Electrok Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 I was doing some tests on my console today and had only the right side of "Abbey road" playing. I noticed on "don't let me down" that there is a blatantly obvious punch on the main guitar right before the first middle eight. I've never noticed it before and I've heard the song hundreds of times. So why are we engineers so anal about stuff like this? In the real world I don't think anyone really cares or notices Electrok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tedster Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 I thought "Don't Let Me Down" was from the Let It Be rooftop jam...finally released in the US on the "Hey Jude" vinyl LP and "Past Masters vol 2" on CD...no matter...my point, if you've got a version of Abbey Road with it on there, you may have a real rarity...or did they release it that way in the UK??? At any rate...that you were only able to notice it recently is a testament to how anal they were. The one bad edit that bugs me to this day is the seg in Mitch Ryder's "Devil With The Blue Dress/Good Golly Miss Molly"...that one reeeeally sticks out. I'd say, if it's so subtle that you can only hear it under the right conditions and it bugs you...well...hmmm...I'd say it depends on a case by case basis... "Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mats Olsson. Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 A fun thing to do with most beatles albums is to switch phase on one channel and pan both channels to center... ...on many songs only the lead vocals disapear and the rest is still there and now you can hear a lot of things you probably never have heard before! /Mats http://www.lexam.net/peter/carnut/man.gif What do we want? Procrastination! When do we want it? Later! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonafide Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 I am willing to bet the farm that there are punches all over that album.. Engineers notice things like punches because our ears are tuned to them. They are obvious in some cases, particularly without todays seamless digital punching. Even back then, the public or masses don't hear anything. I think an engineer (Or anybody who occasionally becomes one) has to be anal to some degree becuase the goal is to get that 'something' to tape. The trick is to know when to say when or when good is good or great is great. Obviously you can over analyze and kill any soul. I think the best engineers are the ones who aren't 100% technical or 100% 'feel'. I think you really need to have your gear down and your ears tuned. A sense of humor doesn't hurt. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtrmac Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 I guess they didn't have Protools back in those days to fix it. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif Maube they thought that the performance was special and didn't want to mess with it. ------------------ Mac Bowne G-Clef Acoustics Ltd. Osaka, Japan My Music: www.javamusic.com/freedomland Mac Bowne G-Clef Acoustics Ltd. Osaka, Japan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr. rob Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 Maybe they were too stoned to bother with those matters .:-0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m2 Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 Here's a website that lists lots of things which Beatles and Co. were not anal about: http://www.pootle.demon.co.uk/beatles/wgoalph.htm Thanks to bOB, wherever you are, for this link. Macle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hippie Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 Originally posted by Electrok: I was doing some tests on my console today and had only the right side of "Abbey road" playing. I noticed on "don't let me down" that there is a blatantly obvious punch on the main guitar right before the first middle eight. I've never noticed it before and I've heard the song hundreds of times. So why are we engineers so anal about stuff like this? In the real world I don't think anyone really cares or notices Electrok I think "Don't let me down" is on Let it Be? I can agree with you about being to critical of your own or somebody else's work. In a year from now, on the stuff you're recording today, you will not remember where all your production errors are; the main thing that will stick out is if the performance is spirited -not a shitty punch here or there, or a slightly flat/sharp vocal, etc. I like to "test market" my mixes using my wife, & get her opinions, 'cuz she has a very, uh, how do I say this politely,..mainstream tastes. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif I'll ask her stuff like, "listen here, do you think the compressor is pumping?" or "is the reverb too heavy here, maybe a smaller plate reverb is needed?",etc. My wife doesn't give a shit about any of the technical aspects at all. Her only criteria is "does it groove?, yes or no?" I believe your average person that listens to pop radio, not involved with recording, listens to music a little less intently than probably a lot of us forum members. We just gotta keeps checks on how anal we are getting, especially with the availability of all this cool, powerful & inexpensive, audio stuff. I try to keep myself in "anal check" by thinking that these tools are like "salt" in the mix, a little is good, too much and your mix is ruined. Here's something I've been doing that works well for me. Before commiting a mix to CDR, I'll mix it to the best of my ability. I'll let it sit for a few days, with all the settings on the board and EFX, comp., etc. in tact, then return to the mix later with fresh ears and hit play. I am able to hear the mix imbalances/problems in seconds,(whereas before they sounded good), I fix those, let the mix sit again for a couple of days, then go back and make a few more minor adjustments, repeating this process until I fire it up and it sounds as good as it's gonna be. -(from me) I've been mixing this way lately, hoping to make mix decisions based on "first impression" listening, 'cuz the majority of the people that hear your recordings will also hear them objectively, with fresh ears. ..am I getting too anal about trying not to be too anal? http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif peace, Hippie In two days, it won't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 I knew Abner Spector, the guy who produced "Sally Go Round the Roses." One day we were talking and he mentioned the time that he cut around 70 masters of a song as he tried to chase down every little detail. Finally, he got one with which he was satisfied. For some reason he had to switch projects and didn't back to the masters until later. When he did, he couldn't tell any difference among them. Those things that he thought were soooo important, he couldn't even detect. Being a perfectionist isn't such a bad thing unless it gets in the way of ever releasing stuff. I mix and master until I hear something that to me has no flaws. That way I'm still happy 10 years later with the material... Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chip McDonald Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 Where is Howard Stern when you need him? Details in mixing - I don't consider this any different than details in playing. It depends on your target audience and application. There is a definite "obvious or not" line, and then below that there are varying Degrees of Perfection. As a matter of procedure I think flow is more important, and *that's* the tricky bit. Is it worth disturbing the flow of the recording process to worry about the details? I don't think so.... It would seem all of my favorite recordings have flaws buried to be found, and after they're found it provides an endearing quality. Because the bottom line is that seldom are you doing to hear a "recording" of an act that represents reality. Everyone knows this, it's the nature of the process. Therefore capturing the vibe/mood is of tantamount importance. There is a point when the process of seeking perfection crosses over diminishing returns. Eric Johnson is a case study in this.... This is something I really need to work on, and tried to get Roger to talk about a bit one time. I'm very interested in hearing all of the Forum Big Shots have to say about managing time versus detail. Fletcher's account elsewhere of knowing about a client's budget and acting accordingly (not aliging the tape machine) was interesting in that respect. ------------------ New and Improved Music Soon: http://www.mp3.com/chipmcdonald Guitar Lessons in Augusta Georgia: www.chipmcdonald.com Eccentric blog: https://chipmcdonaldblog.blogspot.com/ / "big ass windbag" - Bruce Swedien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
- Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 I always read interviews where producers mention how they try to go for the right vibe for the song, that flubbed notes are OK if they still work within the context of the song... And then I'll listen to their recordings and I won't hear any flubbed notes. Still sounds like perfection (or close to it). Nothing wrong with perfection, but I want to hear mistakes sometimes, dang it! I always liked the theory of leaving mistakes in, but the only modern recordings I've heard it on where it didn't sound amateurish is on Ida 's music... They'll let stuff slip in which would be ProTooled to death elsewhere, but it truly gives you the vibe that these are real musicians playing in the room with you... This message has been edited by popmusic on 07-03-2001 at 12:00 AM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dansouth Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 If you're so deeply involved in details that you never get anything done, you may be too anal. On the other hand, if your projects sound sloppy, you may need to focus more closely on details, or better yet, hire someone proficient in such details to help you out. If you never get anything done AND your projects sound sloppy, you need some training. Too anal? Can your pilot go over his checklist too many times? How about your surgeon or your anaesthesiologist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.