Phil Spector Wall of sound

  • Thread starter Thread starter walters
  • Start date Start date
W

walters

New member
1.) What is the Wall of sound?


2.) How do i overdub like the Wall of sound did?


3.) What were Phil Spectors overdub tricks
that he did?
 
I think it was the last issue of Tape Op where they interviewed a jazz bassist who sat in on alot of those sessions.

She said it was just a combination of having a ton of musicians playing at once and the "Wall of Sound" came from them all bleeding into one another's mics.

I.E.
If you have one bass line, use five bassists playing it the room together with minimal baffles.

She said that towards the end even he was minimalizing the bleed through, though.
 
I've read a lot about Spector's sessions. He sometimes had 10-12 people in the studio, then would overdub another session with those same people playing the same thing again... like double-tracking an entire band.

I think for the time, the sound was killer. Really pushing the limits. For today, it's a pretty weak sound. I definitely wouldn't want my albums to sound like that unless it was for some kind of "vintage" effect.
 
From what I understand, not only did he at least double all the musicians, but he added reverb to the entire mix.
 
I used to sit in on a bunch of Specter's sessions.

I'd give Phil a lesson or two in engineering / producing once in a while.

Yea, he'd beg me over and over: "Chessrock ... please, teach me all of your secrets, and show me your audio tricks."

I got tired of him begging me, so one time I just sat him down and said: "Phil, 'ol buddy ... ya see, it's all in the track count." You see those paltry 23 tracks you're working with there? Child's play. That's not even in to the triple digits yet."

Later, he'd come back to me and say: "Chessrock .. okay, I just added 12 more tracks this afternoon. Will you listen to it? How did I do?"

After which I would procede to say: "12? Is that it? How long were you working on this? Do you mean to tell me that you spent an entire afternoon on this, and all you have to show for it is 12 more tracks? You're going to have to do better than that. Dude, my little 7-year old sister records 12 tracks in less than an hour. Quit being such a panzy."

After my stern rebukes of his laziness and general lack of track count ... Phil quickly went to work devising this "new recording technique" as he called it. And thus, the birth of what we now know as "The wall of Sound."
 
chessrock said:
I used to sit in on a bunch of Specter's sessions.

I'd give Phil a lesson or two in engineering / producing once in a while.

Yea, he'd beg me over and over: "Chessrock ... please, teach me all of your secrets, and show me your audio tricks."

I got tired of him begging me, so one time I just sat him down and said: "Phil, 'ol buddy ... ya see, it's all in the track count." You see those paltry 23 tracks you're working with there? Child's play. That's not even in to the triple digits yet."

Later, he'd come back to me and say: "Chessrock .. okay, I just added 12 more tracks this afternoon. Will you listen to it? How did I do?"

After which I would procede to say: "12? Is that it? How long were you working on this? Do you mean to tell me that you spent an entire afternoon on this, and all you have to show for it is 12 more tracks? You're going to have to do better than that. Dude, my little 7-year old sister records 12 tracks in less than an hour. Quit being such a panzy."

After my stern rebukes of his laziness and general lack of track count ... Phil quickly went to work devising this "new recording technique" as he called it. And thus, the birth of what we now know as "The wall of Sound."
Click to expand...
That explains 63 tracks for a song that was one acoustic guitar and one vocal! :eek:

That's how it's done, huh? :rolleyes:

:D :D
 
Rokket said:
That explains 63 tracks for a song that was one acoustic guitar and one vocal! :eek:
Click to expand...


Ah yes ... you must be talking about the time I taught Phil my "stereo-mic'ing of each individal string" technique.

The only problem with that is that we'd get a lot of bleed that way from the other surrounding strings.

And after that, of course you know we'd have to go back and double everything for good measure.
 
chessrock said:
Ah yes ... you must be talking about the time I taught Phil my "stereo-mic'ing of each individal string" technique.

The only problem with that is that we'd get a lot of bleed that way from the other surrounding strings.

And after that, of course you know we'd have to go back and double everything for good measure.
Click to expand...
That's the technique, alright! :rolleyes:

I tried it myself, but the cheap chinese mic I was using didn't hold up too well. Muddier than the Mississippi in springtime... :(

I haven't tried to do a stereo image yet... :rolleyes:
 
man I wish you guys hadn't started joking so that I could complain how much I dislike phil spector and his sound.
 
1.) how do you get the Generation loss in bouncing in Digital?


2.) I want to get Generation loss in Digital?


3.) How do i do it ?
 
1.) That was really one question that you repeated in number two in the form of a statement with a question mark at the end of it.

2.) You neither want a wall of sound nor generation loss. You could do it by saving the tracks as lower quality files... say 128kbps MP3's... but don't.
 
walters said:
1.) how do you get the Generation loss in bouncing in Digital?


2.) I want to get Generation loss in Digital?


3.) How do i do it ?
Click to expand...

Well, you can't, really. You could send it out through the D/A converters and then back through the A/D converters (perhaps running through some cheap analog equipment in the process, or re-amping through speakers) and re-record it. Alternately, there are degradation and bit-rate converter plugins that simulate what you are going for.

This site has a few VST plugins (click "instruments" and "effects" for plugs) that will really jack with your sound: http://www.tweakbench.com/
 
chessrock said:
Ah yes ... you must be talking about the time I taught Phil my "stereo-mic'ing of each individal string" technique.

The only problem with that is that we'd get a lot of bleed that way from the other surrounding strings.

And after that, of course you know we'd have to go back and double everything for good measure.
Click to expand...

Genius. Absolute Genius.
 
You know, I used to sit in a bunch of Spector's sessions...


oh shit!
 
spector was a

spector once toll me that he was often starting fight in clubs and then letting his bodyguard do the job for him ! WoW!!!!
 
1.) What is bleeding ?


2.) how to re-create it ?


3.) Bleeding in post production?
how do i do this?

4.) What causes bleeding?

5.) Is bleeding a form of feedbacking?
 
you have to start talking like a normal person dude. stop with the lists and the numbering. explain what you're trying to do. bleeding occurs when you're recording say... drums and a guitar and a bit of the guitar comes through on the drum mics. feedback is caused on guitar by sympathetic vibrations. you cannot have "bleeding" in post production unless you fake it and add a hint of another track onto an existing track... which is stupid, you usually want to minimize bleeding unless the room you are in sounds excellent... or for some obscure effect.
 
Guys I've got a question..

whenever I use the bleeding technique, i seem to wake up in the emergency room at the local hospital.

what am i doing wrong?

and my faders are all coagulated and whatnot.. this technique sucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top