itchin for some UA stuff...make me sound like harvest

[meldar produxshunz]

hey. got a new setup i am pretty happy with so far. imac running logic pro 8. apogee ensemble...for mics i got a rode NTK, AKG C1000, and a 57. i feel like i have been lucky in my choices so far. mainly because i have been totally geeking out reading everything i can. trying to skip alot of low end needing to be upgraded later on. sooo...my question is this: does anyone have any advice as to what would be the best way to warm up my sound a bit and work well with this setup? i have been reading alot about UA stuff and it seems like a sure thing. i know from what i have read so far not to ask for one thing that will do it all...but i am looking for something to warm things up, maybe do a little compressing. i started leaning towards the UA LA-610. people say it is great for recording bass, which is the one thing i would say my apogee hasnt helped out that much with going straight in. my pallette is mainly acoustic instruments, lotso strumming/fingerpickin acoustic guitars, handdrums, later will be very dirty electrics, quiet vocals. lately though i think the UA 6176 is sounding like a good mix between the 610 and the 1176 (the other thing EVERYONE raves about). like i said, i am looking to get a quality piece, hoping to spend around $2000. if anyone thinks i need to stop obsessing about UA, please tell me there is a cheaper way. people talk alot about the dbx 160...but the lights look kind of lame. i want my stuff sounding like the opening to "out on the weekend". help?

[fossiltooth]

Good, but not overly polished players and sounds--> fairly controlled, but fairly large live room --> nice old mics and a few cheap old mics(nothing that sounds like a c1000)--> Mixing board --> Tape Machine --> mixing board --> not much EQ compression or effects -->Tape Machine.

That's the signal chain. Are you sure you don't want something that sounds like "Come on Feel the Illinoize" instead? Because you can do that with completely digital systems and modern prosumer mics in fairly small studios, and the average modern listener think it sounds more impressive anyway... You still need a good engineer though.

Seriously though, the sound of Harvest is so "of its time" that its incredibly hard to recreate with modern tools and methods. I wouldn't be able to do it with the tools you've mentioned. Admittedly, I would be part of the problem. I'd probably start doing things like adding presence to drums, patching in delays and adding "excitement" to certain sounds with EQ and compression. Avoid that.

Let me ask... do you really love the "sound" of Harvest, or just the songs and the mood?

People have asked me to do things like this: "OK... now that we're mixing, make my record sound like 'Harvest Moon' or early Joy Division, or 'The Noise Made by People'".... um... now? With what... an EQ and a reverb? There are SO many things that go into older records that we love and contribute to their overall tonality. So many things. If a couple parts of the process are different, you'll get something that feels completely different in the end. But rest easy. There's nothing wrong with that. We're not here to make the same records again and again.

PS- I F*ing love Harvest. Alabama? Heart of Gold? Don't get me started. on a side note, I'm not sure if I "get" A Man Needs a Maid... Is the arrangement amateurish or oddly brilliant... or both? It could just be awful. I can never decide!

[Sean Sullivan]

Fossiltooth, people actually ask you to make their record sounds like Broadcast? Man, I wish there was one band I knew that had even heard of them. That's easily my favorite record from them, it's a shame it is out of print. If anyone wants it I have a really old scratched up copy that I can clean up (worked at a record store that repaired disc...and not with a disc doctor)...I don't need too copies.

Anyway, I think fossiltooth makes a good point asking if you really love the "sound" of Harvest, or just the songs and the mood? Albums like that, or early Elvis Costello, stand up to today's standards because the songs themselves are timeless. But, it you really like that sound, buy the signal chain fossiltooth mentioned.

I have a UA M610, and while I enjoy what it does for tracking vocals, it doesn't totally alter the sound and make it instantly 60's sounding. A lot of the sound from those records comes from the rooms they were tracked in.

"People talk alot about the dbx 160...but the lights look kind of lame." Are you drawn to the UA stuff because it looks expensive? Sure, that big blue light is "cool", but you should never disregard a piece of gear because of its appearance. The 160 is a classic on snare drum.

I say save your money, and play around with delay, EQ, and compression settings in Logic and you'll probably surprise yourself and find you can alter the sound in the way you want.

[emrr]

I use a lot of 1940-50's octal tube preamps and limiters, and they won't make you sound like 1950, 1960, or 1970 either. And they have much more vibe than something like the UA. They can help, but you're chasing your tail unless you use all the techniques. You have to go further into antique-land than you'd imagine to get a 1970 sound when using modern mics and recorders.

Using a tape machine at 15 IPS / no NR will do more for getting 'the vibe' than will a tube preamp. You gotta remember too, that everyone was looking to the future as fast as they could get it back then. They were likely using as much early SS as they could get their hands on; Langevin AM-16's, ALtec 9470A's, UA 1108's, etc.

[Red Rockets Glare]

If you want things to sound like Harvest you might want to borrow an 8 track 1/2 tape machine from someone and track your basics to it with 456 formula tape. That will go a long way towards the tonal quality you are after.
Jere is a quick example of me going for the Harvest sound years ago with just a 1/2 inch 8 track, a few ART tube mic preamps and an AT 4033.
http://www.theidahofalls.com/mp3/the_Id ... na_Air.mp3

[kayagum]

I love it when people think the preamps will make the biggest difference in "vibe" recordings.

And the vibiest preamp won't make a difference if you have a cheap-ass guitar with gobs of plastic lacquer on it. Or if your voice is high and whiny (oh, wait, that IS Neil Young )

Guitar strings, guitars, rooms, mics (perhaps even in that descending order) would make a bigger difference.

Give us more details on your guitar/strings/room situation. As for mics, you definitely use some variety- how about some large diaphragm mics (I always seem to say that), and a ribbon mic or two to start?

Also, since you're not recording to analog (and you seem to have a pretty respectable digital setup), maybe a vibe compressor or two would help. On the budget side, the RNLA seem to add that extra vibe for me.

EQ? Low pass it...

[meldar produxshunz]

thanks guys. i knew i would be opening a can of worms bringing up this record. and i guess i know that there is no way i can make that sound with what i have. and yes, "man needs a maid" and "there's a world" are two songs i will never really get that seem to go against the whole neil thing. bad production i guess. too much blow? though i always play the piano part to "maid" by itself and wish it had been used for something else. there are better neil young records than harvest. but i guess i do love the sound of it more than (but definetly including) "the vibe". and it is the sound of only a few tracks (tho the vibe was thick those days) from that record that "do it" for me which were all recorded in a nashville studio.
anyway, there has always just been something about that drum/bass/acoustic sound on the opening to "out on the weekend" that i love. to my admittingly untrained ear, it sounds like compression. i got a nice martin, so i have that, and the drums are obviously tuned/muted nice. bass?
honestly though, i am obviously more interested in something that would be well rounded functionally and work well with what i have already (rode ntk/akg c1000/apogee ensemble/imac/logic pro). so basically forget what i said about harvest. ha! though i enjoy the gab.
tell me what you think about the UA LA 610 (i am hearing mixed things the more i dig), the UA 6176 (this is where i am leaning at the moment-though is mixing a pre and compressor a bad move in the long run?), and the avalon 737. and OF THESE 3 which do you think has the most of that "harvest" vibe? or am i on the wrong track with these?
basically i just want to get something in the range of $1500-2500 that is going to do the same thing for my mood that going from a roland 880 to an imac/ensemble/logic did.
also, i actually kind of like the sound of sufjan's record. a big digital extravaganza. a whole different thing from harvest though. but yeah, i wouldnt be surprised if he is rocking a similar setup to mine. or at least he was before he blew the f up.

[musikman316]

Get a 500 series rack?

For $2,000 you could get an OSA rack and a pair of preamps + an RNLA or some nice plug-ins, like the Chandler/Abbey Road stuff... that seems to be a better use of cash. Plus, with the OSA rack you can add more preamps/compressors/eq's over time with the 11 slots. That is the way to go IMHO. That will get you way farther than any single "channel strip" will.

Josh

[KennyLusk]

I use a lot of 1940-50's octal tube preamps and limiters, and they won't make you sound like 1950, 1960, or 1970 either. And they have much more vibe than something like the UA. They can help, but you're chasing your tail unless you use all the techniques. You have to go further into antique-land than you'd imagine to get a 1970 sound when using modern mics and recorders.

Using a tape machine at 15 IPS / no NR will do more for getting 'the vibe' than will a tube preamp. You gotta remember too, that everyone was looking to the future as fast as they could get it back then. They were likely using as much early SS as they could get their hands on; Langevin AM-16's, ALtec 9470A's, UA 1108's, etc.

FWIW I totally agree with this. Plus it's so much fun.

[KilledByAlbany]

If you want things to sound like Harvest you might want to borrow an 8 track 1/2 tape machine from someone and track your basics to it with 456 formula tape. That will go a long way towards the tonal quality you are after.
Jere is a quick example of me going for the Harvest sound years ago with just a 1/2 inch 8 track, a few ART tube mic preamps and an AT 4033.
http://www.theidahofalls.com/mp3/the_Id ... na_Air.mp3

Do you play with these guys, or did you just record them? I found this and the other songs on the site really effing enjoyable.

[honkyjonk]

wait for awhile before you buy a UA piece. I'm just saying that because a lot of people don't think they're worth the money. The 2108 was a pretty awesome preamp that was built well. I used to have one. But other than that I don't know of any UA things that everyone likes. Some revile them for initially pretending to be clones of past Bill Putnam Sr. masterpieces. I did however like one of the 1176's I've tried. But those were the full 2 RU mono compressors, not half of a 6176. I'd be wary of the combination pieces.

At some point in the past 15 years or so people created an imaginary color that they thought and still think tubes are supposed to impart on everything. But, as has often been mentioned on this board, that sound in peoples heads has more to do with transformers than tubes. A good tube circuit should be pretty clean, until you start adding transformers.

though it has nothing to do with Harvest, and the liklihood of it getting you any closer to THAT sound is pretty small, you probably would benefit from a good preamp. And if you're saying you want something colored and roundish, a Chandler Germanium cost probably less than the 6176 and more than the 610.

The best values are in stuff you build yourself. I don't know if you're handy, but Seventh Circle and Hamptone preamps are pretty much a staple around here. You can use these on everything all the time forever. I probably will. Just sayin.

But yeah, there's a ton of WAY more important things that make Harvest Harvest.

I don't have it in front of me, but in my head I'm hearing the way the kick drum and the bass are tuned in relation to each other, and that boxy kick sound. A lot of times the drummer seems to be not playing anything with his right hand ('cept maybe his leg) Ultra simple stuff that allows the acoustic guitar to stick out. If you were to nail the tuning and get the drums in a relatively bare medium sized wood room it seems like that would go a long way. A lot further than a preamp.

[jckinnick]

If you want things to sound like Harvest you might want to borrow an 8 track 1/2 tape machine from someone and track your basics to it with 456 formula tape. That will go a long way towards the tonal quality you are after.
Jere is a quick example of me going for the Harvest sound years ago with just a 1/2 inch 8 track, a few ART tube mic preamps and an AT 4033.
http://www.theidahofalls.com/mp3/the_Id ... na_Air.mp3

Do you play with these guys, or did you just record them? I found this and the other songs on the site really effing enjoyable.

If I may step in I think he just recorded them Idaho Falls are an awesome band also check out The Broken West pretty sure he recorded them to. He really knows what hes doing.

[honkyjonk]

No mang,

That's Raymond frontin' I thought. I loves me some Idaho falls.

[trodden]

I think you might need leathur pants.

[fossiltooth]

If you want things to sound like Harvest you might want to borrow an 8 track 1/2 tape machine from someone and track your basics to it with 456 formula tape. That will go a long way towards the tonal quality you are after.
Jere is a quick example of me going for the Harvest sound years ago with just a 1/2 inch 8 track, a few ART tube mic preamps and an AT 4033.
http://www.theidahofalls.com/mp3/the_Id ... na_Air.mp3

Aside from the kick drum tuning, that sounds way more modern than Harvest to my ears.

Listen to them back to back.

I'm not sure if people who want there albums to sound like a certain other album have ever listened to some of these records in context with modern recordings on a really accurate set of speakers.

If you haven't yet you're going to be surprised!

Maybe if you have the remastered DVD-Audio version from 2002 it's sonically much more modern or something. I don't know. I haven't heard that version..