Perfect timing or not while recording?

[TuoKaerf]

Props for posting that, great read.

I'm at that wonderful point in my engineering career where I'll pretty much record anything. Right now a monkey playing a skin flute is a viable recording venture for me. So that means I'm dealing with the 15-17 year old high school kids who have never set foot in a studio before. Sure its a great experience for all, but jesus h, some of those kids are morons.

 

[Cloneboy Studio]

Speaking of funny....

I had an acoustic guitar/vocal session a few weeks back where the artist *demanded* a click track so the tempo would be consistent (of course I was going to strongly urge using one anyways). So we're recording and he's getting off beat and he says: "hey, the click is messing up!"

 

[Chris Shaeffer]

So that means I'm dealing with the 15-17 year old high school kids who have never set foot in a studio before. Sure its a great experience for all, but jesus h, some of those kids are morons.

That's the truth. I wouldn't call the kids I work with morons, but some have certainly never practiced with a metronome...

I teach them as part of my gig. Imagine going to high school at a recording studio & rehearsal space for 2 months. Some of them are just learning what playing is. Others what playing "in time" is. All of them have serious trouble listening at first- communicating while playing, following each other, etc. Its like pulling teeth to move them from being 5 guys playing in the same room together at the same to to being an actual band playing a song.

Still- clicks make people nervous at first. Yes, it means they can't play in time with a click, but it might also just be that they aren't as comfortable with the process of recording with a click and its distracting them. While recordings that are in time with a click are MUCH easier to deal with later... if I can get a good performance without the click then I turn it off.

So much so that I don't even bother setting one up except to feed the drummer his tempo. None of them can play with a click. We still get decent takes as long as I'm not planning on doing any editting. If its a little off here and there who cares, if its a the best performance you're going to get.

-Chris

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Speaking of funny....

I had an acoustic guitar/vocal session a few weeks back where the artist *demanded* a click track so the tempo would be consistent (of course I was going to strongly urge using one anyways). So we're recording and he's getting off beat and he says: "hey, the click is messing up!"

heh-heh...

Years ago, I brought in a guy to play some 12-string on a tune... I'd given him a copy of the song beforehand and he said he had no problem working out a rhythm part. So he comes in and we start the session - the drums were sync'd to the recorder (drum machine). Roll tape and he starts to play... after a few seconds, his timing starts to drift, so I backup the tape and start again - same thing... lather, rinse, repeat and the same thing again - so he looks up and says quite seriously, "Shouldn't the drums be following MY rhythm??"

uh... yeah.... they should... my bad...

 

[Harvey Gerst]

Speaking of funny....

I had an acoustic guitar/vocal session a few weeks back where the artist *demanded* a click track so the tempo would be consistent (of course I was going to strongly urge using one anyways). So we're recording and he's getting off beat and he says: "hey, the click is messing up!"

Yup, it's true. Every metronome I've owned always slows down during the chorus.

 

[Dani Pace]

Recently I was working with a drummer who said the click "drove him nuts" it wasn't a timming problem, it was the extra sound that "he wasnt making." We solved it easily with a strobe metronome, just a little pulsing light that kept everyone on time. In fact, the more I use it, the better I like it too.

 

[snow lizard]

Yup, it's true. Every metronome I've owned always slows down during the chorus.

Ladies and gentlemen, Harvey Gerst!

 

[deafsound]

My opinion is if you can't record in time, you shouldn't be recording--you should be practicing.

That's nonsense.
I'll be happy to argue with you about this.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

That's nonsense.
I'll be happy to argue with you about this.

What a silly thing to say............

 

[RAMI]

That's nonsense.
I'll be happy to argue with you about this.

Oh come on...how can you argue about that? That's like saying you'd be happy to argue that it's ok to play out of tune, too. Same thing. No argument.

 

[LfO]

That's nonsense.
I'll be happy to argue with you about this.

Well, there is the Experimental genre...

 

[xstatic]

With experimental stuff it is done with a purpose. Bad timing is just bad timing.

 

[deafsound]

Ever listen to Mitch Mitchell? Imagine getiing him in the studio, and realizing he wasn't playing time all that well. Then you go and Pro tools his parts and ruin his vibe.
Buddy miles speeds up like a bastard on the New years Filmore East record.
How's about some of the Dylan tracks where there's a train wreck in the middle somewhere.
How about the band that comes in, plays like they're on fire, but speeds up from the begining of the song to the end, quite unintentionally, then drops a beat on the middle 8, again, by accident? Do they suck? Are you going to "improve" that take by having them play it to a click track, then edit all the boo boos out?

In regards to singing out of tune, again, Dylan anyone? Who cares if he's out of tune? He sings with conviction. How's about Robert Plant? His tuning kinda sucked, but he sure made up for it by singing like the world was gonna end tomorrow. Pretty much anyone that was in the studio before the era of comping tracks like crazy and pitch correction would sing out of tune from time to time, and maybe all the time---hell, if it's a little flat, it could sound cool and bluesy.

SOme guys can't play perfectly in time, but they more than make up for it in their parts and their vibe.

Plus, the guy who made the comment about if you can't play in time, you shouldn't be in the studio sounds like a guy who works at a studio. So to him and anyone else working at a studio, if someone is paying you to record them , even if they can't play in tune or in time, then you gotta do the job they are paying you to do. And beleive me, I am sympathetic to all of you folks out there dealing with sucky bands. It's not nearly as fun as recording the good ones.

 

[Zed10R]

hmmmm...yeah.....I remeber in high school it was "cool" to play sloppy, out of tune, out of time stuff. I suppose that mind set still exists.

Just as an example....professional studio engineers who record professional bands track the guitars more than once. That's just what you do, unless you WANT a small, thin sound. Now, if you can't play your own parts in time, or at least the same way more than once, what you are left with is the need to justify why your record sounds like shit. Blame it on the engineer. That's easy. Or say you wanted that sound because it's "cool" to suck. But better yet, go home a practice.

The musicians who suck the most are the ones who resist staying in time and in tune. The "feel" of thier music would only improve if it was played with a bit of skill.

 

[RAMI]

Ever listen to Mitch Mitchell? Imagine getiing him in the studio, and realizing he wasn't playing time all that well. Then you go and Pro tools his parts and ruin his vibe.
Buddy miles speeds up like a bastard on the New years Filmore East record.
How's about some of the Dylan tracks where there's a train wreck in the middle somewhere.
How about the band that comes in, plays like they're on fire, but speeds up from the begining of the song to the end, quite unintentionally, then drops a beat on the middle 8, again, by accident? Do they suck? Are you going to "improve" that take by having them play it to a click track, then edit all the boo boos out?

In regards to singing out of tune, again, Dylan anyone? Who cares if he's out of tune? He sings with conviction. How's about Robert Plant? His tuning kinda sucked, but he sure made up for it by singing like the world was gonna end tomorrow. Pretty much anyone that was in the studio before the era of comping tracks like crazy and pitch correction would sing out of tune from time to time, and maybe all the time---hell, if it's a little flat, it could sound cool and bluesy.

SOme guys can't play perfectly in time, but they more than make up for it in their parts and their vibe.

Plus, the guy who made the comment about if you can't play in time, you shouldn't be in the studio sounds like a guy who works at a studio. So to him and anyone else working at a studio, if someone is paying you to record them , even if they can't play in tune or in time, then you gotta do the job they are paying you to do. And beleive me, I am sympathetic to all of you folks out there dealing with sucky bands. It's not nearly as fun as recording the good ones.

I love the music that came out of the 60's as much as anything. Having said that, can you use an example from the last 30 years??? Back then, alot of things were acceptable that aren't now. Try walking into a session on acid the way they used to back then. Not everything that applied then applies now. The proof of that is everyone you mentioned is from at least 30 years ago, it went with the vibe of the times. It doesn't now. Playing in time and in tune does matter now. It's hard to compare eras, but if Mitch Mitchell auditioned for a gig now with the top guitarist , he wouldn't get the gig. If Dylan put out a demo now sounding the way did then, he wouldn't get signed or even taken seriously. I'm not saying that's a good thing, just saying that's the way it is, so your examples, while seeming valid...aren't.

 

[Dogman]

Perfect timing may sound mechanical....but great, or impecable timing is required not to sound way off. I know, just a matter of perception, but you do need some pretty good timeing. Take one of Rami's songs, and move one part just a smidge off. It will go from sounding like a great thing, to shit. If it's just a very small portion out of time, and the rest is in, no one may notice. Doesn't have to be perfect, but has to be close to it. Move one whole track off just a bit, and it will clash. Move several tracks just a bit off, and the whole song loses it's direction. I'm a very sloppy player, and even I know you have to be pretty damn close to perfect. Perfect timing in real life musicianship is impossible, but you had better be damn close, or it gets too choppy.

 

[deafsound]

I love the music that came out of the 60's as much as anything. Having said that, can you use an example from the last 30 years??? Back then, alot of things were acceptable that aren't now. Try walking into a session on acid the way they used to back then. Not everything that applied then applies now. The proof of that is everyone you mentioned is from at least 30 years ago, it went with the vibe of the times. It doesn't now. Playing in time and in tune does matter now. It's hard to compare eras, but if Mitch Mitchell auditioned for a gig now with the top guitarist , he wouldn't get the gig. If Dylan put out a demo now sounding the way did then, he wouldn't get signed or even taken seriously. I'm not saying that's a good thing, just saying that's the way it is, so your examples, while seeming valid...aren't.

There are plenty of bands out there who are making a living who's timing is less than desireable. I saw a band last night called We Are Scientists who certainly have less than ideal time. I don't think anyone in the audience knew or cared, except maybe the "producers" who thouhght how fun it would be to get those guys to play to a click so the tempo didn't move. Would've wrecked a good vibe, but whatever.
Dylan may or may not get a deal out of his demo these days, but once the record company saw his picture, he would be rejected for not being a pretty boy.
And Mitchell might get the gig if he knows the right people. There's a drummer in town here who doesn't have the best timing ( he can play to a click, so he doesn't totally suck---he often plays too slow--like the singer will play the intro at 120, and the drummer comes in and the song slows down to 110) but he gets tons of gigs because everyone in town knows the guy.

But back to my original point, if a band comes into the studio to record, even if they can't play in tune or in time, or write a song, you still have to record them. Their music is just as valid as anyone elses. You might not like it, but they deserve to be there too.

And BTW, if a guy manages to string three chords, a melody (even if it's a two note melody) together with some words, but he speeds up, slows down, sings flat, then sharp, can't tune his cheapo guitar very well and so on, he might somehow come out with a better performance than some slick nashville or LA guy with the kick ass gear and the perfect intonation and metronome perfect timing. Music is a feeling, and just beacuse it ain't perfect, don't mean that it's broke.

FWIW, I agree that it's certainly nicer when bands can play in time and in tune. It makes the producer's job a lot easier. The engineer's job is still the same if they are in or out of tune though.

 

[RAMI]

We'll have to just agree to disagree on this one. And don't get me wrong, I do agree with some of your points. I don't believe in perfection as much as I believe in feel and soul. But I think being able to keep time and play in tune are simply minimum requirements.
Your point about Mitch getting the gig if he knew the right people is off the subject. The band you used as an example is also a different case. Youre talking about a live band that nobody's ever heard of. We're talking about studio recording here.

 

[TuoKaerf]

I'm all about some "feel" to the music, but when the drummer suddenly takes off into the chorus 15 clicks up, it can make a mess if I have to do a lot of edits. Sure it can be genre specific, but when its that bad, I won't let it pass.

 

[Cloneboy Studio]

SOme guys can't play perfectly in time, but they more than make up for it in their parts and their vibe.

Yeah, but most of the people that have trouble with timing have it ALL THE TIME. Barring that, they rarely have much of a vibe or cool to them. Heck, some of them can't even suck in a cool way.

Plus, the guy who made the comment about if you can't play in time, you shouldn't be in the studio sounds like a guy who works at a studio. So to him and anyone else working at a studio, if someone is paying you to record them , even if they can't play in tune or in time, then you gotta do the job they are paying you to do. And beleive me, I am sympathetic to all of you folks out there dealing with sucky bands. It's not nearly as fun as recording the good ones.

Yeah, it can be murder sometimes. Especially when the band starts trying to blame YOU for it not sounding right. Sorry pal, but you're the one that can't play in time, not me! It's even more frustrating when they think their timing is good and it's the production that is hurting them, when the truth is it's their lame, ragged playing and timing.

It's called a "groove" people.... get into one.

I don't ask that bands play like a metronome, but at least make it not suck.