Andy Wallace.... HOW???

[PTUser NYC]

Odysseys wrote:

I think that the best sounding records are the ones that have all parts sounding great even when soloed.Otherwise it's nothing what the band sounds like and becomes heavily tweaked.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion! I would like to clarify a few things, in the interest of common ground.

First of all there is nothing about what I said that implies being untrue to a band's sound. Certainly the techniques I have spoken about CAN be applied in such a way that changes the sound, but they don't have to.

Unless you are a purist who thinks that changing the balances from chorus to verse is untrue to the sound, then you have to admit that there is a role for the engineer. If you do anything other than put up a stereo pair of mics, you are affecting the sound. In fact, even if ALL you do is put up a stereo pair, the sound you will get will be nothing like the sound in the room.

Using gear, making choices is what an engineer does. What the final result of those choices is is a matter of the engineer's taste. You could use a LOT of gear to get a sound that is organic, and sounds unprocessed. Often, you need to do a lot to correct for the way the sound gets destroyed simply by micing it. Doing a lot does not always equate to stepping on the integrity of the source.

Now in regards to your assertion that the best records have sounds that sound great when soloed, I have to ask - did you hear them soloed? Many MANY assistant engineers get their eyes opened when they hear the deconstruction of a mix. Its amazing how different things will sound when soloed from how they do in the track.

If you do nothing to seperate the sounds, you will not be able to put them all together without making mush. If you do not roll off the bottom end of thick guitars, there is no way that you will get them to live with the bass and the kick drum, all of them sounding loud. If you make room, then things will sound smaller than you might expect when soloed.

Now, I'm not saying make everything small, and fit them into a tiny pop mix in all cases. I am certainly in agreement that there is no "right final sound" for every situation! You need to approach each mix as its own thing.

All I am saying is that when you are done, if you have taken every advantage for the mix, (within the direction you are heading in!) then you must have made some choices along the way. Bass louder here, more drums here, more guitar there.

The painful lesson is that you cannot have ELTEE (everything louder than everything else). This is something that every engineer learns. You will not find anyone who has been doing this with success for any period of time who would not agree with that. Perhaps you do too!

[bassmac]

Originally posted by PTUser NYC:
A big part of the way electric guitars sound is the Bass! You may be surprised to hear how thin and small some really huge guitar sounds are when they are soloed. The Bass can add a lot of bottom, but it can also add growl, bite whatever you want to call it.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I still think Led Zep is the all time best example's of this. "Huge" has always been a word used to describe their sound. Yet take away JPJ and JB, and it's one track of a quite thin sounding Tele into a Fender Champ. Go figure.

It's pretty hard to even hear the bass in a lot of new rock. 40 passes of drop-tuned seven stringers into rumbling Mesa Boogies doesn't leave much room for the old four string.

I know I'm old school... but there's just something about a Les Paul / Marshall mixed with a P-Bass / SVT. The frequencies just work really well together.

[img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

[beau]

beau -

what gunshots ?? are you speaking about the
occasional reverb of a snare drum ???

no, i am talking about the actual gunshot noises.
the last record i heard them on is the new sum 41 record. song 4 1:53.


no matter whether you like his work or not,
you must admit that he has attained a very
admirable position in our industry that many
here would like to acheive.

obviously, i think that we all would like to be making several grand per song to mix.


he is quite good - although i will admit that heavy bands don't all have that similar guitar sound-or drum sound.

i didnt say anything about guitar tones. he gets guitars loud. and the bass sits well in the mix

he is hired to selll records and that he does.

ok, now this statement is absolutely obsurd. are you saying that the korn record would still be sitting on the shelves of tower records if it werent for andy wallace? bands write songs, and that is what sells.
the only people that buy records because of production are audio geeks like us.


peace,

beau

[stealthbalance]

beau -
thanks for your responses - but i must respectfully
dissagree with you as to what you call "absolutely
obsurd". it is absolutely true and this is why.
all of us sonic wankers are so busy talking about
this cool sound or that cool drum sound or snare
shmer or gtr chunk this or vocal air that. all of that is
absolutely important. but what is so important
to most can sometimes destroy the main course.
that being the song , voice, lyric, and emotion.
i have been guilty of this myself - where everything
is so big and great and warm and fat and cool -
that i can't hear anything. do you get what im saying?
even if everything is really well done, frequencies are
all dove-tailed and nice, it doesn't matter - it sucks.
what someone like wallace does is he absolutely
serves the song - and there is not a frequency or
a snare hit or a bass drum or whatever it is goin on-
that is going to get in the way. nothing harsh, power
sounds are implied more than realized - just as a
great mix is so often. wallace also has been very
talented at making sure his **** sounds undeniable
on any size system - stereo or mono. his mixes are
something that my mom could hear and hum along
to - or my wasted 19 year old neice before her next
pool game, or all of us sonic wankers.
i don't even know andy - but does he sell records ??
of course he sells records ! MVHO
s

[s2n]

Andy doesn't sell records. Neither does he make them sell. The bands and their music sell records. There's no "Andy Wallace" section at Tower Records or Sam The Record Man. Andy makes the mixes sound better. The producer makes the band sound great.
How does he do it? Tricknology and a bit of magic powder. [img]images/icons/cool.gif[/img]

[stealthbalance]

if mixers don't help to sell records, then why are these
hired gun mixers getting big $$$$ to help nothing???
come on - and not only that but ive heard from too
many a&r guys that they are more apt to go with a
name mixer because at radio if they see a mixer's
name that they recognize, the record is taken
more seriously. as for tricknology, i beleive all that
is is good taste and ears. if an artist or band wants
wallace to mix for them thats great.
but that decision would never fly if in the labels eyes
it didn't maximize their bet.
s

[PTUser NYC]

I dunno.

I think a good mix cna help sell a record. I mean, people like records because of how they make them feel. A good mix can help that.

But I'm not talking about a consumer saying "wow listen to those great sounds!" of ocurse that is really rare. What I mean is that the mix can serve the song. It can help the song get across.

I always think that the song is the key, and everything else must serve it. I guess there are exceptions, but they would be VERY few and extremely rare.

So, yeah, no one buys a killer snare drum sound (except maybe us geeks) - but as an example, would U2's beautiful day feel the same, would it build emotionally the way it does with a lesser mix?

[Matt Zeiner]

And getting back to Mr. Wallace: there's no better example of what PTUser NYC said as his work on Jeff Buckley's 'Grace'. Most importantly it's incredibly deep and powerful music...Wallace's production is tight, clear and powerful while still being 'organic', I learned a lot (still do) just by listening to this amazing record and it's an especially good example of PTUser NYC's 'small being big' theory......

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">So glad someone mentioned THAT record! That is an absolutely phenominal piece of art in terms of so many disciplines! My favorite sounds are on that record. The yellowed snare on track on track 7........know what I mean?

[odysseys]

PTUser:
From what you say,i think the goal is the same:
to capture the exact image of a great band.
But why do we have to use the techniques that you describe,if we want to capture the exact sound that we hear? It's like saying that there is no proper mic/recording method to accuratelly reproduce a sound source.
So,i think that we must hear the artist/band rehearsh before we go into recording them in order to justify our recording method.
For instance,if i have a full jazz band in front of me,then later in the recording,i'll probably put two condensers for the whole drum kit in the proper position,instead of 8-9 mics because that drum kit,doesn't dominate the band,it's just a member of it and stays relatively in the background.
But in a case of a power metal band,the drums will be surrounded by mics.
What i mean,is that if i put 10 mics in the jazz kit,then i'll probably have a rough time during the mix in order to 'position' the kit where it belongs and i'll sure open a huge bag of tricks in order to 'fix' it.

[doorknocker]

Originally posted by Matt Zeiner:
That is an absolutely phenominal piece of art in terms of so many disciplines! My favorite sounds are on that record. The yellowed snare on track on track 7........know what I mean?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">to be honest, no....would you please elaborate on this a bit? The track is 'Lover, you should've come over' right? Incredible song and build up, when the distorted guitar line finally comes in it's almost to much emotionally.......

Originally posted by stealthbalance:
nothing harsh, power sounds are implied more than realized.....

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Right on!

[img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] Andi