gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
638894 Posts in 25535 Topics by 3626 Members - Latest Member: Julia October 17, 2018, 03:43:16 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 77 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The Stephen Desper Thread  (Read 352299 times)
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1266


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #100 on: January 05, 2006, 06:43:30 AM »

Stephen,
Regarding recording basses.
How do you get the bass to sit so well in a mix? Do you use much post-processing on it (compression, EQ)? Do you equalize other instruments frequencies so they don't clash into the bass? How do you get a consistent volume for a bass line that's varied in pitch a lot?
First it helps to have good bass players.  The musician can win or lose that battle. If the music requires it, I work with the bassist and set the limiter so its recovery compliments the bass decay. That way, if the note changes are far apart and the bass dies down before the next note is sounded, the limiter is pulling up the bass gain to keep the note hear-able in the mix. 

Depending on how you want the bass and kick drum to work together, you need to EQ them both for seperation. Harmonics of one should not ride on the harmonics of the other. Sometimes Mike's low vocal bass notes would get lost with too much top end on the bass guitar, so harmonic shaping was required to preserve the vocal bass line.

You can also use the limiter side-chain input to "poke energy holes" in the bass from the kick drum. I  think this only works with actual limiters, not virtual ones.

Then I got into just recording the bass guitar directily to tape.  No EQ, no limiting, just direct.  As the song progressed, and tracks were added and added, and getting toward the final mix time, I would take the output of the bass track and send it into the studio where a bass amp/speaker was set up with mics and such.  Then, listening to the bass and all the other tracks, re-record the actual bass (sometimes in stereo) and apply more processing at that time to shape the harmonic structure to what had been added long after the bass was recorded in the basic tracking session. In fact, I did that with several guitars and it worked out good. Sometimes tracks were not available to re-record to, so the sound used on the mix was done at the time of the mix.  Anyone using the multi-track, in later years, to re-mix would have no record of the oringial sound. But at the time, there were only so many tracks and it was the sound of the mix that was important, not keeping a record of the sound.  So some things are lost forever. Back then it had no name, but recently I've seen this technique called "re-amping."
  ~swd
« Last Edit: January 05, 2006, 06:46:21 AM by Stephen W. Desper » Logged
king of anglia
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 236



View Profile
« Reply #101 on: January 05, 2006, 09:43:51 AM »

Yeah I tend to use direct injection. In fact I just put it through my 4-track to add power and straight through to the computer. Not ideal, but nothing is when I record. I quite like the effect of double tracking my bass. When the tone on one bass "circulates" and eventually drops the other is "circling" the other way and fills out the sound. Kinda.

I've tried overdub-recording bass using amps and different mics but the best sound I ever got was in a band rehearsal onto 4-track. The leakage and room sound made it lovely.

I've tried thinking of ways to do your side input chain effect using software plug-ins, but the best I can come up with is putting a filtered kick drum through a compressor with the bass and then manually dropping the volume of each kick. Bah!
Logged
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #102 on: January 05, 2006, 02:57:08 PM »

Yeah I tend to use direct injection.

That's what she said.
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
aeijtzsche
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2372



View Profile
« Reply #103 on: January 06, 2006, 04:14:26 PM »

Hey Steve, I almost forgot, but if you care to listen, I recorded this

http://www.someoneliving.com/aeijtzsche_silent_night_CTDT.mp3

partially in your honor, before christmas, but then the board went down...

Anyway, I attempted a common time domain environment, not sure if I was terribly succesful, but it was fun to try.

I set up my two LD-condensers in an XY formation, kind of used a wall to get some reflections, and at the same time I had my ribbon mic set up off to the side on which I sang the bass part.
Logged
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1266


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #104 on: January 06, 2006, 06:13:42 PM »

Hey Steve, I almost forgot, but if you care to listen, I recorded this

http://www.someoneliving.com/aeijtzsche_silent_night_CTDT.mp3

partially in your honor, before christmas, but then the board went down...

Anyway, I attempted a common time domain environment, not sure if I was terribly succesful, but it was fun to try.

I set up my two LD-condensers in an XY formation, kind of used a wall to get some reflections, and at the same time I had my ribbon mic set up off to the side on which I sang the bass part.



I loved it!!


 I am honored and humbled that you would attempt such a thing.  I played your production over my JPL monitors.  I think you achieved the group sound -- that is, it did not sound like one person singing many tracks, but rather a group of aeijtzsche's around the mic all performing at the same time.  Very nice bass resonance too.

It was so refreshing to hear your singing.  I know the entrances to the lines are not all together, but that does not matter.  The sound field was full and, as I said, sounded like a group of people singing.  I know you had fun doing it and may have learned alittle long the way. 

Again, I appreciate all your work and hope that you will consider this approach to your work in the future.  it works!! 

Excellent work. High grades.  And Good Listening,
  ~Stephen W. Desper

PS - Comments from others welcome also.
Logged
Jonas
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1923


I've got the Beach Boys, my friends got the Stones


View Profile
« Reply #105 on: January 06, 2006, 11:01:56 PM »

Hey Steve, I almost forgot, but if you care to listen, I recorded this

http://www.someoneliving.com/aeijtzsche_silent_night_CTDT.mp3

partially in your honor, before christmas, but then the board went down...

Anyway, I attempted a common time domain environment, not sure if I was terribly succesful, but it was fun to try.

I set up my two LD-condensers in an XY formation, kind of used a wall to get some reflections, and at the same time I had my ribbon mic set up off to the side on which I sang the bass part.


Thats really neat! I never tried to do the XY formation and recording parts from different parts of the room. I always just setup one condenser and goto town. I have tried to do multiple vocals with just one or three voices. Here are two examples:

http://www.dubnetwork.com/music/vocalmixdowntest.mp3

This is just me, only three parts, sounds neat at the end. No panning.

http://www.dubnetwork.com/music/vocal1.mp3

This is me and two buddies, recorded with one mic. About 3-4 layers, wrote the main melody on guitar and went from there. Once again, no panning since we only used one mic and never really bothered panning it on the mix down. But I definitely wanna give the stereo micing technique a try.

Smiley
Logged

We would like to record under an atmosphere of calmness. - Brian Wilson
--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1IgXT3xFdU
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1266


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #106 on: January 07, 2006, 07:03:44 AM »


Thats really neat! I never tried to do the XY formation and recording parts from different parts of the room. I always just setup one condenser and goto town. I have tried to do multiple vocals with just one or three voices.

Comment to amosaria --

Thanks for the vocal samples.  The examples aeijtzsche posted were recorded using CTDT techniques as discussed on page 36 of my book, Recording The Beach Boys.  There is no spatial time domain in mono, so I'm not sure you understood what aeijtzsche quite admiringly accomplished in his exercise.  It's not about vocals or the layering of vocals, rather it's about making one performer sound as if multiple performers being recorded in one acoustic space -- whether singing vocals or playing instruments.
~swd
Logged
Jonas
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1923


I've got the Beach Boys, my friends got the Stones


View Profile
« Reply #107 on: January 07, 2006, 07:08:16 AM »

It's not about vocals or the layering of vocals, rather it's about making one performer sound as if multiple performers being recorded in one acoustic space -- whether singing vocals or playing instruments. [/b] ~swd

ooh, I guess I misunderstood. Sorry. Razz

Is the book youre talking about the same as the Sunflower/Surf Up recording notes? I saw your website eons ago about it and Ive wanted to get a copy but I wasnt sure if it was still going on...as Sunflower is one of my favorite BB albums. Smiley
Logged

We would like to record under an atmosphere of calmness. - Brian Wilson
--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1IgXT3xFdU
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1266


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #108 on: January 07, 2006, 07:13:33 AM »

It's not about vocals or the layering of vocals, rather it's about making one performer sound as if multiple performers being recorded in one acoustic space -- whether singing vocals or playing instruments. [/b] ~swd

ooh, I guess I misunderstood. Sorry. Razz

Is the book youre talking about the same as the Sunflower/Surf Up recording notes? I saw your website eons ago about it and Ive wanted to get a copy but I wasnt sure if it was still going on...as Sunflower is one of my favorite BB albums. Smiley
Click on underlined link in last post.   ~swd
Logged
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1266


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #109 on: January 07, 2006, 11:14:25 AM »

Comment to King of Anglia & aeijtzsche –

I would also suggest you ask Mark Linett about his ideas on recording bass guitars so they “lay in the mix.”  He will have different ideas than myself and you may find something he says useful to you also.

===================================================================

Since you guys seem to have more than the average amount of recording gear or facility at your disposal, I am going to outline an exercise for you to attempt that will be educational for you and fun to do.

This will be like turning your studio inside out.  The objective is to create a virtual band and then record vocals over that.

To create the virtual band you first lay down a series of separate tracks.  Assuming you do not play the drums, lay down your drum track from the machine using at least three or four tracks and keep the kick and snare on separate tracks. If you do your own live drumming, then first record the drums; again keep the kick on a separate track along with the snare on a separate track.

Next add guitars and keyboards.  All to be added using direct injection. Plug all guitars directly into the recording device using no EQ, or processing. Do the same for keyboard parts. If the keyboard is stereo, use two tracks, but no EQ or processing. 

Let’s assume you have arranged your song with drums, bass guitar, rhythm guitar one, rhythm guitar two, lead guitar, keyboard one, and keyboard two.  This is your re-amp band.  OR any size “band” (number of instruments) can be used.

The next objective is to gather as much reproduction equipment as you can; guitar amps, practice amps, boom boxes, the kids stereo system, your studio monitor system, any loose amplifiers and speakers you can find in the storage closet or borrowed from friends. 

What you are now going to do is feed each of the instrument tracks you recorded into one of the reproduction devices.  The kick drum should go into one of the larger speakers and centered in your studio.  Then reproduce the snare drum over a separate speaker by inputting it from the snare track.  The rest of the drums can go into one or two other reproduction devices.  OR you can just input the drums to one stereo reproduction device.

The bass guitar can be inputted to the bass guitar amp/speaker and placed somewhere in the room. 

Do this with each of the tracks.  Each of the two guitars can be positioned on either side of the sound field.  Same with each keyboard. 

You can also take any of the guitars or keyboards and split the output from your recorder to feed several reproduction devices – maybe with delays between them for added dimensional effect.

The point is that each instrument or drum is reproduced over a separate device in the studio.

Now as you run the playback tape or disc, you go into the studio (or playback room) and adjust the volume on each reproduction device to get a balance you like IN THE STUDIO.  Change EQ on the reproduction device, not at the console.  If you use outboard devices to get guitar sounds or effects they should be incorporated at the reproduction amplifier – just as you would if this were a live gig.

Physically separate each of the amp/speaker reproduction devices out into the room. You should be able to walk amongst the “sound” of the band as they “play” in your studio. 

Pick a “best seat” spot in the studio.  This is a spot where all the elements in the room sound best with respect to level, tone, and clarity WITH YOUR EARS IN THE STUDIO.  Adjust all the amp/speakers in the studio to this spot.  It can be at the front of the studio, in the center, or even to one corner. 

You may need to move some of the instruments around the room to get the best separation in the room mix YOU HEAR.  This is much of the fun, moving elements around the room in 3D space – space you can actually walk around inside of. 

When you are content with the acoustic balance of the “band” in the studio, take your best two microphones and place them a few feet apart near the sweet spot.  If you can, set the mics in the omni position or figure-eight pickup position.  You may want to place the microphones up high in the room. To avoid boomyness don’t go over 80% of the total floor to ceiling distance as you raise the microphones. 

Now listen in your control room or over headphones to just the two room mics, muting, in the monitor, all the band tracks that are feeding out to the virtual band.  You will want to move the two room mics around and try different postions. The mics are, of course, panned left and right.  You may want to add a slight amount of 2.5K to 4K Hz of only a few dB for more presence.  Maybe not.  You can add a third centered microphone that is panned to the center for a more stable bass image. You may find that the center mic will reduce separation.  If that is the case, roll off the highs from 300 Hz and up. It will still give a stable center position.

Once you get the balance you like using only the two (or three) mics out in the studio, you can blend a slight amount of the direct sound back into the mix for added clarity.  But, not too much.  You could even spot mic some of the amps and blend that into the mix.  The possibilities are many.  

To get more room sound, turn the entire band level down.  To get less room sound, make the entire band louder.

If you are the singer, take a mic out into the studio, and NOT USING HEADPHONES, sing with the band into the mic.  Record the band and the singer.  Hold the mic for close mic-ing of your vocal. 

I think you will find that your performance will be more “electric” singing with the virtual band as if on stage. 

This is a good weekend project that you can do all by yourself or with your friends.  It’s a very enjoyable thing to do, especially as you get to the big buildup at the end.  As you work with the amp settings & speaker placement and see how all this effects the mix you get in the stereo mics, take mental notes.  It may one day help you in your engineering efforts.

Once you get the virtual band setup and working, I guarantee you that you will not want to take it all down for some time.  It's too much fun.  So . . . just record another set of direct-injected tracks and use the same setup for more experimenting.


~swd

PS:  If you were on the Disneyland payroll, the next step with the virtual band would be to put the speakers on movable MIDI controlled platforms so as to mimic the body movement of the players.  Such is the stuff of dreams.             
Logged
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7255


View Profile
« Reply #110 on: January 07, 2006, 11:37:15 AM »

This sounds like a blast. Thanks for the exercise.
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius; Patronizing Twaddler; Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick; Sensationalist Dullard; and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
Jonas
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1923


I've got the Beach Boys, my friends got the Stones


View Profile
« Reply #111 on: January 07, 2006, 11:38:07 AM »

Wow...I never thought of reamping a whole ensemble like that. Sounds like fun!

Thanks Smiley
Logged

We would like to record under an atmosphere of calmness. - Brian Wilson
--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1IgXT3xFdU
aeijtzsche
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2372



View Profile
« Reply #112 on: January 07, 2006, 02:36:04 PM »

I don't have enough simultaneous outputs (or inputs, for that matter) to pull that off.  I am increasingly interested in re-amping though.
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8285


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #113 on: January 07, 2006, 03:51:31 PM »

PS:  If you were on the Disneyland payroll, the next step with the virtual band would be to put the speakers on movable MIDI controlled platforms so as to mimic the body movement of the players.  Such is the stuff of dreams.             

If I were on the Disney payroll, I'd also have a girl with a Sonovox talking through the bass guitar, saying "You're not applying enough compression to me, aeijtzsche...more compression, please...." and really freak him out as he's mixing the tracks.

Like that "Sparky and the talking piano" Disney record - freaky stuff. Grin
Logged

“Some people think you have to knock somebody down in order to build yourself up, I don’t look at it that way. To the mentality that likes to disparage other people, I say perhaps you should get a life. It’s just wrong thinking in my opinion and I don’t mind saying that.” - Mike Love

"Every single person who criticized Brian for having She & Him, Kacey Musgraves, Sebu and Nate Ruess guesting on his solo album can now officially go heartily f*** themselves." - Wirestone
aeijtzsche
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2372



View Profile
« Reply #114 on: January 07, 2006, 04:07:44 PM »

Haha. 

I wouldn't do it, you know.  Apply more compression.  It was fine as it was.
Logged
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1266


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #115 on: January 07, 2006, 05:08:46 PM »

I don't have enough simultaneous outputs (or inputs, for that matter) to pull that off.  I am increasingly interested in re-amping though.
I got into re-amping because I just ran out of tracks to record everything I wanted to in stereo perspective. I soon found I could maintain better control and wider stereo spreads by doing the reamp thing toward the end of the mix.  Dennis and I did a 16-Track virtual band once.  He played all the parts.  We even used an acoustic piano to lay down dry parts and then put a speaker in the piano with a weight on the pedels to give a real piano sound to the virtual band.  It was a hoot !

One day while shopping I found the cutest little thing.  It was all miniture.  All the music and MIDI commands were stored on an internal chip in the main unit.  What this was, was a little virtual band.  Picture this:  The center box was about 4 inches square and had a "woofer" in it.  On top of the box was a figure of a mouse standing up and holding onto a microphone. As the music played, this animated mouse opened its mouth and swayed from side to side with the music.  The voice of the mouse came from this center box.  There were four smaller boxes to the left and four to the right, all connected with din plugs in the back. On top of each box was a mouse; a mouse drummer, a mouse keyboardist, a mouse flute player, a mouse guitarist, a mouse at a piano, a mouse with a sax, and a mouse playing the vibs.  All the mice were animated with MIDI. Each box was it's own source of sound.  So this was a nine-track playback with animated mice musicians.  It was real cute, and it sounded great as the sound of each instrument was coming from that instrument's box.  It was over $400.00 and a little to pricy for me, but I stayed around for three songs and was completely entranced with the whole concept.
  ~swd
« Last Edit: January 08, 2006, 05:21:33 AM by Stephen W. Desper » Logged
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1266


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #116 on: January 08, 2006, 05:53:08 AM »

Comment to aeijtzsche --

Concerning Echo Chambers:  The EMT plate chamber is a two-dimensional sounding device.  During the days of mono it was quite popular.  It could be adjusted for density of reverberation.  The sound in mono was very close to any room.  Then when stereo came along, room chambers came into their own.  They produced a three-dimensional sound that could be appreciated in the stereo perspective. Brian's discernment of a three-dimensional versus a two-dimensional quality of image was not very keen.  Carl, on the other hand, was quite aware of chamber differences, both in spatial impression and how the reverb effected what it was used on -- tonality.  Carl's favorite chamber was #2 at Capitol.  On a few occations we would actually record seperate stereo tracks just of the output of this chamber to have at mixdown.  It was a very popular chamber and could be booked for use weeks in advance of sessions.  It was of the same dimensions as chamber numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4, which were all pie shaped and built right next to each other under the Capitol tower parking lot.  Why this chamber had such pleasent sound over its neighbors was a mystery to eveyone.  It just did!

When Carl decided that he wanted to do mixdowns at the house rather than taking multi-tracks to Capitol or some other studio, the first thing I said was we need a chamber then.  Keep in mind that I was not a hired engineer working for The Beach Boys, as is the case with the engineers in use today.  I was part of the staff.  I had an office in the Beach Boy office complex and shared a secretary. I ran a department.  We had a budget. Unless I was spending thousands of dollars of a single piece of equipment, like a console or something, I answered to no one, exept Nick Grillo. So the decision to build a chamber over buying a plate never even crossed my mind at the time.  A plate was two-dimensional and we were going "stereo." I just picked up the phone and called the carpenters together, showed them what to do, and built the chamber.  In hindsight I guess the cost was about the same as an EMT would have been, but it was never considered. The rest is outlined in the book.
~swd   
« Last Edit: January 08, 2006, 05:58:21 AM by Stephen W. Desper » Logged
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1266


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #117 on: January 08, 2006, 06:04:28 AM »


If I were on the Disney payroll, I'd also have a girl with a Sonovox talking through the bass guitar, saying "You're not applying enough compression to me, aeijtzsche...more compression, please...." and really freak him out as he's mixing the tracks.

Like that "Sparky and the talking piano" Disney record - freaky stuff. Grin
Guitarfool2002 -- I think I'd have your Girl with Sonovox talking through the bass guitar amp saying to aeijtzsche, "a little more direct injection honey ... Oh baby!"

 Smiley  ~swd
Logged
andy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 171


View Profile
« Reply #118 on: January 08, 2006, 09:11:53 AM »

"We even used an acoustic piano to lay down dry parts and then put a speaker in the piano with a weight on the pedels to give a real piano sound to the virtual band.  It was a hoot !"


That's a really cool idea that I'd like to try sometime!
Logged
Arthur Slake
Smiley Smile Newbie

Offline Offline

Posts: 7



View Profile
« Reply #119 on: January 08, 2006, 05:29:33 PM »

Mr. Desper,
Does the EMT plate have stereo outputs or is it only mono and that's why it sounds only two dimensional?
Arthur
Logged
king of anglia
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 236



View Profile
« Reply #120 on: January 09, 2006, 03:44:26 AM »

Here's a convolution reverb impulse of an EMT 244. Credit to a Mr. Andreas Bernhard, whoever he may be:

http://s58.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=3MTOFD51X9X6V2VI3TA2BWIN84
Logged
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1266


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #121 on: January 09, 2006, 05:21:15 AM »

Mr. Desper,
Does the EMT plate have stereo outputs or is it only mono and that's why it sounds only two dimensional?
Arthur

All the following can have mono or stereo outputs and produce reverberation.  The spatial impression, depth of dimension, and directional qualities are the attributes I'm speaking of.

SPRING REVERB -- One Dimension -- The length of the spring

PLATE REVERB -- Two Dimensions  -- The length and width of the plate

FOIL REVERB -- Two Dimensions -- The length and width of the foil

CHAMBER REVERB -- Three Dimensions -- The length, width, and height of the room

In an effort to give a more "stereo" reverberation quality to the EMT plate, some engineers used two plates (one per side) which was an improvement (?), but played havoc with mono compatibility and was soon abandon.
  ~swd
Logged
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1266


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #122 on: January 09, 2006, 05:46:37 AM »

Here's a convolution reverb impulse of an EMT 244. Credit to a Mr. Andreas Bernhard, whoever he may be:

http://s58.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=3MTOFD51X9X6V2VI3TA2BWIN84

Sorry, I couldn't get it to download.

Here is EMT plate data and photo  >>>  http://www.sageelectronics.com/bovasound/emt.html  Note the hooks on the side for hanging the unit using isolation springs.  Units were usually hung up in the attic, out of the way.  In the photo you will see the two (left & right) pickups and how they can be moved closer together or far apart to regulate the size and length of reverb tiime.  As you can see there was one (mono) driver and two pickups (stereo).

In Chamber Reverb Rooms you could use one speaker with two mics or two speakers with two mics.  Thus, a chamber could have stereo going into it as well as coming out. 

The following is an interesting discussion from "The Professor Hoffman" website (http://www.netassoc.net/dougspage/HoffLesson4.htm)

~swd
 
  Audio Class With Professor Hoffman:

Lesson 4: Reverb/Echo

We have had the mini-course on "EQ" from you and the recent mini-course on "compression/limiting". How about the history, technology and use of echo and reverb in recordings that we cherish from the 1950's and 60's--why was it used, why so much in so many recordings and some technical comments about how it was achieved and what equipment was used? You have stated in a number of threads that you prefer "dry" or "more dry" recordings to those that are either "wet" or "drenched", as I like to say (recent Frank Sinatra and Nat King Cole threads).

Very quickly. In the late 1920's when electric recording came in (1925), some record companies like Columbia and Victor, recorded in an ambient environment (churches, meeting halls, etc.)

BUT, when Jukeboxes came in, the Jukebox operators DEMANDED that the record companies deaden their sound. The metallic sound of the Jukeboxes made the records sound too thin. SO, the record companies (hurting from the depression) did just that, just in time for the swing era.

That's why, from about 1935 on (until the 1950's), records were recorded as DEAD as possible.

Then, the HI-FI revolution began and the very start of the 1950's. Engineers tried everything to make their records sound "Hi-Fi" even if they didn't have a clue as to what that meant to a consumer. Mercury Records and engineer Bill Fine, put a single microphone in a big concert hall and recorded the first Mercury "Living Presence" LP. This was the start of the "Hi-Fi" craze, and most engineers from other companies quickly came to the understanding that ECHO = Hi-Fi.

A guy named Bill Putnam founded Universal Recording in Chicago and he invented the first "echo chamber". Easier than recording on location in a big hall. One by one, the "echo craze" spread across the country and around the world. Capitol built their chamber in 1953, and when they moved to the Capitol Tower in early 1956, their chambers were well thought out and amazing sounding (still are). Decca used an American Legion Hall in NYC to get that natural echo on "Rock Around The Clock" in 1954, and Columbia built big wonderful wet sounding studios to record stuff in ("Take Five", "Kind Of Blue", etc.)

Echo was here to stay.

Of course, by 1958, when stereo LP's came in, the engineers DOUBLED the amount of echo, but that's another story....

How's that for a quick rundown? 

Thanks--that helps to set the course for what transpired and how use evolved. I was listening to those Mitch Miller produced recordings last night and I could not help but notice how "drenched" they were--Marty Robbins, Frankie Laine, Guy Mitchell, et al. Further, I thought about how their "drenching" actually reduced their fidelity.

Indeed. There is ambience, then there is drenched.

Believe me, after you have heard some of these drenched ones without the downpouring of echo (the bonus track of "Stardust" on Nat "King" Cole's "Love Is The Thing" DCC Gold CD for example), you can begin to hear the magic on the actual tapes.
 
I have the DCC NKC CD (thank you). It is the fidelity of the Love Is The Thing CD (and others of that period) that gets me wondering about how wonderful many of those vintage recordings could sound if they were not so drenched.

A question--In a recording studio or mastering room, is Echo a physically produced process and Reverb an electronically produced process? They sound distinctly different with Echo, to my ears, being a series increasingly softer individual reflections of the original sound whereas Reverb sounds like a timed fade of the original sound so affected.  My father was Chief Engineer for a group of Top 40 Radio stations in the Midwest during the 60's and they added electronically produced Reverb (to everything) at the transmitter site to the signal to be transmitted...more reverb was added to a largely "wet" original product.

There are all types of "wetness".

I guess echo isn't really echo per se. It should be called reverb. True echo is kind of like yodeling on a mountain top and then it comes back to you after a delay.

Nowadays we just use the term "echo" to mean everything.

But, as to types of echo.

1. Reverb, made in a chamber or "plate"
2. Natural reverb with natural decay, from a real big space.
3. Echo or delay. Made by various means. Also called "slap", etc. The cheap Sun Records slap echo.

One example before I have to go actually do some work.

THE BEATLES "I Saw Her Standing There" (or anything on that first Beatles LP that you might have in stereo).

Go listen to that song, cutting off the vocals on the right channel. OK? Now you have heard the Abbey Road "SUPER DUPER" echo treatment:

A reverb chamber being fed back through the console and being printed to a second tape machine. That tape is being fed back through the console to the rhythm track of the live recording. With me so far? Now, since this tape recorder is playing back the live echo, the three-inch gap between the record and playback head of this "echo only" tape machine is allowing the ACTUAL PRINTED ECHO on the session master to have a slight delay in it.

So, it has that nice Abbey Road reverb PLUS the proper slap echo delay sound thrown in for good measure.

Cool, eh?

In a related matter-- what are we hearing when we got to the 70s? Echo Chamber or EMT Plate?

Three things happened that changed the sound of audio in the early 1970's.

First, the Beatles happened, and a style of recording that was strictly non-union and unorthodox. As a result, all studios were forced to upgrade to 8 and 16 track recording all of a sudden, so their clients could overdub to their heart's content. Thirdly, since the old vacuum tube consoles had only three or four track mixing, they were torn out and replaced by solid state gear.

So, in just a few years, all studios had dumped their tube gear. Thus, the sound of the recordings changed. Now that the studios had all these endless channels of sound, there was so much tape hiss that they needed noise reduction during recording and mixing to keep the hiss down. Thus Dolby A was born, changing the sound.

Now that the studios had all these endless channels of sound, there was a need to use more than a few microphones to capture the band. This is where the hi-hat got its own channel, and the bass drum, and the direct box, etc. Room ambiance died and the dry "detailed" 70's sound was born...

A simplified version but you get the ideal.

Thanks - this confirms the change in sound I am hearing. EMT plate echo - how is it different from chamber echo?

Chamber echo is a permanent structure. It works like a cave and is part of the studio. A plate is just like the reverb in your Fender guitar amp; a plate that resonates, sort of a poor man's echo chamber. It's portable and usually sits outside the actual studio in a little side room in a long rectangular box. It sounds pretty good if set up correctly and is meant to mimic a good chamber echo without having to dig a big cave, heh.

I have noticed that EMT plate echo has a different 'timbre' for lack of a better description. I assume it was variable in decay time. I have read stories about these EMT plates being big, bulky, immersed in oil!

It's just a plate, in a box the shape of a coffin. It ain't Gold Star buddy, and the sad thing is that no one seems to care. Echo is echo to them...  "

 
« Last Edit: January 09, 2006, 05:53:08 AM by Stephen W. Desper » Logged
king of anglia
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 236



View Profile
« Reply #123 on: January 09, 2006, 06:38:12 AM »

http://www.xs4all.nl/~fokkie/IR.htm#EMT244
Logged
Mitchell
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 711



View Profile
« Reply #124 on: January 09, 2006, 07:53:04 AM »

Quote
The plate reverb we have at bova sound was originally installed at the Ottawa National Arts Centre in 1967.

Sweet. Represent, yo!
Logged

Watch out for snakes!
gfx
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 77 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.262 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!