[Hysteria]

Michael, many thanks indeed, I really appreciate being able to pick your brains on your superb production work. As the other guys have said above, it really is a thrill to be able to discuss these matters with you.

For the longer reverbs, I used mainly the Lexicon 224 smooth hall programs. For the shorter Rooms I used the Klark Teknik DN780. The longer verbs were around 1.7 – 2.2 seconds with less early reflections and more attention on the actual reverb and the rooms were always under 1 second with more emphasis on the early reflections. For lead vocals (and snare) I normally use a longer pre-delay, around 15 – 35 ms, and for backings a shorter, if any pre-delay. That way the backings appear behind the lead vocal. For the guitar I also would occasionally use a spring reverb, forgot which model, but I think it was an Orban 19” box.

Ah yes, great idea to put the bvox behind the lead by reducing the pre-delay...must try that one.

Would you use the longer verb on both lead and backing (but with different pre-delays) or are the shorter verbs used on the backings?

A spring verb used in the 80s, wow! I guess it must have been something for you to resist loading up the guitars with the latest digital fx. Still, the proof of the pudding is in the eating and the guitars sound great.

I seem to remember you having a Steinberger around which was popular with these bands, presumably because they cut through the mix well (mine seems to).

Yes. To the day I use a basic setup of two reverbs, long and short. The reverb times and algos for the early reflections and rooms are dependent on the songs structure.

If I'm understanding you correctly, you don't blend these verbs for any one source (to make a hybrid verb of say the 224 and DN780) but use them seperately as needed across the track.

What did you think of the 480 and PCM70 in the late(r) 80s? Did you think offered the same and more as your older faves or did you think they were too refined (as we often find in later verbs like PCM91)?

I try to stick to the two kinds of verbs described above and put the whole band into a space.

So the longest verb ends up on everything to some extent?

I always use a single 1/8 note delay on the lead vocals, to create a “back wall” behind the singer. It makes the vocals sit in the track a bit better. I try to avoid the now so popular doubling and tripling of lead vocals for sound reasons (and maybe to hide any shortcomings of the singer), especially in verses. To me it kills the inflections of a single voice and takes away from the feeling of the lead vocal. I like to have one vocal to focus on.

Do you send the 1/8 delay back into a verb?

Really interested to hear that you don't favour doubling and tripling of lead vox, I have never liked that effect either for exactly the same reasons, they loose their intimacy. Nice to know a pro feels the same!

How would you construct backing vocals in terms of number of tracks of harmonies. Would you build a big chorus by stacking harmonies around the lead vocal and would you double or triple the lead vocal in that instance?

try to track with the least amount of EQ I can get away with and rather put an EQ across the stereo bus when mixing.

So you track with limited EQ but don't apply it to individual tracks at the mix stage but do add it across the stereo bus?

Do you remember the mics used for lead vocals for sessions with those bands. The singers had 'similarish' voices from what I recall (aside from one being German and the other a Dane).

Thanks for the RTB Queen tip

I had very bad experiences with exciters very early on and avoided them until BBE came out with their version. I used the BBE 202, 802 etc. extensively on guitars, backing vocals, but never on the stereo mix.

Interesting that you used an exciter on guitars, would they have been clean sounds?

On the subject of guitars, did you add FX at mix time or did the guitarists give you stereo outputs from their racks?

and at that time the race for “loud, louder, loudest” wasn’t on yet. Can we please go back to that!!!, I just heard a re-master of Ozzy’s “No More Tears” album (which I consider one of my best sounding mixes of the time) and I was absolutely shocked how bad that guy at Sterling mangled up the sound, the CD is pretty much unlistenable now. I thought there was a problem with my CD player when I first heard it, awful, absolutely awful. Sorry for the rant

Yeah, and the records were far better for it...dynamics...we remember those!

I haven't heard the No More Tears remaster but it's terrible that it's been ruined and for no need. I thought exactly the same with that Iron Maiden album...is my cd player broken...after trying 5 or 6 I came to the conclusion that someone (probably in mastering) had absolutely massacred it. So far it's the worst I've heard. And being a 'modern' production (no reverb) it's as 2 dimensional as you can get...had to do my own remaster just so I could listen to it (took an exciter and some verb to it - much better imvho). Maybe you should offer to show the guy at Sterling how it should be done!

Again, many thanks Michael.