all concerned should give it the sort of thought and consideration which I feel that I can trust Barry to do.

Sadly however, most students merely 'seize' upon these downloads, pull out a plum, and say "what a good boy am I"

Keith
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: arconaut on December 13, 2010, 04:44:54 pm
ssltech wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 15:49


Sadly however, most students merely 'seize' upon these downloads, pull out a plum, and say "what a good boy am I"




That's not happening here. Our students are too busy jumping over candlesticks.
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: el duderino on December 13, 2010, 05:15:21 pm
Barry Hufker wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 23:25

It is like an autopsy or forensic anthropology.  My students and I can dissect a recording, analyze each part, hear what was sung/played and then see how it assembles back into the whole.



Like all tools, having access to the multi-track masters isn't evil in and of itself, it is what is done with that access.  My goal is education.

Barry




Absolutely. This really isn't much different than when I was an intern at a studio and found 2" tapes from an album I really liked in the tape library. I asked the GA about possibly listening to it one day, eventually we did. Around the same time I was reading an interview with Tchad Blake and he discussed how he likes to record drums, which was especially intriguing to me as I knew very little.

Being able to put up that multitrack and hear Tchad Blake's drums broken down was eye opening to say the least. What was  also just as useful was the track sheet and notes with it!

Plenty of people hate this, but as a purely educational tool it can be a very useful supplement. Considering kids starting out generally don't have the opportunity to work in a large facility and work with a wide range of engineers these days, i'd imagine it to be even more useful now.
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Berolzheimer on December 13, 2010, 05:43:38 pm
Is it possible that some of these things got out because someone at the labels was trying to peddle the tracks for hip-hop usage?
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: Tidewater on December 15, 2010, 07:02:00 am
bblackwood wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 09:05


What you're doing with it is great - far better than most



You ALWAYS liked Barry's mixes better.

Rolling Eyes
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: ssltech on December 15, 2010, 11:55:52 am
Barry mixes batter?

No wonder it's a piece of cake for him!
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: ScotcH on December 15, 2010, 12:44:45 pm
To me most of these sounds like crap ... just ripepd from guitar here/rock band.  They're just sub mixes anyway, with the effects already printed, right?  I suppose it's kinda fun to listen to, but it's not like these are the oringinal recorded tracks that one can "remix" for fun, practice, or sale, or whatever.  I suppose it is interresting to hear that many of the tracks are far from perfect in the performance, noises, and glitches way ... I guess that IS eductational to students of the art (ie, don't sweat the small stuff if the take is great!).
Title: Re: Multrack Masters
Post by: DarinK on December 15, 2010, 01:55:22 pm
ScotcH wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 09:44

To me most of these sounds like crap ... just ripepd from guitar here/rock band.  They're just sub mixes anyway, with the effects already printed, right?  I suppose it's kinda fun to listen to, but it's not like these are the oringinal recorded tracks that one can "remix" for fun, practice, or sale, or whatever.  I suppose it is interresting to hear that many of the tracks are far from perfect in the performance, noises, and glitches way ... I guess that IS eductational to students of the art (ie, don't sweat the small stuff if the take is great!).



A lot of them are not submixes, they're what's on the multitrack.  Much of this stuff was recorded on 4, 8 or 16 track, so the "submixing with effects printed" took place during the recording process.  They are the original recorded tracks that were used in the final mix.
In other cases, they are indeed "rock band" submixes, and not as informative.