Message Board

curtiswyant · Post by **curtiswyant** » Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:04 am

I'd spend more time copying their vocal style rather than worrying about equipment. These guys sang their butts off in bars every night for years before even dreaming about recording at EMI.

hauser gabone · Post by **hauser gabone** » Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:28 am

they didnt have ADT until around Revolver i believe...so the sublte differences of double tracked vocals may have some role...good luck!

dokushoka · Post by **dokushoka** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:54 am

I don't know of any mic that has the sense of "air" or presence that the u47 is capable of. Aside from their great voices (as mentioned) the u47 is really the next big part of their "sound."

digital eagle audio · Post by **digital eagle audio** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 12:17 pm

i pee my pants for the 47.

timbertrout · Post by **timbertrout** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 2:28 pm

Another dimension thus far not mentioned: Context. What are the vocals surrounded by?

The Beatle vocal tracks were not competing with sounds heard in today's instrumental tracks (thundering low bass and kick, hyper-sparkly cymbals & guitars, everything peak limited to death, tracks stacked on tracks, etc)... so to a certain extent, in comparing a 1966 recording to a 2006 recording, the vocals may be the sonic component that has changed the least...

So until one has a Beatle-ish sounding backing track to work with (sonic-wise and arrangement-wise) it's hard to compare one's vocal sound to JPG&R's.

DaViDB112 · Post by **DaViDB112** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:48 am

i think all that valve compression and va;ve tape machines would have a lot to do with that. start investing in some hi-end equipment that has ' that sound ' .

abc · Post by **abc** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:55 am

pantone247 · Post by **pantone247** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 6:16 am

Olivia Tremor Control do great Beatles-a-like vocals, onto four tracks and 8 tracks, I can only imagine they were using 57's... Rob Schnieder mentions a AT4033 in the Tape Op book... maybe that was in there too... actually Apples in Stereo on World Beneath The Moon (on Submarine especially) do some very Beatles style vocals... In both cases I think the "beatleishness" (ahem) is from the style of singing, the close swooping harmonys, a brash EQ technque and overloading the tape, maybe even over loading the pre...

I guess my point is you don't need a U47 or a tape machine to capture the spirit of that sound..

I guess...

abc · Post by **abc** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 6:28 am

dokushoka · Post by **dokushoka** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:13 am

I guess my point is you don't need a U47 or a tape machine to capture the spirit of that sound..

You know the really frustrating part? Getting the spirit is a HUGE challenge, and even with a u47 and a tape machine, you're going to have a hard time capturing it even STILL. I know a guy who's life quest is to get THAT sound and he's come close, but not that close... and this is millions of dollars later!

joeysimms · Post by **joeysimms** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:30 am

dokushoka wrote:
I guess my point is you don't need a U47 or a tape machine to capture the spirit of that sound..
You know the really frustrating part? Getting the spirit is a HUGE challenge, and even with a u47 and a tape machine, you're going to have a hard time capturing it even STILL. I know a guy who's life quest is to get THAT sound and he's come close, but not that close... and this is millions of dollars later!

He's learning the hard way..

;ivlunsdystf · Post by **;ivlunsdystf** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:52 am

Sure helps to do the vocals very early in the process and then start tracking things that complement the vocals, rather than saving the lead vocal for last. Same with mixing. Vocals and drums first. Everything else added afterwards, to taste.

Not that I know how the Beatles approached this, but I can say with certainty that the lead vocals are the main thing on their songs. Everything else is there to help the vocals exist.

timbertrout · Post by **timbertrout** » Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:11 am

Yes - vocals are the prominent feature...also, The Geoff Emerick book mentions adding bass last (during the Sgt Pepper era) thus explaing its co-prominence.

Sidebar--

An interesting time machine experiment:

1. Haul all my fairly humble gear (ADAT HD 24, Mackie Mixer, Distressor, 2108, AT and Groove Tubes Mics... you get the idea) to a Beatles session for Revolver or Sgt Pepper or Abbey Road.

2. Set up all my gear next to the nice Abbey Road stuff .

3. Simultaneously capture all the exact performances that George and Geoff captured. Parallel recording...

4. Compare sonic apples to sonic apples - the only "variable" being the gear.

5. Also, send G + G out of the room to do my own mixes on my gear, then have G + G come back and mix down on my crummy gear...And compare both results to the actual Abbey road mixes...

The point being: On one hand Perhaps I might be surprised how little a factor gear plays...but on the other hand, I think that the Beatles sessions were "lightning in a bottle" (i.e. they were unique events never to be recreated...a combination of all gear, players, and production greater than the sum of parts...and with each component equally critical) For instance, I think the drum sound on Come Together might never be truly recreated by anyone with any gear at any time...

Well...anyway...ahem...What were we talking about?

abc · Post by **abc** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:51 am

abc

abc

Who is online