What defines the sound of an album?

  • Thread starter Thread starter philbagg
  • Start date Start date
philbagg

philbagg

Just Killing Time
I've been thinking about this for a while now. It's probably more apparent in
rock and metal, however I find it quite interesting.

Listen to 2 or 3 songs from Metallica's "Ride the Lightning", then 2 or 3 from
"Master of Puppets" and "...And Justice For All". They each have a "sound" to
them. Ride the Lightning and AJFA sound fairly dark to me. Yet Master seems
to have more depth and brightness to it.

These are just examples. You could also use:
Judas Priest - Turbo vs. Painkiller
Iced Earth - Night of the Stormrider vs. Burnt Offerings
Thin Lizzy - Jailbreak vs. Johnny the Fox
Iron Maiden - Somewhere in Time vs. Seventh Son of a Seventh Son
Slayer - Reign in Blood vs. Seasons in the Abyss

etc. etc.

It seems to me that you can listen to a song off an album, and even if you
didn't know that particular song but knew the album, you could tell which
album it's from.

Is this sound defined in recording, mixing, mastering, or a combination of all
three? I'm thinking along the lines of "formula" for the album. Like mix choices
such as effects and EQ. Or guitar tones/bass tones/drums/vocal styles used
throughout. Micing techniques?

I'm just wondering if anybody else feels this way, and if so, what's your
opinions of it.

PS: Sorry if it seems fairly rock/metal based. If you have any other examples,
throw em in!
 
well, it depends on everything. The guy mixing it will mix it the way he wants it to sound. If the guy mastering it is doing his job right, all the songs should sound coherent and have a similar sound. As times change, recording, mixing and mastering techniques change and newer albums follow the trends.

There are so many factors that affect the way an album sounds. Same reason why a song you record sounds different than a song I record.
 
bozmillar said:
well, it depends on everything. The guy mixing it will mix it the way he wants it to sound. If the guy mastering it is doing his job right, all the songs should sound coherent and have a similar sound. As times change, recording, mixing and mastering techniques change and newer albums follow the trends.

There are so many factors that affect the way an album sounds. Same reason why a song you record sounds different than a song I record.
Click to expand...

All great points but you missed the rooms recorded in plus mic and mic pres used.
 
philbagg said:
I've been thinking about this for a while now. It's probably more apparent in
rock and metal, however I find it quite interesting.

Listen to 2 or 3 songs from Metallica's "Ride the Lightning", then 2 or 3 from
"Master of Puppets" and "...And Justice For All". They each have a "sound" to
them. Ride the Lightning and AJFA sound fairly dark to me. Yet Master seems
to have more depth and brightness to it.

These are just examples. You could also use:
Judas Priest - Turbo vs. Painkiller
Iced Earth - Night of the Stormrider vs. Burnt Offerings
Thin Lizzy - Jailbreak vs. Johnny the Fox
Iron Maiden - Somewhere in Time vs. Seventh Son of a Seventh Son
Slayer - Reign in Blood vs. Seasons in the Abyss

etc. etc.

It seems to me that you can listen to a song off an album, and even if you
didn't know that particular song but knew the album, you could tell which
album it's from.

Is this sound defined in recording, mixing, mastering, or a combination of all
three? I'm thinking along the lines of "formula" for the album. Like mix choices
such as effects and EQ. Or guitar tones/bass tones/drums/vocal styles used
throughout. Micing techniques?

I'm just wondering if anybody else feels this way, and if so, what's your
opinions of it.

PS: Sorry if it seems fairly rock/metal based. If you have any other examples,
throw em in!
Click to expand...



The "sound" of any well done album comes from the band or artist and nowhere else. The artist hires producers and,recording personell and studios for the benefit of the artist. Everyone works together to achieve the sound the artist envisions. This is what seperates a true professional act from wannabes.
 
Thanks for the replies guys.

I'm just wondering if you agree about a "formula" for the album. Like, I know
that every song is recorded and mixed differently, but do you think the
engineer might choose to use the same techniques on a lot of the content just
to give a sound to the album?
 
Yes...if you use similar tracking/mixing techniques for many of the instruments/vocals per song...when it all comes together, there will be a common sonic thread that binds them, of course, you have to follow through on that during the entire process.

I kinda’ went with that plan on my own album that I just wrapped up last month. I was going for a darker tone, so I was conscious of that when adjusting the guitars and whatnot, and I think there IS a certain sonic signature to the album as a whole.
 
MCI2424 said:
The "sound" of any well done album comes from the band or artist and nowhere else.
Click to expand...

I'll disagree with this one. The band does play a role in the overall feeling of the album, but each album does have a certain sound to it that makes it distict from the others. I think the producer plays a huge role in that.

In the metal world, this seems to be more common. In singer/songwriter world, I've seen more variation because you get different studio musicians on the different instrument. You see this a lot with indie artists or albums that take years to make.

MCI2424 said:
Everyone works together to achieve the sound the artist envisions. This is what seperates a true professional act from wannabes.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. If you are a professional band you work for the record company, so your job is to make the music they want you to make. It's the producer's job to turn the band into something the record company can sell.

I'm working on a metal album right now, and it will most definitely have a feel to it. Our process for recording guitars and drums will be similar for most if not all of the songs. The songs range from standard rock to heavy chugging metal, but they will all have the same signature sound to them. If I ever get around to making another album, I'm sure it will have a different sound because we will do things differently the next time around.
 
bozmillar said:
I'll disagree with this one. The band does play a role in the overall feeling of the album, but each album does have a certain sound to it that makes it distict from the others. I think the producer plays a huge role in that.

In the metal world, this seems to be more common. In singer/songwriter world, I've seen more variation because you get different studio musicians on the different instrument. You see this a lot with indie artists or albums that take years to make.



I don't think so. If you are a professional band you work for the record company, so your job is to make the music they want you to make. It's the producer's job to turn the band into something the record company can sell.

I'm working on a metal album right now, and it will most definitely have a feel to it. Our process for recording guitars and drums will be similar for most if not all of the songs. The songs range from standard rock to heavy chugging metal, but they will all have the same signature sound to them. If I ever get around to making another album, I'm sure it will have a different sound because we will do things differently the next time around.
Click to expand...

A band or artist chooses a producer that they think will give them a production that suite their vision. The record companies generally take on bands that are "ready to go". Gone are the days of endlessly drawn out practice, studio musicians etc. Artists and bands change their minds from album to album, song to song all the time. Producers are hired and fired all the time. A producer is hired to produce a body of work that the artist wants and that is as it should be, otherwise, what is the point? If a producer had such a great role in the "sound" of any album, he could just hire a bunch of studio musicians and produce a record for himself.

I am afraid that here, greater weight is given to the roles of recording engineers and producers than to the artists themselves. Without the artists, producers and recording engineers are totally useless and without meaning.
 
As a listener, I've often felt that when I'm listening to a metal album and I'm thinking, "wow, that's really well mixed," usually it's the drum sound and the vocals, probably in that order, that my ear latches onto as sounding really good.

What's interesting about that is I'm an instrumental guitarist who can play a pretty solid 4/4 rock beat, but not much else on a drum kit, and can't carry a tune to save my life. :p
 
DrewPeterson7 said:
As a listener, I've often felt that when I'm listening to a metal album and I'm thinking, "wow, that's really well mixed," usually it's the drum sound and the vocals, probably in that order, that my ear latches onto as sounding really good.

What's interesting about that is I'm an instrumental guitarist who can play a pretty solid 4/4 rock beat, but not much else on a drum kit, and can't carry a tune to save my life. :p
Click to expand...

I'm becoming the same way. I only play guitar, yet it's becoming one of the last
things I listen to these days when listening to a metal album. Maybe it's the
mystery that fascinates us :p
 
It really is a big combination of things. Lots of it is decisions made at tracking: How many guitars, crunch or clean amps, tight or loose drum tuning, etc.

But these days the mix is a huge part of it. Mixing can completely transform an album into something else. If you listen to a lot of mixes by a mixer like Tom Lord Alge, you can definitely hear a sound across all (or at least lots of) those records.
 
I don't know. I mean, to an extent, I think a lot of that is true, but I think very few bands are ready to go out of the box. I think a 3rd person (producer) is very necessary for getting the band to sound good. A band needs someone who can listen from the outside who was not part of the writing process to really get the subtle details down.

to me, the trend seems to be like this: Band writes good songs and gets signed. Either they hire a low end producer or the label provides a low end producer and the first album is made. If there is a good song on there, people will like it and the band will become known.

For the second album, the label realizes that the band is a money maker and provides a better producer (or funds for a better producer) to make the second album. The second album is much more polished than the first with better production. If there are good songs again, the band will get even more recognition.

The third album is usually just like the second, possibly a little more experimental because they have enough fans to have some wiggle room.

After the third album, the band realizes that they are putting a lot of money into a producer and want to produce themselves. Sometimes they do a great job, having learned from past producers and produce great albums themselves. Sometimes they go crazy with the freedom and put out a really poorly produced album.

Point is, the producer, whether it's a member of the band or a outside guy has a huge effect on the sound of the album.
 
MCI2424 said:
A band or artist chooses a producer that they think will give them a production that suite their vision. The record companies generally take on bands that are "ready to go". Gone are the days of endlessly drawn out practice, studio musicians etc. Artists and bands change their minds from album to album, song to song all the time. Producers are hired and fired all the time. A producer is hired to produce a body of work that the artist wants and that is as it should be, otherwise, what is the point? If a producer had such a great role in the "sound" of any album, he could just hire a bunch of studio musicians and produce a record for himself.

I am afraid that here, greater weight is given to the roles of recording engineers and producers than to the artists themselves. Without the artists, producers and recording engineers are totally useless and without meaning.
Click to expand...
I mostly agree with the sentiment that these days not enough weight is given to the artists *as musical artists*, but with respect I think much of the rest is kind of off-base much of the time.

Of course you got to look at it on a case-by-case basis and it's tough to make a blanket statement on either side of the debate, but if you look at the average Top40 list these days, a significant persentage, if not the actual majority, of the actual musicians you'll hear *are* studio cats and not band musicians, that are backing up name-brand performers. And notice I say "performer", and not necessarily "singer" or "musician". The big labels these days tend to put their budgets behind those that look hot and can perform two hours of choreography on a live stage tour, and on the albums back them up with engineers that can make their voices either sound palatable or sound over-processed in that modern style of heavy autotune and chorusing, managed by a name-brand producer with a track record of producing hits.

And for the "alternative" band scene (simply meaning non-Top40 non-pop), there's a large number of bands who do play their own music, but are big enough to make their own demands who purposely seek out Big Boy producers not so much to give them the sound that the band wants, but rather to put themselves in the producer's hands to let the producer come up with a fresh take on their sound. Sometimes it works, sometimes not, but it does seem to be an increasing trend, not a decreasing one.

And let's not forget the commercial hip-hop scene, where artists-***-producers (and I mean real producers, not "producahs") like RZA, Dre, and the like are almost definitely the major component of "the sound" of any given song or album.

I'm not blanket stating that it's all good or all bad. Some aspects of it are (IMHO/YMMV) positive, some negative. Personally, I'd like to see a return to musicianship carrying the day, but at the same time, a quality creative engineer/producer can really create a legendary recording. Where would music be today we be without the previous production influences of Alan Parsons, Tom Visconti, T-Bone Burnett, etc.; let alone famous session cats like the Memphis Horns, The Wrecking Crew, The Swampers, etc?

G.
 
bozmillar said:
I'll disagree with this one.
Click to expand...

me too. vehemently. the sound of a purely live recording comes partially from the band. the room, how many people are in it, mics, and a recording engineer/producer/mastering house has the rest.
 
Just as another example, let's look more deeply into metallica. They're an established band that has been around for a while. They also have the momentum to be able to play whatever they want whenever they want, so they don't really have to cater to the demands of the record label, at least not as much as newly formed bands do.

Their albums vary a lot from album to album. AJFA has a very odd production style even though the song and playing style is very similar to Master of Puppets. The two albums sound very different. Then there is St Anger. I don't think suddenly all 4 of them woke up one morning and said "On this album, we will only write crappy songs and sing like a high school girl. Lars, get rid of your drums and use trash cans instead." I think the sound on that album as well as the songs were very much influenced by the producer.

They also had the Black album which was very well produced which brought metal to a radio friendly level. That was most defenitly the producer who did that.
 
bozmillar said:
They also had the Black album which was very well produced which brought metal to a radio friendly level. That was most defenitly the producer who did that.
Click to expand...

This is true. The Black Album and Bob Rock are constantly mentioned in the
same sentence, moreso than most producers and their works.
 
bozmillar said:
I don't know. I mean, to an extent, I think a lot of that is true, but I think very few bands are ready to go out of the box. I think a 3rd person (producer) is very necessary for getting the band to sound good. A band needs someone who can listen from the outside who was not part of the writing process to really get the subtle details down.

to me, the trend seems to be like this: Band writes good songs and gets signed. Either they hire a low end producer or the label provides a low end producer and the first album is made. If there is a good song on there, people will like it and the band will become known.

For the second album, the label realizes that the band is a money maker and provides a better producer (or funds for a better producer) to make the second album. The second album is much more polished than the first with better production. If there are good songs again, the band will get even more recognition.

The third album is usually just like the second, possibly a little more experimental because they have enough fans to have some wiggle room.

After the third album, the band realizes that they are putting a lot of money into a producer and want to produce themselves. Sometimes they do a great job, having learned from past producers and produce great albums themselves. Sometimes they go crazy with the freedom and put out a really poorly produced album.

Point is, the producer, whether it's a member of the band or a outside guy has a huge effect on the sound of the album.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this. The only real point I have is in all cases, the production staff is there to make the artist's album work. There would be little point in trying to get AC/DC to make a disco album. Producers get known for the bands they produce and their track record. If a producer is good at doing a heavy metal record, then heavy metal artists will seek him/her out. That is how a producer gets the reputation and then it is up to who idolises who. A heavy metal band will idolise the band recorded and a recording engineer will idolize the producer. However, most people who buy the record could care less about the engineer, producer or record label for that matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top