Rudy Van Gelder and secrecy

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by TonyBelmont

Yeah, but enough engineers have learned that teaching others what you do (and how you do it), will make you expendable very quickly.

Well, I know that this is the fear, but I have never encountered this phenomenon.

I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I've never witnessed it.

I have a hard time imagining the circumstance where it would happen.

- c

[phillysoulman]

Originally Posted by The Listener

This morning I put on "A Love Supreme" - reminded by this thread yesterday.

Read the sleeve notes starting with "Dear Listener: All praise be to God to whom all praise is due", but I almost read it "Dear Listener you talked out of your ass again"

Following the hunch I went to check who recorded one of my favourite sounding jazz albums "Lush Life" by Joe Henderson...

Funny that I never bothered to check that little detail. Of course if was Mr.Van Gelder...

Maybe the impression that stuck with me about those 60s jazz albums is because of poor transfer of the masters to the early CDs. Actually these new editions sound fine.

But I do prefer contemporary jazz sound - even Van Gelder's contemporary obviously.

I suppose that praising imaginary beings is the secret
Maybe Ill try that and see what doesnt happen..lol

[gearjones]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

My general stance on the issue: None of us could make "A Love Supreme" if we knew which microphones were used and where they were placed.

I mean, the notion that we could is fundamentally absurd, I think.

...but that's just my particular point of view.

- c

^^ This is one of the coolest and to me, the truest things I've ever read here on GS, and I totally agree. SS - great thread and I also love the philosophical bent going on.

I'm also a Rudy Van Gelder fanatic. I think he is just amazing. And the fact that he's re-mastering these days? Crazy and great. The guy still has ears and still has great taste. My buddy just got all his Miles Prestige re-masters and swears by them. I'm going to try to hook up with him and hear those soon before he leaves town.

BTW- thank you again for selling me the Avedis E27's. I've been putting them to good use in a lot of projects I've been doing.

[uncle muscles]

Who the hell is Rudy van Gelder?

Edit: ahh.. I see.

[ofie]

i think he only wanted to create an aura, like "no one can create my sound" so record companies can keep coming back. well it worked well for him in a time when lps and technology was some kind of magic.

why do we even argue about him. secrecy is part of his selling point, learn something from this and get more clients. if costumers think you bring some magic to your sound, they'll keep coming back.

guys that make beats will always like to get the daw files so they can see your "magic". RESET MIXER in the daw is my weapon.

[psycho_monkey]

I suppose that if you actually KNOW the only reason you get work is because of a particular piece of gear, technique or just an air of mystery, you'd be right to be paranoid.

However, I'd imagine that any of the greats could hold monthly masterclasses on their techniques, attended by whoever, and they'd still be first in line when someone wanted an x style production/mix/"sound".

Anyone who's ever assisted a great mixer or tracking engineer knows this; which is why the paranoia is a little funny.

[Ernest Buckley]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

I suppose that if you actually KNOW the only reason you get work is because of a particular piece of gear, technique or just an air of mystery, you'd be right to be paranoid.

However, I'd imagine that any of the greats could hold monthly masterclasses on their techniques, attended by whoever, and they'd still be first in line when someone wanted an x style production/mix/"sound".

Anyone who's ever assisted a great mixer or tracking engineer knows this; which is why the paranoia is a little funny.

Good point. From now on, I too will reveal nothing!

Also, about those master classes, I think Bruce Swedien does them on occasion. So does Ronan. I`m sure there are others. I will be joining this group as well charging upwards of $500,000 for a weekend at my place sharing all my trade secrets.

[megido]

I think two of RVGs secrets were; trading realism for seperation and not padding his condensers down before the MX-10, hence the muddy pianos and fuzzy cymbals.

[Seamus TM]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

My general stance on the issue: None of us could make "A Love Supreme" if we knew which microphones were used and where they were placed.

I mean, the notion that we could is fundamentally absurd, I think.

...but that's just my particular point of view.

- c

Ah, recording. It's never the same thing twice. That's a big reason why we all love it, right? Every time you plug a mic in, it's new. Recording is literally a perpetual state of possibility.

Not only do I agree with SS above, I would go so far as to say this:
If a painter paints a picture, then the painter attempts to paint the same picture again, do you think it would be exactly the same? Of course not. There would be subtle variations from the first. There would be a signature aesthetic, but the two paintings would not be the same.

In my limited recording life, I don't think that I have ever gotten the same sound twice. I'm not even talking about taking the performance into account, which is a big variable, obviously.

Using this logic, I would argue that if given the opportunity (equipment, space, players) I have my doubts that Mr. Van Gelder could reproduce any of his own recordings in the exact same way a second time.

However, there would be a signature aesthetic, which is really what we are talking about when people ask "what mic, what tape, what placement, etc etc". What they are really asking is, "what makes you you?".

While my above statements are scientifically true, the kicker is that only the painter and VERY few other people (if any) would actually see the subtle variations. The casual viewer would only see the signature aesthetic of two seemingly identical paintings.

The signature aesthetic is what people try to replicate, but will always be doomed to fail because they are just simply someone else. In many cases, it's probably not something that can even be explained or something that they are even aware that they are doing. Maybe Mr. Van Gelder won't say anything about it because he doesn't even know.

You know how people have their own smell? Like you know your wife's scent or your brother's scent? Someone's sonic signature is like their scent. You can't smell your own scent. Catch my drift?

I guess what I'm saying is that it's never about equipment or even technique.
It's about the perception of individuals. Always will be.

I'm rambling and starting to not make sense to even myself, but thanks for this thread. It reminded me of why I love recording.

[Lumin One]

maybe why i can understand and relate to his reasons to keep things a secret is because i came up through hip hop and djing. you didnt tell people what records you used to sample. you sometimes covered the labels on the records when you didnt want anyone to know what you were playing while. this is to keep the leeches and non-style having folks guessing. if you were in the know, you appreciated. if you didnt, you just had to enjoy it when you had the chance.

in the information age we are in now, folks feel like they are entitled to info because its everywhere and you can just go on google or a forum like this and ask a question, and someone is ready willing and able to share what they know. so why should someone like RVG keep their mouth shut? probably because there are droves more people who will either not appreciate what was said or nitpick and break down every sentence and tell RVG why what he is doing is wrong. ive seen it happen on this board a million times. i would keep my mouth shut too.

[Papanate]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

However, I'd imagine that any of the greats could hold monthly masterclasses on their techniques, attended by whoever, and they'd still be first in line when someone wanted an x style production/mix/"sound".

Anyone who's ever assisted a great mixer or tracking engineer knows this; which is why the paranoia is a little funny.

Musicians and record companies who liked what they heard from RVG naturally will try to book him in hopes of capturing the 'hit' sound he just got on X's record - hoping that doing so will also help the new record be a hit as well.

Mystique and secrecy is part of the bullshit marketing all Engineers and Producers have to go through to keep themselves relevant and working.

Dr. Van Gelder is a superb engineer to be sure....he stamps a 'sound' through his techniques. But it's not magic and it's not a secret in regards to what he did.
The gear isn't magic any more than the gear the Beatles used was magic.

But much of the music he recorded is magic...it touches that human mystic in a lot of people. Anyone with talent could of recorded it...and no it wouldn't sound the same...it still would have sounded great. The only difference is we would be talking about that engineer instead and assigning all these secret qualities to him instead.

[Silver Sonya]

I would like to point out that this thread represents the first time I've ever disagreed with Tony Belmont.

I'm kinda expecting balloons to drop from the ceiling or something...

- c

[The Listener]

Originally Posted by phillysoulman

I suppose that praising imaginary beings is the secret
Maybe Ill try that and see what doesnt happen..lol

Well, it helped John Coltrane, it helped Bach and many others... especially if the word or idea of "God" doesn't mean some "imaginary being" to you, but "A love supreme".

[chrisj]

Originally Posted by The Listener

For example - what bothers me in those recordings foremost - I like the recordings where the double bass is "bigger", more real - has more bass, impact, larger & fatter sound like in real life, the drums should be "bigger", too, smooth, but with more impact, not just that distant room sound.

Compare - even on youtube the difference is obvious:

A Love Supreme, Part 1: Acknowledgement - John Coltrane (1965) - YouTube

But I don't understand. Isn't it obvious? I can see why he wanted to be mysterious, but that doesn't mean people knowing the fundamental techniques would have his taste, any more than knowing what paints someone used would let you paint their picture.

This link is better- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fth9UUa1Mfw

That ride cymbal is blatantly obviously a closer mic panned hard right, and just as directly coming through the bass mic, which is enough farther away to sit it in Haas effect. Either the piano mic or the bass mic- I think he's got the bass mic, a cardioid, to be the one pointing at the ride cymbal. I think the bass mic's a lot closer to the bass but it seems to be out of phase with the piano mic so the piano's not generating the lows I'd expect- the bass gets them all, and the piano's share of the room sound kinda cancels the lows of the room ambience.

I think he's also got two mics on the right on Coltrane. The louder one is the farther one, hard left, and the nearer mic is just cracked open, just enough to give a glint of texture 'inside' the more diffuse sound from the farther one- I'm willing to bet the farther one is cardioid and the close one is actually brighter but an omni. That one is actually heard in the center by 1:51... I don't think that's bleed at all. I think that's a close-mic mixed way down. He's getting two different sorts of room ambience combining that way. It's a way to smooth out or gloss up a rawer tone like Coltrane's. It's really obvious, the double-image... when I went to the next song on the album he had it all very different. Even within that one song he's playing with balances like crazy while it's underway. Another possibility is mics pointing from different directions- it could also be one mic in front and one from the side, layered.

To spell out what's being done with mic spill, in-vs-out-of-phase, and layering mics on top of each other in the same acoustic space, is SO totally not enough to give somebody the ability to 'reproduce the sound', because that sound is another kind of performance. I think Mr. Van Gelder's secretiveness about some of this stuff is a disservice to his real gifts. As if some of it is that secret... the trick with pointing the bass mic past the piano at the drums is flagrantly obvious, as is having the close bass mic out of phase with the piano room mic. I think the bass mic is pointed away from the piano- out-of-phase is more neutralizing the room bleed on the low end of the piano.

The space differences between these mics, combined with the way they're aimed, cause room ambience to be stacked up exactly like Bob Katz's 'K-Stereo' processor: if it's layered and delayed properly (by positioning alone) the ambience is reinforced and you don't hear smeared transients because the initial transient masks successive transients. To my mind the coolest part is what he's doing on the sax. This is somebody who really understands how microphones pick up sound in a room

Jimmy Page was doing just the same sort of thing in rock, largely with guitar tones. Bowie used a similar trick on the vocal in 'Young Americans'. Secrecy is foolish because the range of things you CAN do is so huge, that the ability to think up original things to do is priceless- if you proceeded to do a bunch of jazz recordings without Coltrane using the Love Supreme miking setup, and just let the mix sit there, you don't have it at all.

Just my thoughts- I'd never heard this famous track before so I appreciate the heads-up.

[EisenAudio]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

Would it dispel the magic if we knew the techniques?

Some people think so.

Rudy Van Gelder, on ensuring that his knowledge will die when he dies.

- c

When you visit his studio (I've been there on service calls) you realize that there are no secrets. No secret gear, no crazy contraptions, just a great room (and booths) that he knows where to position the performers in, and quality mics that he knows where to position in relation to the players and the room. He hears things a certain way, and that's what he captures. It's the same fundamental approach most any skilled engineer has always used to capture live acoustic ensembles.

Fortunately for Mr. Van Gelder and his audience, the way he hears and captures was and continues to be very well received, and has built a lasting brand. As one would in other industries, he uses mystique to maintain a competitive edge (or at least the impression thereof), thus fortifying his brand. WSJ might not otherwise be writing about the "notorious" RVG.

[The Listener]

I really like the last two posts, I think you guys made some very good points. Not just regarding possible RVG philosophy or psychology, but what really matters and what should be foremost thought of when recording live acoustic music with all musicians playing at one in one space. Thanks.

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by Papanate

Musicians and record companies who liked what they heard from RVG naturally will try to book him in hopes of capturing the 'hit' sound he just got on X's record - hoping that doing so will also help the new record be a hit as well.

Mystique and secrecy is part of the bullshit marketing all Engineers and Producers have to go through to keep themselves relevant and working.

Dr. Van Gelder is a superb engineer to be sure....he stamps a 'sound' through his techniques. But it's not magic and it's not a secret in regards to what he did.
The gear isn't magic any more than the gear the Beatles used was magic.

But much of the music he recorded is magic...it touches that human mystic in a lot of people. Anyone with talent could of recorded it...and no it wouldn't sound the same...it still would have sounded great. The only difference is we would be talking about that engineer instead and assigning all these secret qualities to him instead.

I see your point.

However, the best engineers and producers I know are very open to share techniques. Somehow they still get hired.

I just think it's a slightly selfish attitude. I sure hope he learned everything in his own, and no-one showed him a thing when he was learning. You ever hear of paying it forward?

[jmikeperkins]

Rudy Van Gelder is cool just because he built a home studio and somehow got a large number of the world's best and most respected jazz musicians to go there, hang out, and record their greatest works for him. He is an inspiration for anyone who ever built a home studio, bought some Neumann mics and dreamed of doing something great.

[Papanate]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

I see your point.
However, the best engineers and producers I know are very open to share techniques. Somehow they still get hired.

Good creative people are neither petty nor scared when they are steadaly employed. It's different today.

I just think it's a slightly selfish attitude. I sure hope he learned everything in his own, and no-one showed him a thing when he was learning. You ever hear of paying it forward?

Well don't judge him so harshly...the world does not treat engineers very nicely...engineers have to present themselves as special.

[Lumin One]

Originally Posted by jmikeperkins

Rudy Van Gelder is cool just because he built a home studio and somehow got a large number of the world's best and most respected jazz musicians to go there, hang out, and record their greatest works for him. He is an inspiration for anyone who ever built a home studio, bought some Neumann mics and dreamed of doing something great.

this x1000

[Ward Pike]

There is a fine line between genius and insanity.

Mr. Van Gelder has MORE than earned the right to dance across that line whenever he wishes to.

Respect, RVG, mad respect.

[megido]

Originally Posted by jmikeperkins

Rudy Van Gelder is cool just because he built a home studio and somehow got a large number of the world's best and most respected jazz musicians to go there, hang out, and record their greatest works for him. He is an inspiration for anyone who ever built a home studio, bought some Neumann mics and dreamed of doing something great.

Hear, Hear!