D
darnold
New member
Im really surprised by alot of the answers already given, although i havnt read all them. Heres my look on them all.
<b>1. No click track - they played EVERYTHING to a scratch guitar track.</b>
I dont think you should give the wrong idea here. Are you sure the guitar player wasnt playing through a direct line at the same time as the drum player? This is normally how i do it in these kinds of situations. Infact im recording a hardcore band at the moment. Doing a quick 6 song CD. Turning out great so far. I plugged the 2 guitar players and the bassist in direct, and let them play in the control room with the drums in the other room. This can be good or bad sometimes because if you have one weak link in the chain messing up the timing a little in some parts it can mess up the drummer. But if you have a solid drummer who can focus then it doesnt matter. Ive always thought this was a pretty standard way, at least in the professional world. But it only works if youve got the tracks. I ran everything into its own channel. Kick, Snare Top, Snare Bottom, Hi Hat, Tom 1, Tom 2, Tom3, Left OH, Right OH, Room 1, Room 2 (sometimes more if i feel like it), then 1 or 2 channels for guitars direct, and 1 through the nicer DIs incase he nails his takes. This sometimes will consist of 2 scratch vocals too in the control room. All recorded onto individual tracks. Ive done this with and without metrenomes. It helps for a much more organic feel to the music, and helps the drummer get into the music a little better. It also helps the drummer use correct dynamics for the music. If its done with a metrenome its usually tighter, but if not its not the end of the world. Even the ones that arnt perfectly tight sound more alive and exciting than ones right on beat and beat matched.
<b> 2. They recorded one instrument for all the songs, then went back and recorded another instrument, etc. For example, they recorded 10 songs with nothing but drums, then went back and added all the guitar, etc. </b>
I dont think ive ever done it any other way. Saves time, keeps things consistent, and keeps things more organized. I just feel its much more efficient. Im surprised others do it differently because ive never seen it done differently with a real album in the professional world. I guess if the band was writing the songs as they went and wanted something different for each track. But thats rarely the case. This is why an engineer or producer will usually meet with the band first and organize it. Finalize exactly how many songs they will be doing. What instruments will be in each song and map it out. This way you can just go from one song to the next with an already clear perspective on whats going to be added. Also, with limited mics, how are you going to take the mics off the drum set to use them for something else and then put them exactly in the same position? Seems like a cluttered pain in the ass to me.
<b> 3. The tech was really helpful - for example he would tell you if you messed up and needed to redo something. </b>
Heh, this is one of the hardest things for me as an engineer to deal with. Since they arnt highering me as a producer i try not to get in the way of their style. But at the same time, it is most likely, by how much time i spend in the studio and how much music i listen to in the studio, that in general i know what works well and what doesnt. And although its not my job to tell them how it should be, its my job to help the band get the sound they are looking for. Thats part of being a professional engineer. Knowing what "niches" there are in genres that hook the bands to it. And what i find most of the time, is that most of these little bands and stuff that come in want something but have no idea what it is. Good example is guitar players always wanted to crank the highs and suck the mids. They think they know and they are persueing that specific sound but do not have the trained ears to even know what it is they are hearing. Of course, in the other sense, i shouldnt be so prideful that i know better than them. The band really might have figured out their sound and you might want to sit back and go with it. But thats rare
. Its a tough thing. I feel confident in my work that i try and get the band to trust me at the beginning. Infact i normally explain to them before we start that they should trust me. They are putting their money into what i am doing, and if they dont trust that i will do it for them they shouldnt be there in the first place. I had a screamo band a few months ago that came in and were extremely laid back. Not only did they allow full trust and input from me on their sounds, but also a little in song structure. The CD turned out tight and in the end turned out exactly what they were looking for. I blame it on perspective. I dont have the greatest ear in the world, but i have done alot of albums and have done alot of different generes of work, both perfectionist jazz artists and small time high school students. I work with this stuff every day all day. It should be obvious my perspective and view of the sounds and music are a little more advance than a high school band who plays at bars and pizza shacks. Im sure others here also feel the same. There are some people who are very difficult to work with and neither do i enjoy working with these kinds of people, but normally they are not satisfied with the end results. Then it all ends up looking bad on my part. So ultimately i avoid them as much as possible. On the other hand, if a band came in and told me they wanted to do something totally new and they wanted to try a bunch of things out and they new what they were looking for. I would do it their way. What it all comes down to, is this is why a producer is so important. Even if its someone in your band. At least have someone there with real life experience.
That was pretty long. But i new if i didnt explain it correctly it would have looked bad. This is a perspective the way a professional engineer would see it. No im not expert, i just do it full time and is my main source of income. Most people here are musicians who will someday go into a professional studio. Now you are a little more prepared on how the engineer looks at you when you walk in the door.
<b> 4. They did not multiply any guitar tracks. Isnt that kind of a standard thing? </b>
Multiplay as in duplicate the tracks or record them twice? I dont think its a good idea for everything. Duplicating 2 rythm tracks to make it thicker just means you didnt get it right on the first time. In hardcore, its normally recorded with the rythm hard left and the lead hard right. And then if there are parts where the lead isnt playing, i will usually have the lead player play along with the rythm on the bald section just so it doesnt feel like something is lost, unless thats what the song is calling for. And another thing, if do double track a single rythm distortion guitar like that, its just so i can pan one hard left and one hard right and keep them out of the center. I think any distortion guitar panned in the center at that kind of volume is just trouble. Theres not much going on the structure of the music so thats the only way to keep a wide stereo spread. Might as well use it.
This project im working on right now is a pretty quick one. We started on Thursday and we have to finish it by the 6th of January. Turning out great so far though with a few problems in performance we have to straighten out. Drums sound great so far. Ill try and get permission to post it up for everyone thats interested to hear. Started working on the distortion guitar today with a JCM2000 and a 60's 4x10 cab. Spent a few hours messin with the amp to get a really deep sound. 11 tracks on the drums, 3 signals with the bass including Countryman Type 85 DI, Direct from an Ampeg SVT 350 head (not great i know), then the head into the Ampeg 6x10 cab with a Sennheiser MD421. The distortion guitars will consist of 4 signals through the JCM2000, one direct through DI box, one 57, one MD421, one Royer 122, and a AKG C414. Then vocals. Dont know how many tracks here yet or what mics. Im expecting around 32 channels at the end. So there will be plenty of options for tones when mixing time comes. The reason why im telling you this is because i am thinking of trying to get permission to put a song up for a mix contest. Should be a good experience for everyone to mix something with these kinds of options. See different characteristics of mics and see how they might work with each other. If i see a bit of interest i will pursue the idea more. No guarantees though.
Anyway, im done with this reply.
Danny
<b>1. No click track - they played EVERYTHING to a scratch guitar track.</b>
I dont think you should give the wrong idea here. Are you sure the guitar player wasnt playing through a direct line at the same time as the drum player? This is normally how i do it in these kinds of situations. Infact im recording a hardcore band at the moment. Doing a quick 6 song CD. Turning out great so far. I plugged the 2 guitar players and the bassist in direct, and let them play in the control room with the drums in the other room. This can be good or bad sometimes because if you have one weak link in the chain messing up the timing a little in some parts it can mess up the drummer. But if you have a solid drummer who can focus then it doesnt matter. Ive always thought this was a pretty standard way, at least in the professional world. But it only works if youve got the tracks. I ran everything into its own channel. Kick, Snare Top, Snare Bottom, Hi Hat, Tom 1, Tom 2, Tom3, Left OH, Right OH, Room 1, Room 2 (sometimes more if i feel like it), then 1 or 2 channels for guitars direct, and 1 through the nicer DIs incase he nails his takes. This sometimes will consist of 2 scratch vocals too in the control room. All recorded onto individual tracks. Ive done this with and without metrenomes. It helps for a much more organic feel to the music, and helps the drummer get into the music a little better. It also helps the drummer use correct dynamics for the music. If its done with a metrenome its usually tighter, but if not its not the end of the world. Even the ones that arnt perfectly tight sound more alive and exciting than ones right on beat and beat matched.
<b> 2. They recorded one instrument for all the songs, then went back and recorded another instrument, etc. For example, they recorded 10 songs with nothing but drums, then went back and added all the guitar, etc. </b>
I dont think ive ever done it any other way. Saves time, keeps things consistent, and keeps things more organized. I just feel its much more efficient. Im surprised others do it differently because ive never seen it done differently with a real album in the professional world. I guess if the band was writing the songs as they went and wanted something different for each track. But thats rarely the case. This is why an engineer or producer will usually meet with the band first and organize it. Finalize exactly how many songs they will be doing. What instruments will be in each song and map it out. This way you can just go from one song to the next with an already clear perspective on whats going to be added. Also, with limited mics, how are you going to take the mics off the drum set to use them for something else and then put them exactly in the same position? Seems like a cluttered pain in the ass to me.
<b> 3. The tech was really helpful - for example he would tell you if you messed up and needed to redo something. </b>
Heh, this is one of the hardest things for me as an engineer to deal with. Since they arnt highering me as a producer i try not to get in the way of their style. But at the same time, it is most likely, by how much time i spend in the studio and how much music i listen to in the studio, that in general i know what works well and what doesnt. And although its not my job to tell them how it should be, its my job to help the band get the sound they are looking for. Thats part of being a professional engineer. Knowing what "niches" there are in genres that hook the bands to it. And what i find most of the time, is that most of these little bands and stuff that come in want something but have no idea what it is. Good example is guitar players always wanted to crank the highs and suck the mids. They think they know and they are persueing that specific sound but do not have the trained ears to even know what it is they are hearing. Of course, in the other sense, i shouldnt be so prideful that i know better than them. The band really might have figured out their sound and you might want to sit back and go with it. But thats rare
. Its a tough thing. I feel confident in my work that i try and get the band to trust me at the beginning. Infact i normally explain to them before we start that they should trust me. They are putting their money into what i am doing, and if they dont trust that i will do it for them they shouldnt be there in the first place. I had a screamo band a few months ago that came in and were extremely laid back. Not only did they allow full trust and input from me on their sounds, but also a little in song structure. The CD turned out tight and in the end turned out exactly what they were looking for. I blame it on perspective. I dont have the greatest ear in the world, but i have done alot of albums and have done alot of different generes of work, both perfectionist jazz artists and small time high school students. I work with this stuff every day all day. It should be obvious my perspective and view of the sounds and music are a little more advance than a high school band who plays at bars and pizza shacks. Im sure others here also feel the same. There are some people who are very difficult to work with and neither do i enjoy working with these kinds of people, but normally they are not satisfied with the end results. Then it all ends up looking bad on my part. So ultimately i avoid them as much as possible. On the other hand, if a band came in and told me they wanted to do something totally new and they wanted to try a bunch of things out and they new what they were looking for. I would do it their way. What it all comes down to, is this is why a producer is so important. Even if its someone in your band. At least have someone there with real life experience. That was pretty long. But i new if i didnt explain it correctly it would have looked bad. This is a perspective the way a professional engineer would see it. No im not expert, i just do it full time and is my main source of income. Most people here are musicians who will someday go into a professional studio. Now you are a little more prepared on how the engineer looks at you when you walk in the door.
<b> 4. They did not multiply any guitar tracks. Isnt that kind of a standard thing? </b>
Multiplay as in duplicate the tracks or record them twice? I dont think its a good idea for everything. Duplicating 2 rythm tracks to make it thicker just means you didnt get it right on the first time. In hardcore, its normally recorded with the rythm hard left and the lead hard right. And then if there are parts where the lead isnt playing, i will usually have the lead player play along with the rythm on the bald section just so it doesnt feel like something is lost, unless thats what the song is calling for. And another thing, if do double track a single rythm distortion guitar like that, its just so i can pan one hard left and one hard right and keep them out of the center. I think any distortion guitar panned in the center at that kind of volume is just trouble. Theres not much going on the structure of the music so thats the only way to keep a wide stereo spread. Might as well use it.
This project im working on right now is a pretty quick one. We started on Thursday and we have to finish it by the 6th of January. Turning out great so far though with a few problems in performance we have to straighten out. Drums sound great so far. Ill try and get permission to post it up for everyone thats interested to hear. Started working on the distortion guitar today with a JCM2000 and a 60's 4x10 cab. Spent a few hours messin with the amp to get a really deep sound. 11 tracks on the drums, 3 signals with the bass including Countryman Type 85 DI, Direct from an Ampeg SVT 350 head (not great i know), then the head into the Ampeg 6x10 cab with a Sennheiser MD421. The distortion guitars will consist of 4 signals through the JCM2000, one direct through DI box, one 57, one MD421, one Royer 122, and a AKG C414. Then vocals. Dont know how many tracks here yet or what mics. Im expecting around 32 channels at the end. So there will be plenty of options for tones when mixing time comes. The reason why im telling you this is because i am thinking of trying to get permission to put a song up for a mix contest. Should be a good experience for everyone to mix something with these kinds of options. See different characteristics of mics and see how they might work with each other. If i see a bit of interest i will pursue the idea more. No guarantees though.
Anyway, im done with this reply.
Danny
