Fashion v. Music ...was: Soundelux or Neumann?

Discussion in 'rec.audio.pro' started by Fletcher, Aug 13, 2003.

  1. Fletcher

    Fletcher Guest

    Kris Singh wrote:

    > "...the differences between the "classic albums that were recorded and
    > mixed on the
    > > same console" and the Pro-sTools/Auto-Tuned-Lord-Alge/SSL-Marcussen Mastering
    > > type "loudness above audio" stylings we are subjected to today"

    >
    >
    > Tom Lord-Alge is more a victim of excessive compression then "Loudness
    > above audio."


    Didn't say he was... I indicted Marcussen and the followers of the Marcussen "shotgun in the
    face loudness factor" for 'loudness above audio'... TLA has made himself millions from other
    shitty practices... so I guess they're good practices and I'm the one who is wrong... or I'd
    have a Ferrari and a yacht and he'd have a '95 Cherokee 'Sport' w/128k miles...

    > He does not make records too loud, that falls usually
    > in the hands of the mastering engineer. I am not the biggest fan of
    > Lord-Alge's work, but he is great at putting a vocal in your face. It
    > helps boost the impact of the emotion when the vocal is well
    > preformed.


    He, and his brother(s) and his wannabe followers are also the absolute masters of the "small
    sounding grainy mix" that has become oh so fucking prevalent on modern radio. I was associated
    with a record where TLA/CLA mixed some of the same songs Jack Joseph Puig mixed... the
    differences were more than palpable. I was recently associated with a record that was mastered
    by Howie Weinburg, Steve Marcussen, Dave Collins and Bob Ludwig... all had interesting ideas...
    and while a couple of them came pretty close, none of them really nailed it... each had a wart,
    one had the least obtrusive wart and that's who's work will be on the release.

    > When you have a great singer(attitude-wise), like a Mick
    > Jagger, it is even better to put the vocal on the listeners lap. That
    > is the kind of thing he does.


    If you say so... my mileage has varied... I have just found a lack of depth and intimacy to
    TLA's work [like he could give a fuck what some asshole pimp thinks]... could be the
    music/recording before it gets to him, could be the factory methods employed, could be I'm just
    fucking old and am whining about the "new shit" as my father whined about the Allman Brothers
    and The Stones... who knows.

    >
    > You have d*&kheads on this group that complain, "OHH I saw Cris
    > Cornell live and he was flat most of the time...." That is why we
    > have auto-tune and we are forced to use it.


    No, that may be why you employ it... but I think Jim Morrison proved you can sing out of tune
    and still sell records. The people who might notice that _____ sang flat, sharp (whatever) in
    a live setting are pretty few and far between... in fact, some of us who would notice find a
    certain charm and "humanness" [is that a word?] when vocals are a tad off both on record and in
    live performance. Then again... someone like Avril Levigne (sp?) has no business making
    records in the first fucking place... but the technology employed made her a fucking star,
    didn't it. It could just be a 'varying mileage' thing again... I'm old, I like a little soul
    in my music... I also like Tabasco in my Margaritas... so what the fuck do I know.


    > So don't blast what you help make a standard. People
    > on this group(not all) have criticized pitch so much, they forgot
    > about emotion. That is why a great performance is forced to be on the
    > center of the note now to be passable. That is B.S. That is the
    > newsgroup/world we live in.


    What *I* helped make a standard? Hello? McFly?... if it were up to me most of the records
    would sound like a cross between 'Exile On Main St.' and 'London Calling'... raw fucking
    emotion, that smells like Bourbon and vomit...

    Autotune when applied by a skilled operator in small quantities can indeed help a track.
    Morphine applied in small quantities can be a very effective 'pain management' tool. Autotune,
    like Morphine, has a large propensity for abuse... and just as a novice junkie is far more
    likely to 'turn blue' than a veteran junkie... too many of the Pro-sTool wielding motherfuckers
    that plague our cities seem to have a propensity to use the power afforded them by the tools to
    the point of abuse... much for the same reason a dog licks his balls... because they can
    [actually a dog licks his balls because he can't make a fist... but that's a debate for another
    day].

    >
    >
    > Records today don't sound terrible across the board, and I
    > would like you to acknowledge that.


    Acknowledged. However, many records that shouldn't sound like shit, do sound like shit... I
    would like you to acknowledge that.

    > I can record something to pro
    > tools HD in my home studio and I'd bet my last dollar that you would
    > not know that it wasn't done on tape the old fashion way. I can even
    > simulate the hiss for you if you like that sort of thing.


    I'd bet you my last dollar that I don't give a shit if sounds like it was done on tape or not
    [I'm a RADAR-24 user... haven't touched "tape" in close to 2 years]... I only care if the audio
    supports the music presentation, or at least gets out of the fucking way of the music
    presentation. Too many recordings that enter my world sound like "the process" interfered with
    the presentation... with this, I have a problem. What tools were employed? Who gives a fuck.
    To paraphrase a wonderful old quote... I ain't never seen no motherfucker walking down the
    street humming the 'workstation' [substitute console, microphone, mic pre, compressor, etc. to
    suit your application].

    I cringe every time I hear the phrase "well we had ___ editing it in the other room while we
    were still tracking". Why? Yeah, I've been associated with records that were done on analog
    where there were hundreds of edits to produce a drum track... and I felt it was a fucking
    dumbass thing to do then too [I had no problems depositing the checks... just thought the work
    was fucking stupid and superfluous]. How about getting the lawyers to send a good old "non
    disclosure agreement" to a gunslinger drummer's office and just hiring that 'gunslinger
    drummer' to play on the fucking record? It, like 'soul removal editing' is done on a regular
    basis... however 101 times out of a 100 chances hiring in an amazing drummer sounds and feels
    better than 'edited to death'... and to top it off... it makes for far less work, and a better
    overall product.

    Yeah, I know it's 2/3rds a mortal sin to suggest that records be made in less time for less
    money... especially when assholes like me work for a "day rate"... let's face it, it's in our
    best interest to spend many more days working on a product... even if we're sacrificing
    "greatness" for "perfection" in the process. The lovely new position of 'Pro-sTools operator'
    has to look like they're worth the money... so they have to "do" things... there are enough
    "producers" who have no fucking business being anywhere near the recording process that they
    depend on the "Pro-sTools operators" to make things "perfect" so they look like they're doing
    their job. It's a viscous fucking circle... and the people that suffer most are usually the
    artist and the audience while the incompetent producer covers his incompetent ass and the
    'Pro-sTools operator' works on moving from Glendale to Silverlake.

    >
    >
    > The difference between "classic albums" is more in the artists and the
    > moment then the stupid equipment.


    Absolutely.

    > The way records sound is like
    > fashion, they go through changes. When something works for the time,
    > it works. When people get into something new, the engineers will
    > follow.


    Right... the 80's were a great example... and so is the modern Pro-sTools abuse era... tools
    abused to create current fashion also put a time and date stamp on the music. Truly excellent
    recordings [where the technology doesn't impede the performance] are timeless. N.W.A.'s
    "Straight Outta Compton" sounds as fresh today as it did in 1987... "Appetite For Destruction"
    sounds as 'in your face' today as it did in 1988... "Nevermind" is still compelling 12 years
    later...

    'Addicted to Love' sounds like the poster child for why the 80's sucked [along with the entire
    Howard Jones catalog]... The Stones "2000 Light Years From Home" blows... but "On Down The
    Line" is as cool as the day it was released... why? The 'time and date stamp' of the "fashion
    period" in terms of the "production techniques" is why... the 'music' seems a secondary
    consideration to the implementation of the current fashion edict. "On Down The Line" seems to
    have transcended the current fashion of the day, whether that was a conscious decision or an
    accident will never be known [Jimmy's dead and I didn't think to ask him before he up and
    died... my bad]... the bottom line is that "On Down The Line" is as compelling today as it was
    in 1972.

    > Thus, when a true artist comes in and only worries about
    > performing, they are not as good for having a loud possibly
    > over-compressed record??? give me a break dude.


    Be happy to give you a break if I understood what the fuck you were talking about.

    When a "true artist" has a production team around them that can actually hear the music above
    the current 'fashion requirements', and that production team has the fucking balls to make a
    record that "presents the artist's material" in the most musical manner for that particular
    artist... then who gives a shit what they did, or how they did it.

    The audio either enhances or gets out of the way of the performances... it doesn't interfere
    [if the production team does their job correctly the audio doesn't interfere with the musical
    presentation... more often than not the "production team" seems to want their 'stamp', or to
    keep current with modern fashion and the audio interferes with the presentation... bad
    production team... bad, bad, bad, bad, bad].

    >
    >
    > Ohh, and the whole statement you made that I am responding to....
    > it is a load of crap. The great "classic records" you are loosely
    > referring to were not at all great due to the gear. The Beatles could
    > have done Abbey Road on a mackie, and you know what, it would still be
    > amazing.


    No argument.

    > Marvin Gaye could sing "What's Going On?" through a sm57
    > into a mackie with spider webs and it would still be great.


    No argument. For that matter Aretha could sing into an MXL mic through a DMP3 pre into a set
    of ShitiDesign 888's and even if some asshole motherfucker pulled out the 'global autotune' it
    would still get your johnson harder than Chinese Algebra... but might it not be better if they
    left the 'soul' intact?

    > Same with
    > many of today's singers. Records are deeper then which buttons they
    > turned.-
    >


    Absolute agreement... with a caveat. Records *should* be deeper than the tools employed. I
    think we're basically saying the same things here... I just get dismayed with the tools are
    used for evil instead of good... especially when they're used for evil by an operator that is
    trying to be 'fashionable'... or worse, is just plain old fucking incompetent... now, you can't
    argue with me that there are way too many incompetent motherfuckers making records today... if
    you can argue that, well then I'd be really impressed.

    --
    Fletcher
    Mercenary Audio
    TEL: 508-543-0069
    FAX: 508-543-9670
    http://www.mercenary.com
    "this is not a problem"
  2. ScotFraser

    ScotFraser Guest

    << I am not the biggest fan of
    > Lord-Alge's work, but he is great at putting a vocal in your face. It
    > helps boost the impact of the emotion when the vocal is well
    > preformed.>>


    Yes, however, it completely drains the emotion when there's no dynamic
    contrast. When the meters go straight to zero on the downbeat & never move, I'd
    say the mixer has pretty well emasculated whatever performance may have
    originally ocurred.

    Scott Fraser
  3. Kris Singh

    Kris Singh Guest

    "Didn't say he was... I indicted Marcussen and the followers of the
    Marcussen "shotgun in the
    > face loudness factor" for 'loudness above audio'... TLA has made himself millions from other
    > shitty practices... so I guess they're good practices and I'm the one who is wrong... or I'd
    > have a Ferrari and a yacht and he'd have a '95 Cherokee 'Sport' w/128k miles..."



    Why did you have Lord Alge in the same sentence then?? I am still not
    clear of what you are trying to say. You did say he was by attaching
    the auto-tune problem with the "loudness above audio" string. Like
    they are hand in hand.


    "He, and his brother(s) and his wannabe followers are also the
    absolute masters of the "small
    > sounding grainy mix" that has become oh so fucking prevalent on modern radio. "


    His mixes do cut through. What is "GRAINY" about his mixes?? Dude,
    what are you saying. Calling it "small" I can understand.
    Over-compression can often be interpreted as small. "GRAINY????"
    What does that mean? I have no clue where you get that from his
    stuff. Example please. Early Iggy Pop records can sound grainy.
    What is "Grainy" on a Tom Lord-Alge record???


    "I was associated
    > with a record where TLA/CLA mixed some of the same songs Jack Joseph Puig mixed... the
    > differences were more than palpable. I was recently associated with a record that was mastered
    > by Howie Weinburg, Steve Marcussen, Dave Collins and Bob Ludwig... all had interesting ideas...
    > and while a couple of them came pretty close, none of them really nailed it... each had a wart,
    > one had the least obtrusive wart and that's who's work will be on the release."


    What does this mean?? What is this in response to? Who do you
    like??? Why don't we start a thread where Mr. Fletcher speaks of the
    good rather then what he does not like. Are you afraid to commend
    something new????

    "If you say so... my mileage has varied... I have just found a lack of
    depth and intimacy to
    > TLA's work [like he could give a fuck what some asshole pimp thinks]... could be the
    > music/recording before it gets to him, could be the factory methods employed, could be I'm just
    > fucking old and am whining about the "new shit" as my father whined about the Allman Brothers
    > and The Stones... who knows."


    Tom Lord-Alge is like a Harley. If you want that sound, get a Harley.
    Nothing else sounds like it. Not a bad thing to have a hold on a
    sound. It is his thing. Can't knock him... he has the Ferraris and
    Yachts!!! LOL

    "No, that may be why you employ it... but I think Jim Morrison proved
    you can sing out of tune
    > and still sell records. The people who might notice that _____ sang flat, sharp (whatever) in
    > a live setting are pretty few and far between... in fact, some of us who would notice find a
    > certain charm and "humanness" [is that a word?] when vocals are a tad off both on record and in
    > live performance."


    Then keep that as you mojo. Don't bust pitch anytime. It can't work
    as a "it's OK for Morrison but not Avril...."


    "Then again... someone like Avril Levigne (sp?) has no business making
    > records in the first fucking place... but the technology employed made her a fucking star,
    > didn't it."


    No. She can sing. Fuck anyone who says she can't. There is no such
    thing as a talent knob or plug-in. She gets across. That is it. She
    is not greatness, but she can sing a little and looks good naked in
    many young boys minds.... including mine.


    "t could just be a 'varying mileage' thing again... I'm old, I like a
    little soul
    > in my music... I also like Tabasco in my Margaritas... so what the fuck do I know."


    Maybe..... I will have to try the tabasaco!!!

    "What *I* helped make a standard? Hello? McFly?... if it were up to
    me most of the records
    > would sound like a cross between 'Exile On Main St.' and 'London Calling'... raw fucking
    > emotion, that smells like Bourbon and vomit..."



    I can't argue that!! AMEN!


    I said, " Records today don't sound terrible across the board, and I
    > > would like you to acknowledge that."

    >
    >Fletcher said, "Acknowledged. However, many records that shouldn't

    sound like shit, do sound like shit... I
    > would like you to acknowledge that."


    Agreed, but that is not just true for records of today. There are old
    great records that sound like shit that didin't need to.



    " Right... the 80's were a great example... and so is the modern
    Pro-sTools abuse era... tools
    > abused to create current fashion also put a time and date stamp on the music. Truly excellent
    > recordings [where the technology doesn't impede the performance] are timeless. N.W.A.'s
    > "Straight Outta Compton" sounds as fresh today as it did in 1987... "Appetite For Destruction"
    > sounds as 'in your face' today as it did in 1988... "Nevermind" is still compelling 12 years
    > later..."


    Not true. I love those records, but they sound dated. "Nevermind"
    sounds so dated it isn't even funny. Listen with your ears, it will
    help you hear. Leave heart out of it. "Appetite" has gated reverb on
    the snare. Hello 80s. They are in-your-face records, but they are
    dated in their own respective ways. Pro Tools never dates a record.
    Auto-Tune used as a effect does.

    "The Stones "2000 Light Years From Home" blows... but "On Down The
    > Line" is as cool as the day it was released... why? The 'time and date stamp' of the "fashion
    > period" in terms of the "production techniques" is why... "


    dude, GO AWAY. "200 light years..." and the whole "Satanic" record
    are magic. They are great sounding well produced songs. The
    mellotron in that song is the reason Fionna Apple had a career.


    "Absolute agreement... with a caveat. Records *should* be deeper
    than the tools employed. I
    > think we're basically saying the same things here... I just get dismayed with the tools are
    > used for evil instead of good... especially when they're used for evil by an operator that is
    > trying to be 'fashionable'... or worse, is just plain old fucking incompetent... now, you can't
    > argue with me that there are way too many incompetent motherfuckers making records today... if
    > you can argue that, well then I'd be really impressed."


    I agree completly there. No Argument.-Kris













    Fletcher <Fletcher@mercenary.com> wrote in message news:<3F3A3CFD.DC872278@mercenary.com>...
    > Kris Singh wrote:
    >
    > > "...the differences between the "classic albums that were recorded and
    > > mixed on the
    > > > same console" and the Pro-sTools/Auto-Tuned-Lord-Alge/SSL-Marcussen Mastering
    > > > type "loudness above audio" stylings we are subjected to today"

    > >
    > >
    > > Tom Lord-Alge is more a victim of excessive compression then "Loudness
    > > above audio."

    >
    > Didn't say he was... I indicted Marcussen and the followers of the Marcussen "shotgun in the
    > face loudness factor" for 'loudness above audio'... TLA has made himself millions from other
    > shitty practices... so I guess they're good practices and I'm the one who is wrong... or I'd
    > have a Ferrari and a yacht and he'd have a '95 Cherokee 'Sport' w/128k miles...
    >
    > > He does not make records too loud, that falls usually
    > > in the hands of the mastering engineer. I am not the biggest fan of
    > > Lord-Alge's work, but he is great at putting a vocal in your face. It
    > > helps boost the impact of the emotion when the vocal is well
    > > preformed.

    >
    > He, and his brother(s) and his wannabe followers are also the absolute masters of the "small
    > sounding grainy mix" that has become oh so fucking prevalent on modern radio. I was associated
    > with a record where TLA/CLA mixed some of the same songs Jack Joseph Puig mixed... the
    > differences were more than palpable. I was recently associated with a record that was mastered
    > by Howie Weinburg, Steve Marcussen, Dave Collins and Bob Ludwig... all had interesting ideas...
    > and while a couple of them came pretty close, none of them really nailed it... each had a wart,
    > one had the least obtrusive wart and that's who's work will be on the release.
    >
    > > When you have a great singer(attitude-wise), like a Mick
    > > Jagger, it is even better to put the vocal on the listeners lap. That
    > > is the kind of thing he does.

    >
    > If you say so... my mileage has varied... I have just found a lack of depth and intimacy to
    > TLA's work [like he could give a fuck what some asshole pimp thinks]... could be the
    > music/recording before it gets to him, could be the factory methods employed, could be I'm just
    > fucking old and am whining about the "new shit" as my father whined about the Allman Brothers
    > and The Stones... who knows.
    >
    > >
    > > You have d*&kheads on this group that complain, "OHH I saw Cris
    > > Cornell live and he was flat most of the time...." That is why we
    > > have auto-tune and we are forced to use it.

    >
    > No, that may be why you employ it... but I think Jim Morrison proved you can sing out of tune
    > and still sell records. The people who might notice that _____ sang flat, sharp (whatever) in
    > a live setting are pretty few and far between... in fact, some of us who would notice find a
    > certain charm and "humanness" [is that a word?] when vocals are a tad off both on record and in
    > live performance. Then again... someone like Avril Levigne (sp?) has no business making
    > records in the first fucking place... but the technology employed made her a fucking star,
    > didn't it. It could just be a 'varying mileage' thing again... I'm old, I like a little soul
    > in my music... I also like Tabasco in my Margaritas... so what the fuck do I know.
    >
    >
    > > So don't blast what you help make a standard. People
    > > on this group(not all) have criticized pitch so much, they forgot
    > > about emotion. That is why a great performance is forced to be on the
    > > center of the note now to be passable. That is B.S. That is the
    > > newsgroup/world we live in.

    >
    > What *I* helped make a standard? Hello? McFly?... if it were up to me most of the records
    > would sound like a cross between 'Exile On Main St.' and 'London Calling'... raw fucking
    > emotion, that smells like Bourbon and vomit...
    >
    > Autotune when applied by a skilled operator in small quantities can indeed help a track.
    > Morphine applied in small quantities can be a very effective 'pain management' tool. Autotune,
    > like Morphine, has a large propensity for abuse... and just as a novice junkie is far more
    > likely to 'turn blue' than a veteran junkie... too many of the Pro-sTool wielding motherfuckers
    > that plague our cities seem to have a propensity to use the power afforded them by the tools to
    > the point of abuse... much for the same reason a dog licks his balls... because they can
    > [actually a dog licks his balls because he can't make a fist... but that's a debate for another
    > day].
    >
    > >
    > >
    > > Records today don't sound terrible across the board, and I
    > > would like you to acknowledge that.

    >
    > Acknowledged. However, many records that shouldn't sound like shit, do sound like shit... I
    > would like you to acknowledge that.
    >
    > > I can record something to pro
    > > tools HD in my home studio and I'd bet my last dollar that you would
    > > not know that it wasn't done on tape the old fashion way. I can even
    > > simulate the hiss for you if you like that sort of thing.

    >
    > I'd bet you my last dollar that I don't give a shit if sounds like it was done on tape or not
    > [I'm a RADAR-24 user... haven't touched "tape" in close to 2 years]... I only care if the audio
    > supports the music presentation, or at least gets out of the fucking way of the music
    > presentation. Too many recordings that enter my world sound like "the process" interfered with
    > the presentation... with this, I have a problem. What tools were employed? Who gives a fuck.
    > To paraphrase a wonderful old quote... I ain't never seen no motherfucker walking down the
    > street humming the 'workstation' [substitute console, microphone, mic pre, compressor, etc. to
    > suit your application].
    >
    > I cringe every time I hear the phrase "well we had ___ editing it in the other room while we
    > were still tracking". Why? Yeah, I've been associated with records that were done on analog
    > where there were hundreds of edits to produce a drum track... and I felt it was a fucking
    > dumbass thing to do then too [I had no problems depositing the checks... just thought the work
    > was fucking stupid and superfluous]. How about getting the lawyers to send a good old "non
    > disclosure agreement" to a gunslinger drummer's office and just hiring that 'gunslinger
    > drummer' to play on the fucking record? It, like 'soul removal editing' is done on a regular
    > basis... however 101 times out of a 100 chances hiring in an amazing drummer sounds and feels
    > better than 'edited to death'... and to top it off... it makes for far less work, and a better
    > overall product.
    >
    > Yeah, I know it's 2/3rds a mortal sin to suggest that records be made in less time for less
    > money... especially when assholes like me work for a "day rate"... let's face it, it's in our
    > best interest to spend many more days working on a product... even if we're sacrificing
    > "greatness" for "perfection" in the process. The lovely new position of 'Pro-sTools operator'
    > has to look like they're worth the money... so they have to "do" things... there are enough
    > "producers" who have no fucking business being anywhere near the recording process that they
    > depend on the "Pro-sTools operators" to make things "perfect" so they look like they're doing
    > their job. It's a viscous fucking circle... and the people that suffer most are usually the
    > artist and the audience while the incompetent producer covers his incompetent ass and the
    > 'Pro-sTools operator' works on moving from Glendale to Silverlake.
    >
    > >
    > >
    > > The difference between "classic albums" is more in the artists and the
    > > moment then the stupid equipment.

    >
    > Absolutely.
    >
    > > The way records sound is like
    > > fashion, they go through changes. When something works for the time,
    > > it works. When people get into something new, the engineers will
    > > follow.

    >
    > Right... the 80's were a great example... and so is the modern Pro-sTools abuse era... tools
    > abused to create current fashion also put a time and date stamp on the music. Truly excellent
    > recordings [where the technology doesn't impede the performance] are timeless. N.W.A.'s
    > "Straight Outta Compton" sounds as fresh today as it did in 1987... "Appetite For Destruction"
    > sounds as 'in your face' today as it did in 1988... "Nevermind" is still compelling 12 years
    > later...
    >
    > 'Addicted to Love' sounds like the poster child for why the 80's sucked [along with the entire
    > Howard Jones catalog]... The Stones "2000 Light Years From Home" blows... but "On Down The
    > Line" is as cool as the day it was released... why? The 'time and date stamp' of the "fashion
    > period" in terms of the "production techniques" is why... the 'music' seems a secondary
    > consideration to the implementation of the current fashion edict. "On Down The Line" seems to
    > have transcended the current fashion of the day, whether that was a conscious decision or an
    > accident will never be known [Jimmy's dead and I didn't think to ask him before he up and
    > died... my bad]... the bottom line is that "On Down The Line" is as compelling today as it was
    > in 1972.
    >
    > > Thus, when a true artist comes in and only worries about
    > > performing, they are not as good for having a loud possibly
    > > over-compressed record??? give me a break dude.

    >
    > Be happy to give you a break if I understood what the fuck you were talking about.
    >
    > When a "true artist" has a production team around them that can actually hear the music above
    > the current 'fashion requirements', and that production team has the fucking balls to make a
    > record that "presents the artist's material" in the most musical manner for that particular
    > artist... then who gives a shit what they did, or how they did it.
    >
    > The audio either enhances or gets out of the way of the performances... it doesn't interfere
    > [if the production team does their job correctly the audio doesn't interfere with the musical
    > presentation... more often than not the "production team" seems to want their 'stamp', or to
    > keep current with modern fashion and the audio interferes with the presentation... bad
    > production team... bad, bad, bad, bad, bad].
    >
    > >
    > >
    > > Ohh, and the whole statement you made that I am responding to....
    > > it is a load of crap. The great "classic records" you are loosely
    > > referring to were not at all great due to the gear. The Beatles could
    > > have done Abbey Road on a mackie, and you know what, it would still be
    > > amazing.

    >
    > No argument.
    >
    > > Marvin Gaye could sing "What's Going On?" through a sm57
    > > into a mackie with spider webs and it would still be great.

    >
    > No argument. For that matter Aretha could sing into an MXL mic through a DMP3 pre into a set
    > of ShitiDesign 888's and even if some asshole motherfucker pulled out the 'global autotune' it
    > would still get your johnson harder than Chinese Algebra... but might it not be better if they
    > left the 'soul' intact?
    >
    > > Same with
    > > many of today's singers. Records are deeper then which buttons they
    > > turned.-
    > >

    >
    > Absolute agreement... with a caveat. Records *should* be deeper than the tools employed. I
    > think we're basically saying the same things here... I just get dismayed with the tools are
    > used for evil instead of good... especially when they're used for evil by an operator that is
    > trying to be 'fashionable'... or worse, is just plain old fucking incompetent... now, you can't
    > argue with me that there are way too many incompetent motherfuckers making records today... if
    > you can argue that, well then I'd be really impressed.
  4. EggHd

    EggHd Guest

    Something to add to this.

    In many cases the artists themselves are asking for the mixers that mixed the
    hit record they listen to over and over again. Many times it's the same
    mixers.

    The management can get into the paranoia bandwagon and want the person mixing
    the hits as well.

    Everyone involved in the record is guilty of picking the same people over and
    over again.


    ---------------------------------------
    "I know enough to know I don't know enough"
  5. Bob Olhsson

    Bob Olhsson Guest

    In article <20030813140902.29721.00000761@mb-m14.aol.com>, EggHd
    <egghd@aol.com> wrote:

    >Everyone involved in the record is guilty of picking the same people over and
    >over again.


    And on top of that, everybody considering giving it some airplay is
    likely to be swayed by the number of familiar names they see in
    addition to the focus group results.

    --
    Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN 615.385.8051
    Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
    http://www.hyperback.com/olhsson.html
    Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
  6. Buster Mudd

    Buster Mudd Guest

    Fletcher <Fletcher@mercenary.com> wrote in message news:<3F3A3CFD.DC872278@mercenary.com>...
    > Autotune when applied by a skilled operator in small quantities can indeed help a track.
    > Morphine applied in small quantities can be a very effective 'pain management' tool. Autotune,
    > like Morphine, has a large propensity for abuse... and just as a novice junkie is far more
    > likely to 'turn blue' than a veteran junkie... too many of the Pro-sTool wielding motherfuckers
    > that plague our cities seem to have a propensity to use the power afforded them by the tools to
    > the point of abuse...



    Something about that paragraph reminds me of a quote I heard
    attributed to Todd Rundgren. "Pitch shifters are like heroin: The
    first time you put an Eventide Harmonizer on your tracks, it makes you
    throw up. But after that, you just can't quit."
  7. Kris Singh

    Kris Singh Guest

    scotfraser@aol.com (ScotFraser) wrote in message news:<20030813131816.10408.00002446@mb-m05.aol.com>...
    > << I am not the biggest fan of
    > > Lord-Alge's work, but he is great at putting a vocal in your face. It
    > > helps boost the impact of the emotion when the vocal is well
    > > preformed.>>

    >
    > Yes, however, it completely drains the emotion when there's no dynamic
    > contrast. When the meters go straight to zero on the downbeat & never move, I'd
    > say the mixer has pretty well emasculated whatever performance may have
    > originally ocurred.
    >
    > Scott Fraser



    He doesn't slam the whole song... just vocals. I have heard mixes he
    has done before they were mastered. That maybe the mastering
    engineers fault.
  8. Fletcher

    Fletcher Guest

    Kris Singh wrote:

    >
    > Why did you have Lord Alge in the same sentence then?? I am still not
    > clear of what you are trying to say. You did say he was by attaching
    > the auto-tune problem with the "loudness above audio" string. Like
    > they are hand in hand.


    The original line was: "Pro-sTools/Auto-Tuned-Lord-Alge/SSL-Marcussen Mastering type "loudness above
    audio" stylings we are subjected to today"... lemme break it down into little chunks for you.

    I find the whole "Pro-sTooled to death", which includes, but is not limited to "auto tuned into
    submission" fashion trend to be annoying. I find the cookie cutter SSL gymnastics small sounding mix
    fashion to be annoying [they are mutually exclusive, but oft times follow each other in the chain of
    production]... and those product seem to be followed by the "Marcussen style" mastering job... and
    right or wrong, it has always seemed to me that Marcussen started the "loudness wars". I could be
    indicting the man for something he didn't really do... but my perception, which may indeed be skewed,
    was that Marcussen is the man behind the loudness curtain.

    So... to recap... the 3 things I find annoying about modern music production are 1) the overuse of
    the power of Pro-sTools for what seems to be flashing of the potential power as opposed to the
    enhancement of the musical statement; 2) the TLA mix style that is the current standard of the
    industry; and 3) the "loudness above audio" mastering fashion of the day.

    In the interest of brevity [which has obviously been shot in the fucking head at this point and is
    bleeding by the quart into a pool or explanations of what I mistakenly thought was a fairly straight
    forward concept] I strung the sHit Record Trifecta together. My bad, sorry, I swear on my mother
    I'll never do that again.

    OK?

    >
    >
    > His mixes do cut through. What is "GRAINY" about his mixes?? Dude,
    > what are you saying. Calling it "small" I can understand.
    > Over-compression can often be interpreted as small. "GRAINY????"
    > What does that mean?


    Adjectives are funny things when applied to audio. I was talking about what sounds to me like the
    employment of many onboard SSL compressors. I find DBX VCA's to sound 'grainy'... as in 'shitty,
    harsh and nasty'... as in it seems to me that the switching noise of the steps of a DBX VCA when it's
    in motion creates an upper, not so musical sounding harmonic that I find personally annoying as a
    motherfucker. That is what I mean by "grainy". If you have another adjective I can use that doesn't
    require a diatribe explanation... I will gladly employ it in any and all subsequent references to the
    artifacts that are sonically apparent from the implementation of DBX VCA's.

    >
    >
    > "I was associated
    > > with a record where TLA/CLA mixed some of the same songs Jack Joseph Puig mixed... the
    > > differences were more than palpable. I was recently associated with a record that was mastered
    > > by Howie Weinburg, Steve Marcussen, Dave Collins and Bob Ludwig... all had interesting ideas...
    > > and while a couple of them came pretty close, none of them really nailed it... each had a wart,
    > > one had the least obtrusive wart and that's who's work will be on the release."

    >
    > What does this mean?? What is this in response to? Who do you
    > like??? Why don't we start a thread where Mr. Fletcher speaks of the
    > good rather then what he does not like. Are you afraid to commend
    > something new????


    Sure... I was associated with a record where TLA/CLA mixed some to the same song JJP mixed... JJP's
    mixes where beautiful open and clear. JJP's mixes had an absolutely lovely range of emotion that was
    enhanced by the audio presentation. CLA's mixes (for the most part) made the record... JJP and TLA
    had one or two (I don't really remember) that made the record (I was in no position to make any call
    what so ever... I was merely a semi interested by-stander)

    I have no idea how to "speak of the good" any better than that... everything there was "positive"
    wasn't it? As for the 'mastering' side of the story... I really can't say anything more "positive"
    than "all had interesting ideas". The ideas were interesting. Not what I would have envisioned for
    the record by a long shot... but definitely an eye opening, interesting event.

    >
    >
    >
    > Tom Lord-Alge is like a Harley. If you want that sound, get a Harley.
    > Nothing else sounds like it. Not a bad thing to have a hold on a
    > sound. It is his thing.


    I may ride rice for the rest of my fucking life after reading that.

    Ya know... if you actually listen to the sounds of H-D's... a Panhead sounds considerably different
    than a Blockhead... and an Ironhead different than a Knucklehead... and with the possible exception
    of the timing, a Shovelhead has a little less than nothing in common with the tone of a 104 cui.
    stroked S&S V-Twin motor. Seeing as there is president for me explaining each and every fucking
    analogy into submission... lemme cut to the fuckin' chase here...

    There are a lot of variations to the sound of Harley Davidson style motorcycles. To lump all
    Harley's into the same basket is just wrong [and annoying]. TLA/CLA's work does indeed have the same
    "curve", "texture", "signature" [find me a fucking adjective I'm not going to have to debate...
    OK?]... H-D's have a "curve" and a "texture"... but upon closer examination, there is less of the
    "sameness" than can be found in mixes from the TLA/CLA et al school of factory mixing.


    > Can't knock him... he has the Ferraris and
    > Yachts!!! LOL


    Yep... can't knock that in the slightest. I absolutely do appreciate what goes into that sort of
    affluence... and more power to 'um for achieving it. Just as there is no mandate that I enjoy the
    work, there is no mandate that I begrudge them their successes...

    >
    >
    > "No, that may be why you employ it... but I think Jim Morrison proved
    > you can sing out of tune
    > > and still sell records.


    <snip happens>

    > Then keep that as you mojo. Don't bust pitch anytime. It can't work
    > as a "it's OK for Morrison but not Avril...."


    Huh? Now I need a 'clarification'...

    >
    > No. She can sing. Fuck anyone who says she can't. There is no such
    > thing as a talent knob or plug-in. She gets across. That is it. She
    > is not greatness, but she can sing a little and looks good naked in
    > many young boys minds.... including mine.


    Sorry... I forgot what period we're talking about. My bad. Yeah, I forgot that all you need to do
    these days is look like a fuck sponge and have your shit reconstructed in Pro-sTools to be considered
    a genius artiste... eMpTy-V is more than 20 years old at this point... you'd think I'd have fucking
    learned by now... good Lord I'm a putz.

    > <agreeing shit snipped>
    >
    > I said, " Records today don't sound terrible across the board, and I
    > > > would like you to acknowledge that."

    > >
    > >Fletcher said, "Acknowledged. However, many records that shouldn't

    > sound like shit, do sound like shit... I
    > > would like you to acknowledge that."

    >
    > Agreed, but that is not just true for records of today. There are old
    > great records that sound like shit that didin't need to.


    Absolutely... but find me a "Led Zeppelin ___" that came from a Pro-sTools/SSL [insert favorite
    famous mix dude name here]/Loud School of Mastering [shit... 3 in a row again... hope I don't have to
    clarify this again...] production ideal.

    Find me a record that hits home like "Sticky Fingers" on the first listen. I'm not trying to break
    your balls (ok... maybe a little bit I am)... I sincerely would love to hear it. I'm way sick and
    tired of 10-15-20-30 year old records still holding up or surpassing the emotional content of what's
    in the Wall Mart record bins.

    When was the last time the "audio" seriously enhanced the presentation? "OK Computer"? Whadda we
    got? "Division Bell?"

    >
    > Not true. I love those records, but they sound dated. "Nevermind"
    > sounds so dated it isn't even funny. Listen with your ears, it will
    > help you hear. Leave heart out of it. "Appetite" has gated reverb on
    > the snare. Hello 80s. They are in-your-face records, but they are
    > dated in their own respective ways. Pro Tools never dates a record.
    > Auto-Tune used as a effect does.


    Really... and what would be your "date stamp" for 'Nevermind'?

    Funny, I don't hear gated reverb on the snare [in that "Hugh Padgham" kind of gated snare signature
    kinda sound]... some "non-lin II" from an RMX-16 perhaps, [but it ain't "Let's Dance" by a long
    shot]... not enough to be any more than aggressive... and FWIW "non-lin II" hasn't entirely
    disappeared from the mixing radar screen... granted, TLA/CLA don't seem to employ it, but it's still
    out there.

    Pro-sTools never dates a record? Pal-leeeze.

    >
    >
    >
    > dude, GO AWAY. "200 light years..." and the whole "Satanic" record
    > are magic. They are great sounding well produced songs.


    ....but they're a definitely 'time stamped' event... where as the 'Jimmy Miller era' RS records could
    just have easily been done in damn near any decade... as both the Black Crowes showed in the late
    80's and the Yayhoos [and to a good extent the Bottle Rockets] exemplified in the late 90's

    > The
    > mellotron in that song is the reason Fionna Apple had a career.


    And that would be a good thing... why?

    >
    > <more agreement snipped>


    [note to Kris... I'm leaving on a family vacation tomorrow afternoon... so we only get to go one more
    round of this... it is a kinda cool debate... but I've been absolutely instructed by both wife and
    children that I am strictly forbidden to bring the laptop on the vacation... so we're gonna have to
    wrap this up...]
    --
    Fletcher
    Mercenary Audio
    TEL: 508-543-0069
    FAX: 508-543-9670
    http://www.mercenary.com
    "this is not a problem"
  9. EggHd

    EggHd Guest

    << He doesn't slam the whole song... just vocals. I have heard mixes he
    has done before they were mastered. That maybe the mastering
    engineers fault. >>

    I don't know about that. I have been in the studio listening to his mixes many
    times and the stereo SSL comp is stitting straight up the entire mix, not to
    mention every compressor on most channels.

    Love him or hate him you can't claim they he doesn't slam or as he would say
    spank his mixes.



    ---------------------------------------
    "I know enough to know I don't know enough"
  10. ScotFraser

    ScotFraser Guest

    << He doesn't slam the whole song... just vocals. I have heard mixes he
    has done before they were mastered. That maybe the mastering
    engineers fault. >>

    A friend played me a tune he tracked & Lord-Alge mixed. Prior to mastering
    there was NO dynamic range whatsoever. It hit zero on the downbeat & never left
    through the whole tune. It sounded dumb.


    Scott Fraser
  11. transducr

    transducr Guest

    Fletcher <Fletcher@mercenary.com> wrote in message news:<3F3B8ADD.7101F0BF@mercenary.com>...
    > When was the last time the "audio" seriously enhanced the presentation? "OK Computer"? Whadda we
    > got? "Division Bell?"


    i know this a minor point in a very long reply, but i was a little
    confused by the wording in this part...are you saying that "OK
    Computer" is a modern example of "audio enhanc[ing] the presentation"?
    or are you saying that it's an example of a modern attempt that tries
    and falls short? or are you saying that it's more crap that people
    think is great because there's so much worse crap happening in
    contemporary music...i.e. it's the best we got for awhile so let's
    celebrate it.

    personally, i love that record so i'm curious to hear your take. (not
    trolling, just interested to hear another perspective.)

    i *do* think that they (radiohead/nigel godrich) used pro-tools, etc.
    in a creative musical way that i don't think necessarily dates the
    record. in my opinion it's a great example of exploiting the
    technology musically, rather than letting the technology exploit and
    rob the music...ok, ok, technology doesn't rob or exploit anything...i
    always have to remind myself of the classic NRA line: "guns don't kill
    people, people kill people". just like i shouldn't hate cellphones...i
    should hate ridiculous yuppies who can't drive and talk on a phone
    simultaneously...yet insist on doing both anyway. (sorry...)

    anyway, that being said about "OK Computer", i don't think that it's
    nigel godrich's best work to date sonically speaking. i think he was
    still finding his stride.

    i think the follow-up, KidA, is a beautiful record both sonically and
    production-wise.

    also, godrich's work with Travis is some of my favorite contmeporary
    recording work. though it has some of that godrich flavor, the mood
    and tone is pretty contrast to his work with radiohead and he manages
    to make the recordings sound as warm and personal as the songwriting.
    tasteful stuff that i think will stand up very well over the years.

    seems like everytime i hear his newest work it sounds better than the
    last thing he worked on and that's a great thing...unless you're the
    second to last artist he worked with!

    i would be interested to hear who you (and whoever else is reading
    this thread) think *is* making (as far as producing, recording,
    mixing) records that may stand the test of time these days...
  12. david

    david Guest

    In article <3F3B8ADD.7101F0BF@mercenary.com>, Fletcher
    <Fletcher@mercenary.com> wrote:

    > Find me a record that hits home like "Sticky Fingers" on the first listen.
    > I'm not trying to break
    > your balls (ok... maybe a little bit I am)... I sincerely would love to hear
    > it. I'm way sick and
    > tired of 10-15-20-30 year old records still holding up or surpassing the
    > emotional content of what's
    > in the Wall Mart record bins.




    Try Black Rebel Motorcycle Club's self titled 2001 release. Some of the
    intros and outros are a bit excessive, but that record moves me.
    (Pretty fuckin stupid name 'tho.)

    And why always the pissing on Satanic Majesty?? Some of us old farts
    had some wonderful times with that record. Sure, it ain't no Exile or
    Pepper, and you can't listen to "Why don't we sing this song all
    together" the long version, without being wrecked on something. But I
    love "2000 Light Years From Home."



    David Correia
    Celebration Sound
    Warren, Rhode Island

    CelebrationSound@aol.com
    www.CelebrationSound.com
  13. Fill X

    Fill X Guest

    I have a friend who's mixes have been remixed by lord alge. You'd better like
    pancakes.


    P h i l i p

    ______________________________

    "I'm too fucking busy and vice-versa"

    - Dorothy Parker
  14. EggHd

    EggHd Guest

    << You'd better like pancakes. >>

    LOL!



    ---------------------------------------
    "I know enough to know I don't know enough"
  15. Fletcher

    Fletcher Guest

    transducr wrote:

    > Fletcher <Fletcher@mercenary.com> wrote in message news:<3F3B8ADD.7101F0BF@mercenary.com>...
    > > When was the last time the "audio" seriously enhanced the presentation? "OK Computer"? Whadda we
    > > got? "Division Bell?"

    >
    > i know this a minor point in a very long reply, but i was a little
    > confused by the wording in this part...are you saying that "OK
    > Computer" is a modern example of "audio enhanc[ing] the presentation"?
    > or are you saying that it's an example of a modern attempt that tries
    > and falls short?


    I thought that the audio on both OK Computer and Kid A [same with Division Bell] enhanced the musical
    presentation... so before those albums were jammed back in my face, I figured I'd bring them up...
    sometimes my propensity for sarcasm can get in the way of clarifying statements... if only vocal
    inflection could come through the typed word as well as the spoken word things would be much easier.
    --
    Fletcher
    Mercenary Audio
    TEL: 508-543-0069
    FAX: 508-543-9670
    http://www.mercenary.com
    "this is not a problem"
  16. Jim Kollens

    Jim Kollens Guest

    Dave Correia: >And why always the pissing on Satanic Majesty?? Some of us old
    farts
    >had some wonderful times with that record.


    Heh, that was my favorite Stones album, of course I felt a lot like the cover
    looked.


    Jim Kollens: Some people have a studio in a room in their home. I have a
    bedroom in my studio. As my tech said the first time he visited my house:
    "Well I can see right away you ain't married."
  17. david

    david Guest

    In article <20030815114122.22835.00000040@mb-m05.aol.com>, Jim Kollens
    <jimkollens@aol.com> wrote:

    > Dave Correia: >And why always the pissing on Satanic Majesty?? Some of us
    > old
    > farts
    > >had some wonderful times with that record.

    >
    > Heh, that was my favorite Stones album, of course I felt a lot like the cover
    > looked.



    Remember when somone told you the Beatles were somewhere in the cover?
    I could only find 2 of them, had to be shown where the other two were.

    Now that was pretty damn cool, putting the Beatles on a Rolling Stones
    album cover.




    David Correia
    Celebration Sound
    Warren, Rhode Island

    CelebrationSound@aol.com
    www.CelebrationSound.com
  18. transducr

    transducr Guest

    Fletcher <Fletcher@mercenary.com> wrote in message news:<3F3CBBEB.1BAE1DE2@mercenary.com>...
    > transducr wrote:
    >
    > > Fletcher <Fletcher@mercenary.com> wrote in message news:<3F3B8ADD.7101F0BF@mercenary.com>...
    > > > When was the last time the "audio" seriously enhanced the presentation? "OK Computer"? Whadda we
    > > > got? "Division Bell?"

    > >
    > > i know this a minor point in a very long reply, but i was a little
    > > confused by the wording in this part...are you saying that "OK
    > > Computer" is a modern example of "audio enhanc[ing] the presentation"?
    > > or are you saying that it's an example of a modern attempt that tries
    > > and falls short?

    >
    > I thought that the audio on both OK Computer and Kid A [same with Division Bell] enhanced the musical
    > presentation... so before those albums were jammed back in my face, I figured I'd bring them up...
    > sometimes my propensity for sarcasm can get in the way of clarifying statements... if only vocal
    > inflection could come through the typed word as well as the spoken word things would be much easier.


    very much agreed. (on the audio and typed word points alike)

    i learned after making a few embarrassing angry rebuttals to friends,
    that it's important to re-read, give the benefit of the doubt and/or
    ask for clarification when it comes to typed conversations...
  19. Jim Kollens

    Jim Kollens Guest

    >Now that was pretty damn cool, putting the Beatles on a Rolling Stones
    >album cover.


    I don't think that the original 3-d cover has been available for years, has it?
    Oh, I forgot; vinyl is actually gone, more or less. I actually cut the thing
    out and built a high-psychedelic frame for it in the 60's. Boy, what different
    times we live in.
  20. ScotFraser

    ScotFraser Guest

    << And why always the pissing on Satanic Majesty?? Some of us old farts
    had some wonderful times with that record. Sure, it ain't no Exile or
    Pepper, and you can't listen to "Why don't we sing this song all
    together" the long version, without being wrecked on something. But I
    love "2000 Light Years From Home." >>

    'Citadel' still does it for me. Chimiest of chimy guitar chord riffs ever
    recorded.


    Scott Fraser

Share This Page