SH Spotlight Recording and Mastering Questions---Answered here. Any more?

That answers the question Steve. Thanks!

I do wonder if your work shines even brighter when on a particular album the past efforts have been so poor that a quality mastering like we see from you stands out even more in contrast...

On the other hand it must be cool to work with certain big titles...

 

I don't know. The best known of those lp's was 'Street Player' by Rufus. It actually sounds pretty decent. Roy has quite a few classics under his belt, including records by Simon & Garfunkel, Supersession, Blood Sweat & Tears, Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Journey, The Byrds, The Roches, and Moby Grape to name a few.

I must admit I originally was fooled by Roy. At first he seemed to not know very much about the technical aspects of recording but obviously that was a rouse. He was sly like a fox. He just seemed to know how to turn the knobs to get great sounds. I was quite mystified by him.

One time he was doing some work and our EMT 240 gold foil reverb unit developed a problem. I set him up with a dusty old AKG BH-20 spring reverb which nobody used. It was almost considered semi-pro gear and left over from an old garage studio. My thought was that he could start with the AKG and then hopefully replace it with the EMT. After a few hours, I had repaired the power supply in the EMT but Roy had no interest in my bringing it on line. He had gotten that AKG to sing. I wouldn't have believed it had I not seen and heard it.

 

I was just being flippant - I know Roy has produced many a classic record with his methods so he must be doing something right. However, recording at levels well below the saturation point ain't it!

 

I kind of figured that Mal, but wasn't sure. And for the record, I agree with you.

 

Quick question regarding bounces: When you do a bounce/reduction mix, do you have to mix down to a second tape? Or, are there machines (for example, a 4-track) that allow you to mix tracks 1, 2 and 3 to the vacant track 4 of that same tape?

Follow-up question: I remember a scene in The Buddy Holly Story where Buddy's dubbing his second vocal onto "Words of Love." The engineer tells him he's only got one shot at it. Why? If he's bouncing, he would still have the original vocal on tape, and could re-try the overdub as often as necessary. I suspect this is merely Hollywood drama...

 

Thanks for the responses, guys. I hear it occasionally on different recordings and have wondered what caused it. I was thinking that it might be something along the lines of what meredrums or robby suggested but I could see that a very short delay on an ADT'd vocal could create that sound too.

 

Thanks Steve, I thought so.

 

Can this reissue still be bought? I'd die to hear that or a good needledrop. Such spatial distortion is not detectable on my Mastersound cd (although I believe it to be the best digital transfer thus far)

 

I guess their uninformed thinking was that they liked the sound of the upsampled remastered product and just wanted you guys to translate it to vinyl.

 

You've actually posted this story before. I'm guessing that he was trying to do like Phil Spector, in that he wanted to hear the mix as he recorded, and maybe in parts if recording seperate tracks. This actually makes sense to me, except for the hiss levels. However, I have the Rufus featuring Chaka Khan's "Street Player" CD, and it sounds fantastic! You can't argue with success!

 

That raises another question about the old days - why did you guys all have pots in the States while we had faders in England?

How could a US engineer hope to fade more than 2 tracks at once on their own? Over here they could use a piece of wood and move the lot with one hand!

 

Well one thing I didn't mention was that this record used DBX 216 NR on the 24tk. Like it or not, it did lower the noise floor and lessen the penalty for his technique.

 

Hey Steve,
Of course without revealing any secrets of a specific project, can you give me a timeline of reverb and compression. What I mean is, based on the technology available and the general sound the changed each decade, what are we hearing... for example- in the 70s the average compression on the mix of an Eagles song would typically be 2 to 1 on a DBX 160 or whatever with the peak output to the tape set for +3 and the vocal reverb was probably a plate set at 250 milliseconds. Compared to the 50s with slapback tape reverb and tube compression at 5 to 1. Do you get what I'm asking? Even though each studio/engineer/song has it's own unique setup, the overall sound of a decade can usually be identified by whatever equipment was available then for everyone to use and most likely falls with in the same general range. I realize this might be too general of a question and if so, skip it.

 

No problem. Glad you're answering all of these other super questions. I'll let you describe them all when I compile all of your ramblings on here into a book. You can have a special chapter!!
Thanks.

 

For what it's worth, I'm an idiot. I meant "Words of Love," of course.

 

Talking about Chuck Britz's mixing methods - can you explain to me again why on earth he monitored the stereo mixes in mono? I find it incredible that he wouldn't even have listened to the stereo mixes in stereo before they were cut and sold to the public!!!

Was this standard practice? Was it just that stereo was considered a gimmick in the early/mid 60s?

[I realise we've covered both of my last two questions in the distant past but I figured they would make good subject matter for this thread]

 

If i'm not mistaken, the Beatles had pots on the gear at EMI for all except the album "Abbey Road"...

 

Nope - faders all the way!

 

That description KILLS me. I always wondered what the heck was going on with the stereo FFF.