Producer high resolution database

[1 1 Meta 2 2 2]

Sorry if I'm in the wrong forum topic for this.

I have 2 real research stumbling blocks currently. Been going on quite awhile.

Problem 1:

I choose a work, such as "Safe As Milk."
I want to know everything I can about it with the highest resolution as possible. Right down to the names of the microscopic creatures playing in the dust on an instrument cable. You know, Jessica, Ron, Yukitaka, etc.
I go to cdnow.com and pull up the sheet for the album, scrolling down I find the production notes. Producer = Richard Perry.
I click on that name. whoaa. Lot of work there. But that's the best I've been able to do. As far as detail and mo detail, nothing.
Sure there are hectic searches on the net at large but that's all over the place.

Is there a better way?

Problem 2:

I'd like to know details about the first digital multitrack FZ used. I believe he acquired it in 1984, a sony machine. But that's the most I can find. In terms of converter quality, sampling rate/depth, I can't find anything. I think it would especially interesting to compare specs for that system as opposed to those we use in our home and project studios today.


I wouldn't ask if I hadn't done some work on this already. Any ideas are more than welcome and thanks for reading,

Jeff

 

[sonusman]

I can almost assure you that the average standard +4 capable soundcard contains better converters with much better specs than the old Sony PCM machines that were floating around back in those day do. Anyone still using those machines had them retrofitted with usually Apogee converters after it was discovered that better converters could indeed be made!

I doubt you are going to find any of the top producers/engineers of the world confessing much of anything useful about their production approaches to great releases they have worked on. Much of the techniques used by people at that level were deverloped after years of trying everything else imaginable, and you could probably understand that the reason THEY are working on those great CD's, and not YOU, is that THEY KNOW HOW to get the sound you hear and YOU DON'T. Get it?

It would all be mostly worthless to you anyway. Seldomly do people recording at home have access to the brilliantly designed rooms, the all Class A signal path, first class songwriting and musicianship, and first class monitoring that these guys do. It is the sum of all these parts that make great recordings. Well, and add an engineer who has worked a zillion sessions that has a pretty good clue at what actually sounds good and what doesn't when he hears it.

I suspect that you are looking for some hints on how to improve the recordings you do at home. I suspect you feel that your recording device is not up to par. I suspect that you feel there is a "secret" out there that if you could find it, your recordings will be as great as anything you have ever heard. I suspect you think I am full of dog doo doo right now....

I can tell you in all honesty that the way your recordings will get MUCH better is to spend that time you spend reading over production notes on actually DOING some recording. Then do some more. Then totally obsess and do some more recording. After you are sick and tired of it all, well, do some more. Wake up at 3am and do some recording. Get home from work and record until 2am (you can get an hours sleep!).

Sigh.....practice practice practice......If only they would make that one device that makes everything sound great no matter what!

Oh wait, doesn't the POD do that?

Good luck.

Ed

 

[1 1 Meta 2 2 2]

Thanks for the reply. Actually those 2 problems are more of a hobby of mine. Like history. Actually I have alot of problems with the reply, I disagree with most of it. But that doesn't matter since most of its premises are wrong. In fact that reply is so off base from myself or what I'm looking for I wish you wouldn't even have put it in my thread with all due respect.

So I'm still looking, and not going to give up. As far as the Zappa machine, like I said I need every detail. I'm no shmuck so when I say I'm looking for details that's what I'm looking for. And no amount of difficulty is going to stop me.
And speculation is unacceptable.

 

[Slackmaster2K]

There is no "database" that I've ever been able to find.

I agree with ed that you're not going to get a lot of specific information out of a lot of engineers/producers. In fact when you do get even a tid-bit of specifics it kind of feels like winning the lottery. I could read shit like that all day...and I wouldn't be trying to steal techniques, I just find it fascinating (well, when somebody is describing a recording I enjoy anyhow).

I've gotten more specifics from magazine interviews than anything else. Information like this on the web and usenet is 90% speculation and 10% bullshit. The only trustable source of information is the engineer himself...so interviews are always good.

Also, you might be suprised at how many people you can actually contact via email....and every working studio probably has a phone number.

Slackmaster 2000