The Secret To Great Recordings

[jeff0633]

Fir instance, here's an mp3 recorded in Ethan's great sounding room. You can hear that it's a great room INSTANTLY, even with the simplest of guitar playing at the beginning, even a non player could be taught to hit the right strings and make the beginning, so no matter how good the playing is, how complicated, the room either sounds good or it doesn't. listen to the beginning and tell me that you are hearing great playing, or the great room. It's more than abvious, you can instantly tell this is a great recording room as soon as the playing starts, yet the playing is so simple you can't even describe it as great playing until it actually becomes great playing, yet you can clearly hear the great room, it's undeniable folks. Here you go.

Even before any real playing starts, you can tell this is a world class room.

 

[Fishmed]

Sure. The stuff I've recorded with really good players - their skills translate into tones that are more pleasing to the ears. Even a single snare hit by a good player sounds punchy compared to that of a mediocre player. A single power chord held out to sustain sounds sonically superior to that of my ham fisted technique, even though it could be the same chord, same guitar, same amp, same recording chain as the pro guy.

I don't know why, other than really good players know just how to hit a drum, fret a guitar, time an organ swell to sound good.

Certainly, other factors are important, but none as critical as the player.

I have tried to polish a turn or two in my day; here are two instance off the top of my head where the musician sabotages the recording.

1) Poor timing. If the bass player and drummer are off, how can you make one or the other sound good within the context of the song?

2) Poor song writing. It is very monotonous to mix a song whose chord structures contain the same note in every chord.


When I have great performers with good music, I know I can focus on mixing a song and not repairing a train wreck.

 

[kcearl]

while im no recording expert, for sure, Ive enthusiastically listened to music for four decades, on everything from high end separates to ipods...from 60s garage to 8bit rockers...but Ive never said to myself, ever.."that sounds like that was recorded in a great room" or "that wouldve sounded better recorded in a another room"...not sure I ever will

it just becomes part of the tracks character...for good or bad

 

[kcearl]

while im no recording expert, for sure, Ive enthusiastically listened to music for four decades, on everything from high end separates to ipods...from 60s garage to 8bit rockers...but Ive never said to myself, ever.."that sounds like that was recorded in a great room" or "that wouldve sounded better recorded in a another room"...not sure I ever will

it just becomes part of the tracks character...for good or bad

forgot, I have thought it about tracks on hobbyist sites though

 

[Fishmed]

Fir instance, here's an mp3 recorded in Ethan's great sounding room. You can hear that it's a great room INSTANTLY, even with the simplest of guitar playing at the beginning, even a non player could be taught to hit the right strings and make the beginning, so no matter how good the playing is, how complicated, the room either sounds good or it doesn't. listen to the beginning and tell me that you are hearing great playing, or the great room. It's more than abvious, you can instantly tell this is a great recording room as soon as the playing starts, yet the playing is so simple you can't even describe it as great playing until it actually becomes great playing, yet you can clearly hear the great room, it's undeniable folks. Here you go.

Even before any real playing starts, you can tell this is a world class room.

The room is important, but how can you tell the sound quality you hear is the room?

Could it not be the microphone, mic pre, some other piece of equipment, or a combination of the gear in the chain?

 

[TeyshaBlue]

Thinking more on this, the Wayne Shorter recording in a bad room will still be a bad recording and it will actually sound bad, yep. talent doesn't stop standing waves and flutter. Talent doesn't stop bass build up in untreated corners. Sorry, but talent doesn't stop frequency smear and all kinds of horrible problems from a bad room. I ahve made many a recording of wonderful singers in bad rooms, and the recordings still sounded bad. they were bad, smeared, recordings of a great singer. It's really that simple. If you can't listen to a recording and actually hear the bad room and realize that the room is the problem, then you haven't been recording and listening long enough. Again, I have recordings of great singers made in small bedrooms with no bass trapping and the recordings sound horrible, no matter how good the singer is. I can easily hear a pro sounding room and so can any engineer who is worth his salt. A poor room is a poor room and nothing can change that, not talent, not wishing, not hoping. You change it by fixing the room to get rid of standing waves and frequency smear, flutter, and comb filtering. It's really that simple. You need to read at Ethan Winer's site. Absorb it, learn it, know it.h

I've read Ethan's stuff. I've studied with Marty McCann. I understand, at an intimate level, the effects and the importance of a decent room. I've understood those priniciples for a couple of decades now. You're still incorrect. You may garner a more accurate recording. But is it better? Questionable....enough so that I can tell you that by emphasizing the room uber alles, you're making a mistake.
The room is simply...a room. A poor room will detract from a recording...sure. Generally speaking, in my opninion, a good room does nothing other than get the hell out of the way. Talent can and does transcend a poor room. A good room is important...even desireable. The most important? I think not.

 

[TeyshaBlue]

Recordings have always changed as the technology developed. And people, being what we are, have always used the current, new and existing technology in ways that the inventors of said technology did not forsee. That's partly what has made music of the last 100 years such a boon and a bane ! Who would've thought that a tape based sampler meant for families to play on sunday afternoons at home would become one of the staple sounds of British psychedelia and nascent progressive rock ? And that much of the character of the sound and playing technique that the players of it developed, derived from the fact that it was moved about from gig to gig to studio to rehearsal space and constantly went out of tune because it wasn't in the corner of the family front room?
As for songs being assembled, The instant Les Paul put into practice multitracking, assembly became part of songwriting. Hence the difference between writing and arranging a song and the recording of it. When many songwriters in the recording age's early days 'wrote' songs, whatever they had in mind was rarely the final recording. But as bands and artists became more self contained, penning their own stuff, the studio became more and more a part of the writing and arranging process.
I don't see assembling as a negative. It's 'technological arranging' that many many bands and artists have utilized for the best part of half a century.

Good points. I guess assembly, in my mind, consists of cutting and pasting 8 bar phrases over and over in your DAW. Got a good vocal take on a chorus? Great! We'll cut and paste it over all of the choruses! I'm no purist by any stretch of the imagination. I've built thousands of sequences that do nothing more than copy the first verse over to the second verse. I grok the notion that recording is actually part of the creative process with the advent of decent DAW's that anyone with a room temperature bank account can buy. Having written in both worlds, I feel the later process to be somewhat less rewarding, perhaps just as creative (in a slightly different sense) but damned more productive.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

IMHO (YMMV), the definition of "best recording" has to involve all elements, from technical sonic quality to musicality, and everything in-between, because they all contribute to the final result.

But that said, the musicality trumps everything else. I'd much rather listen to any recording of Wayne Shorter playing in a pool of vomit in underground sewer pipe than a recording of someone blowing chow into a sax bell in the sweetest-sounding live room on the planet.

I'd also much rather listen to a scratchy, hissy, limited-bandwidth 1959 recording of a B.B. King guitar solo than a pristine 2009 recording of B.B. King doing the same thing, because the energy level of the performance is usually better in the older recordings. By my own personal math, that makes the 1959 version a better recording.

G.

 

[true-eurt]

Good points. I guess assembly, in my mind, consists of cutting and pasting 8 bar phrases over and over in your DAW. Got a good vocal take on a chorus? Great! We'll cut and paste it over all of the choruses! I'm no purist by any stretch of the imagination. I've built thousands of sequences that do nothing more than copy the first verse over to the second verse.

..dammit..if you had posted that 5 yrs ago, I could've been outta dis place and creating masterpieces a long time ago!!

 

[noisewreck]

if it calls for keeping it simple, then it takes the ability to do that well also.

And I would go further and say that in many ways, doing simple stuff well, keeping it interesting and moving can be far more difficult than virtuoso technically perfect show-off stuff. It takes keen musicianship to pull off the simple stuff well.

 

[TeyshaBlue]

IMHO (YMMV), the definition of "best recording" has to involve all elements, from technical sonic quality to musicality, and everything in-between, because they all contribute to the final result.

But that said, the musicality trumps everything else. I'd much rather listen to any recording of Wayne Shorter playing in a pool of vomit in underground sewer pipe than a recording of someone blowing chow into a sax bell in the sweetest-sounding live room on the planet.

I'd also much rather listen to a scratchy, hissy, limited-bandwidth 1959 recording of a B.B. King guitar solo than a pristine 2009 recording of B.B. King doing the same thing, because the energy level of the performance is usually better in the older recordings. By my own personal math, that makes the 1959 version a better recording.

G.

Exactly. Give me a good musician everyday.
The notion of a good room can be pretty plastic. I seriously doubt anybody wants to track acoustic guitar in some of the settings John Bonham found perfect for tracking his drums.

 

[TeyshaBlue]

And I would go further and say that in many ways, doing simple stuff well, keeping it interesting and moving can be far more difficult than virtuoso technically perfect show-off stuff. It takes keen musicianship to pull off the simple stuff well.

.......the difference between Pat Metheny, who uses space as well as any guitarist I can think of, and Yngwie Malmsteen who has never met a space he couldn't fill with a 32nd. note run.

 

[noisewreck]

I agree that there were lots of bad recordings made during those decades, and maybe I have filtered them out of my awareness to a certain extent.

Keep this ^^^^^^^^^ in mind when you say...

It just seems to me that there is a huge amount of generic-sounding music being made in recent years that is devoid of musical and lyrical hooks, signature riffs, dynamic changes, key changes, chord substitutions, etc. which are the elements that create interest for me.

And I say, it only seems that way (I highlighted "seems" in your quote as well), only because of the proximity. Generic-sounding music has always been made in any era, in abundance. In fact, in any given era you get far more generic-sounding "me too" nonsense than anything that stands out. Which is why, the stuff that stands out, stands out And which is why, the standouts remain in our conciousness, while the generic stuff gets filtered out.

This is true of any era.

In 20 years, there will be very few current artists that will be remembered with any sort of reverence.

 

[TeyshaBlue]

seems[/B] that way (I highlighted "seems" in your quote as well), only because of the proximity. Generic-sounding music has always been made in any era, in abundance. In fact, in any given era you get far more generic-sounding "me too" nonsense than anything that stands out. Which is why, the stuff that stands out, stands out And which is why, the standouts remain in our conciousness, while the generic stuff gets filtered out.

This is true of any era.

In 20 years, there will be very few current artists that will be remembered with any sort of reverence.

Man, that's troof! Those of us that were around back in the day (/grampa) tend to forget the tripe that was passed off in top 40. Meh. The 70's had some great acts....and a crapload of garbage.

 

[TeyshaBlue]

So then sound effects libraries are not ande cannot be good r4ecordings? Nope, a good recording is a good recording, no matter what the sound is that's recorded.

Again, don't confuse accurate with good.

 

[Greg_L]

There is a lot of dumbassedry in this thread. Must be the room.

 

[noisewreck]

There is a lot of dumbassedry in this thread. Must be the room.

I disagree. It's the converters.

 

[kcearl]

Im using a behringer keyboard...I hope my posts improve when I get a mackie and do a high pass on all the letters after e,d,c...........

 

[TeyshaBlue]

Im using a behringer keyboard...I hope my posts improve when I get a mackie and do a high pass on all the letters after e,d,c...........

You need to be prelated.

 

[true-eurt]

Just by the forum the OP posted in, says this should be about great recording *technique*...which would not be about performance of artist..or even so much the room...but the performance of audio engineer...knowledge he posesses and skill level applied to the process..?

Is it a good recording of a crappy band...or a crappy recording of a good band...or maybe it's a crappy recording of a crappy band?


..either way, it's on the sound engineer for sound quality of recording...it's on the artist for sound performance...anyway, that's my opinion.

I don't think it takes a much of a trained ear to know when something sounds bad...it does however, take a trained ear, to discern the difference between a performance boo-boo and an engineering boo-boo.


signed
dumbass...