The Wall Of Sound Thread

[Dunderhead]

So for the last few days I've been going through the tracks on Back To Mono, listening to some of the Good Vibrations sessions, and revisiting the Spector produced Death of a Lady's Man.

I wanted to start a thread specifically to talk about this type of production, how it was accomplished on a technical level, the best examples of its' execution, and its' importance to Brian Wilson's production work.

It took me a long while to notice how some of the sounds on particular records were actually multiple instruments that had been combined. From some of the interviews I've read about Spector, his collaborators have identified not only the echo chamber, but the studio space itself, the physical presence of so many musicians, and even the unique configuration of Gold Star's mixing board as key factors.

Can anyone with some engineering knowledge go into a little more detail about this, how it worked on a technical level? What about in the performance of classical music? I assume that this effect is a natural consequence of the acoustics of concert halls, and that the conductor is preforming a role similar to the producer during a symphony.

Let's get a discussion going, or at least share some of our favorites.

Here's a good one, with some cool blendings:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh1yBV5zXf0

I've always really liked the combinations on I Can Hear Music:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qqyx4TW4Ptw

[Dunderhead]

What's the hang up guys, are you telling me you *don't* like yourself some Spector? What's the world coming to

[guitarfool2002]

Do you have access to a recording setup where you can add effects like reverb and delay, and switch the order of those effects? Either in a DAW or with external rack units or even guitar fx pedals? It's cool to actually try these things and hear the results, if the topic is how Spector got some of those sounds to happen.

[Dunderhead]

Unfortunately I don't. I've never learned to play an instrument, and I've never had any first hand experience with recording anything. I've pieced together my understanding thus far from random interviews I've seen with Brian, Larry Levine, etc, and from things I've read on this board, as well as just close listening to the actual music.

I have a sort of intuitive grasp of it all, but that's all. Hence this thread, I'd like to just read what everyone else has to say. I'm hoping some of the excellent posters here could educate me a little, and maybe we could all learn from one another in the process.

[DonnyL]

Aside from the aforementioned ensemble setup, room sound, echo chamber, and combining multiple instruments into one, tape bouncing was a big part of Spector's sound (and partially what separated his sound from BW's).

Spector loved murk & mud. The chamber was used as an instrument, and he worked on 3-track for most of the songs (later, 4-track). The 'wall' would be bounced machine to machine as overdubs were made, which created a certain kind of saturation (or 'compression', as some like to call it).

In my opinion, the 45 version of 'Heroes & Villains' is the closest BW came to truly getting Spector down in the back track (which bears a striking resemblance to Ike & Tina's Spector-produced cover of 'Save the Last Dance for Me'). BW even got the drums to become part of the murk, which is a hard thing to do. no definition in anything in that track ... brilliant if you ask me.

Most important thing to have for this is the vision of the final result ... Spector and Brian (and I believe, Sonny Bono) had a specific idea in mind, an energy they wanted to bring forward, and they wouldn't rest until the sound was 'one'.

[guitarfool2002]

Unfortunately I don't. I've never learned to play an instrument, and I've never had any first hand experience with recording anything. I've pieced together my understanding thus far from random interviews I've seen with Brian, Larry Levine, etc, and from things I've read on this board, as well as just close listening to the actual music.

I have a sort of intuitive grasp of it all, but that's all. Hence this thread, I'd like to just read what everyone else has to say. I'm hoping some of the excellent posters here could educate me a little, and maybe we could all learn from one another in the process.

That's cool, I was just wondering if you would be able to try anything out and hear the results.

The old saying: If you love music, it's never to late to learn. Seriously, consider getting an instrument (guitar...guitar...) and giving it a go.

This is one of the purely technical tricks that was revealed about how Spector got his "Wall Of Sound", electronically. I think, and I think most would agree, that there were so many things at play when that Sound happened that it can't be narrowed down to a few specifics. From the songs, to the instruments, to the musicians, to the way Spector worked the musicians, to the size of the room, the height of the ceiling in that room, the recording equipment, the guys running that equipment...overwhelming to go through but each was crucial.

Spector's Wall Of Sound was a very specific kind of "huge sound" with echo and whatnot, sometimes sounding like it would swallow up the singer or lapse into echo-driven feedback (think that neat fadeout to Pleasant Valley Sunday). Those productions sounded huge, though the room was small.

Bones Howe revealed what Larry Levine told him he did different with Spector to create that, in a Tape Op interview. Spector's sound was taking the source sound from the board, sending it through a tape delay, then into the echo chamber, then back through the board and mixing it back in with the source. It could feed back on a whim according to Bones but when they got it right, it was that signature sound.

The difference was reversing the order of the signal being sent into the tape delay then into the echo chamber versus the other way around, or minus the tape delay all together. Spector's order of effects would have a bigger sound going into the echo chamber caused by the delay making the original signal longer and would create even more sounds bouncing around inside that echo chamber room, so it was I guess an illusion of depth and size caused by that delay.

It could be replicated by sending anything through an effects chain where you can change the order of the signal going into and out of these effects, a tape delay simulation and a room/chamber reverb-echo type of thing, and play with the delay times and levels as it goes into the reverb and how much of that wet signal you mix in with the original.

Has anyone mixed using that kind of recipe to get the Spector vibe happening?

[Dunderhead]

Great responses right off the bat.

I don't think I would necessarily say that Spector was about murk. I think there's something more than that going on, the Spector sound is this very sort of soft, cotton candyish cloud (I always imagine the color pink I guess). It's formless, and expansive, taking up the whole tape. The sound is indistinct by virtue of really lacking definite edges, but it also sounds very far away. That's something I've really noticed, even though the "wall" seems to take up the entire universe of the song, it also sounds distant and faint. Spector songs always feel quieter than they really are for some reason.

I've heard Levine say that they didn't really use much isolation, but that the shear number of musicians worked to partially dampen the sounds. So Phil would start by working on the guitars, and then the pianos, and so on until he got to the drums. Once he introduced the drum part Levine said that it start bleeding into all the other microphones. So I imagine that once some of the instruments got sent to the echo chamber, they'd each be accompanied by a different aspect of the percussion based on how the drums bled into those particular microphones.

But what about tape delay, are you saying that the sounds would already have an artificial echo on them before they got sent to the echo chamber?   

I've heard numerous times that Gold Star had two echo chambers, how did that figure in? Would Spector send the output from one to the other simply to give it more echo? Or would he mix a few instruments in the first chamber, and then mix the combination with other instruments in the second?

How exactly would the multitracking work DonnyL? I've hard Levine say that 1.) Everything ended up as a single track on three track at the end of the session and that vocals and strings would fill out the remaining two tracks during other sessions. 2.) He recorded the backing track onto two tracks simultaneously in order to make it seem "louder" for Phil.

The way I'm conceiving of it though is that Phil would start by selecting just a couple of signals to combine. He'd send those to the first echo chamber and blend them together. Then he'd take the output from that echo chamber and send it into the second echo chamber along with additional signals. He'd blend all those sounds together, and then put the output onto a track of tape so that he could then send it back into the first echo chamber and add further signals. And in this way he'd bounce between tape tracks and between echo chambers until he eventually got the whole thing put together, one piece at a time.

But I wouldn't ever pretend to any knowledge about all this. This is sort of my working conception of things, and I may be misunderstanding it all entirely so I'd appreciate corrections or additional commentary from everyone.

[Dunderhead]

Also what do you guys all think of the original Good Vibrations track as heard on The Pet Sounds Sessions? I'm amazed at the chorus of that version, there's some really wonderful mixing of instruments going on there. I'd recommend anyone who hasn't listened to it in a while go back and check it out.

[guitarfool2002]

But what about tape delay, are you saying that the sounds would already have an artificial echo on them before they got sent to the echo chamber?   

 2.) He recorded the backing track onto two tracks simultaneously in order to make it seem "louder" for Phil.

Addressing just these two points:

Yes, that is correct, it was sending the signal through a tape machine for delay, then into the echo chamber. Tape delay is a repeat effect where the sound quality deteriorates slightly with each repeat of the original, I've heard 60's sessions where they ask for "repeater echo" and that's a great name for the sound. So you're in effect adding more sounds to follow the original, which adds to and lengthens the sound which is going into the echo chamber.

The echo chamber itself is just a room with a speaker and a microphone, and you send the signal from the board into that speaker, the mic picks it up from another part of the room, then you send it back into the board to mix together.

Imagine standing in an empty room with very reflective walls, and you clap your hands. That clap sort of bounces around for a bit, then that's it. It's not like an echo, it's the room sound, only in a more workable acoustic environment (or a room that just happens to have a great reflective sound by pure coincidence, either way...). Now clap your hands several times in a row, and the sound being reflected by those walls is increased, and the sound changes. If you put that clap through a delay, and set it to repeat, say, four times, you'll have now four claps bouncing around the room at slightly different times, and it will sound a lot bigger and more spacious.

That's the best I can do finding a comparison for what a tape delay versus a dry signal would do in Spector's Wall Of Sound effects chain, at least according to what Levine told Bones Howe. It makes sense, and it is a neat little subtle trick that would seem to be a signature sound.

On the other point, I read Levine saying something similar, and in that context he said he did this to impress visitors to Phil's sessions, and to basically pump the speakers a bit more. Since it was all mono, you'd have people in the room and then push it through two speakers and it would be more intense...at least that's my impression of what Levine was saying. He was showing off for guests to the studio or Phil as they listened to playbacks, I don't think it was connected to the actual mixing at all...but I could be way off on that.

[DonnyL]

How exactly would the multitracking work DonnyL?

Obviously this varied from session to session, but my understanding was his method involved recording to 3 tracks on one deck, mixing to another 3-track, adding 2 more tracks, mixing back to the first 3-track, and so on, until he had the 'wall'. So the end result would be: 1-wall, 2-strings, 3-vocals. In the case of 4-track, I think it might be 4-horns. my understanding is the 'wall' was essentially the rhythm track.

you don't have to call it 'murk', but he liked the glued-together, everything-playing, 'one' sound. and even in the era of 8-track, he still preferred the 3-track and mixing as you go to get the sound of the tape generations. That 'far away', soft thing you're talking about has a great deal to do with bouncing over and over again.

[DonnyL]

to clarify the tape-delay thing ...

tape delay is that 'slapback' Elvis type sound. you send the signal to a separate tape deck, it plays back slightly after it records. you can vary the length of delay with the speed of the tape (other ways to do it as well).

you can send the direct signal to the machine, or you can send the echo through the delay as well ... meaning the echo would start slightly late. The Beach Boys used this a lot later on. you could do the reverse, use the delay first and send the delay into the chamber. or the delay-ed single into the chamber, vice-versa, etc ... endless options. if you send a delay into itself, it'll feedback at some point (an endless loop) ... you hear this in that one version of 'heroes & villains' where is sounds like an explosion building. you can control this with your mixer and find a 'sweet spot' ... just on the verge of feedback.

you can get all kinds of unique and unpredictable phasing happening as well ... creates a bold sound. hard to replicate unless you go all the way, and even then, you'll end up with your own unique take on it.

[Dunderhead]

How exactly would the multitracking work DonnyL?

Obviously this varied from session to session, but my understanding was his method involved recording to 3 tracks on one deck, mixing to another 3-track, adding 2 more tracks, mixing back to the first 3-track, and so on, until he had the 'wall'. So the end result would be: 1-wall, 2-strings, 3-vocals. In the case of 4-track, I think it might be 4-horns. my understanding is the 'wall' was essentially the rhythm track.

you don't have to call it 'murk', but he liked the glued-together, everything-playing, 'one' sound. and even in the era of 8-track, he still preferred the 3-track and mixing as you go to get the sound of the tape generations. That 'far away', soft thing you're talking about has a great deal to do with bouncing over and over again.

How would that work do you think? I heard that the mixing board at Gold Star had 12 inputs. How would those 12 inputs be divided between the three tracks? Would they be "dry"? Or would they have echo on them? Did they stop periodically during each session in order to mix down the three tracks using the echo chamber/tape delay method? Where would Spector start essentially, what got blended first, or did everything get blended all at the same time in just one echo chamber? That's not the way that I've taken descriptions so far, I get the impression that Spector was blending just a few of the signals at a time, and then blending the blended signal, and so on in an essentially iterative method.

Super fascinating stuff both of you.

[DonnyL]

How exactly would the multitracking work DonnyL?

Obviously this varied from session to session, but my understanding was his method involved recording to 3 tracks on one deck, mixing to another 3-track, adding 2 more tracks, mixing back to the first 3-track, and so on, until he had the 'wall'. So the end result would be: 1-wall, 2-strings, 3-vocals. In the case of 4-track, I think it might be 4-horns. my understanding is the 'wall' was essentially the rhythm track.

you don't have to call it 'murk', but he liked the glued-together, everything-playing, 'one' sound. and even in the era of 8-track, he still preferred the 3-track and mixing as you go to get the sound of the tape generations. That 'far away', soft thing you're talking about has a great deal to do with bouncing over and over again.

How would that work do you think? I heard that the mixing board at Gold Star had 12 inputs. How would those 12 inputs be divided between the three tracks? Would they be "dry"? Or would they have echo on them? Did they stop periodically during each session in order to mix down the three tracks using the echo chamber/tape delay method? Where would Spector start essentially, what got blended first, or did everything get blended all at the same time in just one echo chamber? That's not the way that I've taken descriptions so far, I get the impression that Spector was blending just a few of the signals at a time, and then blending the blended signal, and so on in an essentially iterative method.

hmm, who knows, doesn't really matter too much. I'm sure he had specific methods he liked. the # of inputs don't really matter that much either. they'd probably have some submixers going into the board if needed. there would probably also be one mic on multiple instruments as well in places.

so you might have drums, basses, guitars on one track. maybe piano, harpsichord, organ on another.  percussion, etc. on a third. mix it down w/ echo wherever you want it, however he wanted it for that song, and so on.

the echo could be added during tracking, during submixing, and/or during final mix. in any combination.

[Dunderhead]

Maybe we could focus on just one track, Good Vibrations, Heroes, River Deep, Lovin' Feeling. One of those, and then try and dissect the sound a little bit.

[guitarfool2002]

The number of inputs is just the number of lines you could put into the board. I also don't think it mattered in what combinations they were put onto the tracks, but I'm sure they all had a preferred way of doing it.

This is the Gold Star board, circa Feb. 1966:


Notice the 12 channels.

How many send/returns did that board have? Would I be correct in remembering 3?

[DonnyL]

Maybe we could focus on just one track, Good Vibrations, Heroes, River Deep, Lovin' Feeling. One of those, and then try and dissect the sound a little bit.

I'll leave that to the experts ... no way to tell without having been there taking notes.  all of this stuff was 'fly by the seat of your pants' 1960s-style recording.

'pet sounds' as an album is probably the easiest one to pick apart, and those you tube videos some people made regarding how the tracks were put together are pretty revealing. 'pet sounds' has something of a formula that makes sense. only effects were echo, tape delay, and compression. compression was running on the board output, so you'd get lots of individual elements with no compression, then compression added at the end, AFTER everything else in the chain. so when things get louder, reverb goes away. when things get soft, reverb comes up.

I've learned a lot about recording from studying 'pet sounds' and the simplicity in the recording chain. the fewer options you have, the more creativity opens up.

[Ron]

I think you can actually hear the compression (or something) in Good Vibrations, right at the beginning.  The organ (I suppose?) is playing, and after the "Ayeee!... I love the colorful clothes she wears", the organ changes slightly.  Is that the compression altering the sound?  I always thought it was strange, there may be a splice there, because on the demo version, Brian's vocal comes in after that line. 

So I never could tell if it was a splice, or something strange going on with the compression.

[guitarfool2002]

Maybe we could focus on just one track, Good Vibrations, Heroes, River Deep, Lovin' Feeling. One of those, and then try and dissect the sound a little bit.

Since this is a Beach Boys board, I think it ties in perfectly to do an A/B comparison with The Crystals "Then He Kissed Me" and the Beach Boys' "Then I Kissed Her".

It's actually a terrific way to hear just what made Spector's productions different. Brian was trying to copy Spector, that's a given. He's using the same musicians in a few cases, he's going for the Spector Wall, he's doing a song that was  Spector hit.

Yet, the terrific lead male vocal aside, the Beach Boys version lacks the power and the depth/size of Spector's record. There are times on the Crystals record where the song reaches a crescendo and the sound of that mix seems like it will erupt into thunder or fall off the cliff, either one, yet the vocal holds it together. The whole mix swells and builds with the arrangement, and it's like a massive wave forming and just getting ready to break.

Listen specifically for the "size" of Spector's sound versus Brian's. Spector's sound is muddier, more full and harder to hear individual instruments, but that was his whole point and that delay-echo effect is heard best on the drums. It adds so much size to the sound, and more power as a result.

The drums on Brian's tracks sound dry, almost too dry, even though he's going for Spector's drum vibe...yet the lack of that resonating echo makes the sound more clear and present but less powerful.

I hear on the Crystals record the sound of an engine idling underneath everything, just that mysterious groundswell of noise that's unidentifiable, yet it's a presence, a low rumble. Spector's mixes sound loud to me, but yet Brian's has more separation and clarity...and I think Spector's worked better for the song and the market he was aiming for because of those very reasons.

That low rumble (I won't say *menacing* because too many reviewers use that to describe Spector's 'Wall') makes those records sound huge, and I hear the effects coming from the delay-echo chamber setup with Spector that add elements (especially on drums) that Brian's is lacking.

So that's one example where you hear the original versus a copy and can check out some of the variations.

[guitarfool2002]

I think you can actually hear the compression (or something) in Good Vibrations, right at the beginning.  The organ (I suppose?) is playing, and after the "Ayeee!... I love the colorful clothes she wears", the organ changes slightly.  Is that the compression altering the sound?  I always thought it was strange, there may be a splice there, because on the demo version, Brian's vocal comes in after that line. 

So I never could tell if it was a splice, or something strange going on with the compression.

That's not compression, that was a glitch in the tape. It actually does a bit of a tape phase-shift more than anything, compression doesn't change EQ like that.

Compression is McGuinn's guitar on Mr. Tambourine Man...actually three compressors or something...it's more subtle and not as much of an effect.

[DonnyL]

I think you can actually hear the compression (or something) in Good Vibrations, right at the beginning.  The organ (I suppose?) is playing, and after the "Ayeee!... I love the colorful clothes she wears", the organ changes slightly.  Is that the compression altering the sound?  I always thought it was strange, there may be a splice there, because on the demo version, Brian's vocal comes in after that line.  

So I never could tell if it was a splice, or something strange going on with the compression.

I always heard it as a compression artifact as well (sort of like the kind of thing that happens to the whole mix when you pop a 'P'), but the general consensus seems to be that it's tape damage.

[guitarfool2002]

Didn't someone confirm it was tape damage, like Mark Linett? I don't recall.

I'm open to suggestions! I listened to this:

You can *clearly* hear that pumping/swell/noise from the compressor on Carls' vocal on this stereo remix but the organ is unaffected: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwrKKbaClME

Noisy as hell from :10 to :15 on that clip. Maybe just a bad punch-in combined with a weird compressor reaction? Whatever it is, it's only on the vocal.

Then on the released mono mix, the vocal does ride on top of everything...which could interact and phase/cancel out with the organ part...very interesting.

[Dunderhead]

Maybe we could focus on just one track, Good Vibrations, Heroes, River Deep, Lovin' Feeling. One of those, and then try and dissect the sound a little bit.

Since this is a Beach Boys board, I think it ties in perfectly to do an A/B comparison with The Crystals "Then He Kissed Me" and the Beach Boys' "Then I Kissed Her".

It's actually a terrific way to hear just what made Spector's productions different. Brian was trying to copy Spector, that's a given. He's using the same musicians in a few cases, he's going for the Spector Wall, he's doing a song that was  Spector hit.

Yet, the terrific lead male vocal aside, the Beach Boys version lacks the power and the depth/size of Spector's record. There are times on the Crystals record where the song reaches a crescendo and the sound of that mix seems like it will erupt into thunder or fall off the cliff, either one, yet the vocal holds it together. The whole mix swells and builds with the arrangement, and it's like a massive wave forming and just getting ready to break.

Listen specifically for the "size" of Spector's sound versus Brian's. Spector's sound is muddier, more full and harder to hear individual instruments, but that was his whole point and that delay-echo effect is heard best on the drums. It adds so much size to the sound, and more power as a result.

The drums on Brian's tracks sound dry, almost too dry, even though he's going for Spector's drum vibe...yet the lack of that resonating echo makes the sound more clear and present but less powerful.

I hear on the Crystals record the sound of an engine idling underneath everything, just that mysterious groundswell of noise that's unidentifiable, yet it's a presence, a low rumble. Spector's mixes sound loud to me, but yet Brian's has more separation and clarity...and I think Spector's worked better for the song and the market he was aiming for because of those very reasons.

That low rumble (I won't say *menacing* because too many reviewers use that to describe Spector's 'Wall') makes those records sound huge, and I hear the effects coming from the delay-echo chamber setup with Spector that add elements (especially on drums) that Brian's is lacking.

So that's one example where you hear the original versus a copy and can check out some of the variations.

This is a really wonderful take on the song.

Lets look at some Beach Boys songs,
One that I've always really noticed is on Let's Go Away. It really sounds like there's at least one bass being specifically combined with a piano or keyboard of some type. Sometimes it sounds like one more than the other, sometimes it sounds indistinguishable. It's like he was making new instruments.

How about the bridge on Here Today. We have some organ, a bass or guitar playing notes, and drums/percussion. In the second part, listen as the it sounds like the guitar is mixing with some piano, and then possible a woodwind? But they become really indistinguishable, and it becomes a challenge to pull the particular sounds apart.

These moments are all over Pet Sounds. With Spector it's different, he blends *everything* together. He essentially creates one giant, super instrument.
With Brian things are kept more distinct, he doesn't go all the way to that conclusion, he leaves some of them alone and it creates a contrast. As you hear both the combined groups and the unaffected instruments. So the effect becomes all the bolder, the "new" instruments sound all the more lucid and novel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awk-qcTckuw

I think he explains it very well in this interview, starting at about 1:45. What he's describing is exactly what I'm hearing. Effectively new instruments, built up from several component sounds.

[Ron]

If i'm not too far off topic, what's the reason for the vocals changing right there?  Brian's 'demo' vocals start with "She's already working on my Brain"... but there's not "I, I love the colorful clothes she wears".... so which was recorded first, if Brian left a hole for the later vocals?  Craziness!  The damage/artifact right in that area makes it even more confusing.  What the hell was going on with the first 5 seconds of that song? lol

[Jaco]

Very interesting topic!

My 2 cents:
1. There's a Danny Hutton interview on YTube that says the wall of sound started with Leiber&Stoller productions, in New York. (songs like Spanish Harlem, Stand By Me etc) Spector learned from it and developed it further in LA.
2. In the bio He's A Rebel is stated that a key element in the Wall Of Sound was to reuse the sound allready recorded, play it through the speakers and combine it together with new sounds on tape.

[Joshilyn Hoisington]

How would that work do you think? I heard that the mixing board at Gold Star had 12 inputs. How would those 12 inputs be divided between the three tracks? Would they be "dry"? Or would they have echo on them? Did they stop periodically during each session in order to mix down the three tracks using the echo chamber/tape delay method? Where would Spector start essentially, what got blended first, or did everything get blended all at the same time in just one echo chamber? That's not the way that I've taken descriptions so far, I get the impression that Spector was blending just a few of the signals at a time, and then blending the blended signal, and so on in an essentially iterative method.

I think you're making it more complicated than it is.

From what I understand, Spector "always" recorded the track to mono.  The bootlegs mainly seem to back this up--we don't get the stereo mixes were used to from BB boots of the same era.  I don't get the sense that Phil did any more bouncing than Brian.  Most of the Bootlegs seem to indicate that it was:

1. Track
2. Strings
3. Vocals
4. Backing Vocals


To compare Phil and Brian's working methods, keep in mind that you have to think of the tracking sessions as mixing sessions also, because, particularly when Phil's doing the whole track to mono, they are mixing live.  They will not have the chance to redo the mix later.  In Brian's case there is still some leeway, but not much.

Brian had a fairly regular pattern of use for the 3 tracks he'd cut his tracks on.  It doesn't hold good universally, but in general, particularly on Pet Sounds:

1.  Horns
2.  Basses, Piano, Drums, Rhythm Guitars
3.  "Highlight" instruments, lead guitars, accordions, etc.


So let's say we're recording Wouldn't It Be Nice at Gold Star.

That was a track cut on three tracks with no later instrumental overdubs.  It is also one of the larger sessions Brian did in that studio.  

With 12 inputs (and some coupling inputs, I think) we'd have a layout something like this:

Tracks:
1.  Bass Drum
2.  Drum Overhead
3.  Fender Bass
4.  String Bass
5.  Danelectro 6-string bass
6.  Archtop guitar
7.  Piano 1
8.  Piano 2
9.  Accordions
10.  Horns
11.  Percussion
12.  Intro/Bridge Guitars

At this point in time, the mixing consoles were had three busses, that is, you could group any of the 12 tracks into 3 separate and discrete outputs.  These outputs would be linked up to the 3, and then 4-track machines.

So we end up with, I think I remember correctly:

1.  Horns
2.  Basses, Drums, Percussion, Rhythm guitar
3.  Accordions, Intro Guitars, Pianos

Linett and others have told me that Gold Star only owned one compressor until very late, which they used more at the mastering stage.  Western likely had one compressor in-line with each of the 3 output busses.  In other words, compression was limited and could not really be done to individual instruments.

In addition, there was, as has been mentioned, tape delay and reverb chamber.  This, in general, was all added live, and not later.  I have not been able to figure out what the exact method was.  Western had access to many different chambers, including United's chambers across the parking lot.  (Now there's a building in between the studios...)  Gold Star had the two.  I don't know if Brian tended to use one chamber and one tape delay machine for everything or not.  The send pot was pretty primitive and, without a lot of patching, would have been a pre-buss operation.  In other words, what was being mixed would not be dry, it would be "effected" before going down the buss to the master outputs feeding the tape machine.


As for Phil, going straight to mono, this was even simpler.  The 12 inputs were combined with their reverb and delay returns all together at the same time, straight to tape.  He may have gone through two echo chambers, he may have added more reverb to the already reverbed track at the mixing stage, but I don't think there's any evidence that he was doing the process that you describe.