doo wop recording techniques

[pietro79]

I know doo wop was rather diy, so I don't know if you could really categorize anything as being a doo wop recording technique really... but anyone come across good books and/or websites that talk about recording doo wop music back in the day?

I'm recording a neo-doo-wop song soon, and wanted to start thinking how to recreate somewhat the sound...

yeah, record vocals in a bathroom, get the singers to share a mic, I'm sure all the low budget techniques were used...

or if you don't have links or books, any suggestions, things to think about?

p-man

[TragikRemix]

umm how about a little tape recorder?

ya know..

oh wait, those werent invented yet..

i dont know dude.

[jmorris]

I think do wop was more the performance than how it was recorded. The singers were ensemble, no "I'll track my vocals then you do your" kind of thing. Very well rehearsed.Nice harmonies, signers in the same groove.

[Micter]

Ribbon Mic and a Tube Pre to 2" tape would be a good place to start.

[AGCurry]

Well, you have to ask yourself - do you want it to sound like recordings by the Persuasions or the Drifters? There's quite a range of sounds.

In the days when doo-wop was ascendant, usually one but no more than two mics would be used for the singing. The singers balanced themselves by dynamic singing and stepping up for solo parts. RCA ribbon mics were commonly used but condensors were common too.

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Isn't it nice for a change to have a question where an optional answer can not be to use eight mikes on one instrument, double-track them, compress the hell out of them, and hard-pan them to either side?

Yeah, keep the miking relatively simple and very clean. I like the variation of using two mikes in a stereo config and having the vocalists semi-circled around them in order to get a stereo image.

The tricky thing in this kind of recording - at least for me - is getting the verb right. You usually want the vocals to be on the close and dry side but too dry and the "feel" can evaporate. One (of many) possible techniques would be to have the dry vocals on one stereo stem, aux that out to some Motown-style parallel compression one one stereo return, and to a warm room verb on a second return. Bring the verb in behind (and possibly wider than) the vocals until it's just past consciously audible. Then pull in the comp return just slightly to pull the vocals forward a bit.

Just one possibility; it depends upon the room and the tracking as to what will work best.

G.

[AGCurry]

Glen, I think classic doo-wop from the 1950s didn't use a lot of reverb. I think of a pretty dry sound with the space coming from the actual distance-to-microphone of the singers. An RCA 44 would be great, with the lead singer a couple of feet away and the others 4-6 feet off.

And yes, simplicity is highly refreshing.

[chessrock]

I think you should listen to whatever Southside Glen has to say, as he is sort of the resident expert on this particular subject.

You see, our friend Southside has been somewhat of a regular in the local Chicago doo-wap scene, having performed with several of the most well known all male doo-wap acapela reviews. It's rumored that there isn't a club north of Belmont and east of Halsted where Southside hasn't been a regular fixture, doo-wopin' and bee-bopin' in the wee hours with all his boys.

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

Bring the verb in behind (and possibly wider than) the vocals until it's just past consciously audible. Then pull in the comp return just slightly to pull the vocals forward a bit.

You see, just as I had suspected ... Southside again proves his prowess and understanding of bringing things in "from behind," (and possibly wider) ... then pulling things slightly forward on the return.

You're really dealing with a master in the art here, so consider yourself "lucky to be receiving" ... such stellar advice from a knowlegable and credible source on the subject.

.

[ofajen]

Since we're talking the 1950s, wouldn't these have been done live in the studio to a 1/4" full track mono machine... something like an Ampex model 300, 400, 350 or 351?

Recording live in one room could get some of that feel. Using a mono or stereo tape deck (preferably the kind with tubes! ) would give you some of the sound and technique, too. A few dynamic mikes into something like my Altec 1567a tube mike mixer, then into a FT mono tube machine. Use old non-back-coated tape. How retro can you get? Hmmm, mono might be a bit too retro for folks these days.

Cheers,

Otto

[walters]

SouthSIDE Glen

a warm room verb? u mean reamping into a room?

Motown-style parallel compression one one stereo return?
a stereo compressor? or a mono compressor with a stereo return?

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by AGCurry

Glen, I think classic doo-wop from the 1950s didn't use a lot of reverb. I think of a pretty dry sound with the space coming from the actual distance-to-microphone

Agreed that you want to keep it mostly dry, but in my experience* to today's sensibilities (and gear) you want to have *some* ambience there. 100% dry - especially if you don't have an RCA ribbon (which the vast majority doesn't) and a great-sounding room - can just sound dry and amateurish.

There's always more than one way to skin a cat, of course, but I just submit that getting the recording a little wet around the ears in the form of a good sounding room or a good simulation thereof puts a nice polish on an a capella sound. It's that old rule: "if you can noticabley hear the reverb, you probably have too much."

*Yes, chess, you nameless advertising copy boy posing as an audio engineer, I have recorded and mixed a capallea before. Not necessarily so much of a do-wop flavor, but I've done gospel, pop, and classical/standard recital a capella projects with the singers crowded around a microphone or two. Which is probably more than you and your mullet-head headbangers have done.

You really do need to give it up. Your spitwads keep missing the mark and won't even stick to the backboard any more. You really need to see the light and realize that you really need to move on to something else.

G.

[chessrock]

Damn, Southside.

I was just joking around and trying to poke a little fun.

Originally Posted by chessrock

It's rumored that there isn't a club north of Belmont and east of Halsted where Southside hasn't been a regular fixture ...

There was "neighborhood" joke in there that sailed over your head, dude.

.

[ssscientist]

Originally Posted by chessrock

There was "neighborhood" joke in there that sailed over your head, dude.

Unfortunately, southsiders wouldn't know Boystown if it bit them on the ass.

Which the neighborhood won't but the residents might.


.

[SouthSIDE Glen]

But to get back to the subject. Reverb is far from unheard of in doo-wop, especially in more modern doo wop productions (doo-wop *does* exist past the 50's). And considering pietro specifically mentioned "neo-doo-wop" in his OP, I thought it was appropriate to bring it up.

From the Coasters and Drifters with "Under The Boardwalk" and "Up On The Roof", both now doo-wop standards and both originals laden with liberal doses of verb, to The Nylons and Manhattan Transfer of the later years, neither of which are strangers to verb, the idea of doo-wop being as dry as a M*A*S*H martini is just a bit on the mythological side.

G.

[walters]

SouthSIDE Glen

i love this
a little wet around the ears?
a little wet around the ears
a little wet around the ears

warm room verb? u mean reamping into a room?

Motown-style parallel compression one one stereo return?
a stereo compressor? or a mono compressor with a stereo return?

[AGCurry]

Yes, Glen, you're right: There are many different schools of doo wop, and many of them incorporate reverb in recording. My mind, when I hear the term "doo wop", automatically goes to those wonderful early Atlantic recordings where the singers are in the room with the listener.

[ofajen]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

But to get back to the subject. Reverb is far from unheard of in doo-wop, especially in more modern doo wop productions (doo-wop *does* exist past the 50's). And considering pietro specifically mentioned "neo-doo-wop" in his OP, I thought it was appropriate to bring it up.

From the Coasters and Drifters with "Under The Boardwalk" and "Up On The Roof", both now doo-wop standards and both originals laden with liberal doses of verb, to The Nylons and Manhattan Transfer of the later years, neither of which are strangers to verb, the idea of doo-wop being as dry as a M*A*S*H martini is just a bit on the mythological side.

G.

Agreed. In this era, actually doing mono would be a distraction for a lot of listeners, since all they hear is stereo. If that is assumed, more ambience could easily feel right, since stereo allows the ambience to be spatially perceived separately from the direct signal.

Cheers,

Otto

[walters]

a little wet around the ears

[SouthSIDE Glen]

For AGC: Yeah, agreed on the old stuff. Gimme the old Ben E. King stuff any day . And I like mine rather dryer than some of the newer, more polished stuff like The Nylons do, for example. Though I can't say that their level of reverb is necessarily detrimental; They still sound fine. Just "newer" than the old school stuff.

And one might be suprised if they haven't heard that early old school, Atlantic Drifters/Coasters stuff with engineer's ears in a while, just how much more verb is in there than what one may remember. The Drifters recorded "Up On The Roof" for Atlantic around 1961 or 62 (give or take a year?), and that is actually fairly well loaded with reverb if you go back and listen to it now. Same with "Under The Boardwalk", "There Goes My Baby", and many others.

And then of course there's that little ol' uber-standard; the 1961 RCA recording of the Tokens' "The Lion Sleeps Tonight". That puppy is wet enough to irrigate a 36-hole golf course!

It's interesting how sometimes what we hear now can be different from what we remember hearing back in the day. If a few years ago you asked me how much verb any of those songs had on the vocals, I would have said very little, if any. But when I listened to them again for the first time since I was a young-un, in prep for tracking someone, I was quite suprised at just how processed much of that "old school" stuff actually is.

For Walters: Walters, I'm not being a smart aleck here; this is a sincere proposition: let me throw those questions right back at ya. Re-read my original description. You've been around this board long enough and asked about a lot more sophisticated stuff than that. All the info you need to answer your questions is contained in my description. Based upon that and your knowledge of gear and technique, how would YOU do it? What would make sense to you? I'll bet you you already know or at least can figure out a set of good answers.

G.

[AGCurry]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

And one might be suprised if they haven't heard that early old school, Atlantic Drifters/Coasters stuff with engineer's ears in a while, just how much more verb is in there than what one may remember. The Drifters recorded "Up On The Roof" for Atlantic around 1961 or 62 (give or take a year?), and that is actually fairly well loaded with reverb if you go back and listen to it now. Same with "Under The Boardwalk", "There Goes My Baby", and many others.

Oh, I'm talking about earlier stuff than that. The Orioles, The Drifters from the mid-1950s with Clyde McPhatter, the Chords (Sh-boom), the Penguins (Earth Angel). They sound like they're from the same studio where Ray Charles did his great recordings for Atlantic, with a great palpable presence and dryness.

But yeah, I think we all agree that doo-wop encompasses too many years and too many artists and too many producers to be able to prescribe only one way to do it!

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by AGCurry

Oh, I'm talking about earlier stuff than that. The Orioles, The Drifters from the mid-1950s with Clyde McPhatter, the Chords (Sh-boom), the Penguins (Earth Angel).

By morbid coincidence, I just tripped across this news item today:

http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/...t_x.htm?csp=27

G.

[j-boy]

This shows how simple it can be...

http://cgi.ebay.com/THE-SWINGING-SIN...QQcmdZViewItem

[AGCurry]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

By morbid coincidence, I just tripped across this news item today:

http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/...t_x.htm?csp=27

G.

The bridge on that song (Goodnight, Sweetheart) is just beautiful. Goodnight, Mr. Hudson.

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by AGCurry

Goodnight, Mr. Hudson.

Well, it (was) time to go-o.

Yeah, a georgeous tune for sure.

Now he'll be up there singing in the newbies section with James Brown and Wilson Pickett

G.

[BRIEFCASEMANX]

before reverb there was always reverberant rooms and echo chambers. Maybe some impulse response type of reverb of an actual space would sound best?