I would appreciate your thoughts on the drums related matter

[aeijtzsche]

OK, I'm pretty much obsessed with the history of recording in Los Angeles. So I look for a lot of pictures from LA studios from over the years.

I've noticed that in the mid 60s, perhaps 63-67, in about 90% of the photos of drum setups I've seen, out of, I don't know 50 or so, the engineer has selected a small diaphragm condenser for the drum overhead.

see: http://cache1.gettyimages.com/xc/739068 ... 1A57A02854

Hal Blaine from Getty images. There are a bunch more like that on Getty. Between those and others from various books, it's mostly the SDC overhead. You'll see an occasional U47 or 67 overhead, and I've even seen a couple 666s overhead. But by and large, LA seems to have favored that type of mic, across many studios, engineers and drummers. I know 50-100 photographs isn't a great sample, but they're spread over a number of years and places, so it seems consistent to me.


ANYWAY:

I'm not looking to duplicate the sound of Hal Blaine at the moment, but I would like some experienced opinions that might be able to suggest why the LA engineers at the time would have relied on the SDCs over whatever else. Was it just a trend or was there a reason? Perhaps they liked the way it sounded when mixed in with the bleed into the other instrument mics?

Somewhat of an impractical question I guess, but I'm curious as to what people think.

[the finger genius]

this may be oversimplifying things, but one reason that i'll often use a sdc on drum overheads is that they tend to have a good transient response (obviously this can be of benefit when recording drums, depending on the sound you're going for.)

here's a pretty good description of why:

http://www.hometracked.com/2007/08/02/t ... selection/

[I'm Painting Again]

Maybe they picked those fast/crisp, etc. mics to overcompensate for tape recording's smooth and mush factors?

[drumsound]

Or maybe the SDC just sounded good to the folks using them...

[aeijtzsche]

Or maybe the SDC just sounded good to the folks using them...

Yes, yes, of course.

It's just next to impossible to have a technical discussion about recording techniques in such a narrow area of interest for me. I'm desperate to talk about recording studios in LA in the mid sixties, and I'm probably never going to get to talk with an engineer who was both there and remembers specifics. So i was just kind of hoping to snare in somebody who could get me closer to that.

It's difficult, because so many people assume that if you're interested in drum recording in the 60s, you want to copy what they were doing...but in my case, I really just want to know what was going on for the sake of knowing it. Just like World War I buffs don't necessarily want to refight a World War.

But wanting knowledge for the sake of knowledge requires more specific knowledge, because if I just wanted to sound like a 60s recording, I could just experiment.

Ah well. If anybody knows anybody that engineered in LA in the mid sixties at a majorish studio, let me know?

[percussion boy]

Okay, here's a real specific theory for your real specific question. fwiw.

Ever heard little radios from the '60s, like car radios? No woofers at all - it's all tinny upper midrange. In mono, yet.

The overall sound of a lot of sixties pop stuff was apparently crafted to sound good through those little radios. Motown circa 1964 is the classic example. Little tinny drums, little tinny guitars, little tinny bg vocals. And pre-Ringo, recording drummers tuned drums higher and less boomy.

I think Hal Blaine tuned for those little radios. And I think the sdc was stuck up there for those little radios. Plenty of attack and tone, just enough boom.

By 1970, everyone had big stereos, and the overhead sdc was no more, in LA or anywhere else . . .

Does that seem plausible? I convinced myself, anyway . . .

[Jeremy Garber]

Does that seem plausible? I convinced myself, anyway . . .

When I listen to the classic station playing 50s and 60s music, it seems very bass heavy to me. When I began reading your post, it started to make sense- maybe they were bass heavy because they were trying to make up for a lack of bass response in the popular playback source at the time? Then your theory threw me off. I'd figure that recording everything tinny, then playing it back on a tinny system, would only enhance the tinniness. lol

Anyways, I've been using a SDC as a mono OH. Though, I've recently tried my LDC as a mono OH. Neither one are great mics, but I have noticed the differences. The LDC seems to have a slower response to the cymbals (that's what I notice most). I kind of like it actually. I usually have the SDC in omni, but I want to try it in cardioid again to compare. I don't think omni is such a great choice since I am in a small room.

[percussion boy]

I figure it like this:

That '50s/'60s low end you mentioned is there--only natural there's a low-end bump, with so much tape 'n' tubes involved in the signal chain.

But the mids were what most people heard on their shitty little portable systems -- not the bass so much (nor extreme highs, for that matter). Full-range audio in car and portable sound systems is a more recent phenomenon.

For maximum listener excitment, the recordists had to get the mids and the "crack" of the transients right -- which the sdc would help.

Or maybe their LDCs (47s, 67, 251s, et al) were rare and pricey and they saved them only for the vocalist? Another theory, ha.

[MoreSpaceEcho]

For maximum listener excitment, the recordists had to get the mids and the "crack" of the transients right.

i think this would be a basic recording truism regardless of genre and era.

[@?,*???&?]

For maximum listener excitment, the recordists had to get the mids and the "crack" of the transients right.

i think this would be a basic recording truism regardless of genre and era.

The words of an expert!

[MoreSpaceEcho]

do you disagree?

[JoshT]

Nothing to add to the question posed, but I'm not sure how universal the use of SDC as in the picture was. Granted I know little, but I remember reading stuff, as well as seeing pictures, of Sony mics being used as a mono OH in a lot of that stuff.

This was reinforced for me in the recording the beatles book, when they mentioned the C-38 being used by Abbey Road following one of the engineers seeing it in use at Sunset Sound in the 60s, and he used it on OH.

[aeijtzsche]

Nothing to add to the question posed, but I'm not sure how universal the use of SDC as in the picture was. Granted I know little, but I remember reading stuff, as well as seeing pictures, of Sony mics being used as a mono OH in a lot of that stuff.

This was reinforced for me in the recording the beatles book, when they mentioned the C-38 being used by Abbey Road following one of the engineers seeing it in use at Sunset Sound in the 60s, and he used it on OH.

Indeed, Bruce Botnick was a big Sony LDC guy.