Just 8 Tracks, 1", tape. Are you brave enough? (DAPTONE)

[Brad McGowan]

Since everyone is in the sharing mode... Here's a handful of tracks I did this past fall. All were tracked at 15ips to the MCI JH-110A 8-track pictured in my avatar. I mixed them through a Jim Williams modified Soundcraft Delta console onto a Studer A807 using ATR tape at 15ips. That was the most fun I had recording music in a long time. The whole process was just so enjoyable for everyone.

I only used two mics on the drums: Soundelux U195 in front of the kick and a Gefell UM70 as an overhead. U67/Pacifica on vocals! All the reverb was an Orban 111b.

Bumpy Road Band on MySpace Music - Free Streaming MP3s, Pictures & Music Videos

We used some varispeed on the tune "Red Beans"...by accident. I think I forgot to turn it off from the previous song (shhh...don't tell the band). However, somehow at the end of the mix the varispeed turned itself off. Got to love old equipment.

Brad

[RKrizman]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

Since everyone is in the sharing mode... Here's a handful of tracks I did this past fall. All were tracked at 15ips to the MCI JH-110A 8-track pictured in my avatar. I mixed them through a Jim Williams modified Soundcraft Delta console onto a Studer A807 using ATR tape at 15ips. That was the most fun I had recording music in a long time. The whole process was just so enjoyable for everyone.

I only used two mics on the drums: Soundelux U195 in front of the kick and a Gefell UM70 as an overhead. U67/Pacifica on vocals!

Bumpy Road Band on MySpace Music - Free Streaming MP3s, Pictures & Music Videos

We used some varispeed on the tune "Red Beans"...by accident. I think I forgot to turn it off from the previous song (shhh...don't tell the band). However, somehow at the end of the mix the varispeed turned itself off. Got to love old equipment.

Brad

Nice sounding tracks, Brad. Too bad you weren't brave enough to pan the drums all the way right!

-R

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

Nice sounding tracks, Brad. Too bad you weren't brave enough to pan the drums all the way right!

-R

panning drums hard right isnt brave, it's stupid.

with a 2 speaker system you get 6dB more OOMPH by panning drums center.

[RKrizman]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

panning drums hard right isnt brave, it's stupid.

with a 2 speaker system you get 6dB more OOMPH by panning drums center.

It's a joke. Sheesh, if you pan the drums all the way right then you might have to record a tambourine to balance it in the left side.

Wait a minute....

-R

[RKrizman]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

panning drums hard right isnt brave, it's stupid.

with a 2 speaker system you get 6dB more OOMPH by panning drums center.

Seriously though, it could be argued that you get more sonic integrity by putting mono drums (or mono anything) in just one speaker, to avoid the confused imaging that results from hearing the same thing come out of two speakers. When I check mixes in mono, I always turn off one speaker. Everything gets more real and tangible. (Plus, you can always turn the OOMPH knob up 6db.)

And then again, sometimes brave is stupid.

-R

[DJamesGoody]

Why is it stupid pan drums to one side?

No more or less stupid than panning anything to one side or the other, no?

[lakeshorephatty]

Hey Brad, Sounds nice and natural well done! Like hearing the UM70 on the OH, I have one of those in transit to me now

Russell

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by DJamesGoody

Why is it stupid pan drums to one side?

No more or less stupid than panning anything to one side or the other, no?

you guys are joking, right?

how many records have you made where you panned the drums to one side. express as % of whole. if it's over 1% i'll be shocked.

i honestly cannot believe i have to explain this to ppl... drums have the highest amount of peak info, therefore they should be panned where the delivery system can deliver the most amount of peak info.. which is the center. it's pure math. 1 speaker = 50%. 2 speakers = 100%. you can potentially get 50% more peak info before running out of headroom by panning the loudest drums to the center, in mono.

aside from that, there exist: headphones, car stereos, clubs, etc...

i would say hard panned mono drums cross the line from bravery into stupidity... but I SUPPOSE its just my opinion... even tho, the last 40-50 years of musical form agree with me.

sure, all rules can be broken... but have a good reason at least... ignoring all convention is just silly.

[RKrizman]

I've panned drums to one side and have had no problem with the delivery system. Up is louder. No headroom problems. On one project I did, 2 out of 9 songs had the drums panned all the way over. Sounded great. You may not wish to do this but I don't buy that there is any rule based on the rationale you gave.

I say do whatever you like. In certain, if not most, situations it may be ill advised, but in general the idea simply can't be branded as stupid.


-R

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

I've panned drums to one side and have had no problem with the delivery system. Up is louder. No headroom problems. On one project I did, 2 out of 9 songs had the drums panned all the way over. Sounded great. You may not wish to do this but I don't buy that there is any rule based on the rationale you gave.

sounded great to who? i'm not interested in what you buy.

2 speakers are (potentially) twice as loud as one.

aside from that you lose all depth by hard panning... walk around with an eye patch on for a few days. i'd say this is a direct analogy for hard panning drums.

"The fool who persists in his folly will become wise." --William Blake.

[DJamesGoody]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

sounded great to who? i'm not interested in what you buy.

2 speakers are (potentially) twice as loud as one.

aside from that you lose all depth by hard panning... walk around with an eye patch on for a few days. i'd say this is a direct analogy for hard panning drums.

"The fool who persists in his folly will become wise." --William Blake.

Definitely more than 1% here too. Who cares? If it sounds good to me, I'm doing it.
I don't give a shake about loudness, I care about depth and dimension. Unless you're being sarcastic, I'm not sure why you'd care.

After all, aren't you the one who, earlier in this thread, made the distinct point about art providing different flavors? Not to mention, the corporate-hive that you railed against?

[Hardtoe]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

sounded great to who? i'm not interested in what you buy.

2 speakers are (potentially) twice as loud as one.

aside from that you lose all depth by hard panning... walk around with an eye patch on for a few days. i'd say this is a direct analogy for hard panning drums.

"The fool who persists in his folly will become wise." --William Blake.

I listen to a lot of older funk stuff which sounds totally natural with the drums panned hard - you dont loose the depth as there is usually a little spill in the other side, and there is a lot more separation, which makes up for any lack of two channel volume boost. If things are well balanced, it sounds really fantastic - in fact, you often dont notice unless you are listening in an analytical manner.

It sounds great to me.

You dont have to take it personally.

[RKrizman]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

sounded great to who? i'm not interested in what you buy.

2 speakers are (potentially) twice as loud as one.

aside from that you lose all depth by hard panning... walk around with an eye patch on for a few days. i'd say this is a direct analogy for hard panning drums.

"The fool who persists in his folly will become wise." --William Blake.

Sounded great to me, the composer and producer. And the client. Don't understand the "buy" comment.

The reason you see 3D with two eyes is that each eye is seeing a slightly different angle on the same thing. Such is not the case with two speakers and a mono source. It's more analogous to two slightly spaced mics recording a single source.

It's astounding to me that anyone would want to make a hard rule about this.

-R

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by Sounds Great

You could pan them right and boost them 6db.

you'll run out of headroom 6dB sooner tho. anything panned away from center looses 6dB. "i canna change the laws of physics" no matter how much your pan pots lie.

think of it THIS way.... stereo mixing is the creation of 2 waves, left and right. the combination of those 2 waves in the air produces a third, the SUM... mono/center is the height of this sum. because each channel of the stereo wave is 1/2 of the SUM, there is the potential for 6dB more OOMPH.

mono/center is a special condition... it's basic math.

in stereo mixing there really is only SUM and DIFFERENCE.... difference = depth/width

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

Sounded great to me, the composer and producer. And the client. Don't understand the "buy" comment.

The reason you see 3D with two eyes is that each eye is seeing a slightly different angle on the same thing. Such is not the case with two speakers and a mono source. It's more analogous to two slightly spaced mics recording a single source.

It's astounding to me that anyone would want to make a hard rule about this.

-R

you're not understanding what i'm saying.

mono/center is a line, the height of forward THRUST in a 2 speaker system.. the point of maximum loudness thru correlation, NOT volume

the hard L/R pan positions are -6dB relative to mono/center

I didnt make the rule, the Universe did... it's called addition. x=1, 2x=2, 2:1 = 6dB




(i just told you guys how to squeeze 6 more dB out of the loudness wars and you missed it... every stereo recording format has some kind of hard ceiling... i'm showing you how to mathematically optimize impact... this transcends style)

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by Sounds Great

Not a problem.

i find this truly astonishing. ppl here argue over the top 1-5% of performance from a piece of gear... and are yet nonchalant about 50%.

i give up

[RKrizman]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

i find this truly astonishing. ppl here argue over the top 1-5% of performance from a piece of gear... and are yet nonchalant about 50%.

i give up

I don't get it. On the stuff where I panned the drums hard to one side I had no problem getting them loud enough while I still limit the mix tightly up to 0 digital. No headroom problems.

-R

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

I don't get it. On the stuff where I panned the drums hard to one side I had no problem getting them loud enough while I still limit the mix tightly up to 0 digital. No headroom problems.

-R

you would have to mix the same tracks with both schemes and compare to hear the difference...

the problem in pointing this phenomenon out to ppl is that they've been fooled by "panning laws". most mixers don't show a 6dB drop when you pan from Center to L or R... what started out as convention has fooled ppl to a large degree. it's a much bigger problem than ppl realize. the mixer/DAW is compensating for this level change... it is fundamentally flawed.

neve understands this.. and designed the pan pots with on/off switches. see "Channel Pan" and "Channel Pan Engage"



the -3dB drop is an electronic compromise... splitting the difference.

you didnt have "headroom problems" because drums were panned to one side. in the other channel there were no drums. had there been drums on both sides you could have gotten twice the volume with the same "per-channel" headroom.

x=1, 2x=2, 2:1=6dB

6dB is a damn lot... and you dont have to use this for volume.. you could use it creatively. 6dB is a damn lot.

[DJamesGoody]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

6dB is a damn lot... and you dont have to use this for volume.. you could use it creatively. 6dB is a damn lot.

What you're talking about is balance, and my job is to balance as I see fit. Therefore, the pan law means nothing to me outside of the theoretical, because at the end of the day, I care about how the mix sounds, not math my friend.

Actually now that I think about it, you may be right. Rudy Van Gelder must have been just as stupid as I am - or he was bad at math, because those Englewood Cliffs records sound terrible - whenever I listen to them, I always think to myself "god, if the drums were just panned center mono, they'd have 6db more impact...."

are you kidding me?? These are the times Gearslutz amazes me.

[soundbarnfool]

Originally Posted by DJamesGoody

What you're talking about is balance, and my job is to balance as I see fit. Therefore, the pan law means nothing to me outside of the theoretical, because at the end of the day, I care about how the mix sounds, not math my friend.

Actually now that I think about it, you may be right. Rudy Van Gelder must have been just as stupid as I am - or he was bad at math, because those Englewood Cliffs records sound terrible - whenever I listen to them, I always think to myself "god, if the drums were just panned center mono, they'd have 6db more impact...."

are you kidding me?? These are the times Gearslutz amazes me.

Rudy Van Gelder was such an idiot!

Inglewood SoundBarn

[OldSkool]

Most of the classic bossa, most of the original hard funk these Daptone guys were inspired by, and God knows how many other entire genres of "the last 40-50 years" - drums panned hard. I love the sound. I am not an engineer but a musician for the last 35 years and a hobbyist at recording my own stuff. And I don't give a fart how many more dBs of impact my drums have if it sounds good. Louder ain't necessarily better, even in dance music, and Gabe Roth sussed that out long ago.

And to all the experts here who $hit all over this old-school stuff - seems to me you're part of the very problem so many of us real music lovers, including many professional engineers on this very forum, have been complaining about and hope for an end to: the music industry having become completely dominated by robotically formulaic garbage that is so damn bad it compromises the human immune system - even if it "sounds good". It may very well prove to be just a fantasy that we as a culture will ever evolve beyond that, never mind soon, but - you gotta dream, and Roth and Daptone are part of that dream.

I think I'll elaborate on that - I think a lot of people, digital or analog, are obsessed by the idea that music production requires the "right" gear - to the point of completely forgetting that the music is the important thing. As Roth said in his "Shitty Is Pretty" articles, quoting James Brown, "you gotta use what you got to get what you want".

Not the right equipment guys - the right spirit , the right soul, the right attitude. Too artsy-fartsy for ya? Listen to his records and that notion will die fast - unless you have no soul.

[Sugarnutz]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

panning drums hard right isnt brave, it's stupid.

with a 2 speaker system you get 6dB more OOMPH by panning drums center.

Why is it stupid? Listen to Crowded House's "Kill Eye" on Temple of the Low Men. Clearmountain panned the drums AND bass to one side during the verses, sounds great.

[3rd world order]

i love how you guys get hung up on one hot-button word and exceptions... its so easy to make you charge the matador's cloth.

[Hardtoe]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

i love how you guys get hung up on one hot-button word and exceptions... its so easy to make you charge the matador's cloth.

So you're trying to be a jerk?





Super.

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by Hardtoe

So you're trying to be a jerk?

Super.

its half antagonizing ppl and half valid points to wake ppl up. i'm joking about "stupid" and not joking about the math and importance of it.

[DJamesGoody]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

its half antagonizing ppl and half valid points to wake ppl up. i'm joking about "stupid" and not joking about the math and importance of it.

Sure, I get that you used "stupid" as a quip, and that would've been more than sufficient. But you continued to drive home your opinion with equations and things completely unrelated to making music, thus you were charging the "matador's cloth".

I don't personally need to be "woken" up to the pan law, or the claimed importance of the math, thank you. I spend my days making records, not studying for a doctorate.

But I tell you what........ you have the Gearslutz-given right to start your own thread, where you can extoll your mastery of the pan law and the rest of us to bear witness.

[vernier]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

you guys are joking, right?

how many records have you made where you panned the drums to one side. express as % of whole. if it's over 1% i'll be shocked.

i honestly cannot believe i have to explain this to ppl... drums have the highest amount of peak info, therefore they should be panned where the delivery system can deliver the most amount of peak info.. which is the center. it's pure math. 1 speaker = 50%. 2 speakers = 100%. you can potentially get 50% more peak info before running out of headroom by panning the loudest drums to the center, in mono.

aside from that, there exist: headphones, car stereos, clubs, etc...

i would say hard panned mono drums cross the line from bravery into stupidity... but I SUPPOSE its just my opinion... even tho, the last 40-50 years of musical form agree with me.

sure, all rules can be broken... but have a good reason at least... ignoring all convention is just silly.

Hard panning is rad and cool and I love it sometimes.

[u b k]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

When I check mixes in mono, I always turn off one speaker. Everything gets more real and tangible.

Same here, I love the sound of one-speaker mono.


Gregory Scott - ubk

[3rd world order]

Originally Posted by DJamesGoody

Sure, I get that you used "stupid" as a quip, and that would've been more than sufficient. But you continued to drive home your opinion with equations and things completely unrelated to making music, thus you were charging the "matador's cloth".

I don't personally need to be "woken" up to the pan law, or the claimed importance of the math, thank you. I spend my days making records, not studying for a doctorate.

But I tell you what........ you have the Gearslutz-given right to start your own thread, where you can extoll your mastery of the pan law and the rest of us to bear witness.

after 10 years of struggling to create mixes i'm finally happy with, this was they key that unlocked it for me.... it may be of no value to anyone but me... i dont know if you're aware of this but other ppl read gearslutz too.... i'm hoping to reach a younger version of me and turn the light on for them, in my own twisted way. my (debatable) sense of humor and (lack of) presentation may even appeal to them. IMAGINE THAT

if you know everything that needs to be known, thats great FOR YOU... but it doesnt apply to everyone. math, however does apply to everyone... whether or not they're aware of it.

the other thing is.. it has taken me TEN ****ING YEARS to figure this game out.... and so no matter how much of a pain in the ass i am, i deliver the goods, and i've saved SOMEONE a hell of a lot of time.

i extract my own price in my own way for my gifts... you dont have to read any of my posts.. gearslutz does have an ignore function.... so if a lil bit of trolling is my price, SO BE IT. small price to pay if my insights flip the light on for someone..

and what the hell, i have Rupert Neve on my side.. so your opinion matters very little to me.

ppl are wayyyyyyyyyyy too sensitive around here and i like to make fun of them for it. you'll get over it eventually

[DJamesGoody]

Originally Posted by 3rd world order

ppl are wayyyyyyyyyyy too sensitive around here and i like to make fun of them for it. you'll get over it eventually

Nobody here got sensitive dude. Take a deep breath.......