What separates the good recordings from the great ones?

[guosh]

as we record, we always strive to get the best results and representation of the music. however, when do you know you have something transcendental, versus something 'good but not great'? in short, what separates the good recordings from the great ones in your opinion? how would it sound to your ears?

personally i'm not too critical, and as a musician i tend to focus more on the music and the emotions it conveys. if i feel moved by the music, i find it an exceptional recording - of course assuming that things such as noise, balance, and imaging are done adequately

what are your thoughts? while it may be easy to simply say 'it sounds good' , are there any other ways you would describe it?

[joelpatterson]

It only registers on the "transcendental" meter when the underlying song strikes a real chord. That kind of song, engineered flawlessly, fills your bill. It might be different for different people.

[Corran]

I think you mentioned one of the big things in your post - really excellent musicians/playing.

Next for me would be perfect mic choice and placement. When it's just right you've got a winner. For example I just recorded a concert that had a variety of different ensembles, but had some tuba and piano works. The mics were a tad too high and caught the tuba more than the piano. It sounds great but the balance is just off a bit because of that.

[Kyle S]

the way the rooms are mixed into the rest of the mix is a big thing to me. as a last safety and because i had an extra mic, i threw an AT2021 aimed at the wall during a basement recording i did. Completely saved everything. It sounded so cool! too bad it was mono though. I had to do some work to get it sound like it was done in stereo but it worked out.

[guosh]

would it be accurate to say that if you felt the music you were recording was really special and you did everything you could technically to bring out the essence of it, you'd label it as one of your finest recordings?

however, while musicians and the music do most of the work, how would you describe your role in recreating that experience for playback? how does one identify the factors that lead to a really great recording?

my apologies, over the past few months i've been a little confused over determining the best sound through engineering. its one of those moments where i had pretty decent results before, but in search of going one step further i've actually gotten worse results

i know the old 'rubbish in = rubbish out' bit, but perhaps i'm more concerned about 'good in = great out'. i've heard orchestras like the bso, cso and nypo play live but it strangely does not compare to the recordings i've heard of them. so... is it an altered sense of reality? or a truly different standard when in a recording session versus a concert?

i have the opportunity to help a up and coming composer record some of his wind orchestra and new music work, so i just wondered if its the musicians that really need to be pushed to that standard, or if i could make up that difference through engineering

[Mix Master]

Recorded music is nothing but illusion. A great recording is a great performance captured on disc,tape whatever. And the mixers job is to convince the listener that the illusion is real.

[toneguru]

The Listener.

[fifthcircle]

I hear plenty of great sounding recordings that are lifeless and have no soul to them... Especially in the acoustic music world where I spend most of my time, there has been such an emphasis on making things transparent that recordings have gotten sterile and have lost their life.

Mix Master got it right- I usually say that all recordings lie, but it is the same concept. Forget about what's happening in the room and make something that is engaging to listen to. Guess what? The closer you get to that, the more you'll end up with the vibe of the performance in the space from the listener's perspective.

This has nothing to do with gear- it has everything to do with the use of your gear and mixing/recording style.

--Ben

[RobAnderson]

For me, a great recording is like a great photograph, and I guess by extension, a good engineer is like a good photographer.

Given a compelling or beautiful subject, a great photographer will know things about framing, angling, lighting, lenses, exposure, color, etc. to capture that image in a way that it will effect someone who will view it in some other place and time. If you gave three great photographers the same image, they might each capture it differently, but each would be a compelling representation of the subject. A connoisseur might recognize the technique and methods, but it could also be recognized by the "untrained eye" as a compelling image.

I think a great recording/mix is a similar thing.

Sorry I am using "compelling" so much, but it's the only word that really seems to fit.

[Don S]

Originally Posted by fifthcircle

Forget about what's happening in the room and make something that is engaging to listen to. Guess what? The closer you get to that, the more you'll end up with the vibe of the performance in the space from the listener's perspective.
--Ben

Bingo! Well put Ben.

[pan]

Originally Posted by toneguru

The Listener.

I beg to differ: The Musician(s)

[guosh]

i really like rob's analogy of the photographer! - recently i happened to study the case of the photographer for time magazine who photoshopped his photos a few years ago, changing the composition of his photos to get a truly compelling image

of course, he got fired for that as he was not allowed to tamper with the image. however, it got me thinking: we don't suffer from the same constraints as the photojournalist and we're free to create our soundscape...

just that, perhaps it how well we do it? an image may be beautified to an extent before it becomes obviously artificial. where photographers have photoshop, we have our plugins. its just the extent to which we can recreate reality with manipulation that can convince people that its natural

or at least that's my point of view! the problem being that if everything was utterly perfect, it wouldn't be reality would it? but on the other hand, that's what we strive for when we play and record music

it's still one's personal style of recording, as mentioned by ben. but isn't it this style that captures and compliments a great performance the key to being 'great' rather than just 'good'?

[joelpatterson]

Originally Posted by guosh

... how would you describe your role ...

My early life was one long, intense independent study in pop music recordings. From the first little yellow vinyl 78's of Captain Kangaroo singing "Button Up Your Overcoat," on to some elaborate audio montage-style stuff on the multi disc "Bozo The Clown-- Undersea," and through the 60's and 70's with more conventional stuff.

Instinctively-- I was reacting to the sonoroties and emotional dramatics. I suppose I was also being programmed in the aesthetics of properly done soundscapes. The thing about gear-- and this is where maybe some people get confused-- gear itself has no ability to "reallign" the audio passing through it and make it "sound good," even wickedly overpriced phenomenal gear is at the mercy of whoever's controlling the knobs. [And everyone has the shattering experience of realizing your Super 8 camera will not get stoned and render the phantasmagorical imagery you are seeing with your own eyes-- but that's another thread.]

So my role is to "work the gear" so that the final product connects. It's all subliminal. To try and describe it would be futile, or at least vague: "The way the guitar strumming sounds now, it's sounding too inconsequential-- it's not a daydream yet-- it's more like a misremembered trance..."

Here's something from a few weeks ago, done in a huge church. It's a poem set to music. If you listen carefully to the lyrics, the guy is telling about walking through the woods at night, seeing an oak grove "where the Indian village was once." An owl darts by, cows relax in the stillness. It isn't until you get to the last line, about the "huge trees rooted in the graves," that the scene takes on its horrific gravity.

These guys are tremendously talented-- it's like my sacred duty to render it as powerfully as I can. That's my role: "tour guide."


4shared.com - online file sharing and storage - download The Oak Grove -- Newell & Brown & Moors.mp3

[PlugHead]

Originally Posted by guosh

what are your thoughts? while it may be easy to simply say 'it sounds good' , are there any other ways you would describe it?

IMO, there are 2 very important factors to achieving great recordings:

1) experience (A/E and producer)
2) BUDGET

(FWIW, 'budget' entails the recording space, equipment, and the expertise behind it all)

Of course, I should mention that great musicians and material are essential, but that should be a given, otherwise we're kidding ourselves about EVERYTHING in recording greatness...

YMMV,

[talbe1019]

To me it doesn't have to be a sonically perfect recording to be considered great. Some of my favorite cd's of all time are live records that sound good, but it's all about the performance and how the band should sound. Even though the Ramones don't fall into "my top live albums" category, I love listening to their live stuff because it captures their performance perfectly and how they should sound. I actually prefer less "doctored" live albums and don't mind hearing small mistakes.

[boojum]

I, too, like the live CD's over studio ones. I look at studio work as rehearsal time. Yes, I know, that is my bias.

I try to add in a little of the musician's chatter to the tracks. Not a lot, but just enough to give the live feel of "you are there." I do all I can do to capture the room and the sound the musicians put into it. If their performance is good I try to make the mix reflect that. After all, once it is recorded all I can change is the way the tracks play. I cannot change their contents.

When I am blessed with a good performance in a good room and get lucky with the mix magic happens. The "vibe" comes through. Most important for me is what those guys on the stage are doing. I am just the geek with the earphones.