How did they record jazz?

[audiothings]

Jazz to me is Miles Davis and Coltrane in the 50s, particularly the modal stuff.

The music I record is very similar, in terms of being based around improvisation and spontaneity.

Want to know how the players were setup for stuff like that. I mean,

How did they hear each other? Headphones? Speakers in the studio? It would have been an issue, with the bass being so much softer...? If they had speakers in the studio, how did they deal with the bleed?

Did they use pickups on the upright bass or was it mic only?

Did they set up the mics for the musicians or the musicians for the mics (did the engineers get to be fussy about the positioning of the band)?

Were the players particular about the sound, or did they feel that it did'nt matter?

Did they do much post production? Reverb was the room itself, or some sort of echo chamber or... ? Was it tape compression or some Fairchild type of thing? Did they use any/much Eq?

Thanks,
Self.

[doorknocker]

There's some info on Rudy Van Gelder here, not much on specific techniques though, he is known for being extremely protective about his methods....

http://www.allaboutjazz.com/iviews/vangelder.htm

Andi

[kudzu]

I've worked quite a bit with jazzers...Brecker Bros., Ron Carter, Tito puente, Mike Stern, John Schofield etc....you definately set the mics to them...Two books you should definately get if ur into Miles/Trane are by Ashley Khan. They're about the making of the albums "Kinda Bloo" and "Luv Supreem". Lots of detail, gives you a better feeling for the sessions....Try reading the tech chapters of the books whilst listening to the CDs....good times!

Greg

[dbock]

Absolutely read those two books. Bear in mind that the Columbia stuff does sound very different than the RVG stuff. After you read the books try both approaches (the mics used were vey different). It will work out best if you have:
1) Great room (High cielings)
2) "those" mics
3) cowskin drumheads
good luck
David Bock

[atticus]

There is a book called "Temples of Sound" that has a lot of information on Rudy Van Gelder and how his room was laid out. I'm pretty sure you can buy it on Amazon. Good luck!

[NathanEldred]

Very cool thread (no pun intended).

[Ted Nightshade]

Looks like I got some books to buy!

I kinda worship RVG, and when I heard he had this series of RVG-mastered CD's of the classic records, I thought I would buy all of them. I got Wayne Shorter's Juju, great album, great (!!!) music, but it's too compressed. It's depressing to me that the dynamics are reduced as much as they are. By contemporary pop standards, it's very dynamic, but I would rather have a more dynamic version than the RVG series CD version.

A lot of the stereo versions of Cotrane Quartet stuff have way too much sax- it's not like you are going to miss the sax if it's not cranked way up. I always listen to those with the balance dramatically tilted to the "Elvin channel". I've never really heard the mono versions, and judging from the interview link, that's what I ought to be searching out. Hints?

A really mindblowing RVG recording is Coltrane's The Father The Son and The Holy Ghost. Man, that piano sound... that percussion and drums.. the whole thing together... wow! It's very enlightening that the apparent sound quality varies dramatically with what the players are playing- some moments record far better than others. The messiest parts of the music sound like a good but not amazing recording, other parts sound just astonishing.

I got to read those books...

One thing I know is that on a lot of old jazz one-mic recordings, they put the bass right up front closer to the mic than anything else. Ellington put in a lot of time getting killer big fat bass sounds. As far as Coltrane, those bass players were beating the living tar out of really fine basses with high action, to keep up with Elvin Jones' ferocious drumming. But even after Elvin left, on the Live in Japan Coltrane CD, there's a picture of Jimmy Garrison pulling a string an unbelievable distance from the fingerboard, ready to release- YEAH! Man, you never see bass playing like that these days, just producing maximum tone and volume purely acoustically- please alert me to any exceptions! I did get a kick out of seeing Charnett Moffett with Ornette Coleman- he pounded that bass in a very gratifying way. He had an amp though and all that. I saw the trio at Davies Symphony Hall in San Francisco- I was bummed they didn't do it sans PA. It would have sounded awesome in that room just acoustically.

So let's here from the guys who really know- how'd they do it back then?!

[echorec]

Originally posted by atticus
There is a book called "Temples of Sound" that has a lot of information on Rudy Van Gelder and how his room was laid out. I'm pretty sure you can buy it on Amazon. Good luck!

A lovely book, highly recommended

[Ted Nightshade]

OK, I found "Temples of Sound", but having trouble finding the Ashley Khan books at amazon... anybody have titles for those?

[jazzbutcher]

That book "Temples of Sound" is a lovely read and has some great photos in it too, from many studios. Sadly, despite a whole chapter on Van Gelder, there is precious little information on his studio, techniques, room layout, etc... Not that there is much information about it anywhere else either! I think he still is pretty mum on how he does his thing.

Temples of Sound has a lot of great chapters on many other studios and the folks that worked there: Chess, Motown, United Western, Stax, J&M, etc.etc....

I enjoyed the "Kind of Blue" book -- I think this is out of print. I got one a while back from a local used bookstore that makes a point of buying lots of out-of-print music books. I bet there are some shops online that might have copies. Good luck hunting!


-dave

[isa215]

the Ashley Kahn books are great reads for a history on those great albums we all love. Although perhaps a little light on the technical details.

However, I think it goes without saying that a lot of the great sound is down to great musicianship!
Of course - great recording spaces, mic-placement, ambient micing (or at least less 'dead-room'/'close-miked'), attention to stereo image (where appropriate) are also all key factors. - and of course Rudy Van Gelder is *the man*

No plug-ins, little or no overdubs, little or no EQ or dynamics. Might leave some gearslutz feeling a little naked!

That's not to say that later more studio/technology-aided works aren't equally great (bitches brew etc. etc.) - but certainly different.

[doorknocker]

Originally posted by isa215
That's not to say that later more studio/technology-aided works aren't equally great (bitches brew etc. etc.) - but certainly different.

Speaking of later Miles, has anybody recently heard his 'Decoy' album from 1984 or so. I remember it as KILLER sounding (haven't heard the CD though)

Andi

[lowswing]

I heard that kind of blue was recorded exclusivly with m49's

[audiothings]

thanks for the replies.

to be honest, the one question i would particularly like a response to (with regard to ideas for my own work), i think got lost in everything. so, i'll ask it again:

How did they hear each other? Headphones? Speakers in the studio? It would have been an issue, with the bass being so much softer...? If they had speakers in the studio, how did they deal with the bleed?

in general, if i want to record a bunch of musicians who may not have a natural acoustic balance (as in, bass v/s drums+horns in a jazz quintet), what options do i have, short of screwing the musicians with headpohnes?

thanks again,
self.

[Stizz]

Originally posted by doorknocker
Speaking of later Miles, has anybody recently heard his 'Decoy' album from 1984 or so. I remember it as KILLER sounding (haven't heard the CD though)

Andi

This was one of my first CDs - when I had only 3 - I loved the hell out of it in 1985. I recently gave it a spin, and unfortunately, it sounds like 1985, failed the test of time miserably, at least IMHO.

Kind of Blue on the other hand... I recently got the re-mastered CD, and its wonderful - my wife could clearly hear the difference in an A/B.

[doorknocker]

Stizz,

I guess you're talking about the production values and not the sound of the CD per se. Back in the day, I had 'Decoy' on vinyl and it stood out as great sounding at a time when I didn't really care too much about 'production' yet.
But I guess I totally agree, 'Kind of Blue' is as good as it gets in every regard. I'm also really knocked out by the quality of the 1964 'Four and more/My funny Valentine' live sets from the 'second' Miles Davis Quintet.

Andi

[oortnyc]

I have a friend who did a recording with Rudy a few years ago. After they did a take he came into the control room and mentioned to Rudy that he thought his sax sounded a bit hyped in the mid range. Rudy told him to use a different reed!!

Now that is EQ!!

[Ted Nightshade]

Considering they had unmic'ed bass on the bandstand, you'd think they could hear it OK in the studio if they just played in a natural arrangement.

[Stizz]

Originally posted by doorknocker
Stizz,

I guess you're talking about the production values and not the sound of the CD per se.

Andi

True Andi - I suppose the sound quality holds up, but I can't get past the music

[hollywood_steve]

How did they hear each other? Headphones? Speakers in the studio? It would have been an issue, with the bass being so much softer...? If they had speakers in the studio, how did they deal with the bleed?

Not sure where the mystery is; we're talking about acoustic combos (for the most part) - they set up in close proximity to each other and just played. No headphones, no monitors. And the concept of "bleed" wasn't something that really concerned them - they didn't go back and spend weeks mixing each song, bringing up one instrument at a time. This was not multitrack rock production, so you can't approach it from that perspective. Realize that only a couple of years earlier, jazz recordings were made with the entire combo in a circle around a single RCA 44.

[Bob Olhsson]

Motown was just installing our first headphone system when I began there in 1965. It included binaural microphones in the main studio and three newly built isolation rooms. My understanding is that this was one of the very first studio headphone systems. Prior to that time overdubs had been done to the studio playback speaker, an Altec A-7.

When I visited Abbey Road in 1968 one of the things they were taking great pride in was their new studio headphone system.

Prior to the late '60s headphones were almost never used. The same was true of stage monitors.

[dbluefield]

Does anybody else notice some mic distortion on Miles' -Kinda Blue - "So What" about 1 minute in?
On the left side if I have the CD player connected right.

Anyhow the music speaks for itself - great stuff!
thumbsup - you can hear lots of room, great seperation with pleasant bleed.

Maybe, Ben Mass is around - I heard some of his recent jazz recordings -- very nice!

Best,

Dave

[MusicSh*tty]

Originally posted by dbluefield
Does anybody else notice some mic distortion on Miles' -Kinda Blue - "So What" about 1 minute in?

Are you referring to where Paul Chambers comes in?

If so, that's my all-time most favorite moment in recorded music history.

[Ted Nightshade]

You know, I don't think I've ever payed a bit of attention to the technical recording aspects of Kinda Blue- I just listen to the music. Not many albums I can say that about... I'll have to try and listen to the recording next time, if I don't get distracted!

[Drumsound]

Originally posted by oortnyc
I have a friend who did a recording with Rudy a few years ago. After they did a take he came into the control room and mentioned to Rudy that he thought his sax sounded a bit hyped in the mid range. Rudy told him to use a different reed!!

Now that is EQ!!

Priceless

[JAIK]

oh hey there's Tony again ! yeh that is a brilliant story. definitely keeping that one in a drawer in my brain for later.

Some of you might want to take a look at the movie
Thelonious Monk: Straight, No Chaser (1989)
there is a long scene where they are in the studio and the mics are set up all around . I changed my mic placements for a sax i was recording at the time in response and got a much nicer sound ! : )

just watched a Miles video from 1959 in the studio with the quintet and then Gil Evans. kind of amazing how you don't hear the all the paper rustling when they are flipping thrpugh all that ink !

[shineboxNJ]

Originally posted by doorknocker
Speaking of later Miles, has anybody recently heard his 'Decoy' album from 1984 or so. I remember it as KILLER sounding (haven't heard the CD though)

Andi

I think i am missing something with that album. Maybe a little too fusion for me, but everything felt like it belonged in the Beverly Hills Cop soundtrack.
It does sound pretty killer though. I have used it as a reference for some of my mixes.

I just hate the fact I don't appreciate that album like other Miles.

mo

[drundall]

Originally posted by Ted Nightshade


A lot of the stereo versions of Cotrane Quartet stuff have way too much sax- it's not like you are going to miss the sax if it's not cranked way up. I always listen to those with the balance dramatically tilted to the "Elvin channel". I've never really heard the mono versions, and judging from the interview link, that's what I ought to be searching out. Hints?

I know what you mean. Some of the alternate takes have better balances, at least on Giant Steps. You might want to keep an eye out for those. Great stuff...stike

[Jay Kahrs]

Originally posted by audiothings

in general, if i want to record a bunch of musicians who may not have a natural acoustic balance (as in, bass v/s drums+horns in a jazz quintet), what options do i have, short of screwing the musicians with headpohnes?

Move them around until you do have a balance. It works for rock bands too. Don't let anyone play louder then they need to.

[Ted Nightshade]

Originally posted by Jay Kahrs
Move them around until you do have a balance. It works for rock bands too. Don't let anyone play louder then they need to.

Plus, you got the directional characteristic of the mic to work with- whatever's front of that cardioid is getting a level boost of some dB, whatever's more than 90 degrees from the front is getting dip from the average pickup of the mic. With a mic with great off axis response you can do all this at no sonic compromise. Check the Schoeps MK41- great for this approach.