SH Spotlight PART DEUX: Recording and mastering questions asked and (hopefully) answered

That's the way to do it.

 

'Summing the bass high' means the frequency at below which the left and right channels must be reduced in separation--actually bled to mono. DMM could handle lateral information as loud as on lacquer but not vertical. They probably had to do it up around 300 Hz for some DMM work versus 50 or 75 Hz for lacquer cutting.

 

Alright, and what is the disadvantage of summing the bass high? What's the consequence?

 

You lose the image quality, if you like, of the bass instruments. This isn't so noticeable on more contemporary styles of mixing where most low-frequency information is panned to the center, but is obvious on older stereo tracks where things are more left-right or left-center-right. An example I have is an RSO pressing of FRESH CREAM. 'Toad' is the last song on the album, featuring an extended drum solo by Ginger Baker. The drums were recorded in mono, but hard panned to one channel (far left or far right, I can't recall offhand--it's been years since I listened to it). It was more apparent on headphones by far than it was on speakers, but the low resonances of toms and the bass drum tended to be a wash in the middle of the stereo spread rather than tightly imaged with the rest of the drum kit (as things should have been). It's not like the recording had tons of slammin' low end to begin with, but this practice was aimed at making records that would have louder bass than what they could have possibly done if they'd left things the way they were on the original tapes. The cutting engineer would have an easier time of it too, not having to worry about phase-related problems that would result in disasters like cutting through the lacquer into the aluminum substrate (instantly trashing the stylus if not screwing up the cutting head as well) or stylus lift-off (where the groove, for an instant, is either too shallow to track properly or actually stops and then begins again). This practice also helped usher in so-called mono-compatible records whose diminished vertical modulation content made them easier to track on older mono phonographs.

 

The RSO pressing of "FRESH CREAM", was it mastered using DMM?

Any idea why the bass had to be summed high with DMM and why it could not handle vertical information as loud as lacquer? Maybe it has something to do with the physical properties of copper metal or maybe the fact that DMM used a zero degree cutting angle as opposed to 15 - 20 degrees for lacquer.

 

Steve,

I'm enjoying a new batch of Audio Fidelity SACDs...two questions:

1. Max Roach's drums on the Sonny Clark Trio sound a bit soft to me, was this a master tape artifact?

2. What did the team use the Symposium isolation devices for and which products?

 

I just got back on today and I just want to thank you all for your answers to my question.
Steven

 

Steve,

What's the optimum moment to apply compression at the moment of recording voices and acoustic guitars, during the recording itself or at the mixing stage?

 

Thanks Steve.

 

Steve,

Something I've been wondering about for awhile: what's that "click" in the first verse of Joni Mitchell's "Free Man in Paris"? If I recall correctly, it's right after the line "Everybody's in it for their own game" (weird click, maybe a jump too) "you can't please 'em all."

 

Nope. FRESH CREAM was a late-70s pressing, done on lacquer. DMM didn't come along until the early 1980s. And I believe the physical properties of copper are what limited the maximum vertical groove excursions on DMM.

 

peaks.

 

Yes, I get that bit. But wouldn't soft compression on a 'dynamic' acoustic guitar track where you have both finger picking and strumming help to smooth things out a bit beforehand? Or, for example, where you have some inconsistencies on the strumming volume?

I understand how a singer with a strong voice, especially a lyrical one (and if he/she doesn't know hot to manage the distances to the microphone depending on what they're singing), would need some compression so as not to oversaturate or distort.

 

On vocals, I might use some light compression while tracking, just to keep the level under control.

During the mix, you might need a bit more compression and/or limiting on the voice, in order to get it to "sit" just right in the mix.

Remember that multiple "light compressions" are usually less damaging to your tone quality than a one-time heavy dose...so give me a little on the track, and a little more on the mix.

Now having said that, I personally don't care to compress acoustic guitar while tracking. The tone is delicate, and too easy to damage with a wrong attack or release time.

I will compress it if necessary during the mix, but I find it usually works better to shape the part first with a touch of subtractive EQ when I can.

Again, badly compressed acoustic sounds like *****. Use very low ratios, such as 1.5 to 1, to avoid damaging the transient response. Attack and release times will depend on the tempo of the song, but in general, you want the slowest attack you can get away with, and the fastest release time. Threshold settings will be a compromise between control and tone quality...a lower threshold will give you more control but less tone, etc.

hth,

 

Thanks, GT40sc. I have taken note of what you say.

 

Killer orchestra + Nat "King" Smooth; can't ask for more than that.

 

Thanks, Steve.

This is the way I have always recorded. In fact, on the recordings that I, myself, have done I have never used any compression either. Yet, these have usually been of some 3 to 4 instruments at the most (including voices). My question came in part because I have been trying out an electro-acoustic guitar (Yamaha APX) hooked directly into the DAW's input module and am getting a very sensitive response to even small changes in the way the guitar is strummed. It's not the first time I have recorded from an acoustic guitar's piezo pickup output, but it has been years since I last did it. I have been trying to go for the highest signal without saturation. Could less volume help?

 

Note taken.

 

And I appreciate the tasteful choice

Plus, this was a a distinctive advantage when he wanted that "bite" or attack in a line in contrast to the smoothness; had it been overly compressed he would not have had that approach available, at least not nearly as effectively. This is more evident from the mid-'50's on, due to his own creative approaches working in tandem with the recording approach. Nat's use of that is yet another example of the importance of usable dynamics. It really doesn't need to be much; just that it's enough to give the vocalist a dynamic pallette to work with. Of course it matters more to some styles than others, but it's still something worth noting when it comes to vocals and recording 'em.

 

Maybe not exactly on-topic here, but just in case--bump.