big band jazz recording

[ajfarber]

Here is another temp mix. I'm getting closer to what I want.

[ajfarber]

Here's another one. Jerry Dodgion on alto. Wayne Goodman on trombone.

[jamwerks]

Originally Posted by ajfarber

Here is a quick mix from the session.

Man that is TOP notch playing.

[Arkestry]

Really, really nice, Andy! The playing and arrangements are excellent. The sound is glorious. The balance between the instruments is right on the money.

My only issue (and, really, I could live with it) is the imaging. It feels a little extreme to me, like I'm listening to two separate bands. If it were me, I would probably try panning according to the location of the players as opposed to L-C-R. Or, if I were set on doing the L-C-R thing (I know many of the greatest jazz recordings were made this way), perhaps I'd allow for some more bleed to kind of fill in the space a little more realistically.

That being said, this is a minor gripe. Overall, it sounds fantastic.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by Arkestry

Really, really nice, Andy! The playing and arrangements are excellent. The sound is glorious. The balance between the instruments is right on the money.

My only issue (and, really, I could live with it) is the imaging. It feels a little extreme to me, like I'm listening to two separate bands. If it were me, I would probably try panning according to the location of the players as opposed to L-C-R. Or, if I were set on doing the L-C-R thing (I know many of the greatest jazz recordings were made this way), perhaps I'd allow for some more bleed to kind of fill in the space a little more realistically.

That being said, this is a minor gripe. Overall, it sounds fantastic.

It works best with extreme L-C-R panning. With the bleed that we have here, incremental panning makes the ensemble passages sound muddy and the harmonic blend isn't as good. I've already experimented with that idea. There are also some minor phase issues with other panning solutions, so I'm kind of stuck with what I've got. In fact, I think the drums sound too washy where they are, at 2:00, so I'm gonna try hard right panning of the drums and see if that clears them up a bit.

[RobAnderson]

Sounds great Andy. Great separation and I like the L-R conversation between the brass and the winds with soloists showing up just a little off center. Frankly, I like the drums where you've got them. It can sometimes get hard on one ear when the drums are always hitting you on one side

As to your last point, and I don't know if this helps or hurts, (and you no doubt already know) but I've noticed on a lot of the old Columbia stuff they seem to use a mono chamber panned center, and for me this seems to help tie the LCR "panning" together somehow.

I like what you've got going on already though.

[Piedpiper]

Really nice timber! Love them ribbons and tubes! I agree, though, that the LCR thing is very unnatural to the point of being distracting. Obviously different priorities here.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by Piedpiper

Really nice timber! Love them ribbons and tubes! I agree, though, that the LCR thing is very unnatural to the point of being distracting. Obviously different priorities here.

The LCR thing can be weird in headphones, but with all the bleed, it sounds to me like a stage set up with brass on the right and piano and reeds on the left with bass and guitar separating the sections. That's how many big bands set up on big concert stages instead of the usual "stack" format. Also, if you listen to late 50's early '60s big band records from Basie or Ellington, this was the usual panning scheme. It would be more realistic to have the drums in the middle as well, but the bass becomes a bit blurred if I try that.

When I master, I may "bring the sides in" a bit. I am monitoring through 2 channels of my old Ramsa console, and when I set the LR pan pots at 9:00 and 3:00 instead of hard L&R, it seems better.

[boojum]

Hot stuff! Loved it. I have not heard a good big band in a long while. Thanks. You've a nice recording their, my friend. I would like a tad more sound in the center. Other than that, I love it. Yeah, other folks are never happy. ;o)


Great work!


PS - the band liked it, too! WOOHOO!

[Piedpiper]

Originally Posted by ajfarber

The LCR thing can be weird in headphones, but with all the bleed, it sounds to me like a stage set up with brass on the right and piano and reeds on the left with bass and guitar separating the sections. That's how many big bands set up on big concert stages instead of the usual "stack" format. Also, if you listen to late 50's early '60s big band records from Basie or Ellington, this was the usual panning scheme. It would be more realistic to have the drums in the middle as well, but the bass becomes a bit blurred if I try that.

When I master, I may "bring the sides in" a bit. I am monitoring through 2 channels of my old Ramsa console, and when I set the LR pan pots at 9:00 and 3:00 instead of hard L&R, it seems better.

That would help a lot for me. That ping pong stereo is the one thing I don't like about those late 50s/early 60s recordings. But I'm a big fan of ORTF and natural imaging. It's all trade offs as usual. Enjoy what you got. It's gorgeous.

[mastermix]

The Art of Recording the Big Band, Pt.1

Originally Posted by ajfarber

That stuff was posted to the web by Bob Auld, a trumpet player turned engineer. I went to college with Bob over 20 years ago. At that time he did live sound for the jazz concerts at Manhattan School of Music where we were students.

Bob's info is interesting to be sure, but it's nothing I didn't already know. I would be more useful to find photos from some big band dates of the era, particularly Count Basie, Duke Ellington and the like.

I just saw Bob yesterday at the AES NY picnic in New Rochelle. He did a presentation at the last NY section meeting greatly expanding on the Web stuff... with pictures and audio examples. Gave me some good directions on a big band session I had the week after.

BTW he's the incoming section chair.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by Piedpiper

That would help a lot for me. That ping pong stereo is the one thing I don't like about those late 50s/early 60s recordings. But I'm a big fan of ORTF and natural imaging. It's all trade offs as usual. Enjoy what you got. It's gorgeous.

The pan pot wasn't invented yet. Mics could be recorded to channel A, channel B or both.

[Piedpiper]

Originally Posted by ajfarber

The pan pot wasn't invented yet. Mics could be recorded to channel A, channel B or both.

Yup, worked for stereo micing but not so well for spot micing.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by Piedpiper

Yup, worked for stereo micing but not so well for spot micing.

Big band and other jazz dates were all spot mic'ed back then. Only classical recording would have been done with a stereo mic or, more likely, a Decca tree.

I suppose it is the sound I am used to, but I can't think of too many jazz records that sound better than "Kind of Blue" for example. No pan pots or room mics there. Pretty much single M49s spot micing each instrument.

[ajfarber]

Here's a new mix. I still did the brass on right, reeds on left thing, but I fanned the brass out a wee bit, and the same for the saxes. Bass and guitar are centre, drums right, piano left. I did try some more "realistic" panning, but the blend of the ensemble suffered a bit. The piano being alone on the extreme left gives it more clarity than if it were mixed in with the reeds, and the drums being alone on the extreme right gives more definition to the ride and sock cymbals.

[Piedpiper]

Originally Posted by ajfarber

Big band and other jazz dates were all spot mic'ed back then. Only classical recording would have been done with a stereo mic or, more likely, a Decca tree.

I suppose it is the sound I am used to, but I can't think of too many jazz records that sound better than "Kind of Blue" for example. No pan pots or room mics there. Pretty much single M49s spot micing each instrument.

And the classical ones are the ones that sound right to me. As much as I love Kind of Blue (and M49s), for me it suffers from the LCR effect and from too much reverb. The combination of the two is particularly disconcerting because the only way the LCR thing makes sense in terms of natural perspective is if you were in a smallish room such as the actual recording space and you were in the musician's laps. Given a good stereo system with proper speaker placement, these artifacts are very distracting to me.

For me, a great recording not only captures the beauty of the musician's manipulation of the tone and texture of their instruments, but also transports me to an event in time AND space. This is especially so for Jazz where the sense of a creative moment is so relevant to the art form. I love the jazz recordings from the late 50s and early 60s, first, for the music, and second, for the texture revealed by the simple tube circuits and simple micing, but not for the lack of "proper" panning. In short, I like as accurate a portrayal of textures AND perspective as possible, and I see no reason to repeat the limitations of the early recordings. I understand all too well the challenges of accomplishing that with a minimum of compromise.

Re: this last mix, I would still prefer the piano and drums at 9 and 3 o'clock, and I'd put the piano up a bit. Beautiful tune and capture in any case.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by Piedpiper

Re: this last mix, I would still prefer the piano and drums at 9 and 3 o'clock, and I'd put the piano up a bit. Beautiful tune and capture in any case.

I tried that, but the drums seem to be crisper in their own space, same with the piano. When the piano is where the saxophones are, they can clash, especially when the piano comping doesn't mesh with the sax voicings. That is also why I duck the piano in the mix sometimes, because he's over playing. The piainst should sit on his hands when the ensemble is playing or just play fills in the cracks.

[Piedpiper]

Originally Posted by ajfarber

I tried that, but the drums seem to be crisper in their own space, same with the piano. When the piano is where the saxophones are, they can clash, especially when the piano comping doesn't mesh with the sax voicings. That is also why I duck the piano in the mix sometimes, because he's over playing. The piainst should sit on his hands when the ensemble is playing or just play fills in the cracks.

Like I said, different priorities (re: the panning). Mono will be crisper, and a natural perspective will be naturally more diffuse.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by Piedpiper

Like I said, different priorities (re: the panning). Mono will be crisper, and a natural perspective will be naturally more diffuse.

Right, different priorities. My first priority is to make the arrangements sound good. Since I arranged all of the selections, I think I know how to go about mixing them. I agree that the panning isn't the most realistic like a stereo pair in a recital hall would be, but it seems to work for the orchestrations, and to avoid phase issues. And yes, mono would be easier all around.

[ajfarber]

Okay, here's one with vocals. I've spread the reeds out a bit more and the brass as well.

Please keep in mind that the singer is 86 years old, so cut him some slack. Actually, I think he sounds quite good.

[Piedpiper]

Originally Posted by ajfarber

Right, different priorities. My first priority is to make the arrangements sound good. Since I arranged all of the selections, I think I know how to go about mixing them. I agree that the panning isn't the most realistic like a stereo pair in a recital hall would be, but it seems to work for the orchestrations, and to avoid phase issues. And yes, mono would be easier all around.

I hope I'm not detecting offense at my disagreement with you. Lucky for all of us, it takes all kinds. I'm just adding my perspective since you're asking. No doubt you know how you like it best, just as I know how I do. BTW, I meant mono to mean what happens when you pan something hard right or left. There will always be a certain clarity in that, just not the kind that I like. Of course, if you set your speakers up relatively close to each other, the way some folks do, it serves this type of mixing quite well although it doesn't do true stereo imaging justice. I'll shut up now and go listen to my binaural LPs.

[Douglas Whates]

I know you have a pretty firm idea of how you want to mix this and how you want it to sound, but I thought I'd just comment that I much prefer your original extreme panning idea. Sure, it sounds a bit unusual on headphones, but somehow it sounds much more realistic to my ears. And much more striking. And bold. Like the big band should sound.

For me, the cut you posted with vocals - could do with a bit less plate on the vocal. Also, perhaps a bit more fader riding -- the vocals just seem to pop out a bit too much at points.

Of course, these are all small things and I think you've done an exemplary job. Oh, and the band really swings like crazy.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by Piedpiper

I hope I'm not detecting offense at my disagreement with you. Lucky for all of us, it takes all kinds. I'm just adding my perspective since you're asking. No doubt you know how you like it best, just as I know how I do. BTW, I meant mono to mean what happens when you pan something hard right or left. There will always be a certain clarity in that, just not the kind that I like. Of course, if you set your speakers up relatively close to each other, the way some folks do, it serves this type of mixing quite well although it doesn't do true stereo imaging justice. I'll shut up now and go listen to my binaural LPs.

No offence taken.

I guess my speakers are about 3 feet apart. Those are my studio speakers, in the living room they're about 6-feet apart.

[Piedpiper]

Originally Posted by ajfarber

No offence taken.

I guess my speakers are about 3 feet apart. Those are my studio speakers, in the living room they're about 6-feet apart.

How far are you from them? I put myself at the apex of a right triangle with speakers toed in to point just behind my head, IOW, straight at my ears. This is optimized for true stereo recording and imaging. Speakers are halfway out in the room. The image and depth is stunning this way.

Funny thing is I find myself agreeing with naturalstudio. I would separate the brass from the reeds a bit more moving them out to the edges, and move the drums and piano in a bit.

oops. I was gonna shut up.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by Piedpiper

How far are you from them? I put myself at the apex of a right triangle with speakers toed in to point just behind my head, IOW, straight at my ears. This is optimized for true stereo recording and imaging. Speakers are halfway out in the room. The image and depth is stunning this way.

Funny thing is I find myself agreeing with naturalstudio. I would separate the brass from the reeds a bit more moving them out to the edges, and move the drums and piano in a bit.

oops. I was gonna shut up.

My speakers or on the meter-bridge of my console (a mid-1980s 20 input Ramsa). So I guess if I sit dead centre, I'll be at the apex of a triangle. There are 2 computer displays between the speakers. I also A-B the mix with a second pair. Both sets of speakers are KEF "Coda". One pair has 8" speakers and the others are 6" cones. They are un-powered and run through an old McIntosh (solid-state) power amp. My room isn't "tuned" but my mixes seem to work well on other systems, including my car.

Anyway, I am going to experiment with putting the piano in the middle and panning the guitar to the left. The only problem might be too much drums in the guitar mic. With all of the leakage, there are only a few panning solutions available without phase problems. Obviously iso booths would have eliminated this issue, but I rely on the leakage to get the "room depth" on the drums. Also, headphones make it impossible for the players to balance themselves properly in the room and play in tune. I wanted the musicians to set up like a rehearsal so they'd be comfortable. The only regret I have is that I didn't isolate the guitar better. The musicians don't need to hear the acoustic rhythm guitar, so I should have put him behind bigger baffles farther away from the drums and given cans to him only. Also, the room is smaller than I like for big band recording, but the rest of the gear at Sear Sound is top condition vintage. Check out their websight.Sear Sound NYC, NY We were in studio C.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by naturalstudio

I know you have a pretty firm idea of how you want to mix this and how you want it to sound, but I thought I'd just comment that I much prefer your original extreme panning idea. Sure, it sounds a bit unusual on headphones, but somehow it sounds much more realistic to my ears. And much more striking. And bold. Like the big band should sound.

For me, the cut you posted with vocals - could do with a bit less plate on the vocal. Also, perhaps a bit more fader riding -- the vocals just seem to pop out a bit too much at points.

Of course, these are all small things and I think you've done an exemplary job. Oh, and the band really swings like crazy.

Thanks, I agree with you about the vocal levels. This was a quick mix. I'll have to go into my Logic session and draw in some serious automation for the final mix. I used a bit more reverb than I like because that gets reduced when I mix down to analogue tape (an AMPEX 351). So the final mastered mix won't be as wet. In my experience you have to over compensate a bit with reverb prior to the final mastering if you're going analogue.

Also, thanks for the kind compliments.

[Piedpiper]

Originally Posted by ajfarber

My speakers or on the meter-bridge of my console (a mid-1980s 20 input Ramsa). So I guess if I sit dead centre, I'll be at the apex of a triangle. There are 2 computer displays between the speakers. I also A-B the mix with a second pair. Both sets of speakers are KEF "Coda". One pair has 8" speakers and the others are 6" cones. They are un-powered and run through an old McIntosh (solid-state) power amp. My room isn't "tuned" but my mixes seem to work well on other systems, including my car.

Anyway, I am going to experiment with putting the piano in the middle and panning the guitar to the left. The only problem might be too much drums in the guitar mic. With all of the leakage, there are only a few panning solutions available without phase problems. Obviously iso booths would have eliminated this issue, but I rely on the leakage to get the "room depth" on the drums. Also, headphones make it impossible for the players to balance themselves properly in the room and play in tune. I wanted the musicians to set up like a rehearsal so they'd be comfortable. The only regret I have is that I didn't isolate the guitar better. The musicians don't need to hear the acoustic rhythm guitar, so I should have put him behind bigger baffles farther away from the drums and given cans to him only. Also, the room is smaller than I like for big band recording, but the rest of the gear at Sear Sound is top condition vintage. Check out their websight.Sear Sound NYC, NY We were in studio C.

I love Sear Sound, never been there but heard lots and love Walter's attitude. I'm loving the sound your getting. My only issues are with perspective which you've heard enough about. Enjoy!

[ajfarber]

Okay, I've mixed the entire album. The AMPEX 351 had a bad right channel, it sounds like frying bacon, so I just summed everything through some old ALTEC 1567a mixers.

This is not mastered yet but the mixes are now final.

[mathieujm]

Originally Posted by ajfarber

Okay, I've mixed the entire album. The AMPEX 351 had a bad right channel, it sounds like frying bacon, so I just summed everything through some old ALTEC 1567a mixers.

This is not mastered yet but the mixes are now final.

Superb

JMM