Raidohead - In Rainbows - Production questions

[monkeyxx]

Originally Posted by u b k

anyone here claiming otherwise had better be using m-boxes and rode mics with no desire for anything better, lest you be guilty of not walking the walk.

some of Ok Computer's vocals were apparently recorded on a Rode NT1A (...just sayin')

[u b k]

Originally Posted by monkeyxx

some of Ok Computer's vocals were apparently recorded on a Rode NT1A (...just sayin')

"Apparently" ? That means you don't know.

Just sayin'.


Gregory Scott - ubk
.

[Hint]

Originally Posted by u b k

"Apparently" ? That means you don't know.

Just sayin'.

Some of OK Computer's vocals were recorded on a Røde mic:
nigelgodrich.com

[Tringboy]

"Vocals were recorded alternately with a Neumann valve 47, and an Australian Rode valve mic, through a Urei 1176 compressor, and a Pultec valve EQ on a few things. "With months of hindsight, I actually think the Australian mic is a bit too bright, but if it's a good performance, that's it. Maybe the vocal sound suffered from the fact that it was occasionally just thrown down, but I don't think so."

Maybe it was an NTK yes they are a bit bright on vocals as are most Rodes, I still like there clarity though,

I heard the guys on the BBC 6 Music the week the album was out, and Thom said that a lot of it was about is sudden realization that he would one day be dead, take Video tape, in ways a very spiritual look on ether death, and life flashing before you eyes, or as I like to think of it, as Judgment day when our video tapes are played back before the thrown of God and all mankind will see our secrets and then we will be judged innocent, or guilty.

No one has mentioned the other CD 2 on In rainbows, I love it also, great production. Very creative and original.
2 minute warning is top for me

[jamie10]

none of you guys know about kid a.... dont sleep on kid a....

4min warning is the worst song theve ever done...fact.
Go slowly is MINT.

Would anyone care to comment on arpeggi? Production and sound and mix wise....
(im planning on getting arpeggi tatoo on my neck)
I feel the arpeggi vocal is lacking...its not as good in some parts...rather limp at times....half assed at times....
ive heard countless older live versions with better vocals.....

How do you get arpeggi intro drums to sound like that?
can you hear the compression?

Nigel Godrich KNOWS.
But he does have a team around him, assistants etc.
I always ask myself "how talented is nigel?"...sometimes i think he is extremely....but other times i just think
he got lucky meeting thom as thom is the genius at the source.

Look at all the other top producers in world.
They work with other artists and keep doing good work.
But nigel only is only recognised for his radiohead credits.

Nigels greatest achievement is his input into Kid A.
Whoever produced that has GOT to be stupidly talented... or just a good person to work with rhead.

Nigel Godrich doesnt make music himself does he?
ALL THE BAD BOY PRODUCERS IN WORLD SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE TRACKS WITH THEIR OWN SKILLS.
dance producers can do this...hip hop producers build their own tracks...nigel just caresses the bands sounds.
but thats another discussion (albeit a boring one) about the diff types of producers today.


have you guys seen arpegii waveform? its that same limiting compression squashing thing going on..like they did in metallica new album....like rick rubin does all day every day...

videotape = 909 percussion

15 step LIVE at grammies!! hell yeah!!!

[soypancho]

Originally Posted by jamie10

words

You sir, have just failed at Gearslutz. Please do post pics of the tattoo when it's done.

[monkeyxx]

Originally Posted by u b k

"Apparently" ? That means you don't know.

Just sayin'.


Gregory Scott - ubk
.

nice job on the sass

[Tringboy]

Originally Posted by jamie10

4min warning is the worst song theve ever done...fact.
Go slowly is MINT.

Please post the evidence for this?

[u b k]

Originally Posted by monkeyxx

nice job on the sass

Thanks, that's the way it goes down sometimes.

I will note firstly that it does appear as though a rode mic was used on some of the ok computer vocals.

I will note secondly that it was fed thru an original issue 1176, into a pultec, no mention of the pre but I'm guessing it was similar caliber. This doesn't bode well for the claim that gear doesn't matter, or shouldn't, or whatever it was I originally responded to however many moons ago.

I will note thirdly that I love that record, especially on vinyl where the overly bright, chalky texture of the cd is mellowed out a good bit, and the bottom is fattened up. And as much I'd love to say it's all about the music, I know that the gorgeousness of the overall production is a hefty factor in my experience of it.

Kid A was always my favorite Radiohead record, but at some point In Rainbows de.throned it. Which took me by surprise, I didn't dig IR at all when it came out, and I set it aside for the better part of a year. Something made me come back to it, and something kept me listening to it even though I didn't get it.

Then, one day, I got. Now it's one of my favorite records of all time.


Gregory Scott - ubk
.

[monkeyxx]

I have also just started listening to OK Computer on vinyl...I am currently obsessed with this record. next is IR

where do you think the overly bright, chalky texture of OK Computer comes from? I have been trying to figure that out for the longest time

[jaffa]

Originally Posted by u b k

Thanks, that's the way it goes down sometimes.

I will note firstly that it does appear as though a rode mic was used on some of the ok computer vocals


Gregory Scott - ubk
.

Could it be this proves that the mic is the least important link in the vocal chain...

[NathanEldred]

Originally Posted by u b k

and the bottom is fattened up.

If the bottom gets any fatter on the CD version of Karma Police it's going to blow out my sub.

[Eskimo Brain]

Originally Posted by u b k

Kid A was always my favorite Radiohead record, but at some point In Rainbows de.throned it.
.

same here. Kid A was the one that really blew my mind, but some songs on IR get to my heart like no other RH record.

after seeing them live last year, for some reason my appreciation of The Bends has grown considerably.

[u b k]

Originally Posted by jaffa

Could it be this proves that the mic is the least important link in the vocal chain...

Not at all; that a mic is cheap, or less pedigreed, or even not that great in most situations... none of this prevents it from being right for the source, song, and/or moment in question.

But a crapass mic that sounds like crap, on a vocal in a song like Exit Music, wouldn't fly. Not for a second.

When it comes to art, things don't have to be qualty, they have to be effective. When it comes to music, the two often correlate, but not always, and part of genius is being able to discern which is called for at any given moment.

Originally Posted by Eskimo Brain

where do you think the overly bright, chalky texture of OK Computer comes from?

They were really into grinding circuits into overload on that record. Distressors are really awesome for that edgy, pushed and distorted kinda vibe while creating a hefty amount of punch, I wouldn't be surprised if Distressors with 'Dist 3" engaged were one of the keys to that masterpiece; the drums and guitars in particular sound like it.


Gregory Scott - ubk
.

[u b k]

Originally Posted by NathanEldred

If the bottom gets any fatter on the CD version of Karma Police it's going to blow out my sub.

Then your sub has gotta be hot, that record doesn't even come close to the low end of things like Morcheeba's Who Can You Trust, Massive Attack's Mezzanine, or Catherine Wheel's Adam & Eve, all of which were released around the same time.

But I'm not talking about sub bottom, I'm talking the bottom that makes a production warm and meaty, 150-300.

Vinyl bottom.


Gregory Scott - ubk
.

[monkeyxx]

Originally Posted by u b k

But a crapass mic that sounds like crap, on a vocal in a song like Exit Music, wouldn't fly. Not for a second.
.

I have always thought that the vocal sound on that song (Exit Music for a Film) is particularly harsh and unpleasant. I wouldn't be surprised if that's one of the "Rode" takes. or maybe just aggressive treatment as you mentioned

I didn't know distressors had been around that long! cool. also it's good to know what they might be able to do, even if they weren't in Radiohead's rack at the time. I've never had the pleasure of messing with one

It was also really great reading the paraphrased article on nigelgodrich.com, where he says stuff like, "I'm just a music fan", "I don't fuss too much with engineering, just put a 57 on an amp and if the amp sounds good, you're fine", etc... I love it when people admit just to being able to capture moments and moods and workflow as the key skill in production. Kevin Shirley (who produced the Led Zeppelin DVD and live album "How the West Was Won") said a lot of similar stuff in his interviews.

I guess I think there's a difference between I. "beautiful soundscape" engineering, (gearslutz, anyone?) and, II. helping someone make a great record

sorry if I have mixed up the terms engineering, production, and mixing...I guess in my mind they're all pretty related

Nigel also says he likes to do a mix in half a day, thought that was cool, too. oh, and he seems to mix mainly on tiny monitors, the NS-10s and the AES-1 or whatever, hardly ever using the "bigs"

[uosdwis]

I believe the Rode mic used was a Classic, which is not really a cheap mic.

[dkelley]

Originally Posted by primemeat64

.... saw that the engineer had his monitors sideways...

some quick thoughts about your signature quote: (boring techie stuff that I wanted to mention, it's totally unrelated to the thread though, but I'm posting my thoughts and while I'm stating them as facts, if there are other opinions I'd love to hear them... there's always room for differing ideas!)

So imho there's actually nothing wrong with having your monitors sideways if you're sitting in the sweet spot. What it gives is greater vertical dispersion without phasing where as the lateral dispersion will be subject to the phase problems of having two drivers playing the same frequencies through the crossover point while being several inches apart. You have phase issues either way, most of us have them vertically with upright traditional speakers. If you want to have people standing behind you listening and hearing it well, turn 'em sideways and make sure your control room has plenty of absorption on the side walls. if you want your other musicians to hear it better a little off the X axis but at perfect seated listening height then keep 'em upright and make sure your ceiling is absorbing well. Either way, there's only one perfect listening position and if you aim your monitors exactly at your ears then they can be upside down or sideways or on a 22 degree angle, it doesn't matter as long as you take it into account when damping your room or your room is otherwise not affecting the sound either way.

I personally prefer them vertical since I care more about lateral dispersion in my particular room, but there are times when sideways is better (like when I have two sets of monitors and want them on top of each other due to lack of space, I'd prefer to have the vertical dispersion improved in that case so they go sideways, also they're both closer to ideal listening position that way which is an improvement).

Just wanted to elucidate on your signature quote :-)

I still like your quote by the way LoL

cheers,
Don

[yoshimodular]

As long as I remember, the Exit Music for a Film voice was recorded with a dynamic mic, probably a SM7 or a SM58. I read it somewhere in Sound on Sound magazine.

[jamie10]

who cares what mics they used on ok computer?

meeting people is easy documentary.
Footage of studio in there, ok comp time.

[jamie10]

Originally Posted by jamie10

Would anyone care to comment on arpeggi? Production and sound and mix wise....

I feel the arpeggi vocal is lacking...its not as good in some parts...rather limp at times....half assed at times....
ive heard countless older live versions with better vocals.....

How do you get arpeggi intro drums to sound like that?
can you hear the compression?

Nigel Godrich KNOWS.
But he does have a team around him, assistants etc.
I always ask myself "how talented is nigel?"...sometimes i think he is extremely....but other times i just think
he got lucky meeting thom as thom is the genius at the source.

Look at all the other top producers in world.
They work with other artists and keep doing good work.
But nigel only is only recognised for his radiohead credits.

Nigels greatest achievement is his input into Kid A.
Whoever produced that has GOT to be stupidly talented... or just a good person to work with rhead.

Nigel Godrich doesnt make music himself does he?
ALL THE BAD BOY PRODUCERS IN WORLD SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE TRACKS WITH THEIR OWN SKILLS.
dance producers can do this...hip hop producers build their own tracks...nigel just caresses the bands sounds.
but thats another discussion (albeit a boring one) about the diff types of producers today.


have you guys seen arpegii waveform? its that same limiting compression squashing thing going on..like they did in metallica new album....like rick rubin does all day every day...

any comments?

[Butcha]

Originally Posted by jamie10

any comments?

Yeah, I think you should look at his discography. There are at least one or two things in there other than Radiohead which are definitely of some not inconsiderable sonic merit i.e. Terror Twilight by Pavement, Sea Changes by Beck, Talkie Walkie by Air etc.

[kats]

Originally Posted by monkeyxx

It was also really great reading the paraphrased article on nigelgodrich.com, where he says stuff like, "I'm just a music fan", "I don't fuss too much with engineering, just put a 57 on an amp and if the amp sounds good, you're fine", etc... I love it when people admit just to being able to capture moments and moods and workflow as the key skill in production. Kevin Shirley (who produced the Led Zeppelin DVD and live album "How the West Was Won") said a lot of similar stuff in his interviews.

You have to understand something about these kind of comments. They are true, but you have to realize who is saying them. An engineer with YEARS of experience working with some of the GREATEST artist in the world. A person who has honed his craft (really meaning tuned his ears and brain) to a point where yes he can say:

" Just put a 57 on an amp and if the amp sounds good, you're fine." That's a big statement. What do you mean "if the amp sounds fine". How do you know? In the context of what, the song the player, the mix? Where exactly do you stick the 57? Do you look or listen? What are you listening for?

A decision that takes a mere 30 seconds to employ, might have taken 20 years of experience to be able to make that decision. So if you think these are just a bunch of guys running a monkey show "who happen to have talent", you would be mistaken.

[jamie10]

Originally Posted by kats

You have to understand something about these kind of comments. They are true, but you have to realize who is saying them. An engineer with YEARS of experience working with some of the GREATEST artist in the world. A person who has honed his craft (really meaning tuned his ears and brain) to a point where yes he can say:

" Just put a 57 on an amp and if the amp sounds good, you're fine." That's a big statement. What do you mean "if the amp sounds fine". How do you know? In the context of what, the song the player, the mix? Where exactly do you stick the 57? Do you look or listen? What are you listening for?

A decision that takes a mere 30 seconds to employ, might have taken 20 years of experience to be able to make that decision. So if you think these are just a bunch of guys running a monkey show "who happen to have talent", you would be mistaken.

you are mistaken ol chap.
you guys get "too" into it.
so what are you saying? that he is a genius?
they are a bunch of guys running a monkey show. to some extent. thats probably why they take years to make an album.
or maybe im wrong.

why has nigel never done an interview? i mean a proper audio interview.
he is either:
1) trying to create a mystique around him
2) trying to hide his haphazard skills and come across as more talented than he is.
3) is incredibly shy

For the record, i love the guy. He my fav producer in the whole F***in world.

He gets results. thats the bottom line.

[Butcha]

I think comments about sticking a 57 in front of an amp can be kind of deceptive. Firstly, if you are working with a great player playing a great part that really helps. Secondly, if the guitar and amp being recorded aren't a Chinese Squire and a Line 6, but rather the well honed rig of a pro (vintage/boutique guitars and amps etc.) then I daresay even a 57 into an Mbox would produce some quite tasty results.

I'm not sure which album it is, but if I remember correctly the liner notes to one of Radiohead's albums credits their guitar tech Plank as having rebuilt their instruments, so it is safe to assume that a large portion of their gear is not "off the shelf" as such, nor is it just randomly chosen as the first thing that came to hand.

[syntax]

Originally Posted by jamie10

none of you guys know about kid a.... dont sleep on kid a....



Would anyone care to comment on arpeggi? Production and sound and mix wise....
(im planning on getting arpeggi tatoo on my neck)
I feel the arpeggi vocal is lacking...its not as good in some parts...rather limp at times....half assed at times....
ive heard countless older live versions with better vocals.....

How do you get arpeggi intro drums to sound like that?
can you hear the compression?

Beg to differ on "weird fishes/arpeggi." The studio version is a serious evolution of the live version I saw on the tour they did when they tried out the song. The guitar arrangement/mixing is stunning. Here's my 2cents on the mix, from a post I made sometime back on TapeOp:

Thom/Nigel's use of reverb is dynamic. They really use it as an instrument to create emotional space/dynamic changes. To ask what reverb does Thom use, assumes that there is a single set up. Their mixes are always moving. Take the song "Weird Fishes/Arpeggi."

Listen to the way they pan the guitar parts to create tension in the arrangement. At the start, the first guitar is at 2 o'clock and the second comes in hard left. This leaves a nice little space for the vocal reverb to sit and creates tension. The arrangement of the guitars leaves me anticipating the moment when the panning arrangement will be balanced out (I want that hard left space balanced with another guitar or mid-rangy instrument). This finally happens at 1:48 when the third Arpeggio enters hard right and starts the song's ascent into a big dynamic build (as another guitar enters at 11 O'clock, and then another at 3 O'clock...).

There's also a nice example of the wet/dry reverb move in this song. Compare the big pre-delayed vocal reverb at the start of the song (0:58->) to the moment just after the first crescendo. There is a break in the middle of the song, perhaps the emotional moment of stillness after the "escape." At this moment, the big reverb is replaced by an intimate ambiance.

These little moves suggest an evolving temporal view of the mix--very cool.

[jamie10]

syntax
exactly that, mixing and guitars are stunning.

Tape op? is that another webstie?

Yes i noticed the amount of reverb all over In rainbows.

The secong guitar that comes in, if you completely shut down that side of the stereo mix, it sounds
alot better. Ive actually opened the wav form in an audio editor and made a mono file of the right channel
(the main intro guitar)....try it.....trust me......this is what i listen to if i want to hear arpeggi...
mix is cleaned up...unclutterd...just the main guitar arpeggio...only thing lacking is the ending...but you
can still feel the tension/darkness...in a diff light...equally powerful.

very well articulated Mr/Mrs Syntax...

No comment on the compression? Its compressed to F**k...and limited up the a**. Agree?

We should meet for a guiness because we would have a great conversation/discussin about this song...

bass = compressed = controlled
15 step bass production = man...is that controlled with compression or what?? its like someone with giant hands is choke holding that bass line down...

I feel the mix is slightly harsh sounding in the middle to end.

I have a stereo extracted mix (?) , where something is taken out, and all you hear is certain elements.
You gotta hear it. PM me if you want. You clearly hear the pre delay reverb etc effects all over the place.

Man, listening to what you say, I need to re-analyse that song.

For me there are these versions:
1) ether version (thom and jonny classical)
2) acoustic thom and jonny
3) early live rock version on tour (coupla variations)
4) final rock version (more like the studio version)

Surprised the outro picking pattern was not more prominant. Very surprised.


Nigels greatest skill may be mixing.
Also his input on Kid A working methods.
ie splitting them up, teaching them logic and software stuff, sythns,
samplling, beat programming etc etc. That was all nigels doing i believe.
Unless thom was already into that way of working or if nigel just showed
him the tools and methods.

[jamie10]

this is what nigel does in the "studio".
(Drinks tea like a true brit.....milk and sugar stirred with an SM57) "mmm...yeah...nice one mate" (high pitched cockney accent)....

[u b k]

Originally Posted by jamie10

No comment on the compression? Its compressed to F**k...and limited up the a**. Agree?

It is indeed; the vinyl is light years better in that regard (vinyl always is), but I'd still like to have more dynamic range. The ending of All I Need is compromised by the crush, it wants to absolutely explode into a million pieces and instead it's completely held back and mashed together. This kind of limiting creates a lot of tension without allowing for a full release because we're almost always slamming against the ceiling.

A bit too much yang, methinks. I love the amount of squeeze on Kid A, think it's perfect.

Am I the only one who thinks that the drum machines layered on the live drums are gratuitous in 15 Steps? It's way less rhythmically interesting to me and has way less 'feel' because of what I hear as excessively busy and overmixed beat boxes. It seems an odd choice. Contrast this with the stark mechanized beauty of Idioteque, that stupid pumping compression is lovely, it works beautifully.


Gregory Scott - ubk
.

[baikonour]

Originally Posted by u b k

Am I the only one who thinks that the drum machines layered on the live drums are gratuitous in 15 Steps? It's way less rhythmically interesting to me and has way less 'feel' because of what I hear as excessively busy and overmixed beat boxes. It seems an odd choice. Contrast this with the stark mechanized beauty of Idioteque, that stupid pumping compression is lovely, it works beautifully.


Gregory Scott - ubk
.

I agree, actually I think that drum programming is not Radiohead's forté...Same with Kid A, the electronica bits sound a bit cliché. It's a shame because they shouldn't think that they should use this kind of sound/programming to be hip, as it has the opposite effect IMO. The music will gain from using J Greenwood complex orchestral arrangements a lot more than some half baked Laptop treatments.