producer and their.. production

  • Thread starter Thread starter watergun3945
  • Start date Start date
W

watergun3945

New member
hello everyone,
recently we recorded an album with a producer, whos career is based around pop albums (and centered around the vocalist).. we were offered to be taken on by him and were recorded in a great studio, legendary for its work with rock groups from the 60's up to the 90's...

anyway we used to record at our home studio, doing everything from engineering to production ourselves and it fit the the band sonically for what it was (not saying that a "big" studio is a problem--as a garage with a 4 track would be a bigger problem for us), although i agree that it could have been better in a nice studio done correctly.

we got some tracks back and i seem to have the biggest concern, although they are only the "rough mixes" for the 2 songs, theyve been worked on for 2 weeks straight and i thought by now everything would be pretty good (even though i didnt think everything was even tracked as good as possible). the mix alone sounds like sludge--overcompressed, muddy, and there are also cheesy doubled tracks, artificial "breaths", random instrument mutes and edits, everything is synced up to either a grid or the drums, and every instrument/vocal track is comp'ed like crazy... not anything like the band should sound.
i need to know is it just me, is every producer like this or does a producer with a pop background and a producer with a rock background have a completely different approach (because that is exactly what i think).. i also value the production and techniques in older recordings and think that they are lost in todays albums, and i know that has something to do with it but whats the deal... im almost positive we could do better ourselves or at least with a different producer but i need examples and advice on how to convey that to everyone else.

please share ANY and EVERY bit of insight you have on this subject.
thanks everyone
 
it's hard to comment on it without hearing it
can you give us a sample?
 
im alittle skeptical about posting it online, as we signed a contract and everything and i think this would be a problem..
 
watergun3945 said:
im alittle skeptical about posting it online, as we signed a contract and everything and i think this would be a problem..
Click to expand...

understandable, but does the contract say anything about releasing you of all ownership rights?? it's still your song. a short 20 second sample of the worst part of the song would help.
it's up to you, but it's hard for us to imagine how it sounds like from an unbiased point of view without hearing it. plus, i doubt anyone here is going to steal your song...many many people post in the MP3 forum all the time.
if you are really that worried about what is happening with your song, tell the producer. that's one of their jobs. they're the liason between the band/label and the mixing engineer. If you don't feel comfortable with how the producer is handling your music, then ask for another producer
 
bennychico11 said:
if you are really that worried about what is happening with your song, tell the producer. that's one of their jobs. they're the liason between the band/label and the mixing engineer. If you don't feel comfortable with how the producer is handling your music, then ask for another producer
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Some producers believe that they need to do everything they can to leave their personal sonic imprint on what they work on, whereas others feel that they are there merely as another tool for the band to use in creating their record. Going along with this, some artists need a producer who can guide and create along with them, whereas others have a clear vision from the get-go and merely need to get in, make their record, and get out. I believe more firmly in the latter in both instances, but thats just my personal opinion. If your band feels the same way and believes that you would be better served by using a different producer or by producing yourselves, then go that route. It is, after all, your music, so you should have the final say in how the finished product sounds.
 
Well it almost sounds like amaturer engineering as opposed to a bad producer. Is it the same person? Truth be told you never know what coffee boy could be mixing your tracks(at a large studio) FIND OUT and then voice any concerns to the producer. The producers intentions could be noble but the engineer may not be the appropriate person to execute his instruction. But most importantly if its not sounding like your band it's crap. A good producer refines your sound not changes it. If it is their fault GET RID OF THEM!
 
from what I've read, you should head over to Sear Sound studios in NYC, they seem to agree with your complaints. at least, they have some articles posted online that may help you think. yes, find out who's doing these things to your recordings, make the producer sit back a bit if it's him, maybe the band can be a "co-producer"
 
A "producer" should bring your ideas to light or leed you in the right direction to do so. Some, I have been involved with take on projects as if "they" are the artist. Almost force there ideas or creativity. Now, this may not be your case but in general terms a "producer" should be in your corner helping you achieve your goals. Also, just because a studio is big and cool does not mean they are good. Or at least it does not mean the guy engineering for you is good or has any taiste. I'd love to hear some of your project. Remember to maintain ownership of music/publishing rights or at lease a good portion.
 
I have produced several recordings and I always get together with the artist/artists long before the session and discuss exactly how involved they want me to be in the process. Some want me to take total control of everything. Others want varying degrees of involvement. At any rate, I always tell them that my job is to make them sound as good as they possibly can and I'm there to give them what THEY want not what I want. After all, it is their money. They hire me to work for them not the other way around. However, if what they want is so contrary to the way I think and possibly (off the wall) I may not feel comfortable working with them and I will bow out and advise them to get another producer who will be more compatible with what they are looking for.
 
It would be difficult for anyone to give specific advice without knowing you, your producer, and your workflow. But, unless this producer is world famous and very directly involved in this production, you need to stand up for yourself and them him that you don't like these mixes. Be respectful, but direct. He may have good reasons for doing what he did, or he may have no idea what he's doing. In any case, you need to find out what's going on.
 
As a guitarist who has worked on albums/tapes/CDs for at least 20 other artists I have met the good and the bad producers. Some have insisted that I play like so and so or get this exact sound (I hated them) while others have done all they could to assure that the final result was as cloce as possible to what we ( either the artist or me) wanted to hear. I have never walked into a recording session without having a pretty good idea of what was expected from me. I always get together with the writer/artist to rehearse the song(s) and try to get a feel for what they want. I have been overprocessed and undercut in places and parts which were vital to the continuity of certain songs. I agree that the producer is responsible for making a song sound as good as it possibly can, but at times this takes away from the feel, the mood, the whatever that makes a song distinctive. It has been my experience that most of us musicians and writers do not get along well with many producers when they expect us to sacrifice our talent just so they can make an extra buck. Granted the producers may know what sells but we, the artists know what we are trying to express. Unfortunately we are sensitive people, not some part of a machine which churns out rythms and melodies to suit their whims. We are artists, we paint on an audio canvas, we put into words and music the things that many are afraid to admit they even feel, yet if produced and presented correctly, then the masses can relate to them. Yes, make us sound better than we really are, but, don't do anything which changes the message we try so desperately to convey.
 
Production is simply a problem solving endeavour under most circumstances if we are talking about rock music. If everything is going quite well, and sounds good, and the band is kicking butt, the best thing I can do is simply facilitate the pace/comfort level/ air of fun/ and space for "happy accidents" to happen.

Making the studio feel like fun and feel like "we can do anything" even while questioning the 21 measure instrumental bridge is the key. Feeling out the balance of art/commerce built into any given band or songwriter's certain song or album is critical as well. Should a producer try and "enforce" a pop aesthetic on an art punk band? of course not, but then gain: why was that band in the studio with the "pop" producer? I am always skeptical when people pigeonhole themselves as producers, because it seems like they are simply grasping for some sort of validation from genre specific aural cues that they KNOW will work....

Basically the bottom line is this: You should really like some of the tuff that the producer has worked on before you. The producer should also have a range of styles that can be played for you, because it shows depth and knowledge of music at large rather than some speceific niche genre that doesnt really mean anything to you. A 20 minute meeting can prevent the wasting of a week or more....
 
I hate to be the one to break this to you,

but while your band and your label were on that cruise ...

Mixerman, your Producer, and the Producer's nephew all replaced your guitar and bass lines. To make matters worse, the nephew has also been sleeping with your guitar player's girlfriend.

And the funny guy with the smelly Parka ... he's been editing your drum tracks like crazy.
 
haha thanks for the laugh and everyone thanks for the help... allow me to elaborate more on what i feel is wrong and maybe some peole could give me even more great help...

the process--everything was cool being in this great studio, but the thing that wasnt cool was that now that i think of it, we didnt even really play together or warm up as a band for more than maybe 15 minutes before working for the next 2 weeks. the click track to the songs was also disappointing because although weve tracked to click before, it seemed to--along with the combination of everything else--take away from the energy.

the tracking--my personal philosophy is this: the tracks should sound about 90% of how theyre gonna sound when there tracked, especially in a studio like this. heres where i may need a correction if im wrong, i believe that every method of a producer to do something is alittle different and affects the sound differently. that being said, i think by close miking the drums (which is fine) but only having 1 room mic being barely used in the drum room, AND completely sucking the drums dry of any overtones (hard core tape and other stuff), i feel that that method may be employed by him in "pop" sessions but it doesnt translate as well to a rock band. AND i feel that his intention in dampening the drums that much was to have more control over them with triggers and things like that post-recording.

the editing--well it ranged from getting about 5 or 6 drum tracks to make a comp and aligining ANY single little nuance to a grid or "flying in a fill" or this or that. this i think was a major part of why i am not pleased. and the same thing happened with the guitars and some keyboards. basically some days it went like this: play the song live to a click track with drums being isolated, and get an OK take of that, and go back and get about 5 playlists of the drums, and then spend HOURS just editing all of that and making a comp. and by saying all of this it would make you think we are sloppy or can't play our instruments, which if you could take my word without me sounding like a prick is not the case. i know i have a great ear but i feel that everything was made PERFECT, which without saying was completely annoying for a band.

the mixing--this is somewhat of the stage were at now, and the producer has been working on 2 of the 'singles' for 2 weeks, and we get them back--and keep in mind i wasn't at all happy with the rough bounce when recording was over--and i cant think of 1 thing i like. regarding only sonic qualities (as i've already talked about how the emotion has been striped by the editing alone),
the drums-triggering going on, heavy over compression, right in your face, no room or depth,
the guitar-cheesy doubling effects, overcompressed as to where the levels for the clean/distorted/effects tracks are pretty much exactly the same throughout the song,
the bass-im not good with judging good recorded bass so ill let it slide,
the vocals - cheesy doubled tracks panned all over the place, vocals with poor use of delay and reverbs,
the mix - the mix as a whole was over compressed, keep in mind its been 2 weeks with only 2 songs to work on EVERY SINGLE DAY.

i like to think that when i hear a song, i hear the music first, and then the sonic qualities of the song, and then the lyrics last (or at least thats the order of how much i enjoy each). i also know that a bands signature sound (any random band like the strokes, sabbath, queen) works because it works for the band and you shouldnt just settle on getting a song 'recorded' because its not all about the actual song. the reason i feel that early westbound era funkadelic sounds so much different then like One nation under a groove is to me more than just the songs, its the production.. but with that being said the production is a perfect fit for the album, wheras the production for ONUAG is perfect for that album.. im probably starting to ramble

if any one wants to comment on one part or anything, please feel free. ive broken it down alittle better so people who dont want to read the whole thing can comment.
thanks for anyone that reads this
 
watergun3945 said:
the mixing--this is somewhat of the stage were at now, and the producer has been working on 2 of the 'singles' for 2 weeks, and we get them back--and keep in mind i wasn't at all happy with the rough bounce when recording was over--and i cant think of 1 thing i like. regarding only sonic qualities (as i've already talked about how the emotion has been striped by the editing alone),
the drums-triggering going on, heavy over compression, right in your face, no room or depth,
the guitar-cheesy doubling effects, overcompressed as to where the levels for the clean/distorted/effects tracks are pretty much exactly the same throughout the song,
the bass-im not good with judging good recorded bass so ill let it slide,
the vocals - cheesy doubled tracks panned all over the place, vocals with poor use of delay and reverbs,
the mix - the mix as a whole was over compressed, keep in mind its been 2 weeks with only 2 songs to work on EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Click to expand...

sounds like every major made in the states over the last 10 years or so.
:eek:

there is a sonic expectation people feel they have to fill in order for a record to qualify for heavy (hopefully) rotation.
i suspect you're a victim of todays sonic expectations.
(or maby he's in over his head)
 
And another highly paid "producer" sucks all the life and distinction out of someone's music. They should all be boycotted.
 
this kind of thing scares me as a musicians. i know that i am not a recording expert by any means, i have no experience with recording, mixing, engineering, mastering, and whatever else i dont even know about yet. But some of the things i do know how to do (and get paid to do) is play music, whether its singing, guitar, bass, drums or piano. when i went to the best studio in town to put down a few tracks, they killed it. over compressed, to the point it was hard to understand the words.
this brings me to my big question...
Are bands starting to regain their say in what their music is going to sound like? Its hard for me to grasp the concept of someone else stepping all over my music. scary to think about actually. Alot of you, being very talented producers (...right???), could probably give musicians like me alot of advice on what to stay away from when i start to put out my LP and tour. How much trust should i put into a producer? should i even have a producer? as far as contracts, am i stuck with a shitty producer if i sign the wrong deal?
any pointers would be appreciated.
 
KonradG said:
. when i went to the best studio in town to put down a few tracks, they killed it. over compressed, to the point it was hard to understand the words.
.
Click to expand...

don't confuse "overproduced" with "they suck"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top