How to make record albums

If you do give validity to the multitracking culture of the 1960's, you still had bands that felt a responsibility to reproduce those recordings as faithfully as possible. Not all the bands did this of course, but some made very concentrated efforts to do so. The British Progressive or Art Rock bands seemed to take this seriously, probably to their detriment. Some of this music was very complex, and difficult to perform, and there were some serious musicians who prioritized their execution over the spectacle of visceral showmanship. Others combined both of course. However, this led to a rebellion from the counter culture creating the Punk Rock movement, and on the other side of the coin you had the invention of fake bands and experiments in marketing empty talent shells, lip syncing and so forth.

Anyone who was around in the days before digital work stations and even better, drum machines, knows that DRUMS on any kind of rock or fusion record are the most difficult things to record. Not only are many drummers not proficient, but their kits are not tuned or miked properly. Once the cold starkness wore on peoples ears, real drums were then sampled using midi technology, or triggers, and now programs that read the sound file, and replace the peaks with samples of well recorded kick and snare drums. Other programs quantitize the kick and snare hits or even the hats or ride cymbals to the nearest 8th note, or quarter note which really sounds contrived. Can you really buy an honest recording these days?

The point is.. the entire stream of consciousness has moved in this direction, from public listener.. to band... to record company and promoters. Bands now take this onto the stage with loads of technology masking their inabilities to perform.. in fact if you don't do this.. you are not likely to get very far.

At this point, the public ear has been programed to believe that real sounds bad..that excessive compression is a good thing, bass rules, and music is better played through ear pods than tube amps and large properly designed speakers.

No label is going to invest in proper recordings to "a market" that is about as big as this chat forum.

I did work with tape machines early on, just long enough to know how bad things are now. But what are we really going to do?

You could make the greatest record of all time and it could easily go completely unnoticed.

The industry is so dead and stagnating artistically.. I mean there are still singers sounding like Eddie Veder 20 years later thinking that's cool, and getting signed.. look at American Idol... that's the biggest thing in the country, and it is simply a karaoke contest.

Everything is about smoke and mirrors.. and moving further and further from the truth... or a real natural truth.

Not sure what would have to happen to turn the ship around.. but I don't see it happening. I am just thankful I have a mountain of clean vinyls and a nice restored vintage tube amp, and a wall of speakers that make listening to music a proper experience.

I think bands putting stuff out on vinyl these days is simply silly... as they are just pressing their CD onto black plastic... makes no sense other than somehow marketing "cool".

Anyone who invests in a studio, and can press to Vinyl correctly.. do let me know..

I remember George Martin saying in an interview that even when he was producing the first Beatles albums,they were designed really only to sound good through the popular players of the time.That is a 3 in 1 console with speakers only 3 feet apart.He also admitted that he was only learning in public with doing stereo mixes of these records.It probably means you are correct to say that most people have no idea of what is natural or even good for that matter given the influence of the Beatles sound even today and how it is held up in such an iconic way as being the benchmark.Ten years before Muddy Waters and Howling Wolf were making great records that to my ears at least match the Beatles'.

My favourite record is one that was released not long ago, Joe Jackson's Rain album. Recorded as a trio in a Berlin analogue studio, and released on LP. A few clips from an interview:

"When Joe Jackson went into an East Berlin recording studio with the rhythm section that has accompanied him, off and on, for nearly three decades, he had the most strikingly simple line-up in mind: just piano, bass, drums and his unmistakable, eternally yearning voice. As he later pondered a name for this compellingly to-the-point collection of ten new songs, he took a similar approach. “I wanted something elemental because that’s the kind of album I wanted to make,” Jackson explains. “There is no padding on it at all; the album is stripped to the bare essentials, so I hope it has a timeless quality. The title seems to fit.”

http://www.joejackson.com/bio.php

There seems to be some confusion with people mixing up classical and pop/rock recording practices. Recording classical music is completely different than recording pop/rock. In general terms classical music is recorded to sound like a performer actually performing in a real acoustic environment. Pop/rock recordings do not adhere to that standard and have a "whatever works" mentality. In other words, classical recordings are trying to capture a great performance and pop/rock recordings are trying to produce a hit record.

As a result the recording techniques for each type of music is very different. Classical techniques is intended to be unobtrusive and virtually inaudible to the listener. The best way to achieve this goal is to have a very simple recording chain. Pick a good sounding hall, a well rehearsed and talented ensemble, 2 to 5 microphones (even for stereo more than 2 mics are needed to balance direct vs. hall sounds), some great mic preamps, a minimalist mixer and record directly to tape or hard drive. No overdubs, no EQ, no compressions, etc. Contrast that to even a stripped down sounding pop/rock recording. Recordings pieced together from individual instrumental tracks recorded in different studios. Drums playing to click tracks. Mixing MIDI performances with real players. Autotune. Adding reverb to intentionally recorded dry performances. And finally compressing the signal to the point of distortion (and beyond) so that it jumps out at the listener when played as part of some random playlist.

Other than economics there is no reason why current classical recordings cannot sound as good, or even better than the best "golden age" recordings. Current mic, preamps and mixers are better than the old equipment. The old equipment is rightfully legendary and revered, but it is 50 years old and worn out. The new recreations of the classic gear are better performer today. There is no magic to the golden age recording techniques. It was simply the dedicated application of a craft by skill artist and engineers. There's no technical reason why that same expertise and craftsmanship cannot be put into use today.

Thanks for the tip on Joe Jackson.. I learn something on here everyday.

I agree about Martin also. The mixing console is whole other story.

And again you can look at tube based vs solid state studio gear. I know this forum is more for "The Listener" but we have to remember that no matter what you have invested in "audiophile gear", we are always limited by the source recording.

There is no such thing as mixing for universal sound across all speakers.

I used to do mixes for my own personal system that would never be released to the public. Why? because it would sound horrible on a car stereo or boom box.

Again I am talking rock records here, where there are too many instruments sharing the same frequency bands.

The old timers knew what they were doing.

A drum kit, upright bass, piano, and a horn or two, and you have a natural separation of frequencies that don't need manipulation in post production.

That's a big reason why that stuff sounds so good.. just common sense.