what made it "click" for you?

  • Thread starter Thread starter brother rat
  • Start date Start date
PM me your address in Pakistan so I can ship one to you for destruction in your video. :D
 
Greg_L said:
I am 100% anti lava lamp and everything it stands for. I hate lava lamps.
Click to expand...

Greg_L said:
I hate them.
Click to expand...

Greg_L said:
I fucking hate lava lamps.
Click to expand...

They're cool. They do weird things.

LavaLamp.webp
 
Seafroggys said:
While I do prefer not having a click when playing with different people, to say that music becomes sterile with it is bullshit.
Click to expand...
Totally. Saying a click/metronome/rhythm machine/timing reference makes the music sterile and lifeless is, to me, tantamount to saying that sticking to a time signature makes the music sterile and lifeless. The more I think about it, the less sense it makes. Now, I can understand people saying they prefer not to use a click, I prefer not to myself, if I'm tracking with a drummer or percussionist. Recently, while recording on my own, I put down bass parts to a ticking clock and an actual click. Just the fact that you have a solid timing reference helps ensure the very thing that many argue won't happen if you use a click ~ you get to move all over the place pretty skilfully because you know that the solid time foundation never wavers. Far from inhibiting it, it aids creativity.
A good test is to record an instrument for 2 minutes to a click and then listen to what you've recorded with the click switched off. If it really sounds dull, sterile and lifeless, I'd say that's more to do with the way you play than the click..........
In addition, I'd just add that any musician(s) worth their salt should be able to play tightly, without one too. But they are important tools and have little to do with the life of the music. If one is going through lots of time changes in a piece or there is space for improvisation, taking the song in different, unplanned directions, then that is a different matter altogether.
 
Getting back to the topic at hand, for me it was ear training that really made the difference. Back in the 1980s, I met the guy who became my mentor for all things audio. His name was Jeff Gordon, although he is not (to my knowledge) related to the famous race car driver of the same name. Anyway, when I met Jeff, I had already been running sound since the age of 16 and had completed a Bachelors Degree in audio/video production. But he helped me take things to a totally different level. He took it for granted that I already knew how to mic up a guitar amp or drum kit. He went on to the more advanced stuff.

But what I learned from Jeff wasn't simply a bunch of "studio tricks." More than anything, Jeff was all about training one’s ear to the nth degree. In fact, my first “training session” with him was an hour and a half lecture about “listening skills.” He said this is what truly MAKES an audio engineer – knowing how to HEAR what is going on and how to get the sound that you visualize in your head. For example, all optical compressors have a distinctive sonic signature. He would expect us to be able to identify the use of an opto-compressor on a recording. Sometimes, we would get special training sessions. We would show up at the studio and there would be, for example, a guy with a Les Paul and a Marshal half-stack in the studio. Jeff would have a stack of CDs (all with Gibson/Marshal guitars on them) and a stopwatch. We (those of us who worked in the studio) would be expected to match the sound of that particular guitar sound as quickly as possible. This FORCED us to use our ears, since it would take ages to find that particular sound by trial and error. You had to LISTEN to the track, and make an educated guess what mic to use, what settings to use on EQ, compression and reverb, and you had to get there QUICKLY. (Because, in the studio, "time is money.") Working with Jeff, and learning to train my ears, was what really transformed me from a simple audio geek into a genuine “audio engineer.”
 
Truly for me is when mshilarious stated that - recording is a fools errand!

And that pretty much put a stop to it for me. :(
 
moresound said:
Truly for me is when mshilarious stated that - recording is a fools errand!

And that pretty much put a stop to it for me. :(
Click to expand...
kudos on mshilarious. Some things clicked for me when he pointed out to me that as you get higher in the frequency chart you want less volume. (with exceptions of course) Nobody likes to hear nails scratching on a chalk board or the baby crying but a nice low end is soothing.
 
When I knew that my performances were up to par, what did if for me was reverb. This got me much closer to the classic rock recordings that inspired me, which are all absolutely drenched in reverb. Unfortunately I still only have a very low quality one, but that is probably next on my list of things to upgrade. Absolutely essential for rock music IMO. Many people criticize the 80s recordings for having too much reverb, but those were the top engineers with big $ and their reputations on the line, so I think they did what they thought was truly best at the time, and IMO it does sound good. Listen to a tune like "Mama I'm Coming Home" by Ozzy. (not one of my favorite songs btw) The reverb is a lot, buts its lush and gorgeous especially on the backing singers during the chorus.
A couple secondary AHA moments for me:
1. Learning to program a basic drum beat.
2. The vibe of the space is VERY important. I moved to a dark basement with all sorts of spiders skittering around. Technically a worse room that the one I was using previously, but the vibe allowed me to get in much higher quality performances, and since its a basement, play and sing as loud as you want.
3. Just an observation: I still haven't figured out how to use a compressor to good effect. I'm not sure if its
A. The built in compressor of my DAW is just bad, and no setting will do any good. You need a good quality outboard or plugin to really get a good result.
B. Its my fault, I'm just not doing it right.
C. My music doesn't call for any compression, so its unnecessary.
 
grimtraveller said:
Totally. Saying a click/metronome/rhythm machine/timing reference makes the music sterile and lifeless is, to me, tantamount to saying that sticking to a time signature makes the music sterile and lifeless. The more I think about it, the less sense it makes. Now, I can understand people saying they prefer not to use a click, I prefer not to myself, if I'm tracking with a drummer or percussionist. Recently, while recording on my own, I put down bass parts to a ticking clock and an actual click. Just the fact that you have a solid timing reference helps ensure the very thing that many argue won't happen if you use a click ~ you get to move all over the place pretty skilfully because you know that the solid time foundation never wavers. Far from inhibiting it, it aids creativity.
A good test is to record an instrument for 2 minutes to a click and then listen to what you've recorded with the click switched off. If it really sounds dull, sterile and lifeless, I'd say that's more to do with the way you play than the click..........
In addition, I'd just add that any musician(s) worth their salt should be able to play tightly, without one too. But they are important tools and have little to do with the life of the music. If one is going through lots of time changes in a piece or there is space for improvisation, taking the song in different, unplanned directions, then that is a different matter altogether.
Click to expand...

Absolutely I only bought into that myth for a very short time before I wised up. Many classical musicians never bother playing with a click, because its not as necessary for that style of music. Its not like there's a funky groove going on. I bet that's partly where it comes from. The click is a very useful tool.
 
One other thing about a click/metronome ~ use of one still doesn't guarantee perfect timing ! There still remains the very human element of getting it right and I've seen people who have timing issues without one have the same issues with one.
Also, when listening to those disco or dance tracks, whoever stopped in the middle of a song they liked and said "Blimey, there's no wavering of the tempo ! It's all perfect timing ! Urgh !!". Nah, you just listen to and enjoy the damn song.
Bassman Brad said:
learning to train my ears, was what really transformed me from a simple audio geek into a genuine “audio engineer.”
Click to expand...
I haven't even made it to 'audio geek' ! In one sense, I think I've got great ears. I can hear a solitary rat shaking in a warehouse. I can hear my wife turn in bed when I'm downstairs. When I'm upstairs in the bath, I can hear distant footsteps approach our front door. Unfortunately, none of that translates to recording ! I marvel at the way many of the people here, when they hear a recording will isolate this and that frequency and talk about needing X amount of Khz. I just don't hear all that. But like Brother rat, it doesn't matter because I dig this hobby.

moresound said:
Truly for me is when mshilarious stated that - recording is a fools errand!

And that pretty much put a stop to it for me. :(
Click to expand...
At the time, I thought it was ironic that a then mod on a recording website should describe recording that way. I still find it odd. To me, discovery and progression of how to record both sound and pictures is one of man's most stunning achievements.
Imagine if every time you wanted to hear some music, you had go go to Aunt Betty's to hear her play the piano or great Uncle Phidippides to hear the tuba or go to a family sing~song or go to a concert in the park, having to do battle with the rain, the muggers and the dogshit !
A fool's errand ? A flaming stroke of genius, if you ask me !
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top