Stop Recording Parts, Start Recording Performances?

[Anderton]

I've seen people say that Pro Tools ruined music, or maximizers, or samplers, or loops, or whatever. But I think the real culprit was when comping vocals got granular, and parts were so cut up they ceased being performances and started to become assemblies. 

 

So here's my solution, which I've been doing for about the past two years. I record entire performances, no more than three or four. I'll pick the best one and consider that the performance. Then, if a chorus, bridge, or verse is stronger in one of the other comps, I'll use that but the performance for that section stays as intact as possible. 

 

Once I've committed to a performance, I don't care if there are level, tuning, or mouth noise problems. I can fix the levels as described previously in various ways, Melodyne takes care of errant notes, and DSP handles mouth clicks and such. These processes don't interrupt the flow of the performance, but they improve the vocal's sound quality.

 

Bottom line is whenever possible, I'll edit everything except the performance, rather than try to piece together the best parts of multiple takes. But here's the kicker. After listening to the vocal enough times while doing the rest of a song (I try to nail vocals early on), if I do another take, it's almost always is a better performance. It's almost like what it used to feel like singing something over and over again on the road, and then when you get into the studio, you're comfortable and well-rehearsed when you do the song. In this case, though, just listening to the song over and over seems to have the same effect.*   

 

I don't know if this is approach is for everybody, but it's working for me. I have more fun recording, more fun mixing, and I think the end result sounds better. The only downside is the time required to edit minutiae, like little pitch issues that are clearly errors, and not part of the performance.

 

*Studies of what's called mental practice support the idea that this is possible.

[Bill Heins]

No comps here, if it's no good it gets tossed and I try again

 

Bill

[Anderton]

3 hours ago, Bill Heins said:

No comps here, if it's no good it gets tossed and I try again

 

 To be clear...I'm not making any value judgements here, I just feel subjectively that going into a recording thinking you're going to do a performance is different from thinking you're going to record a bunch of tracks and comp them. 

 

[BMD]

Pretty much all of my vocal tracks are performances. Usually first or second take. My songs are littered with mistakes. Who cares? Makes me sound more human

[Notes_Norton]

I prefer performances. And I prefer the ensemble and vocalist(s) to be recorded all at the same time.

 

There are certain interactions between members of the rhythm section that are made both between themselves and with the soloist that just don't happen when it's one track at a time. It might be the vocalist making an inflection and the guitarist copying or complementing it in the spaces between lines. Or it might be an interaction between the drummer and bassist, and so on. Some of these things can be pure magic.

 

On the other hand, I've heard some assemblies that I dearly love.

 

As always, there is always more than one right way to do it.

 

Notes ♫

[KuruPrionz]

I'd love to have a band/ensemble play behind me but at this point, $$$ is not forthcoming since this is a hobby right now. 

I usually start any recording with a scratch track of combined acoustic guitar and vocal, an "open mic" version of the song. That includes any intro, solo and endings, complete. If that's a disaster I record it until it isn't. As Craig mentions, sometimes giving the work some space and just listening will bring inspiration to tweak compositional error. 

 

THEN, I start recording tracks. I like to record as if I am taking part in a live performance. If I play bass, I play complete takes, if vocals, same thing. If the part needs work, I'll still record it while I am trying to get it right. Easy enough to just clear out tracks if/when I get a good one. I'm patient, I'm doing this on my time with nobody else to answer to. 

I'm NOT a perfectionist either, more of an "imperfectionist". I want it to feel good and sound good but it doesn't have to be "perfect" (whatever that is). It's more important to me that the tracks have some life in them.

 

I'm currently challenged by drum/percussion parts AND by the reality that tempo changes are an important part of the expression of a great song. So I'm working on ways to get rid of the metronome, the static but perfectly on time, in one time beat. It is more difficult by far to record while playing along with a track that allows the tempo to flow, that is the challenge in my world. I used to go to all the final practice sessions of the Fresno Philharmonic, they were free if you kept quiet and just listened and you could always get great seats. Final practice was always in the hall the music was performed (usually the next evening). Time and again I saw the conductor speeding up or slowing down. Often these changes were subtle but of paramount importance. Otherwise, you could set up a flashing metronome for the performance and call it good. 

 

Music breathes, flatlined tempo does not. I'm hoping to hear suggestions on ways of working, please share!

[Stokely]

I'm lazy, cobbling something together tends to be more work than doing something right    

Then again, with vocals your voice can get tired.  Not that I'm Roger Daltrey, but I remember a story told by the young (later famous) engineer assigned to record Who's Next iirc.  They told him, you'll have one take, maybe two, with Roger before he blows out his voice for the day   

I definitely will get in there and nudge midi around, and play with/draw in controller info after the fact.  Especially if I was asked to play something out of my comfort zone where I know I could do 100 takes and all of them are likely to be sloppy...surgery required, though it normally will not be something as simple and quick as quantizing.

[KuruPrionz]

One thing I've learned is that I can shred but it rarely makes a song iconic. The best solos are composed of simple, melodic parts that compliment. 

That is easier said than done!!

[AnotherScott]

13 minutes ago, Stokely said:

Then again, with vocals your voice can get tired.  Not that I'm Roger Daltrey, but I remember a story told by the young (later famous) engineer assigned to record Who's Next iirc.  They told him, you'll have one take, maybe two, with Roger before he blows out his voice for the day   

 

On the flip side of that... I read that John Lennon's classic vocal on the beatles version of Twist and Shout sounds the way it does *because* he had shot his voice after a bunch of takes.

[KuruPrionz]

26 minutes ago, Stokely said:

I'm lazy, cobbling something together tends to be more work than doing something right    

Then again, with vocals your voice can get tired.  Not that I'm Roger Daltrey, but I remember a story told by the young (later famous) engineer assigned to record Who's Next iirc.  They told him, you'll have one take, maybe two, with Roger before he blows out his voice for the day   

I definitely will get in there and nudge midi around, and play with/draw in controller info after the fact.  Especially if I was asked to play something out of my comfort zone where I know I could do 100 takes and all of them are likely to be sloppy...surgery required, though it normally will not be something as simple and quick as quantizing.

I saw The Who on the Tommy tour. They played the entire album start to finish. They didn't smash anything. Roger sang well for the entire evening, he was in top shape. Maybe he was ill or tired when you saw them?

[Bill Heins]

I'm a one man do everything setup so my parts are performances and my performances are parts I get what Craig is saying and I agree...just not as cut and dried as I'd like my process to be!

 

Bill

[KenElevenShadows]

21 hours ago, Anderton said:

 

 

So here's my solution, which I've been doing for about the past two years. I record entire performances, no more than three or four. I'll pick the best one and consider that the performance. Then, if a chorus, bridge, or verse is stronger in one of the other comps, I'll use that but the performance for that section stays as intact as possible. 

*Studies of what's called mental practice support the idea that this is possible.

 

With few exceptions, that's the way I've always done it.

[David Emm]

I feel like the odd synthesist out here. Logic has been my studio for many years. I did okay playing a few solo sets with my big Korg, but it taught me that I wasn't meant for serious live performance. I'm more a "Conlon Nancarrow of the Synthex" creature. I'm happiest scowling my way through a piece that's working, but only if I scowl hard enough.

 

Percussion is often my starting point. When something bubbles up in my music gland, I play until I have a personal loop to build on. There are times when I begin with a simple platform, like rain and a cello. Its the flip side of wannabe-prog epics. "Instead of building a wall, make a brick." I need to do that more often.

 

There are also the classical experiments. I'm still weak on woodwinds, but I've got the rest passably sussed. I get some lessons about dynamics and places where I exhibit various compositional tendencies, some good, some stank. I lean towards Jerry Goldsmith's "Explorers" soundtrack: orchestra + synth motifs and effects. The synth things that begin from a pulsing LFO or cross-eyed step sequencer pattern are from Neptune and defy explanation, even to Our Kind.           

 

I don't think what I do really calls for mega-mixdowns. Once I've wrangled a section into place, it fits my intent. Some things call for massaging like EQ or a shorter release. Then all that's left is deleting three excessive tracks that keep the rest from breathing. Remember, every time you overplay, a junior demon gets their leather wings.

[Anderton]

3 hours ago, David Emm said:

but it taught me that I wasn't meant for serious live performance.

 

I've always considered there's a difference between performers and composers. I've worn both hats and enjoy performing more, but I can realize more complex ideas as a composer. That said, when it comes to recording, recordings are generally of performers. So, prior to "paint-by-numbers" music, we became used to recordings being of performances. I think that perhaps set a gold standard for a goal in the studio.

 

I started by recording career when the purpose of the studio was to capture performances, preferably honed on the road. Somehow, the studio turned into a compositional tool, and the goal of playing live was to re-create what was created in the studio.

[Anderton]

On 1/1/2024 at 5:45 AM, BMD said:

Pretty much all of my vocal tracks are performances. Usually first or second take. My songs are littered with mistakes. Who cares? Makes me sound more human

 

Well, then I think that supports what I'm saying. It's easy to "connect" with your music.

[Nowarezman]

I seem to be constitutionally incapable of settling on a fixed melody line when tracking my vocals.  Every take is to some extent an improv.  The recording is in a way simply the last stage of composition.

 

So what I do is record many takes of some section of the song or other.  Maybe just one verse - maybe one verse and one chorus.  It depends on what seems to be working.  Most of the time I don't even keep the prior takes - if a take is not what I want, it's CTRL-Z undo and the take is gone and I hit record again.  I just keep at it 'till I have a take I think I honestly can't improve on.  Or I get tired and just stop for the day, start over later.  But if I do that, I typically start from scratch all over again because I'm not the same person I was yesterday - meaning that I can't "revibe" the prior day's mood usually, so I just start over.  And it seems like my voice sounds just different enough one day to the next to discourage picking up where I left off.  

 

So I don't do much combing through prior takes and making a frankenstein vocal out of selected bits sewn together.  That is soooooo tedious and a vibe killer for me.  

 

My goal is to just get to be a better and better singer and cut all this multiple-take tedium down as far as possible.  One or two and done.  But I'm not there yet...if I ever will be.

 

nat

 

 

[harmonizer]

On 1/1/2024 at 12:54 PM, AnotherScott said:

 

On the flip side of that... I read that John Lennon's classic vocal on the beatles version of Twist and Shout sounds the way it does *because* he had shot his voice after a bunch of takes.

I also heard that Lennon was sick with a cold that day. I'm not sure of my source for that, but it might have been an interview with George Martin.

[ProfD]

On 1/2/2024 at 12:23 AM, Anderton said:

I started by recording career when the purpose of the studio was to capture performances, preferably honed on the road. Somehow, the studio turned into a compositional tool, and the goal of playing live was to re-create what was created in the studio.

Recorded music has been a blessing and a curse. Mostly good.😉

 

Recordings have allowed us to preserve a lot of great music performed by artists and musicians.

 

At some point, the recording industry used studios as music production warehouses with individuals called music producers crafting songs for manufactured artists.  Those are folks who sell a ton of records but they crash and burn if/when it's time to perform live.

 

The affordable musical instruments and studio gear available to us nowadays is incredible.  We do not have to spend a small fortune on gear or studio time and accessories (tape). 

 

IMO, that level of access to technology still comes with a price.  The challenge is coming up with music that sounds like it was performed live.

 

Consideration has to be made whether it is too many parts beyond what a band play up to vocals that cannot be not be duplicated without help from a box (sequencer or Auto-Tune) in a live performance.

 

Whenever I'm composing or playing music, I'm always mindful of a few things:

 

1) Quincy Jones' quote about a mix becoming the equivalent of painting a 747 jumbo jet with Q-Tips.

2) The technology and recordings made at studios like Motown, Stax, Cosimo and Muscle Shoals.

3) The artists and musicians whose live performances have either become or could be iconic recordings.

 

The studio is a great place to work out musical ideas as long as the soul of the music isn't sanitized to the point of sterility.😎

[Stokely]

Who needs to perform live anymore?  Just play the studio tracks.  Nobody cares, or rather, they'll penalize you for not sounding "full, like the original".  I've been told that even on the small club scene by other players that are compelled to run tracks to get gigs.

That aside, it's not really new.  I remember back in the 80s when sequencers really got going, you could copy/paste and loop and draw in notes even back then    And those were the days of MASSIVE overproduction....track after track after track and no way you were going to be able to reproduce it live without an equally massive band.  And some bands went that way--there's a great live performance of Tears for Fears playing with Oleta Adams with such a band doing stuff from The Seeds of Love (which is always the first album I think of whenever "lots of production" ever comes up!).

Huge bands aside, I'd much, much rather hear artists (or cover musicians) pare the song down into a format they can do live, but I'm in the tiny minority.  So be it, there's still some who do it old school and those are the ones I'll pay to see (or pay for drinks to stick around at the local pub).

It's surprising what talented artists can do with unexpected songs.  Richard Page did some fantastic guitar/vocals and piano/vocals versions of the songs he used to sing in Mr. Mister.  Who know those could work acoustically?     Hell, Kip Winger did a great acoustic version of 17  

[ProfD]

9 minutes ago, Stokely said:

Who needs to perform live anymore?

Real musicians.  They will always be able to find an audience.

9 minutes ago, Stokely said:

Huge bands aside, I'd much, much rather hear artists (or cover musicians) pare the song down into a format they can do live, but I'm in the tiny minority.  So be it, there's still some who do it old school and those are the ones I'll pay to see (or pay for drinks to stick around at the local pub).

IMO, this will be the future of live performance.  Musicians playing in smaller, intimate settings.

9 minutes ago, Stokely said:

It's surprising what talented artists can do with unexpected songs.  Richard Page did some fantastic guitar/vocals and piano/vocals versions of the songs he used to sing in Mr. Mister.  Who know those could work acoustically?     Hell, Kip Winger did a great acoustic version of 17  

Similar to my point above.  Especially older artists and musicians who still perform live will get around to doing remixed or unplugged version of their songs.  Smaller band.  Smaller venue.  Appreciative audience. 😎

[Anderton]

22 minutes ago, Stokely said:

It's surprising what talented artists can do with unexpected songs.  Richard Page did some fantastic guitar/vocals and piano/vocals versions of the songs he used to sing in Mr. Mister.  Who know those could work acoustically?

 

It's almost a cliche that if one can't perform a song with just a guitar or piano, one should seriously consider whether it's worth doing.

 

Semi-side note: Here's a comment about the best drum 'n' bass music I ever experienced. I heard the sound from a distance, and thought "man, this is some AWESOME DJ!!" Of course, I had to check out why the DJ was so good. As I got closer, I saw that the music was being made by two musicians playing...drums and bass  

[ProfD]

7 minutes ago, Anderton said:

It's almost a cliche that if one can't perform a song with just a guitar or piano, one should seriously consider whether it's worth doing.

This potentially becomes a bitter pill to swallow for folks who produced their music electronically. 

 

For example, some synthesizer music does not always translate well to piano. 

 

Some parts of Brian Eno's "Music for Airports" cannot be covered on piano or acoustic guitar. 😁😎

[Notes_Norton]

19 hours ago, Stokely said:

Who needs to perform live anymore?

 

I do.

There is something about playing live, in front of an appreciative audience, that is better than taking drugs. It's a thrill.

 

When I am in the zone there is no space, no time, no me, just the music feeling like it is flowing through me instead of from me. The energy from the audience coming back to me makes me get even deeper in the zone. It's the most fun I can have with my clothes on.

 

I'm in a duo with the singer/musician who eventually became my wife. We gig for a living, and we have a great time doing it.

 

I make my own backing tracks, so it can be done in our key, and our arrangement. Plus, I can leave out the most fun parts of the songs to play live on top of the tracks.

 

We do 20-25 gigs a month in the tourist season, and although I'm of retirement age, I have no intention to retire, as long as I can pull a crowd. If I were a zillionaire, I'd do it for free.

 

With the cheap, quality home recording tools, making the tech available to zillions of wannabe songwriter/singer/musicians, competing to get their music listened to on Spotify or YouTube, and 99% will never make enough money at it to quit their wage-slave-day-jobs, I say this:

 

Who needs to record anymore?

 

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

[Stokely]

I was being sarcastic, sorry for the confusion.  I just meant that from an audience perspective.  Audiences have such tolerance for tracks these days and at a certain point I reckon you won't even need the human up there.   My friends already can't get certain gigs for their duo because they don't run tracks.   Our drummer "plays" in a Floyd tribute where he says many nights they don't even mic up his drums, he just plays along to the drum tracks.   He makes at least triple what he does in our band where he works his ass off, so easy money!  Pants on head IMO but that war has long been lost and people like me were not the winners.

[Stokely]

20 hours ago, ProfD said:

This potentially becomes a bitter pill to swallow for folks who produced their music electronically. 

 

For example, some synthesizer music does not always translate well to piano. 

 

Some parts of Brian Eno's "Music for Airports" cannot be covered on piano or acoustic guitar. 😁😎

Yeah I think you could say that about a lot (most?) instrumentals that lack a very defined melody.  Ozric Tentacles, movie sound tracks, ambient stuff, there's a very wide range of instrumental music that I think couldn't be done by some person on an acoustic.  If a song has lyrics, or if the melody is memorable (think Classical Gas) then it probably can be done.   I wonder how a one-chord song like Electric Avenue would go over    (Yep, literally one chord...my son the band nerd and I would catch such things when songs came on the radio.  Whole Lotta Love also has one until the very end  )

[Anderton]

20 hours ago, ProfD said:

Some parts of Brian Eno's "Music for Airports" cannot be covered on piano or acoustic guitar.

But those aren't songs, right? I'm referring to the standard definition of song as "a short poem or other set of words set to music or meant to be sung." Taken that way, the voice is the focus anyway, so the accompaniment is not as significant.

 

For my own songs, I strip it down further and try to write lyrics that people could just read and enjoy. I don't always succeed, but it's a goal. 

[ProfD]

2 hours ago, Notes_Norton said:

Who needs to record anymore?

Excellent question.

 

Especially when very few folks are actually getting paid for their music.

 

Recording for the sake of vanity or posterity has its place too.

 

Otherwise, artists and musicians stand a better chance to 1) get their music heard and 2) make a few bucks by booking shows and performing live. 

 

Whether it's performing at a local coffeeshop, sports bar, lodge  or college campus, live music will always be around. 

 

The Jam Band scene is still thriving. Some of those artists and musicians are playing over 100 shows per year without commercial recordings.

 

22 minutes ago, Anderton said:

But those aren't songs, right? I'm referring to the standard definition of song as "a short poem or other set of words set to music or meant to be sung." Taken that way, the voice is the focus anyway, so the accompaniment is not as significant.

Correct. I was mostly joking about Music in Airports.😁😎

[Anderton]

2 hours ago, Notes_Norton said:

Who needs to record anymore?

 

Composers who can't either find or hire the people needed to realize a complete composition involving multiple instruments.

[KuruPrionz]

1 hour ago, Anderton said:

But those aren't songs, right? I'm referring to the standard definition of song as "a short poem or other set of words set to music or meant to be sung." Taken that way, the voice is the focus anyway, so the accompaniment is not as significant.

 

For my own songs, I strip it down further and try to write lyrics that people could just read and enjoy. I don't always succeed, but it's a goal. 

I tell tories with my lyrics. I try to keep it amusing, sometimes I even write "fairy tales" with animals as the characters. I range from light to dark stories, we've all lived wonderful moments and nightmares. 

[Notes_Norton]

On 1/6/2024 at 11:30 AM, Stokely said:

Audiences have such tolerance for tracks these days and at a certain point I reckon you won't even need the human up there.   My friends already can't get certain gigs for their duo because they don't run tracks.

 

As a sax player, I saw the writing on the wall in the 1980s. The gov't put $0.50 more tax per drink (in 1980s dollars) and the clubs ate around half the increase and started trimming their budgets to compensate. Paying less or hiring bands fewer nights per week was one way. Those who were stubborn about their prices, were replaced by the musicians who would play for less.

 

Add to that, in all my life I've noticed that in most cases small bands make more money per person thank larger ones.

 

So the then future Mrs. Notes and I quit our troubled 5-piece band and went duo.

 

Although I play 7 instruments, my dominant one is saxophone. I bought a Teac A3440 4 track tape recorder, and laid down drums, bass, and comp parts. Then I mixed to cassette tapes, and played them on a 2 bay AIWA cassette player, that I had a repair man adjust the speeds so that they would be in tune with me and my sax.

 

Through the years, technology advanced, I went to hardware sequencers, and eventually to high bitrate mp3s on a laptop.

 

We have about 650 songs in our playlist right now, and always add more.

 

Years ago, a pianist told me the way to stay booked is to be a chameleon and to keep up with the times. So we play many different genres of music, and try to choose the ones that appeal to a wide audience. We collect the requests from our audience, learn what gets often requested, and play what works.

 

Who needs to record anymore?

 

On 1/6/2024 at 12:04 PM, Anderton said:

 

Composers who can't either find or hire the people needed to realize a complete composition involving multiple instruments.

 

It was a tongue-in-cheek response to Stokley's “Who needs to perform live anymore?”

 

Of course, composers can use Garage Band, Band-in-a-Box, arranger keyboards and other similar hardware or software products, but that gets tricky as the arrangements tend to be more generic.

 

I have a long time customer who writes songs and used Band-in-a-Box for his demos. He's had a few published and recorded by Nashville music stars. He doesn't call it “country” because he feels it's no longer country music.

 

And staying on topic, I record my MIDI backing tracks, part by part. I'd rather play them as an organic, live, performance, but I can only play one instrument at a time.

 

I'm happy to make my living playing music. I'd hate to try to compete with the zillions of other songwriter/performers on the web, trying to get a fraction of a penny per play on one of the web hosts.

 

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫