Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Steve Hoffman, Oct 3, 2018.
Make it sound better.
Tastes have changed, I guess.
Sadly, a tendency to record and/or master albums with more "punch and clarity" (equating to turning up the bass and treble until it hurts) is the order of the day, leading to a whole shipload of sibilance and ridiculous, mind-boggling bottom end. I want to hear vocals as they should sound. Sibilance begone. And that, in a nutshell, is what I like about a SH mastered disc - work outwards from the vocals.
U2 - massive sibilance, tambourine is louder than the whole band - c'mon Eno!!! WTF?
When can you start? (All I can offer is dinner with Maryland crab cakes!)
In what way though?
Steve, would you consider mastering any of Dan Fogelberg's albums from his classic years (1972-1981)? Souvenirs? Nether Lands? The Innocent Age? And do you think that would even be a possibility?
Change from thin and mean to not thin and mean.
Interesting. Do you have a source for this information?
As our host said here, ...
In your expert opinion, how do you think the sound of Paul McCartney's Memory Almost Full got so screwed up?
Well now, this reinforces my own opinion of Who's Next on LP. I bought a copy in 1971 shortly after it was released in the UK on Track Records and was thoroughly underwhelmed by what I heard. Here was the greatest rock 'n' roll band of the time and what I was listening to was fairly lifeless. I decided not to bring the album with me when I migrated to Australia in 1975 so I sold it to a good friend.
For better or worse I purchased the "remixed and remastered" 1995 Polydor CD and this, for me at least, is the band I should have been hearing in 1971. Punchy and dynamic as The 'Oo should be heard.
Thanks for the forum, it's really helped me to upgrade my collection with better sounding recordings.
Are there any genres of music that you think it's impossible to capture properly on tape? I'm thinking of stuff like New Orleans brass bands - for me I love the live sound but on record it always seems to lose a great deal (maybe it's a limbic system response thing) Happy to take any recommendations for great brass brand recordings/masterings
Let's talk Ringo's recorded drum sound. Any thoughts or opinions? Cleary that process evolved throughout the years. Any guesses as to how or why the drums on "Abbey Road" are so much more dynamic than say on "Rubber Soul"? I would not simply contribute that to the use of his newly acquired Hollywood Ludwig's, he used those on some of the tracks on the "White Album".
Just to confirm, I am not looking to criticize or disparage. I admire what I heard on those records. He may have had the best sounding kick drum in the business. I wasn't a fan of the tea towel over the snare, but that's just me.
Just looking for your educated guess as to what evolved.
ps. Love the shot here of the Wilbury's. I'm guessing guitars are from Tom Petty's collection. Couldn't help but notice that Petty, Harrison, & Orbison all had the common sense (or respect) to rest the guitars on their shoes.
What are some of your favorite albums recorded on the API board?
I'll take a guess. I believe Abbey Road was the only Beatles album recorded on eight tracks, and I've read that it was the only album where Ringo's drums were recorded in stereo. More tracks probably allowed them to place more mics around his kit, and having his initial takes tracked in stereo means there would have been more mixing options in the end.
Or, more simply, the whole album sounds more "modern" (i.e. like a 70s album and not a 60s album) than Rubber Soul.
Portions of the White were recorded on 8 track as well. But all of Abbey Road was on 8 track. I thought The Beach Boys were the first to actually record in true stereo and that was on the Holland album. But I may be wrong.
My sketchy recollection for part of the reason Ringo’s drum sound changed on Abbey Road was the move to solid state from tubes/valves.
Different drum kit by Abbey Road time as well, no?
At the time of Rubber Soul, Norman Smith was only using 2 mics on the drums: one on the kick and one overhead. By the time of Abbey Road, engineers were using more mics, typically on the toms, the hi-hat, and under the snare.
The End and I Want You (She's So Heavy) were the only tracks on Abbey Road with stereo drums. Glyn Johns had also previously recorded tracks from the Get Back/Let It Be sessions with stereo drums (Get Back and Don't Let Me Down included), albeit with fewer mics (4 total). While not common, the practice originated in the early '60s.
While it's true that much of Abbey Road was recorded with the solid state TG 12345 mk I desk instead of the valve REDD.51, a bigger difference is that the TG desk allowed each mic to have its own channel on the desk, with individual EQ and compression. On the REDD desks the various drum mics had to be pre-mixed prior to entering the desk, limiting processing choices.
Yes, you are correct, however this new kit did make it's way onto a few of the lastly recorded "White Album" tracks with little or no audible difference.
I would tend to believe it had more to do with what others have mentioned here: micing techniques, number of mics (and recorded tracks), as well as specifics of mics chosen.
He also had new toms that he liked and used them heavily. His style changed.
Ringo's style changed?
Well, he layer a lot more toms. Listen to Something.
I've listened a few hundred times like everyone else. I'm more music changed so he adjusted or added but his style didn't imo.
Separate names with a comma.