Studio Tip #24: "Synthesize Me"
From their first real introduction in the early 70's the synthesizer has played a unique role in popular music. From the pioneering work of groups like Can and Kraftwerk on the Krautrock side to the slippery funk of Sly Stone and Stevie Wonder, the synth has had its ups and downs. Some years it’s all over stuff and then for some reason it goes into the musical witness relocation program. I think it is safe to say that today it has come out of hiding again and is back with a vengeance. Like any weapon, it can be used responsibly or it can be misused with tragic consequences for all involved.
In part this rise and fall can be located in what kind of synthesis we are talking about. When they first came into prominence the reigning design model was multi-oscillator analog synthesis with names like Moog and Arp dominating the landscape. Further down the road various other designers and manufacturers got on board and those quirky sounds give way to the dreaded digital synthesis of the 80's and the emergence of Yamaha and the ubiquitous DX-7. The DX-7 is the kind of beast that can give any instrument a bad rep for years to come. That is exactly what happened. The cheese factor of digital synthesis was so insanely high that it basically broke the cheese-o-meter in half.
But then a funny thing happened. Some clever teenager (probably in Sweden or Germany) decided that the old and finicky analog synth could be righteously modeled in the digital realm and that in fact we didn't need a dedicated instrument at all and viola- the so-called "soft" synth was born. The soft synth was simply some snappy code that imitated all the awesomeness and parameters of the old and finicky analog synthesizers (which had now become very expensive collectors' items btw). Suddenly anyone with a computer and a controller keyboard (essentially a keyboard with no sounds of its own) was able to do a pretty damn good imitation of the classics in the field. Witness the rebirth of the synth in the 21st century. While some analog purists still maintain that the real thing can never be truly copied, the advent of soft synthesis certainly did allow many people to make some ultra-funky sounds for very little money and even less programming skill. The threshold of entry was lowered considerably and some fairly astounding sounds emerged as a result.
Some readers may wonder where I am going with this history lesson but let me assure you I do have a point. My point is that an absolutely enormous and dazzling galaxy of waveforms are now available to musicians that wish to add these exotic ingredients to their music. No longer are we limited to the prevalent designs of an era and virtually every kind of sound from the earliest monophonic bleeps and blips to the most complex polyphonic multi-timbral onslaught can be dialed up and brought into being. I would argue strongly that we are in living in the new Golden Age of synthesis and that any band would be crazy not to at least experiment with what this can mean for their palette of colors and textures.
Like anything on Earth synths can be overused and contrived but they can also be deeply mysterious and brilliant. When you are thinking about what a song needs, sometimes it is not another section or another chord or another guitar part. Sometimes it is the infinitely malleable and amazing synthesizer that can mean the difference between ordinary and extraordinary.
Studio Tip #23: "Background Anyone?"
Obviously when you're talking about pop music the lead vocal and the groove are probably the most important elements in making something really work for the average listener. In fact, most contemporary hip-hop production could be reduced to basically two fundamentals, drums and cursing. But once we accept the overall importance of these points it must be acknowledged that getting something truly special in some of the less prominent categories can yield some fairly extraordinary results. Think of the background vocals in "God Only Knows" by the Beach Boys or "It's Your Thing" by the Isley Brothers to name only two examples. These are essential points on the pop music map and without the background vocal they are simply not the same animals. Now the Beach Boys and the Isley Brothers have that genetic advantage that makes their voices blend in a way that can give you chills, but before you think that's where the road begins and ends remember that perhaps the finest harmony singing achieved by a pop group in the rock era was by four unrelated people, The Beatles.
Now you may ask what does this weird tangent mean for me and my band? Fair question and here is the honest answer. Hard work. Unless, like my friends the Montesano brothers (who you may remember them from the killer Pepper's Ghost), you grew up singing with your siblings, this is not a skill set that the average musician has in their tool kit. If you were lucky enough (or maybe not depending) to sing in the choir in high school (Glee anyone?) this is the kind of thing that you may need to seriously sit down and practice. Call a rehearsal and just try singing background parts together as a unit. You may discover that some people are naturally great at this and that others, well, not so much. But what you will find is very important, can you even do this? Some bands, try as they might, simply cannot really blend vocally in a way that serves the music. Others will find that not only can they do it but they are incredibly good at doing it and that will add another outrageously hip element to their musical arsenal that they had not really considered.
The other good news I have for you is that in the studio, even if you personally cannot carry a tune in a bucket, that does not preclude your band from having great backgrounds; the secret is called stacking. Pioneered largely by the late Michael Jackson, one of the most incredible singers that has ever lived, stacking basically means having all the various parts of the harmonies sung by the lead voice. Not only did Michael sing each note, he then doubled and tripled each note to make those harmonies huge and amazing. This MJ-inspired trick was used to great effect by guys like Prince who was also a master of the stacking technique. Obviously, if your band can't sing and play at the same time (see that is a WHOLE other question) you will not be able to pull this stuff off live except with pre-recorded vocals triggered as samples on a keyboard and while possible this is a pretty lame substitute for the real thing. With plug-ins like Melodyne, "intelligent harmonies" can be created on the fly by a very skilled live sound engineer and of course can be created in the studio as well.
But I still like to hear folks sing together and make a joyful noise. If you can spend some time with your musical cohort and put in some serious effort to master this often overlooked aspect, I am positive that when all is said and less is done you will be really psyched that you can at the drop of a hat pull out this secret weapon and blow the competition off the stage. I'm not saying music is a competition or anything like that but blowing some clowns off the stage does kinda feel good. Just saying...
Studio Tip #22: "My Favorite Things"
I think that one of the most overlooked aspects of making a recording is the "sonic template". Most people will scratch their heads when I say this phrase and have a somewhat confused look on their face. What do I mean by this? What I mean is that if you are going into the recording studio and already have a pretty definite idea as to how you want your finished recording to sound you need to do everything in your power to help convey this vision to the other people involved in the process, the engineer, producer, fellow band mates, arrangers, etc. This may seem like a fairly obvious point but it is often lost, forgotten or misplaced along the way.
The best way to achieve this is fairly simple. Bring the one recording that best represents what you're shooting for in your project. If you have a bit more ambitious game in my mind bring two recordings that together help demonstrate this final outcome. Obviously, there are constraints that must be addressed from the outset on any project but within reason this a very valuable tool when it comes to helping people share the sound and vision that is going to take shape.
This is not just a good thing for you as the artist to have some tangible touchstone for use as a reference but perhaps even more importantly it is a really helpful yardstick for the engineer so he can hear specifically (and without the vagueness of descriptive language) exactly what you have in mind. That way when he or she is making choices during the sessions they have something concrete and definitive to refer to right on down the line. Obviously there are some things that cannot be perfectly duplicated but with enough planning and helpful discussion you will be amazed at how much can be achieved by using this pretty simple approach.
The age of digital audio has brought good and bad things down the path but as far as manipulation of sound goes we live in an infinite universe. However, in order to make the manipulation useful the initial recording itself must be the closest that it can be to what you as the artist are hearing in your mind's ear. Like any strategy this one has its limitations but believe that to have this "sonic template" as a part of your arsenal can prove to be a very helpful map when navigating the unknown rivers and forests of the uncharted creative world.
Studio Tip #21: "Mics & Preamps"
In recent months I have added a substantial number of new and vintage mics and preamps to the Range gear list. I love bringing new things into the fold because it effectively expands the palette of what can be achieved in our studio. As fans of my studio tips know by now I am a big proponent of getting it right "off the floor". This simply means that by selecting the right instrument and the right mic and the right preamp you have already effectively fought a big part of the audio battle-- and won. When you need to radically equalize an existing track that is almost certainly indicative of the fact that somewhere down the line this selection procedure broke down. The genre of music is really irrelevant in this kind of discussion because good mics are useful to everything as are preamps. These are the bread and butter of good recording and when you have a very talented engineer (I'm looking at you Ritrovato) who knows exactly what the capabilities and limitations of the gear are, you are well on your way to audio nirvana.
The array of things that I have brought to Range in recent months spans the gamut from vintage ribbon mics from the 50's to modern high end large diaphragm condensers like the incredible Neumann TLM-103. But I also brought in some very unusual and esoteric mics like a pair of Swedish-made Milab VM-44's. These are some of my favorite mics in the world and they blow the doors off of some much more famous short body condensers that shall remain nameless because I don't want to hurt their little electronic feelings. These are used a lot in Europe and Scandinavia for classical music but I have found, as has Brian, that throwing the pair up on an acoustic guitar will make a grown man (or woman) cry. Likewise when we used them as a stereo pair as room mics, their results were equally beautiful.
But it’s not just mics that we added to the family. I also brought along some of my favorite preamps to use in conjunction with the transducers themselves. Maybe my favorite of the bunch is an Altec-Lansing 1567A tube mixer that I bought from Brian Wilson's favorite engineer, the legendary Mark Linnet. Mark snapped this unit up from the University of California state college system and the one I acquired had every available bell and whistle including a VU meter and XLR inputs on every channel as well as complete set of Peerless mic and line input transformers. This unit is now THE secret weapon of ultra-high end rock engineers who swear by this thing as a front-end for drum recording. I helped my best friend create a library of custom drum sounds about 15 years ago, we sampled my old Ludwig jazz kit through this unit and he swears to this day they are the most organic and funky drum samples he has EVER used.
Anyway, this column is more of an update than a tip per se, but we thought it would give us a nice chance to informally introduce you to some of the newest and sweetest members of the ever-expanding Range arsenal. Give us a call for a tour if you want to see the stuff first hand or better yet give us a call and book some time and hear for yourself how great stuff sounds on YOUR music.
Studio Tip #20: "Report from the Front: The Loudness War"
Perhaps no issue has been quite as heated in recent years as the so-called Loudness Wars. For those unfamiliar with this battle it involves the use of compression in the mastering process. For quite some time now a struggle has taken place in the mastering studio. Usually the mastering process is a quiet domain as compared to the recording studio where most of the fighting, physical and mental, takes place. But as of late the field of combat has shifted to this heretofore placid outpost of audio alchemy. The mastering engineer is the guy that takes your finished mixes and puts them all lovingly together in sequence, with meta-data, adjusts amplitude for level matching between the tracks and adds a secret sauce of little tweaks like a stereo EQ that pull and push those stereo mixes until they shine and pop.
But this idyllic world has been shattered in recent years by the commercial battle and everyone wants their mix to be "competitive". Don't be fooled…that just means as loud as possible. And with that desire for loudness comes fatigue and sameness. Sure your ears are hearing it but all the details, the hills and valleys, the dynamic contour of the performance is squashed. The loud parts are all brought down evenly and the quiet parts are now as loud as possible. This makes everything within a very compressed range and while loud it is not really that fun to listen to. The irony is that recording and mixing engineers and producers spend a lot of time doing the opposite of this. They in fact try to have lots of different things going on at different levels simultaneously. And these same things may rise and fall in loudness throughout the song. But all of this attention to change and subtlety is crushed by the Loudness Wars.
The Loudness Wars are being waged by marketing people and jaded hacks that think that a track's loudness on some obnoxious commercial radio station that is losing listeners by the day really still matters. That in itself is a joke. Forget chasing the commercial tail of radio, make the best music that you can exactly as you want the world to hear it and make sure no focus group steps out and tells you to make it louder. Stand by your vision and that act of vigilance will pay off a thousand-fold. We live in a loud, complicated and sensory overloaded world, all the more reason to keep the nuance and nature in your music.
Studio Tip #19: "I Have A 2-Track Mind"
As anyone that knows me will attest I am a total sucker for classic jazz recordings of the 50's and 60's. Blue Note, Impulse, Contemporary, Prestige…these labels are the stuff of legend among jazz aficionados. But for me, one of the things that I love most about them is the fact that they are NOT multi-tracked. The whole thing goes down at once. Leakage everywhere and if one person screws up and misses the change to the bridge everyone has to start all over again. If you are an obsessive jazz fan of the Be-Bop era you already know that many alternate takes exist of Moose The Mooch or Ornithology. The reason for this is simple: everyone played at once. This Three Musketeers ("One for all and all for one" for those of you who didn't read the book) philosophy really makes people play together and at the top of their game.
I'm not saying that cats today are slackers about playing tightly and sensitively but the ability to go back and fix things is simply a different frame of mind. You just think to yourself "I'll go back and fix that." Well in the old days that thought literally could not cross your mind. I also think, without getting too freaky, that a kind of ESP develops under these circumstances that cannot happen in an overdub situation. If you want to hear what I mean by that listen to the album The Bill Evans Trio Live at The Village Vanguard. The tightness of that playing is nothing short of spooky; it is like one person playing bass, drums and piano at the same time!
Obviously this does not work for every kind of music or musician but if you are in a jazz band or a bluegrass group for example, I urge you to pack your axes, drive to Range and jump into the Wayback Machine. It just requires setting up some beautiful ribbon and condenser mics, great pre-amps, and then counting off the tune; you will instantly set sail for the Kingdom of Live. The two-track mind-set is not for everyone that's for sure, but when it works right the magic is truly unmistakable.
Studio Tip #18: "Lo-Fi, Take It Easy"
I am a big fan of high resolution digital audio files (24/96) and good old fashioned analog tape, they are my dear friends. But I need to say that sometimes lo-fi is better. Sometimes a lower fidelity recording simply fits the intentions of the music in a more powerful way. Sometimes the grit and grime just makes you groove harder. I don't think it works for a piano concerto but for a sweaty garage band or a nasty funk outfit the lo-fi thing can REALLY set the stage in a beautiful way. I was listening to the MC5 recently and I was struck by how great the music meshed with the lo-fi rendering of the work. It just had a certain cocky swagger and dirty window vibe that was pure magic.
One way to achieve this on your own music is to use dynamic mics (thinks Shure 57's and 58's and EV RE-20) on everything. This will automatically leave a grungier smack on your tracks. Another sure-fire trick is to use really little amps and crank them like crazy. Little amps can sound freaking huge if you know what you are doing. The other things that puts it in the deep mud is solid state effects pedals and running things like lead vocals through them. They were never intended for this and it instantly puts that good Stankonia on your music. Cutting live with tons of leakage everywhere also does wonders for the rowdy bar fight energy that the most memorable lo-fi recordings have in spades. I have also discovered a plug-in called Vinyl by Izotope that is my secret weapon when it comes to seasoning a stereo mix or a single overdub. Track it down and play with the little devil…I think you'll be seriously impressed.
The other level at which you can do this is to add a little white noise to your tracks as a bed in the background, and likewise, a gritty synth pad can do wonders when used sparingly. In most cases at Range we strive to give you gorgeous, round, liquid tracks, I know that our engineers and I all appreciate the beauty of a really transparent, dynamic and natural recording. But we also know that you need "horses for courses" and that means that there is no one-size-fits-all in recording and producing music. You need to remain open to all the solutions and not dismiss anything simply because "it's not done that way". Also, not every song on your album may ask for this approach but for the ones that do, nothing can replace it.
Studio Tip #17: “Shoulders of Giants”
"If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants."
-Sir Isaac Newton
The thrust of this comment is simple: If you can build on the great ideas of the past and benefit from the insights of your ancestors you will get that much further in your own pursuits. I think that this is especially true of music. Each of us has favorite bands or solo artists that are beacons for us. In my case, I have heroes that I look up to and while they may be totally unconnected by style or genre, they are unified by their uniqueness and overall artistry. Joni Mitchell, Tom Waits, Glenn Gould, Charlie Palmieri, Rashaan Roland Kirk, The Carter Family, Sly Stone, Ella Fitzgerald. On the surface this may seem like an unconnected stream of names but in my mind they are all intimately connected by their amazing musical gifts. I never tire of listening to their music, watching their performances or reading about their lives.
But in addition to their personal importance in my life as people I love they also function in a very practical role. I use them as models for my own work. If I am working on a jazz record I will often listen to Ah-Um by Charles Mingus and try to keep that in my head as a model for my own goals. That does not mean that I try to copy them, that is destined for failure as artists of this caliber are incapable of being imitated. But it does mean that something about their output informs my own process. Maybe it's the structure of the songs, or the instrumentation or it could be the album artwork or the liner notes. But it is not always dictated by genre either. If I'm working on a singer/songwriter album I may be thinking of There's A Riot Goin' On by Sly and The Family Stone. Or a rock record might be informed by The Goldberg Variations by J.S. Bach. In any case, using great artists as models for your own work can be a very valuable tool in sharpening and focusing what you are trying to achieve.
You may even take the suggestion literally and bring in a record that you really love as a model for mixing your own project. Of course, nearly every rock band on Earth wants their album to sound like Led Zep III and let me tell you now: it ain't gonna happen kids. But using these records as springboards for inspiration, as benchmarks of excellence and as warm fires to warm the tired hands of creativity all of this is great. Someone once said that "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery". While this may be quite true it does not help your critical standing as an original thinker. Ultimately, the pressure and reward is on your shoulders to do something beautiful, magical and unforgettable. But there are some very gifted people out there who are always available to help you. Call upon them day or night, they are more than happy to help.
Studio Tip #16: “Where The Hell Are My Keys?”
Picking a key for your song is something that has a great effect on the perceived musicality of your band. If you find that you often default to the obvious choices C major, F, D, A, E, G, you are not exploiting all the guns in your belt. Obviously, you need to pick keys that are good for your singer (if you have one), but it really makes sense to explore as many choices as possible before you settle on the one that fits the song.
Most bands have never played in C# minor as an example. This expansion of key signatures will greatly add to the diversity of your songs. The other thing it does is give your album, if you are working on one, many more "colors" than just sticking to the usual suspects. Keys also have a mood and you can use these moods as a way to further your vision as a band. D minor for instance is not a particularly happy key and if you have a song about something dark or mysterious picking a key that matches the content of the lyrics helps to really reinforce the mood of the track. Likewise if you have a great flag waver of a tune C major says that the parade starts at noon.
The other thing is of course the number of chord changes or modulations that your song has. There have been plenty of great 3-chord bangers in the history of pop music and I am not saying to just throw in a bunch of modulations if they are not necessary but on the other hand having a bunch of cool chords flying by especially in a bridge for instance really adds to the memorable nature of a composition. If you want to really study a band that does a tremendous job with using very unusual "changes" and still manages to make it sound like pop music I would like to direct you to Steely Dan. Becker and Fagen, the principal songwriters, are huge jazz fans and you can see when you try and play a cover of their music that they are exploiting a harmonic palette that is truly vast and sophisticated in its scope of influence. Joni Mitchell is another composer who really does some incredible things with the harmonic universe and her songs are among the greatest ever written because of her uniqueness and her fearless use of what are called "upper tensions". This mean that she will often go way beyond the triad or the C7 and use the 9th, 11th and even 13th degrees of the chord. Augmented chords, diminished and suspended chords are all too infrequently employed by rock and pop composers and these more unusual voices can elevate your work to the next level of interest.
Sure this will require that you study some theory but without a doubt the rewards that can be reaped by making this extra effort will end up being well worth the time spent cracking those dusty old textbooks that you skimmed over in music class. For the truly adventurous, I highly recommend that you track down a book called Slonimsky's Thesaurus of Scales. Just open it up to any page and start playing and I assure you that new ideas and approaches will come pouring out of you. Remember there are only 12 notes in Western music and I think its well worth the effort to try them all...
Studio Tip #15: “You Can Tune A Piano But You Can't Tuna Fish”
Everyone knows that you need to tune your instrument when you play but I think that the critical role and procedure for tuning is often overlooked in the rush to play. As a social service I am taking this chance to offer a little primer on tuning and how it can be best done for maximal benefits for all involved. First, one little known fact is that there is a hierarchy of tuning that should be followed to get things really perfect. The instrument that should always be tuned to first, if it’s a part of your ensemble is the keyboard. Everyone should tune to the A of the keyboard. The note of middle A is 440 cycles and it is considered the concert pitch. A keyboard typically is the most accurate barometer and when everyone adjusts to that one source the entire ensemble will blossom accordingly. Likewise it is most difficult to retune a keyboard from the standpoint of labor involved so make sure that becomes the center of pitch for the whole group. What I mean by that is that even if the keyboard you are using is a few cycles off if EVERYONE tunes to that reference point the entire ensemble will sound fine to virtually every listener except of course those very rare birds with perfect pitch who will notice a teensy bit of deviation. The problem arises when you get everyone to tune to the guitar for example because the piano player cannot readjust the intonation of their instrument on the fly as all string players can do with the simple twist of a peg.
The other thing that I like to point out to people is that if you have a session for Saturday morning at the studio (with Brian) ask if you can drop off your instruments the night before. I know that sounds kinda nutty but there is a good reason for this extra step. When you bring an instrument, particularly one made of wood from one environment to another the instrument minutely expands and contracts depending upon temperature and humidity. Therefore if it's 90 degrees outside and humid (welcome To Philly) your instrument will really change noticeably for a few hours as it encounters the cool and dry atmosphere of the studio that is climate controlled at all times. On a practical level this means that even when you tune up for the first song that the guitars and basses will be going through an acclimation process and they will be more likely not to "hold tuning" for as long as they would if you had brought them in the night before and allowed them to thoroughly adjust and "settle" into the specific temperature and humidity of the studio itself.
This is just a little insight into two aspects of the tuning process but I think that with a little planning and knowledge you can save yourself and your band mates a bit of hassle down the road. One final thought is that if you have more than an one electronic tuner that everyone in the band should agree to share the same one so that any minute deviations between different tuners are eliminated at the outset. I hope you found a little something out from this tip that helps you get a few cents closer to making that perfect record.
Studio Tip #14: “Time Loves A Hero”
There can be no doubt that straight 4/4 is the dominant time signature for American popular music. Virtually everything you hear on the radio stays within these familiar confines. But whether it be "Take Five" by Dave Brubeck in 5/4 or the tricky compound rhythm of Led Zeppelin's "Kashmir" where the Bonham is playing in 4/4 but guitarist Jimmy Page is playing in 3/4 against it, the world is full of many roads. Thinking about your music with all these possibilities in mind is a very powerful tool to expand the horizons of your approach. One of my favorite bands is Ween and they often use the Cha Cha rhythm of Latin music as the basis for many of their songs, while technically the time signature remains in 4/4, the beat of these songs is quite different than what we are normally accustomed to hearing in the usual rock band setting. Another main difference that is often overlooked is the distinction between playing swing versus straight. Jazz bands also play in 4/4 but they frequently, as the name implies, swing the rhythm and that immediately sets what they are doing apart. Try playing one of your songs with a swing feel as opposed to a straight 4/4 and you will discover that it completely transforms the mood and character of your composition.
The other thing that I love to hear is groups that can play music using clave. This is the two measure feel that dominates Afro-Cuban music and it has been used to tremendous and legendary effect by Santana in his classic version of "Oye Como Va". The clave can be played in either a 3-2 pattern, sometimes called "forward clave" or reversed and played in a 2-3 pattern. Once again, even though the feel seems radically different you are still technically playing in 4/4. This takes some getting used to and I would advise that you simply play the clave pattern itself for awhile before you try applying it to your own stuff. Another sweet thing that can transform your feel is playing something in
2/4. This pulse is in many cases associated with old time Gospel music and will impart a "churchy" vibe to whatever your playing, if done correctly.
As with all suggestions these are just raw ideas and they need to creatively applied to whatever you are doing in a "measured" fashion, if you don't mind a really bad pun. But this fundamental aspect is overlooked by many bands and when they begin to incorporate this kind of rhythmic nuance into the creative process it can result in something truly distinctive and really sets what you are doing apart from the pack. If you want a more dance floor friendly feel try asking your drummer to play every beat of the measure on the kick drum. This is called "four on the floor" and can immediately make a rock song feel more insistent and pounding like house music. I could go on ad nausea about these subtleties but the real acid test is how they apply to what you are trying to achieve. After driving these ideas around the block you may still decide that a straight up old school 4/4 back beat is still the thing that works best. But after trying these great variations I bet you will instinctively approach your music with a much more open mind moving forward and in the end, that can only be a good thing. I almost forgot, in the immortal words of the Godfather of Soul, it never hurts to "give the drummer some".
Studio Tip #13: ‘It's Not Unusual...but it should be!”
Expect the unexpected. One thing that always makes a record stand out from its peers is when a texture pops up that falls far outside of the usual arsenal of sounds. In hip-hop Timbaland has made a career out of adding novel elements to the genre that were rarely, if ever, used before. This thinking outside the box approach has made him a very wealthy man and has kept him an in-demand producer when other guys have fallen by the wayside. This approach however can be applied to virtually any genre and it is an idea that really works. I will never forget being on a panel at a music conference and having a guy play some of his music in an A&R evaluation session. His name was Johnny Skil-Saw, and yes, he used the sound of a revving electric Skil-Saw in his heavy metal record; every single person on the panel was knocked out by the ingenuity and originality of this idea. He was by far the most memorable guy of the day. I'm using him as an example in my own experience of someone that did something completely new and unexpected and was rewarded for his perspicacity. If you’re in a rock band throw a viola solo in there; if you’re in a jazz group get a bagpipes player; if your an R&B artist put a Theremin on a track. In many case, there are sample libraries that have all sorts of unpredictable and surprising instruments and textures that can be utilized without incurring the expense of hiring a special player, though having said that, I always encourage people to hire real cats to do the gig.
This does not mean that you need to go overboard and throw a bunch of unrelated sounds on your records just to be different. Use this suggestion sparingly, use it judiciously, and I am confident that you will find it a rewarding strategy at the end of the day. The Beatles were of course, under the guidance of George Martin, the pioneers of this idea. But for many years, since people have become a bit timid in this respect, they have retreated to a far more business-as-usual approach that has not helped them or their art. At the risk of repeating myself I am always an advocate for letting your freak flag fly and in doing so allowing your music to become something that stands out as innovative and satisfying, at the same instant and in that regard you will undoubtedly benefit from your daring. If Missy Elliott can do it so can you!
Studio Tip #12: “Let It Bleed”
The power of digital audio is truly amazing. The ability that we now have, in even a low cost package, to manipulate sound is something that even a decade ago we could barely imagine would be possible. As a result of that, people have flocked to the technology in astounding numbers. This has proven to be a challenge for conventional institutions like recording studios that depended upon clients to come into their facilities and avail themselves of specialized technology and expertise. Unlike the old 4-track cassette recorders that could not produce a professional grade product (except in the rarest instances) the quality that can now be achieved with a home recording rig is pretty damn impressive. But one thing that still cannot be achieved by bedroom recording is cutting live. Unless you have floated your floors, installed mic panels and acoustically treated your room the results of tracking a band live in your apartment or house is going to be a pretty underwhelming experience.
This is fine because at the end of the day there is still a pretty strong argument for going into a studio if you are indeed a band. If you are making computer-based music that is all comprised of samples, synths and the occasional vocals or a bass line cut direct, then tracking at home is sufficient for the task at hand. But if you are a band, a group of people that play together and react to what you are hearing and seeing and feeling around you then tracking live in a studio is not something that can be done in any other way. In celebration of this experience I would like to remind people of the joys of leakage. In general, folks have tried to avoid leakage, that is, the sound of another instrument entering a mic that was designated for something else. An example would be drums getting into a mic that has been placed on a bass cabinet. However, despite what you may imagine leakage for certain kinds of music is actually really desirable from a sonic standpoint and can be used to your advantage. If you are a jazz quartet for instance I would urge you to play all in one room, actually as close together as possible, sounds weird I know but trust me here. You will find that the resulting sound is "knit together" in a way that no amount of isolation and close miking can achieve. If you love, as I do, the sound of Blue Note jazz recordings from the 50's and 60's that is the sound of leakage! In fact, when I work with a band of this type I encourage them to go this route first and only after exhausting this as an option should they even try to move on to doing it in a more "pop" production approach.
Not only does the music have a sonic cohesion that is basically unachievable in any other way, but the musical effect of everyone in the same room at the same time, reacting to the same cues and accidents is absolutely priceless from the standpoint of creativity. I know that this advice goes against the grain of what you have been taught and may even believe that it will degrade your final result but really just the opposite is true…If you can cut it all at once and feel the sway and breathing of live playing you will discover a level of intensity and power that cannot be described. As the Stones so aptly put it, Let It Bleed!
Studio Tip #11: “Reach vs. Grasp”
Back in the Golden Age (sounds terrible, but true); rock bands were in a constant creative struggle to one-up each other. This resulted in a lot of friendly competition and a figurative avalanche of amazing music. Perhaps the most famous example of this was when Brian Wilson played Sgt. Pepper for the first time, he had just finished making Pet Sounds (which he considered the landmark of his career) and he was pretty depressed when he heard what the guys across the pond had done. Of course he was not alone in that feeling, as the repercussions of that album shook popular music to its very core. Jazz cats, classical musicians, pop stars and everyone making music was literally stunned by the enormity of their achievement. But as much as The Beatles are credited with that singular masterpiece equal credit must go to their producer George Martin. George Martin was a master arranger/orchestrator in addition to his skills as a producer and his arranging chops are front-and-center on this remarkable album. In fact, I think it is probably fair to say that the orchestral grandeur of that album is what made it so astonishing within the context of what people considered popular music made by kids for kids.
The point of this little history lesson is to remind people about the role and value of the arranger in creating classic albums. If you are in a rock band and are working on your first album (or your fifteenth) I encourage you to consider setting aside a little bit of money to hire an arranger for one song at a minimum. This will be money well spent if you find and hire the right person and give him or her the latitude to do something really audacious with the song(s) in question. I suggest allowing them to do it from "the ground up". That is to say let the arranger craft the structure of the entire song. Don't give them a finished song and say "slap some strings on it". This defeats the entire purpose at hand. Instead, give them a rough demo of the chords, lyrics and melody and let them go to town. Most musicians know an older player who has done this kind of work in the past, and if not a real recording studio like Range, can help you find someone that can do the job. I think that you will find that the experience alone of having a sophisticated, outside musical mind examine your work will have all kinds of long-term benefits that go way beyond the finished arrangement itself. I also think that what is lacking most of all in today's bands is that their grasp exceeds their reach. It is better to aim high and fall a little short of your mark than aim low and hit the bull’s-eye that a million other bands could also nail. Making music should be an exercise of your imaginative range and all too often it is simply a repetition of what has already been done, often and better. Do not fall into the trap of mediocrity, shoot for making something truly extraordinary and I'm positive you will find that it will not go unnoticed.
Studio Tip #10: “The First Kiss”
Normally when I write these tips they specifically relate to what you need to do to maximize what you are doing inside the studio but I felt compelled to write this one about what to do /outside/ the studio. I am doing this in honor of my mentor Joe Boyd. In fact, I am writing this as I travel up to NYC to see Joe tonight at Joe's Pub (no relation) where he will be reading from his magnificent memoir entitled White Bicycles. Some of his talented friends will also be showing up to sing some songs that relate to the stories in the book. Anyway of the many invaluable lessons that I learned from my apprenticeship with Joe one of the most important was the value of rehearsal. DON'T DO IT! What? Don't rehearse? I hear people falling out of their chairs already but indeed you read it right. This does not mean you should not know the songs in question, you should know the chords, the melody and the overall structure of the song. But what you most definitely should not do under almost any circumstances (Okay, maybe Zappa is the sole exception) is rehearse the songs over and over and over before you get in the studio. The reason for this is quite simple: familiarity breeds contempt. You do not want to lose the sense of newness, of discovery and profound exploration that comes with getting to know a piece of music.
I cannot tell you how many times I have been in a session and someone, or worse, everyone will groan in unison "I'm SO sick of this song." That is exactly what you want to avoid when you are recording music for posterity. You remember the first time you kissed a girl or vice versa? Me too. Now do you remember the 14th time? Neither do I. My point is that there is a very fine line between knowing the basic form and changes of what you are playing and rehearsing it so damn much that you no longer are even vaguely excited by the prospect of playing it. Joe Boyd has produced Pink Floyd, Nick Drake, REM, Clapton and many other legends in the history of music and he has virtually always employed this counter-intuitive rule when he worked with these people. If it's good enough for a genius like Joe Boyd it's certainly good enough for me. I think you might want to strongly consider it as well. If however you don't choose to follow it don't blame us when your stuff sounds bored and even worse BORING. Keep it new...for you and your audience, you can't go wrong.
Studio Tip #9: “All That Is Old Is New Again”
We live in an age of astonishing technological advancement and this rapid evolution has afforded us countless advantages as creative people. The cost of making a world-class recording has come down dramatically and the ability to explore a wide range of sounds and textures has made the palette from which we choose more abundant everyday. All in all, one has got to see this as a tremendous advantage and I am not one to argue the point. However, in our rush to get the latest and greatest I would like to also write a few words in defense of the tried and true. If you are a violinist I would strongly argue that a Stradivarius made in Cremona in 1701 is still the finest example of your instrument ever made. One might make the case for a pre-war German-model B Steinway Grand piano as well. The list goes on and on, when it comes to electric guitars many folks think that virtually all the first stand forests that used to supply wood for people like Leo Fender disappearing has had an impact on the sound of those guitars.
Basically, this article is here to encourage you to take all the great stuff that is available to us today and use that side-by-side with the incredible stuff that has come before. I could make a powerful case for the superior quality of vacuum tubes made in Europe and the USA in the 50's and 60's versus the ones being made by the Russians and Chinese today. So when you are going to make a recording, carefully consider all of your options and craft your decisions based on a variety of factors. Just one example that we employed recently at Range (which has a superb selection of the old and the new) was in the making of our critically-celebrated blues album "Rediscovering Lonnie Johnson" with Jef Lee Johnson and Blues Anatomy. I always take my time and evaluate all the variables in a project before I commit music to tape. Obviously, the songs, the players and the arrangements have got to make sense or the rest of it is just “window dressing”, but once those critical decisions have been made the selection of the specific instruments are a very important (and often overlooked) part of capturing the authentic sound of whatever you are aiming for. In light of this, I was keenly interested in using a drum set that was not modern and would have been appropriate for a blues album made in Chicago in the 1950's. Our brilliant house engineer Brian Ritrovato came up big in this regard and sourced a kit that was from that exact vintage. Likewise, employing a real Hammond Organ with a Leslie rotating speaker was another crucial addition to this sonic equation. I am not saying that without these vintage elements the record would have been diminished but I am saying that when you employ them judiciously and appropriately, they make your life a hell of a lot easier. You want a drum sound like a smoky bar on the South Side of Chicago…get a little Ludwig kit from 1949; you will be amazed at how quickly that dream will be realized.
Anyway, just look carefully at what you are trying to achieve, make a comprehensive checklist of how that was achieved by people in the past and do your best to incorporate what was great about yesterday (and indeed 300 years ago) and make sure that you marry those elements to all the wondrous toys we have at our disposal today. When these two worlds meet I think you will find that something pretty magical will result. Happy recording...
Studio Tip #8: “From The Big Leagues”
Every once in a while I feel compelled to share a real secret based on some of my experiences in various studios around the country. This one comes from a guy that has been blessed with doing mixes and re-mixes for some of the biggest pop and r&b vocalists in the game today. He is let's say kind of an eccentric personality but as a mix engineer this guy is a total monster and I learned a lot working with him a few times over the years. I was having a little trouble getting a lead vocal to sit right in the mix and he said that as an r&b expert that was kind of his specialty and he was kind enough to reveal this little secret to me.
Okay, you are 95% done your mix, things are basically completed but you still have the nagging suspicion that the vocalist is not "popping" enough out of the mix. One common mistake is to only use additive equalization to achieve this goal. That is usually okay but in some cases it also adds some subtle but still undesirable phase shift to the track and it feels a little smeared and puffy as a result of that approach. Here is the secret: take your entire mix-minus the lead vocal and bus it down to stereo, this is the acid test and will tell you how your mix really sounds anyway. When you have the thing bussed go to the master EQ section and go in at about 1K and pull it down about 2-3db. You will hear the whole thing kinda "thin out" in the mid-range and the whole track will sound a little bit "weaker" for lack of a better word. Okay, you have created the "trough". Now bring in the lead vocal track that you muted when you made the instrumental stereo mix and go in and add to the lead vocal the exact amount that you took out of the stereo mix.
Now, just to reiterate you have scooped a trough of roughly 2.5db @ 1K from the instrumental mix and added it back in JUST ONE THE VOCAL. Okay, so you have not really changed the overall amount of EQ, you have simply allocated it to a different and far narrower part of the mix. When you play it back now you will discover (hopefully) that the vocal rests much more comfortably in the track and is also more intelligible overall. You may have to massage the exact EQ point and the Q to get it just right for your particular vocalist but I have found 9 times out of 10 that this solution offers pretty dramatic results when used sparingly. Well I hope this little trick helped you out and happy mixing...
Studio Tip #7: “England vs. America”
No this is not a soccer match. This is a little meditation on the differing philosophies of how things get made. Specifically, it's how things get tracked and mixed. Now today, some of this has changed because of the universal prevalence of the DAW and one's ability to "undo" anything you don't like, but "back in the day" this is how things worked. It is universally recognized that the British and the Yanks have the best recording studios in the world and are home to the best engineers as well. That is not to say you cannot record a great record in France, or Cuba or Ireland because you can do it (but it will be a lot tougher than locking out Ocean Way and hiring Elliot Scheiner). Having said this, these two countries evolved somewhat distinct approaches when it came to how records actually were recorded. In America, the ideal has basically been to "cut it flat". This means that you record the instrument or voice without any effects, processing or equalization added and you have the best and most unadorned representation of what the part "really sounded like". This approach gave what mixers like to call "flexibility" in the mixing process, all this means is that the mixing engineer was not locked into a particular sound or "choice" and was able to try many different treatments of the track in order to get the most arresting manifestation of each part on the song. As a result of this approach Americans have developed a whole hierarchy of engineers that are incredible at one thing in particular. This is not to say that there aren't some guys who are great at more than one thing but in many cases, the live sound engineer is probably not a good mastering engineer and a dedicated maintenance engineer will not necessarily be a great mixdown cat. But this philosophy of the mixing stage being an entirely new creative episode in the record making process is primarily an American phenomenon. Obviously, this also allows the producer to offer the band some creative input at this point and helps them shape the sounds in the most advantageous direction. So let's call this "clean and flat" idea the American way.
Now we will fly across the pond and see how they do it over there. Well the big difference is that the Brits are extremely creative people and they enjoy trying freaky things to see what happy accidents occur as a byproduct of this. As a result of this, they are also keen on capturing the sound "as it goes down". This just means that they have the opposite of our approach and they want to get the entire sound all at once. So when you stepped on that pedal and the thing was set wrong and the battery was dying, that weird bass sound no one had ever heard before- they want THAT. They do not want to try and get it again. They want you to play it that way and get that down as the sound as a whole. This is of course a commitment to it as a "performance" because at least in the analog domain you could not strip things away once they were "printed" to tape. You might argue that this approach was more limiting as you basically had to live with what you got when the faders got pushed up and basically that is true. But don't be deceived either, many times it is virtually impossible to recreate some freaky sound you got no matter how well you detail the process that you used to arrive at it. So, this "print the effect" approach had its own very cool advantages that cannot be underestimated.
But as I mentioned today with the prevalence of DAW's and Pro-Tools as a recording standard in many studios here and in England, we are able to move instantly between a session done in one place and later work done in another, assuming of course that you are talking about compatible versions of the software and a complete duplication of the plug-ins used in both facilities. This is the ultimate manifestation of the American way in the sense that you can endlessly tinker with the sound after the fact and be able to add and strip things away in a non-destructive environment. But if you do work in two places and they do not have similar plug-in libraries you are forced to go back to the
British model and print the plug-in on the audio track itself. My own personal philosophy is to split the difference. By all means record that wild-sounding thing that you stumbled upon but if possible also get a "dry" signal so that if you find that in the end you need something beyond the "happy accident" you have that covered as well. I hope this was a useful little meditation on how people think about the record-making process and what you can do to maximize the final mix in your next project.
Studio Tip #6: “Cover Me”
When you are considering recording a full length album one needs to be aware of the way in which people discover music in the 21st century. In the past, folks went down to their friendly neighborhood record store and asked the person behind the counter what was good. But today, in a Web 2.0 universe, the internet has become the record store and the options for finding new music have become a bit overwhelming. Last year 80,000 recordings entered the marketplace.
That is a lot of music. Much of it, to be honest, was probably pretty bad. Much of it will soon be forgotten. But in amongst those 80,000 releases were probably some pretty great ones as well. The question for the artist is therefore how do you cut through the weeds and get people to pay attention to your work in an environment that is teeming with competing interests. Well of course it goes without saying that making something original and striking and memorable is the cornerstone of that task.
Beyond the goal of making the best possible new music, is there any other strategy that can be employed to assist the new artist in rising above the creative fray and getting themselves noticed? The answer to that question is yes, but with a surprising answer - Do someone else's music as well. How you may ask, does doing someone else's music help get my music noticed? The short answer is that you need something familiar to help people find something new. By that I mean that with iTunes as our example that the search function of the iTunes system allows people to search for music, most easily by songs themselves. Let's say you are looking for Stairway To Heaven. If you type in that title you will not only get the Led Zeppelin version but also any other band that has recorded the song right along side with Zep.
Okay, now someone clicks on a cover version and they are blown away by how cool, interesting and memorable the cover version is of this song that they love so much…what do they do next? They search for other music by this killer band that they have just discovered. They find that they have a new album and when they sample a few tracks they discover that the album is amazing. They love it. They buy the entire album and play it for all their friends. They go to the band's website. They buy a shirt. They go to a show. They become a hardcore fan. But if the band did not do a brilliant cover, that person in all likelihood would never have discovered the existence of this new group in any other way.
Remember there were 80,000 albums released last year and it is basically impossible for anyone to check them all out. But by doing a version of a song by a band that is known and loved the world over, you have created a pathway for discovering new music and a new audience. Of course, picking the right song, doing a great arrangement and hiring the right producer, studio and engineer to help you execute this idea are of paramount importance to the getting a great final result…But don't overlook the strong possibility of using the tried and true to help "uncover" the original and the new.
Studio Tip #5: “Toys In The Attic”
Everyone wants to make music that is truly memorable - that sticks with the listener and resonates over time. Of course, the first and foremost goal that must be met to achieve this result is great songwriting…So I will always tell an aspiring artist to work at their craft as a songwriter as hard as they can. But at the same time having a memorable recording is of paramount importance as well. That is to say that that both sides of the coin, a great song and an unforgettable rendering of that composition is the ultimate achievement. While it is always your aim to make your music as professional as possible and that is why a professional studio, well-maintained gear and a seasoned producer and engineer are so crucial to that outcome, never lose sight of originality. By originality I mean that you have come up with a unique element in your music that makes people say to themselves “hey, what the hell is that sound, how did they do that?" One surefire way to achieve this result is by recording toys. Toy pianos, toy guitars, noise makers, speak and spell, all kinds of different non-professional devices when used judiciously can impart a special character to your songs that conventional instruments cannot achieve. Like any other "flavoring", this kind of treatment must be used sparingly but when it does get used in the right measure the effect can be startling. Sure, when you got to be a certain age it may have seemed silly to be playing with toys, but never forget that music at its best reminds us of what it means to be creative, to be inventive and never to lose sight of the inspired child within all of us that has never stopped dreaming.
Studio Tip #4: “Session Musicians”
In the 60's and 70's studio musicians were the lifeblood of pop music production. Sure bands like the Beatles and Yes and many others were self-contained organizations by and large, but even these groups often hired "session cats" to come in and play on their tracks. Perhaps the most famous of these was the late organist Billy Preston who was often called the "fifth Beatle". A session player is valuable on so many levels that it is hard to do them justice but I can try.
One, they are simply superior instrumentalists and no matter what style they are asked to play they can convincingly play within that idiom. Two, they have a great instrument and when they are asked to play on a recording, the sound that they have and the gear that they bring is perfectly suited to the task at hand. Three, they are used to working quickly. The guy or girl in your band may be perfectly good at playing chords on the organ but if you ask them to take a jazz solo it may take them weeks to get up to speed on such a request. The right session keyboard player will come in and knock that solo out in half an hour. Finally, they know a wide range of "tricks of the trade" that they bring to your track, like which pedal sounds best, or even what pick is the proper tool for the job at hand. From Steely Dan to Aretha Franklin and everything in between, hiring the right studio musician can often make the difference between pretty good and completely amazing.
Studio Tip #3: “The Secret of the Preamp”
When people go in the studio, selecting the right microphone should be one of the most critical components in the production process. Whether it be ribbon, dynamic or condenser, on the one hand, or tube versus solid-state on the other, the choice of mic is a very important element in making your record as good as it can be. But to be fair, the process is a bit more complicated than most people realize and there is often an overlooked parameter in this journey which should be mentioned and that is the preamp itself. Most people would be amazed at how different a mic can sound depending upon which preamplifier it is mated with. This is especially true of ribbon mics, which can sound quite different depending upon what impedance they are "seeing" on the preamp side. Range has an excellent selection of preamps to choose from and for mission critical elements like the lead vocal it is worth it to swap the mic and the preamp out until you find the exact combination that best suits your desire. In many studios they only have whatever the console has to offer but at a better room they have an array of preamps besides the consoles pre's. Take your time, listen carefully, make notes if need be and you will find that invariably with a little time set aside for the "shoot-out" you will come up with a mic/preamp combination that will really take your tracks to the next level of excellence.
Studio Tip #2: “Switch It Up”
When making a recording one of the things people often forget is that your microphone is actually an equalizer. By that I mean that each microphone imparts a particular character that it brings to whatever goes through it. Certain frequencies are raised while others are brought down depending upon which mic you ultimately select. Everything that is recorded through that mic will have a very distinct "flavor" which is based on the unique frequency response curve that the mic imparts…So when you are recording electric guitars for example, try using a different mic to record the rhythm parts than you employed when you recorded the solos. This will help make the parts immediately stand out from each other and will lend a unique sound to each separate track. It is super easy to just set up a Fender Twin, pull out the trusty SM-57 and let it roll, but you will end up with a certain sameness that will make your parts all blend together in a way that may not serve the song itself. Take your time, throw up a few different mics, and see for yourself how instantly different the same guitar and even the same amp sounds with a different mic in a different position. These are small changes but when you are all done and each little part on your record has a special stamp that makes it stand out from its neighbors, you will be glad you took the time to experiment and you will see the powerful difference that selecting a unique mic can make to the final result. Your mic choice is the first stage of the recording chain so be creative at the beginning and reap the sonic rewards right on down the line.
Studio Tip #1: “Big Bass”
In much of contemporary pop music people want big bass on their tracks this is especially true of urban music. One great trick for getting maximum bass on your record is to get a bass player to play five strings on your tracks. Nothing makes a bass rounder than a solid player with great feel playing that low B string on your music. But in addition many top producers will then use a Moog type synthesizer sound to double the parts played by the bassist. The synth and the electric bass combined sound so round and in-your-face that you have to make sure to use it sparingly or it will knock the wheels off your jeep. A good engineer like our resident genius Brian Ritrovato will help you get things just right...
|
