Listening example: dry, small, and gorgeous

losthighway · Post by **losthighway** » Tue Jul 16, 2013 9:21 am

I've been digging the stuff Jeff Tweedy has been producing in the Wilco loft with engineer Tom Schick. They are starting to stump my engineer skills by comparison (rightfully so with a couple of pro's).

Here's a good example from Mavis Staples:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Edtv64pQag

The drums sound like a small vintage kit. Really dry and dead. Austere acoustic guitar. I've seen tons of photos they used for promo with her singing through an SM7. It sits nice. Not really an impressive richness, or *sparkle* on the top. Other than a really clever trick with the drums leaning pretty hard left, and this subtle delay of the snare popping out on the right depending on how hard it is hit, and some tickles of wurlitzer and really quiet horns it's all very minimal, sparse and small. Almost no audible reverb, or room sound, but perhaps a touch of both.

The kicker for me is it sounds so gorgeous. If I tried for this it would sound just as small, and relatively dark, but not as magical. It's the difference between sounding dry/dark and muted/cloudy sounding.

I guess this is fascinating to me because the majority of the time I'm working with people they're going for *big*. I'm not so well versed in doing a great job of sounding small. If I recorded/mixed a kit like that, everyone (including me) would say 'those drums don't sound very good', but the way they come across here they're perfect.

Gregg Juke · Post by **Gregg Juke** » Tue Jul 16, 2013 9:34 am

Very nice stuff. "Beautiful" is a great description. "Simple" would be accurate too, but not simplistic.

A few mental notes, the first one being obvious, but-- sometimes (mostly) song and performance trump production. Plus, the whole "less is more; and when you do add stuff, it really sticks out" approach works on the mini-bridge/pre-chorus and chorus here...

I also think that this mix is more like what mixes used to be, at least on vocal records (for better or for worse)-- very "vocals up" and forward. That might contribute to the drums or other elements sounding "smaller," but because of the strength of the song and the laid-back vibe, it works. I don't know. Just spewing out-loud, as it were, but I'd probably go for more aggressive sounds on the drums too, which as you implied, would probably ruin this track, so kudos to Tweedy and Schick...

GJ

Bigsby · Post by **Bigsby** » Tue Jul 16, 2013 2:43 pm

Damn, that's nice.

vvv · Post by **vvv** » Tue Jul 16, 2013 3:16 pm

It is.

Reminds me I meant to pick this record up.

Lemme note, it almost sounds like Ms. S. is copping a little of Tweedy's vocal stylee, no? I mean, it could be a Wilco tune ...

Recycled_Brains · Post by **Recycled_Brains** » Wed Jul 17, 2013 12:54 pm

Dig this. I am always so envious of people that can mix things like this and have it not sound weird or distracting. Every time I have attempted panning things in this manner, it has never worked.

drumsound · Post by **drumsound** » Wed Jul 17, 2013 2:37 pm

I think the song and the playing on this are absolutely lovely. I think the mix misses by about a mile. There is a beauty in the the playing and arrangement that is completely thrown off by the drums and acoustic guitar. The hard panning and really off kilter blend of those instruments REALLY distracts me. The playing is SOOOOO right, that the mix bothers me even more. If the musical statement was weak, I might even dig the oddness of balance.

losthighway · Post by **losthighway** » Thu Jul 18, 2013 7:50 am

Interesting. Goes to show it takes all types. It's kind of hilarious, I post a song to say "Dang, how do you accomplish this?" and a very experienced tapeopper says "You shouldn't, it's bad."

Maybe I should dig up another great "small" example these guys did on the new Low record....

vvv · Post by **vvv** » Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:01 am

The latest Low record, what I do have, is excellent - I love that band, and the sound of the latest record; very spare.

RoyMatthews · Post by **RoyMatthews** » Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:10 am

The panning on that is great. The guitar and drums are opposite each other but they balance each other out perfectly. I didn't find it distracting. If I had to nit pick I'd like the vocals up a hair but it's absolutely fine where it is.

That's a great sounding song.

I don't know if you guys saw this but it has some great studio shots from the album.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqc1I9oSGiE

losthighway · Post by **losthighway** » Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:37 am

Ooh, I was able to pause it and get a look at the drum mic'ing setup.

It looks like a Senn Md441 pointed down at the snare (pretty close to 90 degrees), maybe a R121 a few feet over the snare and hi hat, and then some kind of Neumann a little higher than where you'd put the floor tom mic in a Glyn Johns thing, almost the way George Massey does it. The weird thing on the Neumann is there is no floor tom (at least in the song they were recording when the picture was taken) and there's no way it's equidistant from the snare with the R121. I think I peeped a D112 on the kick. Lots of towels muting things.

This song has a similar drum panning thing as the one that I posted, but maybe not as extreme. I think the slight delay snare on the right thing, is really the Neuman hearing the snare a little after the 441, and maybe a little pinch of delay on it to make it stick out a bit more and keep the phase from doing bad stuff. It's panned to the right, the way it would look from the drummer's perspective.

SM7's all around on Mavis and all the amazing backup singers.

The other things making this amazing you can't see (as mentioned) first the incredible talent. Also all the tiny eq and compression choices that allow it to work together so wonderfully.

Gregg Juke · Post by **Gregg Juke** » Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:58 am

>>>>The panning on that is great. The guitar and drums are opposite each other but they balance each other out perfectly.<<<<

Beatles stereo mixes, anyone???

GJ

drumsound · Post by **drumsound** » Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:24 am

losthighway wrote:Interesting. Goes to show it takes all types. It's kind of hilarious, I post a song to say "Dang, how do you accomplish this?" and a very experienced tapeopper says "You shouldn't, it's bad."

Maybe I should dig up another great "small" example these guys did on the new Low record....

I did not say it's bad, I said the mix misses the mark. Really I'd just like 2 key elements slightly different. The recording and song and performances are FANTASTIC.

RoyMatthews wrote:The panning on that is great. The guitar and drums are opposite each other but they balance each other out perfectly. I didn't find it distracting. If I had to nit pick I'd like the vocals up a hair but it's absolutely fine where it is.

That's a great sounding song.

I don't know if you guys saw this but it has some great studio shots from the album.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqc1I9oSGiE

I find the hard panned pulls me AWAY from the brilliant vocal. The drums more than the guitar, but only by a short margin. if they weren't so freaking loud (and it those hats didn't sound like such shit) it would bother me much less. I'd just like to hear that guitar and the drums brought down in level and brought more to the center. Not even full center, just not hard panned. I'd like the drums at about 10 o'clock and guitar around 4.

I agree it's a great sounding song, just not a great mix.

I think the song you posted is a much better example of a mix that suits the song and recording better.

Gregg Juke wrote:>>>>The panning on that is great. The guitar and drums are opposite each other but they balance each other out perfectly.<<<<

Beatles stereo mixes, anyone???

GJ

The Beatles and the production team don't like the stereo mixes and prefer the mono. Stereo mixes were just done because Capitol in America demanded them. I believe Abbey Road was intended to be stereo from the get go, and possible parts of the White album,

Gregg Juke · Post by **Gregg Juke** » Thu Jul 18, 2013 12:30 pm

>>>>The Beatles and the production team don't like the stereo mixes and prefer the mono. Stereo mixes were just done because Capitol in America demanded them.<<<<

Oh, I'm hip Tony. And yet like it or not (us, the Beatles, the production team), they are now fixed, iconic cultural objects, like Phil Spector's arrangement/production on "The Long & Winding Road" (various remixes and reissues and versions notwithstanding). "When you think Hard-Panned, think Beatles." (tm)

GJ

drumsound · Post by **drumsound** » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:09 pm

Gregg Juke wrote:>>>>The Beatles and the production team don't like the stereo mixes and prefer the mono. Stereo mixes were just done because Capitol in America demanded them.<<<<

Oh, I'm hip Tony. And yet like it or not (us, the Beatles, the production team), they are now fixed, iconic cultural objects, like Phil Spector's arrangement/production on "The Long & Winding Road" (various remixes and reissues and versions notwithstanding). "When you think Hard-Panned, think Beatles." (tm)

GJ

And I think because of that type of gut reaction to hard panned drums, it makes it feel more gimicky.

losthighway · Post by **losthighway** » Thu Jul 18, 2013 2:00 pm

drumsound wrote:(and it those hats didn't sound like such shit)

They remind me of those really dark, thick, hand-hammered hats I see at the drum store and can't afford. They make almost a different sound than any other hi hat, way less sizzle.

Message Board

Listening example: dry, small, and gorgeous

Listening example: dry, small, and gorgeous

Who is online