gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
633421 Posts in 25354 Topics by 3609 Members - Latest Member: fox67 June 25, 2018, 12:58:00 AM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 21 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The Mark Linett Thread  (Read 123518 times)
Toby
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 30


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: January 04, 2006, 07:35:53 PM »

Interesting thread. I've had Waves' IR-1 Convolution Reverb for awhile without using it, so I'm trying it out now as I'm typing this message and it sounds wonderful. A great function is that you can have any reverb sound reversed by the push of a button. I've never used a reverb unit with this impulse response function that King of Anglia brought up, so this is all really exciting.

Logged
yrplace
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 220


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: January 04, 2006, 08:16:07 PM »

Interesting thread. I've had Waves' IR-1 Convolution Reverb for awhile without using it, so I'm trying it out now as I'm typing this message and it sounds wonderful. A great function is that you can have any reverb sound reversed by the push of a button. I've never used a reverb unit with this impulse response function that King of Anglia brought up, so this is all really exciting.



Yeah I have that one as well. Really great sounding although the interface isn't as good as Altiverb. I bought the new Waves APA unit so I could run more plugins at higher samplerates and they were offering the IR1 for free. Sadly when I upgraded to Pro-tools 7 the APA stopped working and I am still waiting for Waves to come up with a software fix.

Mark
Logged
Toby
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 30


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: January 04, 2006, 08:33:53 PM »

Shame about the software bug. Prior to that, have you been using the IR-1 a lot? My main reverbs have been the other ones from Waves (True Reverb and Renaissance Verb) but they truly don't stand a chance to the IR-1! I haven't used the IR-1 so much before because it consumed too much RAM but that's sorted out now. Just for the sake of it, I took our well-known LA studio Cello's Echo Chamber reverb and put that over some of my tracks and the sound is HUGE! Huge and clean.

And to think I used the Boss RV-3 as my main reverb 10 years ago...
Logged
JRauch
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 386



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: January 05, 2006, 04:34:19 AM »

I guess you missed the question, so I post it again. Itīs kind of important to me to know that:

In the SMiLE-booklet, Brian is credited with "music, vocals, keyboards". On which parts did he play the keys?
« Last Edit: January 05, 2006, 04:36:06 AM by JRauch » Logged

Dance as if no one's looking. Wrestle things out to bring moment to your own sense of discovery, and make the world a better place. This is no time for whiners.† Ė† Van Dyke Parks
yrplace
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 220


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: January 05, 2006, 10:34:15 AM »

I guess you missed the question, so I post it again. Itīs kind of important to me to know that:

In the SMiLE-booklet, Brian is credited with "music, vocals, keyboards". On which parts did he play the keys?

I don't recall.......but several sections throughout.
Logged
king of anglia
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 235



View Profile
« Reply #30 on: January 05, 2006, 02:28:44 PM »

1966 tape echo and echo chamber courtesy of a computer:

http://s50.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=1R6ISB9WU3N810INHJ4S4O12WE
Logged
aeijtzsche
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2366



View Profile
« Reply #31 on: January 05, 2006, 02:47:01 PM »

The bass in particular sounds really spectacular.
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8100


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: January 05, 2006, 09:09:47 PM »

Interesting discussion, and some cool innovative ideas on capturing the room sound through something like a talkback mic click.

But has anyone done an A/B comparison sending a track through any average rackmount studio reverb unit set to the "large room" or similar setting and compared the quality of that sound to one of these convolution reverbs?

Or is a basic convolution reverb doing essentially the same thing as your average digital reverb would do, only giving you specific parameters to match some specific rooms that have gained a legendary reputation?

I may be a skeptic until I hear more evidence, but I almost see signs of salesmanship in some of the claims, like those guitar salesmen who might crank a lesser-quality guitar through a really nice tube amp, hit an open A chord,  and watch as the buyer's eyes get really big... Wink

I'm not saying the convolution reverb isn't a great tool, but I'm not convinced you couldn't get the same effect with a decent rackmount reverb. Convince me, please!
Logged

ďSome people think you have to knock somebody down in order to build yourself up, I donít look at it that way. To the mentality that likes to disparage other people, I say perhaps you should get a life. Itís just wrong thinking in my opinion and I donít mind saying that.Ē - 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
yrplace
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 220


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: January 05, 2006, 11:55:31 PM »

Interesting discussion, and some cool innovative ideas on capturing the room sound through something like a talkback mic click.

But has anyone done an A/B comparison sending a track through any average rackmount studio reverb unit set to the "large room" or similar setting and compared the quality of that sound to one of these convolution reverbs?

Or is a basic convolution reverb doing essentially the same thing as your average digital reverb would do, only giving you specific parameters to match some specific rooms that have gained a legendary reputation?

I may be a skeptic until I hear more evidence, but I almost see signs of salesmanship in some of the claims, like those guitar salesmen who might crank a lesser-quality guitar through a really nice tube amp, hit an open A chord,† and watch as the buyer's eyes get really big... Wink

I'm not saying the convolution reverb isn't a great tool, but I'm not convinced you couldn't get the same effect with a decent rackmount reverb. Convince me, please!

Conventional digital reverbs use algorithms to simulate the sound of a real acoustic space. Some do it better than others but none sound exactly the same as a real acoustic space. Convolution reverb programs are capable of sampling an acoustic space (or a digital or analog reverb) and then recreating it.

I bought Altiverb soon after it came out and I now also own the Waves IR-1 convolution reverb and frankly I almost never use anything else. Having real chambers and acoustic spaces available just sounds better to my ears (for whatever that's worth!) And they aren't all that expensive to boot...

Mark

Logged
king of anglia
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 235



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: January 05, 2006, 11:58:45 PM »

I think the basic principle as I understand it is that convolution reverbs multiply the dry sound by the impulse sound. Digital reverb merely repeats the sound in various ways.
Logged
Andreas
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 226


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: January 06, 2006, 12:15:43 AM »

In case you missed my question....please let me repost it.

Mark,

the song Soulful Old Man Sunshine (on the Endless Harmomny soundtrack) alternates between stereo in the chorus and fake stereo during the verses.  Could you explain why this is the case?
More generally, could you explain what tapes and tracks of this song exist, and how you came up with the finished mix?  Were some sections already mixed in 1969? If no original mix or test mix existed, how was the strucutre of the song decided? Do all the instrumental sections exist on multitracks, i.e. would a true stereo instrumental mix have been possible?

Thank you in advance.
Logged
yrplace
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 220


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: January 06, 2006, 09:53:14 AM »

In case you missed my question....please let me repost it.

Mark,

the song Soulful Old Man Sunshine (on the Endless Harmomny soundtrack) alternates between stereo in the chorus and fake stereo during the verses.† Could you explain why this is the case?
More generally, could you explain what tapes and tracks of this song exist, and how you came up with the finished mix?† Were some sections already mixed in 1969? If no original mix or test mix existed, how was the strucutre of the song decided? Do all the instrumental sections exist on multitracks, i.e. would a true stereo instrumental mix have been possible?

Thank you in advance.

The tape was a two-track that came from Rick Henn and was something he put together from old ruff mixes. Only the original tracking date with some overdubs exists on multi-track. The tape with the vocals is missing.

Mark
Logged
Andreas
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 226


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: January 06, 2006, 10:46:19 AM »

The tape was a two-track that came from Rick Henn and was something he put together from old ruff mixes. Only the original tracking date with some overdubs exists on multi-track. The tape with the vocals is missing.

Mark

Thanks for the answer. Did I understand that right: Those old rough mixes were duophonic for the verses, and that's all that survived with vocals? Who mixed those rough mixes? Rick?
Logged
brother john
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 589



View Profile WWW
« Reply #38 on: January 06, 2006, 11:25:30 AM »

For aeijtzsche  and K.o.A. -

Have a look at this site for an example of someone who's really into IRs. Lots to download:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~fokkie/IR.htm

I haven't tried them myself yet, but they look pretty interesting...

BJ



Logged

Religion is a privilege, not a right.
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8100


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #39 on: January 06, 2006, 01:00:45 PM »

I'd be more confident in something like the Waves IR-1. My issue is perhaps with the sampling - if the sample was made using a starter pistol to excite a room such as the Putnam chambers at United/Western, and those results were recorded and sampled directly from that room then shaped by the end user, that would be perfect. I'd expect great results, and obviously great results have been created using those samples. But I'm not as sold on sampling an echo or reverb from, say, a vintage recording and applying that to a track, suggesting that that is a simulation of the original room. If you take it from any commercial CD, even one stage away from the raw master tapes, wouldn't you have certain parts of the mastering/transfer process coloring the sound of that room? If I take a reverb from a Beach Boys outtake, I'm not getting the pure sound of that room...rather I'd think I'd be getting the sound of my own track as heard through whatever processing the Beach Boys track has received in the process of putting it onto CD. It's not the same as applying the sampled sound of the actual live reverb room.

Maybe I'm stuck in the past, but I still need to be convinced that a properly-applied rackmount reverb wouldn't be a more pure sound than a sample from a recording, in the way the track interacts with that reverb.
Logged

ďSome people think you have to knock somebody down in order to build yourself up, I donít look at it that way. To the mentality that likes to disparage other people, I say perhaps you should get a life. Itís just wrong thinking in my opinion and I donít mind saying that.Ē - 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: 2366



View Profile
« Reply #40 on: January 06, 2006, 01:10:42 PM »

Quote
I'd think I'd be getting the sound of my own track as heard through whatever processing the Beach Boys track has received in the process of putting it onto CD.

That's not a bad thing, in my book.
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8100


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #41 on: January 06, 2006, 01:24:48 PM »

Quote
I'd think I'd be getting the sound of my own track as heard through whatever processing the Beach Boys track has received in the process of putting it onto CD.

That's not a bad thing, in my book.

So you'd rather have mastering, compression, EQ, etc...as added to a CD recording in the modern era applied to a reverb you want on your original track trying to get the sound of a room like Western/Cello, rather than the un-processed sample of the reverb room in question? It's just my opinion, of course, but I'd rather use my own reverb as set, created, and applied by my own ears, or else an un-doctored sample of the actual Putnam room, instead of going for a notion of what GoldStar's reverb would have sounded like based on a sample taken from a recording. It's a lot of fun to create samples using the classic rooms heard on recordings, but my question involves the musical/sonic value of doing such a thing instead of using a plain ol' effects unit.

Seriously, I'm open to all options, and not sold on anything yet. This is a fascinating topic, and I'm just raising my skeptical points hoping to be convinced otherwise. 
Logged

ďSome people think you have to knock somebody down in order to build yourself up, I donít look at it that way. To the mentality that likes to disparage other people, I say perhaps you should get a life. Itís just wrong thinking in my opinion and I donít mind saying that.Ē - 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: 2366



View Profile
« Reply #42 on: January 06, 2006, 02:02:16 PM »

It's all the same to me.  If it's not the real thing, then it's not. 
Logged
yrplace
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 220


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: January 06, 2006, 02:11:31 PM »

I'd be more confident in something like the Waves IR-1. My issue is perhaps with the sampling - if the sample was made using a starter pistol to excite a room such as the Putnam chambers at United/Western, and those results were recorded and sampled directly from that room then shaped by the end user, that would be perfect. I'd expect great results, and obviously great results have been created using those samples. But I'm not as sold on sampling an echo or reverb from, say, a vintage recording and applying that to a track, suggesting that that is a simulation of the original room. If you take it from any commercial CD, even one stage away from the raw master tapes, wouldn't you have certain parts of the mastering/transfer process coloring the sound of that room? If I take a reverb from a Beach Boys outtake, I'm not getting the pure sound of that room...rather I'd think I'd be getting the sound of my own track as heard through whatever processing the Beach Boys track has received in the process of putting it onto CD. It's not the same as applying the sampled sound of the actual live reverb room.

Maybe I'm stuck in the past, but I still need to be convinced that a properly-applied rackmount reverb wouldn't be a more pure sound than a sample from a recording, in the way the track interacts with that reverb.

Sampling a chamber with a starter pistol will give you the sound of the chamber but not what it sounds like when used as an effect on a recording. To do that you need the speaker and the microphones which is why you use the frequency sweep to sample the chamer.

I am also not convinced that a talkback "pop" will give an accurate sample although in the case of Goldstar's chamber it is certainly worth a try.

Mark
Logged
aeijtzsche
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2366



View Profile
« Reply #44 on: January 06, 2006, 03:44:18 PM »

OK, Mark, this is going to be a potentially involved question so feel free to answer in parts or not answer at all...

Anyhow, my primary interest in life over the past few years has been, basically, learning about recording and recording technology and techniques used by Brian from roughly 63-67.  Not necessarily just Brian per se, but using Brian as the "template."  Really simply "the hollywood recording studio in the mid sixties".  You've answered some questions I've had before and I've appreciated it.

You explained some of the inner workings of your board from Western Two.  I'm trying to clarify the various signal flow options.  Here is my understanding from what you've written as well as others, and from info from an original 610 module manual from 1967.

The 610 boards had something in the area of 12 inputs at that time.  Three program busses (l-c-r) would be sent out to the three-track tape machine.  Each module also had an echo send pot, and as such there were three "echo busses".

So it would be possible to send a dry signal from, say Carl's direct 12-string guitar, to one track, and the return from the chamber to another track.

Now, I realize they'd be monitoring in mono, but would they be monitoring off the program busses or are there monitor sends?

That was the end of "topic 1."

Topic two:

In several interviews, Bruce Botnick has mentioned that he would only use tube condensers to record at Sunset Sound, primarily U47s and C-37As. 

Larry Levine has said in interviews that Gold Star didn't really even own more than two or three condensers until pretty late in the 60s, and that for Brian, the only condensers in the room might have been a U67 over the drums and a U47 on the percussion.

So, in listening to the discrete tracks from the three-track, does something like "Here Today" show a marked increase in leakage compared to "I Just Wasn't Made for these Times"?

To my ears, those two tracks sound very different, but it's hard to tell what makes up the sound without hearing the building blocks of it.

And then how does Western fit in to that spectrum?


One last thing:  If you have the Phil Spector back to mono boxset, any idea what the Small Diaphragm condenser over Hal's set is on the pages with all the musician's pictures?  Craig, if you're reading in, do you care to hazzard a guess if you have that?

Thanks, Mark.  I appreciate what you're doing to preserve the knowledge of what guys like Chuck Britz did.  You and Alan Boyd are guardian angels.
Logged
yrplace
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 220


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: January 06, 2006, 04:44:35 PM »


You explained some of the inner workings of your board from Western Two.† I'm trying to clarify the various signal flow options.† Here is my understanding from what you've written as well as others, and from info from an original 610 module manual from 1967.

The 610 boards had something in the area of 12 inputs at that time.† Three program busses (l-c-r) would be sent out to the three-track tape machine.† Each module also had an echo send pot, and as such there were three "echo busses".  THE ECHO SEND AUTOMATICALLY SWITCED WITH THE BUSS SELECT SO THAT IF YOU WERE SENDING A CHL TO THE LEFT BUSS (TRACK) THE ECHO SEND WENT TO THE LEFT ECHO BUSS. THE THREE ECHO RETURNS WOULD NORMALLY GO BACK TO THE SAME BUSS (LEFT TO LEFT ETC.) BUT YOU COULD PATCH IT TO A DIFFT BUSS ON THE RETURN ALTHOUGH THIS WAS DONE ONLY ON OCCASION.

So it would be possible to send a dry signal from, say Carl's direct 12-string guitar, to one track, and the return from the chamber to another track. YES BUT SELDOM DONE.

Now, I realize they'd be monitoring in mono, but would they be monitoring off the program busses or are there monitor sends? NO MONITOR SENDS AT ALL. YOU EITHER MONITORED THE THREE BUSSES IN THREE SPEAKERS OR THE SUMMED MONO OF THE THREE BUSSES  WHICH THE CONSOLE DID AUTOMATICALLY AT WESTERN, MONITORED IN ONE SPEAKER.

That was the end of "topic 1."

Topic two:

In several interviews, Bruce Botnick has mentioned that he would only use tube condensers to record at Sunset Sound, primarily U47s and C-37As.† SEEMS VERY UNLIKELY. HE CERTAINLY USED CONDENSERS AND PROBABLY MORE THAN AT WESTERN OR GOLDSTAR, BUT DYNAMICS WERE CERTAINLY IN USE AS WELL.

Larry Levine has said in interviews that Gold Star didn't really even own more than two or three condensers until pretty late in the 60s, and that for Brian, the only condensers in the room might have been a U67 over the drums and a U47 on the percussion. THAT SEEMS LIKELY

So, in listening to the discrete tracks from the three-track, does something like "Here Today" show a marked increase in leakage compared to "I Just Wasn't Made for these Times"? THE TRACKS SOUND DIFFT. BUT NOT AS IF A BUNCH OF CONDENSERS WERE BEING USED AT SUNSET. GOLDSTAR AND WESTERN SOUND SIMILAR AS WELL. BIGGEST DIFF. IS IN THE REVERB AND THE ADDITIONAL NOISE ON THE TAPES MADE AT GOLDSTAR.

To my ears, those two tracks sound very different, but it's hard to tell what makes up the sound without hearing the building blocks of it.

And then how does Western fit in to that spectrum? SEE ABOVE


One last thing:† If you have the Phil Spector back to mono boxset, any idea what the Small Diaphragm condenser over Hal's set is on the pages with all the musician's pictures?† Craig, if you're reading in, do you care to hazzard a guess if you have that? I'LL HAVE TO LOOK

Thanks, Mark.† I appreciate what you're doing to preserve the knowledge of what guys like Chuck Britz did.† You and Alan Boyd are guardian angels.
Quote
Logged
aeijtzsche
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2366



View Profile
« Reply #46 on: January 07, 2006, 01:09:28 PM »

Thanks, Mark.  Particularly for explaining the echo send, I wasn't clear on what the manual was suggesting when it said "3 echo busses."

Western had (er..."has") 3 chambers, correct?  Would the engineer be able to patch into all three of them at the same time, if they were all available?

It sounds to me, on the stack-o-tracks stereo versions of the California Girls track and the Let Him Run Wild track, that Brian chose to print reverb returns from certain things on different tracks than the dry signal.  Carl's 12-string on the intro to Cal Girls, in particular, although it's difficult to tell with so many guitar players on that date.
Logged
yrplace
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 220


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: January 07, 2006, 03:52:18 PM »

Thanks, Mark.† Particularly for explaining the echo send, I wasn't clear on what the manual was suggesting when it said "3 echo busses."

Western had (er..."has") 3 chambers, correct?† Would the engineer be able to patch into all three of them at the same time, if they were all available?

It sounds to me, on the stack-o-tracks stereo versions of the California Girls track and the Let Him Run Wild track, that Brian chose to print reverb returns from certain things on different tracks than the dry signal.† Carl's 12-string on the intro to Cal Girls, in particular, although it's difficult to tell with so many guitar players on that date.

At the peak there were only four chambers at Western and three at United so EMT plates were certainly in use by the early 60's as well (I'd guess around 1963)
Logged
aeijtzsche
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2366



View Profile
« Reply #48 on: January 07, 2006, 04:06:30 PM »

Ah, I was actually going to ask you about that.

Was there a working standard, as far as you can tell, for the Beach Boys and EMT versus Chamber?  Has Brian ever said the he prefered the chamber for something but EMT for something else? 

One thing I was surprised to find out was that Stephen Desper built a chamber at Brian's house, because until I got his book, I'd sort of assumed they just bought or rented some EMT plates for the house.  But obviously it was worth it to somebody to build a real chamber.
Logged
yrplace
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 220


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: January 07, 2006, 05:43:23 PM »

Ah, I was actually going to ask you about that.

Was there a working standard, as far as you can tell, for the Beach Boys and EMT versus Chamber?† Has Brian ever said the he prefered the chamber for something but EMT for something else?†

One thing I was surprised to find out was that Stephen Desper built a chamber at Brian's house, because until I got his book, I'd sort of assumed they just bought or rented some EMT plates for the house.† But obviously it was worth it to somebody to build a real chamber.

Can't answer that one. My guess is it was mostly Chuck Britz's decision what to use or it may have been simply been a matter of what was available. How the reverb was used would have certainly been Brian's decision. At Western Studio two had (has )  its own dedicated chamber above the hallway, but the other chambers would have been available to any room that needed them.

As for Brian's house I assume building a chamber was easier and cheaper than bringing in an EMT plate.

Mark
Logged
gfx
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 21 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.356 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!