Recording Problem Index - marking mistakes during a session or editing

citizen77

citizen77

New member
I've been trying to come up with a quick way of marking scores for good and bad takes. I'd like some refinement. I came up with an acronym for ease of memorization, but that's not necessary to keep. PRINTEDLX and G

I notate these letters in the score to show what's good and bad, and then those phrases or bars get recorded again. I also use this with pop song - I have the artist give me a copy of their music and lyrics (as basic or precise as they can make it) and mark that up too.

What changes do you suggest?

Problems:
P - Phrasing/Musicality/Breathing
R - Rhythm/Tempo
I - Intonation/Pitch
N - Note (wrong/missing)
T - Tone
E - Extraneous Noise (buzz, cracks, fracks, chip, double note)
D - Dynamics/Balance
L - Word/lyrics
X - out of tune, rushed, lots of things

G - for good bars/parts.
 
Do you mean marking your tracks (you said 'scores')? Or are you marking a tracking sheet (paper)? As I only record myself, its a matter of comping together takes as needed, and I'll scribble notes on a scrap of paper (i.e. "lead 2 - intro", "lead 5 - ending until 4:40"...)
 
I used to mark actual physical copies of musical scores (with staff lines and notes) with pencil, but I just bought a tablet to electronically mark PDF scores. That way I can email the marked up score to clients for review quickly.

In Reaper, I make notes with markers while in the editing process like you're doing on a scrap of paper. (I have a problem with misplacing paper notes when I need them). Those examples you gave are very helpful for keeping track of takes.

Most of what I do is for classical and jazz, so my question might be a little too specific to those genre's. The pop bands I've recorded usually just give me chord progressions and I'll map out the Chorus, Verse, etc... for them. I'll still use these mistake cues to give me a reference of problem points, but it's much simpler than in classical.

To give an example why this is so important to my process:
To get 1 minute of final product, I will record up to 2-4 hours. Then I will edit up to another 4 hours per minute of music. This is pretty typical for classical. Rock is a little different process for me and doesn't usually need these type of notes.

While in a session, I'm always in communication with the musician writing down notes between takes. While they are performing, I am marking up the score with these acronyms. I might end up taking a single note out and replacing it with another (but I'll do that with pop too).

Does that clarify my intentions?
 
4 hours of editing per minute? Yikes! :eek: I love listening to classical, but won't be recording it! I put markers in my Reaper projects like you mention, verse 1, chorus 1, bridge, etc, and that's about all I need to keep track of stuff.
 
DM60 said:
Hum, I just split the file and Color code it or relabel it or both.
Click to expand...

Me too, I've found it really helps to do that during the editing process after I know what I want to keep and cut. Keeps my edits organized.

Do you do that while recording or only while editing?
 
citizen77 said:
Me too, I've found it really helps to do that during the editing process after I know what I want to keep and cut. Keeps my edits organized.

Do you do that while recording or only while editing?
Click to expand...

Kind of hard to say as I use it for so many reasons. Example, I lay down a drum pattern, but I need some que that there is a change coming up, I mark the change so I can see it, then if I am using pads, I make a pattern to indicate change up. I sometimes use it to determine If I just want to re-record the chorus or the part, and everyone, close your eyes, if I want to reuse that part again, if it is good, I keep it and use it again. Saving my playing skills (OK, that is a joke) for more important things than proving I can strum the same thing for 3 minutes. But it does leave me time to focus on adding to the song.

I also use it when I am still in composing and arrangement mode. If I start out with lyrics and I am trying to get them to work, I use that to see if a section needs to be longer, etc. I just it for all sorts of reasons. Plus, a retake may not happen then and there for various reasons. (Lazy, vocals suck more than usual, too many people moving about)
 
DM60 said:
Not all of us have your mad skills. :eek:
Click to expand...

hmmm . . . just a different approach, that is all.

I will do a vocal track . . . and maybe there are bits that I don't like. If I am firing on all cylinders, I will re-track those bits straight away. But sometimes I'm tired or too lazy or whatever, so I just leave them.

When I come back to the song, those bits will make me grimace, so I go and fix them . . . they are not going to let themselves be forgotten. On the other hand, sometimes they are not so obvious and I can't remember what I was going to fix. If that's the case, then I just forget about it . . . if the bits that I thought were bad first up and don't reveal themselves at a subsequent listening, then no remedial action is needed.
 
gecko zzed said:
hmmm . . . just a different approach, that is all.

I will do a vocal track . . . and maybe there are bits that I don't like. If I am firing on all cylinders, I will re-track those bits straight away. But sometimes I'm tired or too lazy or whatever, so I just leave them.

When I come back to the song, those bits will make me grimace, so I go and fix them . . . they are not going to let themselves be forgotten. On the other hand, sometimes they are not so obvious and I can't remember what I was going to fix. If that's the case, then I just forget about it . . . if the bits that I thought were bad first up and don't reveal themselves at a subsequent listening, then no remedial action is needed.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean any disrespect. Just pointing out you are probably at a more seasoned level than most of us.
 
gecko zzed said:
When I come back to the song, those bits will make me grimace, so I go and fix them . . . they are not going to let themselves be forgotten. On the other hand, sometimes they are not so obvious and I can't remember what I was going to fix. If that's the case, then I just forget about it . . . if the bits that I thought were bad first up and don't reveal themselves at a subsequent listening, then no remedial action is needed.action is needed.
Click to expand...

Sometimes those mistakes really make a song too. It sounds more organic and less over produced. Years back, I did an EP for a girl and she totally messed up on an acoustic part - she hated it and wanted to retake it, but it was the coolest mess-up I've heard. It was perfectly placed in the climax of the bridge and became my favorite part. I can still hear it now and it's the first thing I think of. New Order's "Blue Monday" is another example of a complete mess up. The drum track was synced on the wrong beat, but this mistake created an amazing shift in the beat emphasis. The "correct" version is boring!
 
mjbphotos said:
4 hours of editing per minute? Yikes! :eek: I love listening to classical, but won't be recording it! I put markers in my Reaper projects like you mention, verse 1, chorus 1, bridge, etc, and that's about all I need to keep track of stuff.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, what you hear in classical music is completely fabricated. It's not that it's not "real," it's just the perfected version. A musician might not like the tone of one note and will replace it. It's the same with pop music, but because classical music doesn't have the repetition of "parts" like pop, we can't cut and past sections. That's why it takes so long.

I'm sure that the development of technology encourages the perfection in current recordings (or maybe the need for perfection developed the technology). Either way, it's put a huge strain on performing musicians today. It's unfortunate how many orchestral musicians take beta blockers or illegal drugs to get through a performance. My violinist wouldn't ever play without beta blockers and some of our friends in the MNOrch never played without being on some type of drug. I'm completely against it and I've seen too many good musicians loose their edge and careers because of drugs.
 
gecko zzed said:
I don't do any of that. I just fix the mistakes. Either by re-tracking there and then, or by editing straight away.
Click to expand...

Me too.

In my case, I don't think it's because I'm operating at a particularly high level, it's just a combination of wanting to work that way, being lazy, and not putting myself into a position of having to track something so difficult that I will need to comp takes later to make it sound the way I want.

Just one of many ways of doing it I guess. I'm sure it depends greatly on the type of music, whether you're doing it all yourself or tracking others, etc.

The kind of editing processes you guys are talking about certainly don't sound like much fun, but I guess it isn't always just about having fun.
 
heatmiser said:
The kind of editing processes you guys are talking about certainly don't sound like much fun, but I guess it isn't always just about having fun.
Click to expand...

If you're writing about classical editing.... I actually love doing this stuff! It probably sounds like a mindless monkey job, but it's actually very creative and musical in nature. I have to understand what the artists interpretational goal, what the composer was intending, fitting it all together to make it sound like a seamless take (but everyone tries to do that too). It annoys the heck out of me when I listen to a hit song on the radio and can hear all the splices! And the same goes for a classical or jazz, of course.

Does no one else make a chart for mistakes like I have? I got this idea a few years ago after doing a session in Orchestra Hall for the Bell' Alma Duo. We were chatting about the editing/recording process of their previous album (w/Grammy winner Steve Barnett) and I picked up some really great ideas that he uses, including this one. I've been modifying this list throughout the years and this is what I have been using, but was hoping that someone was as analytical as me - or even not: creative, outside opinions that go with the flow. Our collective knowledge is much more than any one of us alone, which is why I throughly enjoy reading everyones ideas (even if i don't initially agree with something, i know there is a purpose for why someone does it and it works for them and at sometime it might come in to be useful for me).
 
I just did a google search on Steve Barnett and found his site - but not only that, he wrote some essays on recording! Nice. Mostly it is on recording etiquette, expectations and the producers job. Nothing on what he notates for mistakes though. Steve Barnett - Production Essays
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top