How long to make a pop album?

[sedohr]

How much time does it take you to make a pop record? From the first studio session to the mastering. I read in a Steve Albini thread somewhere that mr. Albini finishes album in a week!! I'm not sure I could do that.

Well, of course it depends on the music and the musicians. Still, it takes me so many weeks to finish albums. I usually produce them and am often involved in the writing so it may feel a bit longer to me. But I tend to spend a whole lot of time in my projects. Maybe 500 hrs or so. How about you guys?

Kalli

[ArcCirDude]

The Beatles did it in a day.

[sedohr]

Originally Posted by ArcCirDude

The Beatles did it in a day.

The white album? Sgt. Pepper's lonely hearts club band? In a day ? Neh..

[ArcCirDude]

No, the first one, "Please Please Me". That's why John's voice was so raw on the last cut of the day, "Twist and Shout". They were playing 9 hours a night in Hamburg and were prepared for the session. THAT doesn't happen too much anymore....

[sedohr]

Originally Posted by ArcCirDude

No, the first one, "Please Please Me". That's why John's voice was so raw on the last cut of the day, "Twist and Shout". They were playing 9 hours a night in Hamburg and were prepared for the session. THAT doesn't happen too much anymore....

No, sadly one don't come across bands like The Beatles very often...

[Stu Gutz]

Originally Posted by ArcCirDude

The Beatles did it in a day.

And the rest took even longer!

[davedarling]

there's not one answer for this, but there IS a physical property at work...
Time swells, and shrinks to fit the budget.

If you've got $500,000 budget you'll be taking 3 to 6 months ..need it or not.
If you've got $10,000 - you'll be taking 10 to 20 days...because that's all you can afford.

I just finished a record that took 6 weeks. it was a band, doing pop rock, with a pretty high level of production - lots of over dubs, and bleeps and bloops.
6 weeks was fine, not rushed, and exactly the amount of time the budget would allow-
go figure.

best - dave darling

[quietdrive]

If you've done your homework (= preproduction) you should be able to track one song in 3 days. Add 2-3 days for mixing/mastering.

The reason why most people waste so much time in the studio is cause they didnt do enough preproduction. Even if you have a 500k budget, why waste YOUR money (yes, you'll have to recoup it), if you dont have to? I never got that. I'd rather go down to Mexico, rent a beach house and do more preproduction than sit in a dark room without windows (which costs me 1.6k per day), desperately trying to figure out which direction the song should take.

[lowswing]

I usually calculate 6-7 weeks for an album ,top to bottom (pre-prod till end of mixing ,6 days a week)
But the albums I really loved working on usually took 3-4days tracking +ca. 3days vocal/over dubs +7days mixes but this can happen only if the band is great, playing live together . this can never work if your aim is to sound like the ****ing over-edited and "produced" album like the cheesy shit they (unfortunately) plays now a days on main stream radio.

making great album shouldn't take long but todays standard is to work out every "mistake" ,to edit every bit to death, concentrating on production and sound instead of the music and performance and this is sad.

[idylldon]

Originally Posted by quietdrive

The reason why most people waste so much time in the studio is cause they didn't do enough preproduction.

Yep. And then there are the folks who didn't do enough preproduction and don't have the necessary chops to pull off what little preproduction they did do.

Cheers,
--
Don

[James Lugo]

It depends on the situation. Albini works usually with full bands that are rehearsed and he track them live. That can be done fast but for a lot of us we work with artists and play most of the instruments ourselves. That can get time consuming and is way more involved. You have to create a vibe and sound and then track all the instruments alone one at a time. I like to do both track and engineer alone a lot so I use the transport pre roll in protools for punching.

[swisha31]

I dont know how long it took Gavin Degraw to make his album but he had a second disc where he went in with his band and tracked the album all over again in one day with the addition of his version of "Change Gonna Come" and it was presented as "stripped." I find myself listening to that disc more than I do the one that has all of his radio releases on it.

[sedohr]

Originally Posted by James 'LA' Lugo

... for a lot of us we work with artists and play most of the instruments ourselves. That can get time consuming and is way more involved. You have to create a vibe and sound and then track all the instruments alone one at a time. I like to do both track and engineer alone a lot so I use the transport pre roll in protools for punching.

Well put!

[Kenny Gioia]

Using Steve Albini for a reference when making a pop record makes as much sense as getting your hammer and nail prices from the US Military. It's irrelevant.

I take about 2 - 3 months to do a pop record.

Emo rock bands about 2 months.

[sedohr]

Originally Posted by Produceher

Using Steve Albini for a reference when making a pop record makes as much sense as getting your hammer and nail prices from the US Military. It's irrelevant.

I take about 2 - 3 months to do a pop record.

Emo rock bands about 2 months.

Thanks guys, I feel better now.

[Tony Shepperd]

I've worked on pop records that took 60 days.
And I've worked on pop records the took 2 to 3 years.

Until someone says it's done or until the money runs out...
That's when it's done.

[Eric Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tony Shepperd

I've worked on pop records that took 60 days.
And I've worked on pop records the took 2 to 3 years.

Until someone says it's done or until the money runs out...
That's when it's done.

:D

John Fogerty's "full moon fever" ..... FIVE years

[sedohr]

Originally Posted by Eric Greedy

:D

John Fogerty's "full moon fever" ..... FIVE years

Please, please me - The Beatles: 9 hours..

[Jay Lee]

I remember Max Martin having said in his early days as starting to be a hit producer (Britney Spears Hit Me Baby One More Time etc.), that he can use a week only for choosing and tweeking drum sounds and such for a song... Don't know if it's true...

[quietdrive]

Originally Posted by Jay Lee

I remember Max Martin having said in his early days as starting to be a hit producer (Britney Spears Hit Me Baby One More Time etc.), that he can use a week only for choosing and tweeking drum sounds and such for a song... Don't know if it's true...

It is, they spent one week mixing "baby one more time"... or was it one month? Not sure, but Max spends A LOT of time on his songs, that why they're hits.

[Kenny Gioia]

I heard that one of the early "Tears for Fears" songs took a whole month.

For one song.

Seems nuts but those productions are amazing.

[picksail]

It's also depends, wholly upon whether or not the client/artist is paying for exclusivity.

The complexity of the production is another issue.

Those are the two biggest factors. Politics are another thing all together.

In most cases I can pull-off a song a week with non-exclusive deals.

Working in the "ProTools age" has made things much easier for me for songs that could have otherwise taken indefinite periods of time.

[lowswing]

Originally Posted by Jay Lee

I remember Max Martin having said in his early days as starting to be a hit producer (Britney Spears Hit Me Baby One More Time etc.), that he can use a week only for choosing and tweeking drum sounds and such for a song... Don't know if it's true...

well, if I had to spend so much time on a mix (or drum sound) I would probably have to come with the truth: "I can't make records" and anyway I would be just bored of myself.
If I had worked on a mix for a whole week and the result was "Hit Me Baby One More Time" I'd kill myself even though the paying check might be cool.

I worked with "big name" producers (as engineer) that made huge albums back in the 80's beginning of 90's and they told me one reason that albums took so long to make is:
1. the band was sent to studio by the label even though they didn't have songs writen yet= they start to write in the studio.
2. they re-record, re-mix many songs which is result of 1, they just didn't live with their songs long enough to make the right decisions fast.
3. there was hugh budgets to spend
4. a lot of musicians had serious drug problems and man ,its hard to record with people on the needle .
5. did I mention they had realy huge budget to spend?

[quietdrive]

Originally Posted by lowswing

well, if I had to spend so much time on a mix (or drum sound) I would probably have to come with the truth: "I can't make records" and anyway I would be just bored of myself.
If I had worked on a mix for a whole week and the result was "Hit Me Baby One More Time" I'd kill myself even though the paying check might be cool.

Maybe that's the reason why you arent as successful as Max.. you cant recognize great songwriting, and instead have to post on Gearslutz bashing others!

[lowswing]

Originally Posted by quietdrive

Maybe that's the reason why you arent as successful as Max.. you cant recognize great songwriting, and instead have to post on Gearslutz bashing others!

I just measure success in other way rather than only $$$

[quietdrive]

Originally Posted by lowswing

I just measure success in other way rather than only $$$

And there we have it again, Art vs Commerce... unsuccessful guys slamming successful guys... and unsuccessful guys justifying their lack of success as some form of integrity ("I'd never write that crap"... maybe you wouldnt cause you CANT!), calling the successful guys sell-outs for being able to create hit songs.

Jesus, I wont participate in chapter 577520373772554 of this discussion. But have fun.

[lowswing]

Originally Posted by quietdrive

And there we have it again, Art vs Commerce... unsuccessful guys slamming successful guys... and unsuccessful guys justifying their lack of success as some form of integrity ("I'd never write that crap"... maybe you wouldnt cause you CANT!), calling the successful guys sell-outs for being able to create hit songs.

Jesus, I wont participate in chapter 577520373772554 of this discussion. But have fun.

I don't want to get into this kids war.
i didn't ever tried to bash this max dude (never heard his name before) I just meant to say that in my book (maybe i am too old) working on a drum sound for a week is called computer Programming and not making music...
and by the way , quietdriver, why don't you use your real name , before you called other people "unsuccessful"

[Robert Sands]

I'm getting near the end of a 15 song country CD for a local guy. It will be somewhere between 500 - 600 hours of work by the time it's done. I take a long time maybe but the project just seems to need that much time. A week per song I think is very justified.

[midigod]

Originally Posted by lowswing

If I had worked on a mix for a whole week and the result was "Hit Me Baby One More Time" I'd kill myself

To be honest, if I spent a week on a mix and it turned out like that tune, I would weep with joy. That track's production and arrangement are astonishingly good. It shouldn't matter whether you like Britney, or even the tune, there should still be the ability to appreciate the effort and talent on everyone's part that came up with that final mix.

Craig

[Jay Lee]

Originally Posted by lowswing

i didn't ever tried to bash this max dude (never heard his name before)

WHAT?! Lol... Where have you been? Under a rock? There are people who make pop, but don't know who Max Martin is? Or are you a rock dude? Well, he with Cheiron guys created that whole Britney, Backstreet, N'Sync etc early days sound... He produced songs for Kelly Clarkson's last album...

Surely you're joking...or really old and not hang of things anymore?