Miking/recording techniques in the sixties

[Robert M]

I know this may not be the most interesting subject in 2007 on a board like this, but, me and my buddy are really into mid to late sixties sound (Doors, Beatles, Love, Stones etc.) and I was wondering if anybody could help us with miking and general recording techniques of that era.

We're especially interested in stuff like how to mike the drums, what kinda mics were used, how were for example 8 tracks used (which instruments went where and which groups) etc. etc.

If someone could help us or tell where to find this kinda info it'd be greatly appreciated!

[Tibbon]

I'd encourage you to search around the board here, but nonetheless, here's a bit of information:

First of all, it's unlikely IMHO that you're going to get the 'sounds of the 60s' these days. Not impossible, but just unlikely. Some of it had to do with the gear, some the rooms, but mainly the engineers and musicians as well as the technical limitations that they face these days.

Some of that recording was done on 8 track, but some of it (The Beatles notably) was done on a pair of 4 tracks for a long time (although they did eventually move over to 8 tracks, but many of those extra tracks ended up being used for orchestral/band overdubs and larger vocal overdubs. The basics were still done in a fairly similar matter).

One thing that's crucial to realize about this era, was that it was about making decisions early in the process about how you wanted to do thing and make things sound. Also it required making a lot of decisions about what parts you wanted to keep and what you wanted to ditch. It wasn't a game of "Throw down 40 vocal tracks and comp them together, and layer up 25 guitar tracks and figure out what tone to keep later". You often had to get it right the first time.

Most stuff earlier in the 60's was made with mixing in mono in mind. Although there were stereo sets, and stereo mixes were done, stereo was seen as a gimicky afterthought and subsequently many of the stereo mixes suck in comparison to the mono ones.

Another thing in this era was creativity and trying to make the most of the gear available. Go listen to The Beatles's "Revolver". Putting things in reverse on tracks, odd reverbs (not digitally created of course), and tape loops. All were pretty amazing in their time.

There were also some technical challenges that people these days would either laugh at, or probably just not put enough effort into to try. Would you get a group of several friends to stand around while holding a glass with tape running around on it just to get some loops going all day (as they had to do for "Tomorrow Never Knows"?

To get the closest vibes to the 60's today, with the gear that you likely have available here's what I'd advise:

1) Start with the best songs and arrangement you can. Get those down BEFORE you start hitting record quite often.

2) Record as much of the stuff as you can at once with a whole band, in the same room. The acoustics of that room are a huge deal.

3) Consider a greater mixture of close micing and far micing. Get the sounds you want while tracking, not while mixing.

4) Limit your track count. If you're reaching 24 tracks, then you're probably doing something wrong. Everything should fit nicely on a 16 track, 2" without issue or much/any bouncing at all.

5) Limit your use of digital, mainly so that you are listening to the music and not watching waveforms. I'm not going to say that you must use all EMI replica gear (and thus analogue only) to get any decent sounds, but keep in mind that many digital techniques, or even modern analogue techniques such as reamping weren't done at the time.

6) Your mixes shouldn't take forever. If you have made decisions early on, and have a clear idea in mind of what the sound should be, then you're fine.

7) Use real rooms for reverb. You don't have to have a dedicated echo chamber. Your garage, basement, bathroom, hallway, etc... would all sound rather interesting.

8) Try to not squish the shit out of it mastering. If you really want brownie points, when mastering it, master to vinyl and keep considerations in mind while mixing it for this. (Thumping huge bass could be a poor idea)

9) Mic the drumkit with fewer mics than people do these days.

10) Don't use DI on the bass (most of the time)

Like I said, the 60's are gone. This is 2007, and you'll likely not get sounds of the 60's going today, nor would you really want to in all likelyhood (well not for everything...). Some 60's vibe however would be cool.

[Robert M]

Tibbon, thank you for a very enlightening post!

[Scratchy Pots]

also! fatten up your guitar strings
there was no light string in those days
heavy,heavy,heavy, for that monster sound!!!!......

after thought !.....flatwound bass strings to

[AdamLazlo]

Tibbon did a great job, laying it all out.

In the 60's there was a completely different standard. The listening medium was LP, the mics to record the bands were decades ahead of the consoles and tape machines. I suppose lately there have been a few groups that stride toward a 60's sound but get beat down by red-tape execs or there's a compromise somewhere.

My advice is: keep the mic set-up simple, use mics and gear from the 60's or earlier, and be true to form. The Kinks stuff is amazing but they were working at/with places where they had the best of best, at that time.

If anything else, start recording with what you got and play around with the mix. Don't expect to get it on the first run, it'll probably take a bunch of trial and error... be patient. Eventually you'll find a nice marriage of yesteryear and today. At least you-all have the same perspective of getting that sound, it's just a matter of getting to that point... and like I said, that comes with experimenting, but once it's locked-in, you'll be golden. Try to critically listen to the aspects of any given album(s) that are golden and then allow yourself to experiment with recording techniques in order to achieve it.

The most frustrating thing about the older recordings (or books that reference 60's recordings) is the gear they used (especially the mics) are in the high thousands (after-market originals). There are other mics since then, for less, that will work out, it's just a matter of troubleshooting and finding the pocket. It might take a lot of time (as long as you don't lose focus - or get too obsessive) but it's worth it, when it works.

-- Adam Lazlo

[soupking]

This thread rocks.

I'm currently trying to get early 60's sounds. I've been preparing for about 6 months now, and there's never enough info about that on this forum because info anywhere else is next to zero.

Not to hijack this thread, but to find out what Link Wray or Leslie Kong (Desmond Dekker) or other obscure lovelies used to record with, you'd need to find the treasure map in some antique shop in East Texas. It's rival to a college degree in effort and $$. Believe me, I know.

In other words, good luck!

[Josh Hoisington]

All of the above info is great, but it always frustrated me how lacking the record is about recording technology in history. I know that you're actually interested in getting a 60's sound, I'm not really interested in wholesale 60's sounds in my own recordings, but I just have an obsessive interest in that era for the same reason scholars are interested in how English was spoken in the 1700s in New England; it's not so they can speak that way, but just because it's interesting and important to know where we came from.

So anyway, just my thought, I wish there were more resources that got into extreme specifics rather than generalities. That said:

We're especially interested in stuff like how to mike the drums, what kinda mics were used, how were for example 8 tracks used (which instruments went where and which groups) etc. etc.

I'm afraid generalities are all I can give you for that.

Drum miking underwent some of the most dramatic evolutions during the 60s that it would ever do. My knowledgebase is centered around Hollywood, so I'm sure things varied around the world, but in the early 60s, perhaps through 62, 63, Drums were generally given the two mic treatment, which was relatively close-mics on the kick and snare. Generally, it seems like these were dynamics. EV 666, Shure 545, etc. At some point, condensers started to take favor. I've seen a lot of pictures from Sinatra sessions, or of Hal Blaine or Earl Palmer with little SDCs over the snare. About forehead level. Probably AKG in many cases.

There are plenty of stories from engineers like Larry Levine, Stan Gold, Bruce Botnick, and Bones Howe about using nice big tube LDCs overhead, Neumann U67, Sony C-37, U47. As the 60s went on, you'd start to see more mics, two overheads, maybe a 546 on a hi-hat. Until 16-track came along, though, the drums were still pretty much mono, and even if there were 4 mics on the kit, it might only occupy two channels into the console and almost certainly go to just one track on the tape if not be combined with the bass and other instruments.


By the way, there are lots of classic mics from the 60s that are not expensive at all. You can get cool Electro Voice mics on ebay for 200 bucks, the Shure 545 is pretty cheap. Really, since the late 60s, we have a lot of the same mics around now that were around then, slightly altered perhaps, but you'll see plenty of 57s, 421s, etc in old pictures.

Recording really isn't that different these days, but it's true, the spirit surrounding recording often is, and I suppose that's what's most important.

[Tibbon]

Josh,

You should pick up the new book on Recording the Beatles, which outlines much of the gear and technical end of what was used in recording the Beatles. It was sold out last time I checked, but worth getting from what I hear.

Another book that IS available, is "Here, There & Everywhere" by Geoff Emmerick, who was one of the Beatle's primary recording engineers at EMI, and the person that set up the studios at Apple (after 'Magic Alex' was unable to produce his 72 track machine in a matchbox, and sent to make color organs in a little workshop before running off). It's a great book on the recording of the Beatles, but not overly technical either. I think it's an amazing book and rather well written IMHO. My girlfriend smartly got it for me this holiday and didn't even know who Geoff was! Lucky guess I suppose considering all the crap books there are out there about The Beatles. One unexpected thing after reading this is that it made me think more and more than John Lennon (and Yoko) were much more assholes than most people thought, and that Paul really was the more productive Beatle most of the time... and that George Harrison for the longest time needed to work on his chops.

[Mike Jasper]

Originally Posted by Josh Hoisington

I know that you're actually interested in getting a 60's sound, I'm not really interested in wholesale 60's sounds in my own recordings, but I just have an obsessive interest in that era for the same reason scholars are interested in how English was spoken in the 1700s in New England; it's not so they can speak that way, but just because it's interesting and important to know where we came from.

I love that analogy, but then I was an English major. And you're right, getting info from that period is difficult.

Welcome to Gearslutz, btw.

Jasper

[peritus]

I had a book that detailed a lot of cool old recording techniques...

It got left on a plane... :( Maybe someone cool found it...

http://www.amazon.com/Studio-Stories.../dp/0879308176