Headphones in the studio

[Joshilyn Hoisington]

Too much time to think, these days.

As I listen to productions for transcription and audio stuff, it is striking me that there are times when the band or at least a few people in the band would be wearing headphones.

We know from the WIBN situation that Hal had to wear phones there to hear the direct guitars.  But there are other times where there are direct guitars that it seems like the band would have needed to hear.  I believe in Dance, Dance, Dance, Glen mentions wanting to hear more of himself in his cans at some point.

This is partly just an observation - I have just tended to picture all these sessions as more or less headphone free affairs.

It's also a sort of open ended question.  When people were going direct, who could hear it?  How did this impact the playing?

But it's also a specific question - how many monitoring headphones could these simple consoles handle?

[c-man]

Too much time to think, these days.

As I listen to productions for transcription and audio stuff, it is striking me that there are times when the band or at least a few people in the band would be wearing headphones.

We know from the WIBN situation that Hal had to wear phones there to hear the direct guitars.  But there are other times where there are direct guitars that it seems like the band would have needed to hear.  I believe in Dance, Dance, Dance, Glen mentions wanting to hear more of himself in his cans at some point.

This is partly just an observation - I have just tended to picture all these sessions as more or less headphone free affairs.

It's also a sort of open ended question.  When people were going direct, who could hear it?  How did this impact the playing?

But it's also a specific question - how many monitoring headphones could these simple consoles handle?

Glen wearing "cans" on the "DDD" session makes sense - since he was playing an acoustic, and playing a significant lead line on it (doubling Carl's 12-string electric part), rather than a simple strumming part, it makes sense that he'd need to hear it over the din of the drums, accordion, and electric guitars (assuming the electrics were amped, which I think they were).

[guitarfool2002]

The issue of how many headphones could these consoles handle isn't as much of an issue - They could easily build what you can buy pre-made anywhere today, in the form of a headphone distribution amp. All that is needed is a single output coming from the board feed, and you could build a low-power amp with multiple 1/4" outputs to distribute the feed to as many sets of headphones as needed. Depending on the boards themselves and the limitations, you might not have had the luxury of building separate cue mixes to suit every individual player, but they could easily send one main cue mix (or the main feed as heard in the control room) to anyone who needed to hear it in their cans.

Now, of course, each player can have a separate mini-mixer where they are seated and adjust the mix however they want. That is an incredibly cool feature. And by now, pretty standard everywhere.

But yes, the issue of sending the feed to headphones wouldn't have been an issue, with the exception being (in the 60's at least) the ability for each player in a group to customize their own cue mix.

[yrplace]

Unlike today where everyone has headphones and often their own mixer (which I don't think helps) , back then headphones were the exception and usually only used if someone was in an iso booth or in the case of WIBN Hall needed to hear the direct guitars being played in the control room so he could bring the band in. But no one else in the band heard those guitars.

And for hat matter the band couldn't hear the blend or the reverb or tape slap while they were cutting the track. I think its at the end of the GOK master that Brian says "come on in if you want to hear it" cause when they played the tape back then everyone could hear what the track actually sounded like.

[Joshilyn Hoisington]

The issue of how many headphones could these consoles handle isn't as much of an issue - They could easily build what you can buy pre-made anywhere today, in the form of a headphone distribution amp. All that is needed is a single output coming from the board feed, and you could build a low-power amp with multiple 1/4" outputs to distribute the feed to as many sets of headphones as needed. Depending on the boards themselves and the limitations, you might not have had the luxury of building separate cue mixes to suit every individual player, but they could easily send one main cue mix (or the main feed as heard in the control room) to anyone who needed to hear it in their cans.

Now, of course, each player can have a separate mini-mixer where they are seated and adjust the mix however they want. That is an incredibly cool feature. And by now, pretty standard everywhere.

But yes, the issue of sending the feed to headphones wouldn't have been an issue, with the exception being (in the 60's at least) the ability for each player in a group to customize their own cue mix.

I didn't think of it as being an "issue" I was just interested in, practically, how many headphones studios were using on a session to session basis, and thus accommodating for. 

[guitarfool2002]

Unlike today where everyone has headphones and often their own mixer (which I don't think helps) , back then headphones were the exception and usually only used if someone was in an iso booth or in the case of WIBN Hall needed to hear the direct guitars being played in the control room so he could bring the band in. But no one else in the band heard those guitars.

And for hat matter the band couldn't hear the blend or the reverb or tape slap while they were cutting the track. I think its at the end of the GOK master that Brian says "come on in if you want to hear it" cause when they played the tape back then everyone could hear what the track actually sounded like.

The help afforded by the individual cue mixers for each player may be more psychological in my experience than anything lol. I've done a few sessions where as much time and energy was spent trying to get a cue mix for a picky singer as was spent on the actual vocal track being recorded! Isn't a lot of working with singers an exercise in being a psychologist and therapist?    (Just kidding...kind of...)

I will say that having an individual mixer *was* helpful for me when I played in pit bands for stage musicals, especially being able to adjust whichever instrumental section I needed to lock in with for either the flow of the cue or who I had to listen for to hit my own cues. But that's live performance synched with both live and keyboard-based players and the live action on the stage. Like on one show I had to play a banjo cue with a few horns if I remember, and I had the horns way up on my little mixer so I could hit the same groove as them rather than locking in with the less prominent instruments on that cue.

[Joshilyn Hoisington]

Now, Dance Dance Dance was recorded at RCA - a fairly large corporate studio.  Is it likely they had a few more headphone hookups than a Gold Star would at that time, so the band could have more phone options?

[DonnyL]

What headphones were used in West Coast studios at the time? I’m not that familiar with this aspect, but I think we were a few years away from hi-fi headphones, so interesting to think all of those classic BB vocals may have been recorded while listening to a limited-bandwidth headphone.

[Joshilyn Hoisington]

There was of course also the added novelty (to us) of the one-cupped phone.  Genius, I say, and way more conducive to ensemble playing or singing!

[c-man]

What headphones were used in West Coast studios at the time? I’m not that familiar with this aspect, but I think we were a few years away from hi-fi headphones, so interesting to think all of those classic BB vocals may have been recorded while listening to a limited-bandwidth headphone.

Can we tell from the vocal session footage here?:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdU6W__EU_c

[Stephen W. Desper]

 
COMMENT to aeijtzsche:

Others have answered your immediate questions, but knowing your fascination of time’s past, here’s a couple of points for you to consider.

The Natural Headphone …

Before multitrack, many records were recorded all-at-once. Take for example, Frank Sinatra or Tony Bennett. The orchestra, conductor, and singer were all in a studio room at the same time with the orchestra mic-ed and the singer standing in front of their microphone. Sometimes it was hard for the singer to hear their own intonation, over the orchestra that may be only a few yards from them. But no headphones in those days. What did you do? You made your own by cupping you hand around your ear. This gave you enough of a vocal hearing boost to overcome the problem. Sort of a do-it-yourself headphone. Ever see photos of Sinatra in session? In some photos you see him wearing that rimmed hat of his – kind of his trademark hat. But why wear a hat in a recording session?  Because the rim of the hat would reflect the voice back into the ear, which made singing less of a strain to hear yourself over the orchestra, and a more natural delivery.



ONE is enough …

When I use to work at MGM, the movie studio, I would sometimes sneak into the scoring stage at lunchtime or after a shoot finished. If I was lucky, a scoring session would be in progress, and as long as I was quiet I would sit in the couch that was under the control room glass window – out in the studio itself. The MGM scoring stage is a huge sound stage, easily housing a full symphony orchestra. So it you are recording the sound track for a movie or TV show, how many headphones will it require? Do all the members of the orchestra get headphones?  Back in those days the answer was: one. One headphone – for the conductor.

Here’s the setup. The orchestra, maybe sixty players, is arranged in typical seating arrangement around the conductor, who is standing on a box. Behind the orchestra, but visible to the conductor, is a large (movie theater sized) screen. The conductor can see the screen. The orchestra cannot; they see the conductor. In his headphone, the conductor hears a count while simultaneously a “wipe” or line is moving across the screen. He hear’s “4-3-2-1-beep; as the wipe moves left to right. The downbeat is on the beep and the orchestra is closely watching the conductor for the beginning queue. The conductor may move his baton silently in the air to signal the coming downbeat. Then at the beep, the orchestra plays.

In a movie there are many moments of silence (perhaps during dialog) but there are also “bridges” or “stings” that help to tell the story. I use to really enjoy the scoring of Tom & Jerry cartoons. It’s really amazing how many “stings” are in a cartoon. Every one has to be done with a count and wipe – to be edited into a complete film later. So Tom may get hit on the head by Jerry in one shot. And with that hit in the action would be a chord or short series of notes to go along with the action on the screen. Very fascinating to watch – but only one headphone is required. Sometimes the conductor would hear dialog in his headphone, if the music was to swell or be dramatic as the words were spoken. Sometimes sound effects were in the feed if the music was to interplay with a crash or hammer blow or some other effect. Sitting in the studio, right in front of the orchestra all I heard was the music, but what a sound! Those stages had dead acoustics, so all you heard were the live instruments, no effects, no dialog.

Here’s an example. Ignore the dialog and FEX (sound effects). Just listen to the music and imagine each little sting or bridge of music as a separate wipe and little recording sequence.

Tom & Jerry >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5BLUtsbjzI&feature=emb_logo

Although the Beach Boys used double headphones, most of the time while singing around a mic, most would just move one ‘phone off of one ear and listen to the blend as they sang with one ear and hear the track from the ‘phones in the other ear. Brian would set the ‘phone off to the side of his ear so he could hear the live blend and the track leaking from the offset ‘phone. Singing with both headphones in place and hearing a feed of yourself in the headphone was not that popular in the studio. Of course in concert work today, each singer has custom fitted in-ear phones that block out all sound. Hence the need for a separate headphone mixer and console giving each singer his own special blend in his earbuds. Rather complex today and a far cry from just cupping your hand around your ear. ~swd

[Lonely Summer]

COMMENT to aeijtzsche:

Others have answered your immediate questions, but knowing your fascination of time’s past, here’s a couple of points for you to consider.

The Natural Headphone …

Before multitrack, many records were recorded all-at-once. Take for example, Frank Sinatra or Tony Bennett. The orchestra, conductor, and singer were all in a studio room at the same time with the orchestra mic-ed and the singer standing in front of their microphone. Sometimes it was hard for the singer to hear their own intonation, over the orchestra that may be only a few yards from them. But no headphones in those days. What did you do? You made your own by cupping you hand around your ear. This gave you enough of a vocal hearing boost to overcome the problem. Sort of a do-it-yourself headphone. Ever see photos of Sinatra in session? In some photos you see him wearing that rimmed hat of his – kind of his trademark hat. But why wear a hat in a recording session?  Because the rim of the hat would reflect the voice back into the ear, which made singing less of a strain to hear yourself over the orchestra, and a more natural delivery.



ONE is enough …

When I use to work at MGM, the movie studio, I would sometimes sneak into the scoring stage at lunchtime or after a shoot finished. If I was lucky, a scoring session would be in progress, and as long as I was quiet I would sit in the couch that was under the control room glass window – out in the studio itself. The MGM scoring stage is a huge sound stage, easily housing a full symphony orchestra. So it you are recording the sound track for a movie or TV show, how many headphones will it require? Do all the members of the orchestra get headphones?  Back in those days the answer was: one. One headphone – for the conductor.

Here’s the setup. The orchestra, maybe sixty players, is arranged in typical seating arrangement around the conductor, who is standing on a box. Behind the orchestra, but visible to the conductor, is a large (movie theater sized) screen. The conductor can see the screen. The orchestra cannot; they see the conductor. In his headphone, the conductor hears a count while simultaneously a “wipe” or line is moving across the screen. He hear’s “4-3-2-1-beep; as the wipe moves left to right. The downbeat is on the beep and the orchestra is closely watching the conductor for the beginning queue. The conductor may move his baton silently in the air to signal the coming downbeat. Then at the beep, the orchestra plays.

In a movie there are many moments of silence (perhaps during dialog) but there are also “bridges” or “stings” that help to tell the story. I use to really enjoy the scoring of Tom & Jerry cartoons. It’s really amazing how many “stings” are in a cartoon. Every one has to be done with a count and wipe – to be edited into a complete film later. So Tom may get hit on the head by Jerry in one shot. And with that hit in the action would be a chord or short series of notes to go along with the action on the screen. Very fascinating to watch – but only one headphone is required. Sometimes the conductor would hear dialog in his headphone, if the music was to swell or be dramatic as the words were spoken. Sometimes sound effects were in the feed if the music was to interplay with a crash or hammer blow or some other effect. Sitting in the studio, right in front of the orchestra all I heard was the music, but what a sound! Those stages had dead acoustics, so all you heard were the live instruments, no effects, no dialog.

Here’s an example. Ignore the dialog and FEX (sound effects). Just listen to the music and imagine each little sting or bridge of music as a separate wipe and little recording sequence.

Tom & Jerry >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5BLUtsbjzI&feature=emb_logo

Although the Beach Boys used double headphones, most of the time while singing around a mic, most would just move one ‘phone off of one ear and listen to the blend as they sang with one ear and hear the track from the ‘phones in the other ear. Brian would set the ‘phone off to the side of his ear so he could hear the live blend and the track leaking from the offset ‘phone. Singing with both headphones in place and hearing a feed of yourself in the headphone was not that popular in the studio. Of course in concert work today, each singer has custom fitted in-ear phones that block out all sound. Hence the need for a separate headphone mixer and console giving each singer his own special blend in his earbuds. Rather complex today and a far cry from just cupping your hand around your ear. ~swd

I think maybe it was better back in the old days. I've seen quite a few pics of Dennis singing, with the hand cupped around his ear.

[guitarfool2002]

In response to C-Man posting the GV film footage, I'm posting a few still frames showing the headphones in use...by the band members overdubbing vocals and one interesting one from a musician at Western.

The GV film clip is a mix of several sessions as you can see by the different clothing and setup. But all the vocal clips were shot at Columbia, and the instrumental sessions at Western #3. So the headphones were different based on studio location and what they either bought or built for the clients to use.

Donny L: There were what were considered "high fidelity" stereo headphones available by the late 50's, coinciding with the boom in stereo records for audiophiles and hi-fi hobbyists. But in rock/pop music, this wasn't as much of a concern until 66-67 as you know. Most of the music was geared toward older listeners with bigger budgets. But Koss had the first stereo 'phones for home use and other makers followed suit. I don't know how many studios were buying these home 'phones for studio use though, since the musicians overdubbing wouldn't need to hear stereo until 66-67 when it became standard for rock/pop.

So here are the frames. I have no idea what model the 'Boys are using at Columbia at this point. AKG? They're too small for Koss. How about Beyerdynamic? Guesses?










And here is one to look at on several levels. Notice Dennis is holding his 'phones and getting the wire untangled - But they're not attached to a headband. Both speakers are loose, so he can take them on and off his ears at will. Or do one off/one on while tracking and listening. Again, no headband. And Al's have the headband. It was personal preference, but it brings up the question if the studio had sets of 'phones set up without the band in case a singer like Dennis or Bruce preferred to track vocals that way.

Note #2 - Instead of Al Jardine's famous "box" where he'd stand to track group vocals, on this day at Columbia they had Al standing on a baffle or GoBo instead! Watch the clip as they're gathering up their headphones to record and Al grabs his phones and climbs up on that baffle.

Note #3 - As the clip combines several separate sessions, notice how Dennis for one is using the free-floating 'phones in the group session, then in another session he wears the standard headband 'phones.

So can anyone ID these cans?




Last one. Jay Migliori recording an early GV bass clarinet part with Tommy Morgan on harmonica next to him. Notice Jay M is wearing the headphones with only one speaker (over his right ear). So these were available and in use at least by June '66, and at Western. The question is, did these come from the manufacturer this way, or were they modified on demand by either the studio staff or the players themselves? Were they just using the types of single-sided 'phones used by thousands of switchboard operators, or were these made specifically for musicians? Opens up a lot of questions.  

And Tommy Morgan has what looks like a standard pair of 2-speaker headphones, different model than Jay's, sitting on his leg waiting for the take.

See what you think:






There may be no standard answer as to the question "what headphones were used" because in just one film clip taken at two LA studios there are multiple variations and uses shown. Not to mention all the other Pet Sounds vocal still photos as reprinted in many sources.

I think Al may have the best reply for this: "Headphones? Oh, I got headphones for 'ya..."

[Stephen W. Desper]

COMMENT:

Most studios used AKG headphones. AKG was the first manufacture to recognize the pro-headphone market and the need for headphones to be used by musicians in a studio setting.

From a design and engineering point of view, the difference between a professional and an audiophile headphone is:

Pro -- lightweight easy to slip on and off // A'phile -- sits well on the head for extended periods and comfort

Pro -- higher impedance (voltage driven) so several can be connected to one line-amp // A'phile -- lower impedance (current driven) to be more matched to a power type amp

Pro -- one cord on one side, doesn't get tangled up if playing an instrument such as a violin or woodwind // A'phile -- 'Y' connection with plugs into each phone, to facilitate different styles of "designer" cables

Pro -- open cup design, not too closed, so to hear other musicians // A'phile -- closed cup to provide wide range and deep bass isolated from surroundings

Pro -- high compliance Q factor, more efficient, takes less power // A'phile -- lower compliance for deep bass, unnecessary in a studio and actually unwanted due to headphone leakage picked up by microphones

~swd