The Fundamental Skill of an AE

[James Meeker]

I apologize in advance for the relatively long-winded nature of this sort-of article. Just something I've been thinking about a lot lately that I wanted to share. Hugs all around.

I see a lot of discussion around the 'net about audio engineering, mostly focusing on gear and technique, both of which are necessary skills for making great sounding records. Let's face it, if you don't know how to run the gear and make intelligent choices in the studio about what to buy, how to use it and so forth you're productions are going nowhere.

However, there is really little discussion about the fundamental skill that really separates the good from the bad, and the good from the great. This skill is the ability to know what a record sounds like.

I know, it seems pretty basic. I mean, we all know what a real record sounds like, right? Well, after listening to a lot of small level productions over the years I'm not sure if a lot of people do. I hear a lot of basic mistakes--balance levels being way out of whack seems to be pretty common mistake, but this is only one of hundreds of mistakes audio engineers are making on a daily basis.

It makes me sometimes stop and wonder if the engineer ever took the time to really LISTEN to how a record sounds. I think so many of us get caught up in "this gear versus that gear" and "this technique over that technique" that we've missed the forest for the trees. We've forgotten that the most important, most critical skill is to listen... and to instinctively know in your bones what a real records sounds like.

Myself, years ago I was as guilty as the next guy. I was sitting around the studio kicking myself for making another so-so record that sounded alright until you compared it to something a big name engineer produced... then all the flaws came to the surface. Very frustrating. Then it hit me--half the time when I was putting the track together I was sort of stabbing in the dark, second-guessing every decision: "does this sound right?", "is this guitar bright enough?" I didn't really KNOW how a record should sound! Boy, did I feel like an idiot! I'd already spent a couple of years earning a living off of making records and I didn't even have a mastery of how records should sound.

The second realization was that *THIS* was the skill the big boys had that I didn't. They weren't really doing anything different from me, and they weren't really using all that much better gear. The difference was they had an intuitive understanding of what a record needs to sound like in order to impact a listener and it pervaded every element of their production.

So I spent the next couple of years just LISTENING to records. All kinds of records. In fact, I make it a point to spend a few hours a week listening to various productions in the studio. All kinds of records, from every decade imaginable.

Keep in mind I'm not talking about just passively listening, in one ear and out the other. I'm talking about analyzing the sounds, the balance levels, paying attention to the details that make the production sound amazing. Slowly, over time, I began to just know what a record sounds like. My mixing skills doubled in speed and quality, and my ability to capture sounds in the studio improved immensely. All because I shifted the focus from DOING to LISTENING. Incredible.

Ask yourself--do you struggle around with sounds always second guessing yourself if you "have enough of this or that"? Do you find yourself wrestling with basic levels? Do you wonder if you've got enough compression or too much on something? Have you ever mixed a track only to find out the next day that your low end was actually a mess?

If so, chances are that there isn't anything wrong with your engineering per se--it's just that you don't fully understand what a record sounds like.

So let's get out there and listen to some records... that way we can MAKE some great records!

[chasman]

freakin awesome ideas............thanks james

[edcampos]

Nice post, partner. This is how I learned how to produce records, but it is an interesting (and equally valid) approach to engineering. Thanks!

Ed

[UnDeFiNeD]

from all the repeating bs I read here on daily basis on GS, this is by far one of the best analysis on AE I ever read.

Reminds me of a thread I was reading this afternoon, a quite popular poster kept pushing his idea on the whole boring tape vs. digital thing...but when I went to his sig site (myspace) I discovered that the music on there sounded horrible to my ears (dunno if it was his/her work, I just assume), so hence it became a bit stupid to even consider his/her opinion if u aren't talking about the same result u want to achieve.
We are all talking about some sort of "perfect sound", but in reality our idea of how this and that should sound is so imensly different between two engineers coming out of different era's and styles, that the whole discussion becomes irrelevant.

Pzz

[PistolP]

you are very right about the ability to listen and the need for learning how things should sound.
on the other hand errors sometimes give us new ideas/outcome/ways of thinking etc. this again is what makes life interesting. it would kill the personality if everybody was making ´perfect´ sounding music.
every pop-rock song would sound as it was mixed by T. Alge (just an example).

...but you got a good point there!

Pistol

[StudioFvictor]

Hey James!
That describe my situation too!
I start buying records coz' i buy an ipod,and finally like it,and buy a turntable too.
And start to love to listen to records really much.
Now i listen at least 3 or 4 each day
When i started really to listen to records ,that make me realize how far my work was,and really in the wrong direction artistically.INVALUABLE !!!!

I wish i start many years ago.........

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by James Meeker

[
However, there is really little discussion about the fundamental skill that really separates the good from the bad, and the good from the great. This skill is the ability to know what a record sounds like.

!

I don't feel the problem around here is not knowing what a record sounds like or is supposed to sound like. Personally i think people listen too intently and either over analyze, over idolize or dilute the entire process.

Its not rocket science, math or heart surgery.

Its capturing sounds and playing it back.

What i feel is lost the interaction with other people that are better than you at what you are desiring to do. Also the interaction with other people that are the best at what they do. This does not happen at home on the internet or listening to every cd imaginable. It happens in the trenches in a studio by doing it. I've said this a bunch of times but the lack of pressure that the home project studios has created has made people laxed and just slide by. This attitude does not go over in the heat of battle in a studio. People who are the best only want to work with the best, at the best places. In the music business if you can't cut the mustard you will get cut and they will find someone who can. Without the pressure you won't really know where you stand. Some people thrive in it and some people wilt under it. But it does makes you stronger.

Look there is nothing wrong in listening to other forms for inspiration or enjoyment. But ask a the top jazz players in the world how they became such great improvisers and they will tell you "man it just happens and it just flows". Sure they put in the hard work and practice but on stage they aren't thinking "well if i play this scale over this chord i can use this note,blah.blah,blah). You can analyze recordings all you want, but alot of what makes them great is just coping in the moment with what's at hand. This is impossile to recreate, there are too many randomn things going on. Also the perspective at the time comes into question. Were the choices made based on desire or limitation? Think about your best mix a little bit? Was it a perfect ride all the way through? Was there pressure or compromise between you and the talent? Did you have all the gear you thought you needed or did you fudge things to make thinks work? I mean the situations are endless. That's why i feel its pointless to try to recreate something that's been done. I feel its better to focus on the now.

Lastly i don't know when things changed but somehow there is this view that it is written that everyone is supposed to be great at this engineering thing. Well 20 years into it i can definitely tell you that its not true. Some of us are destined to be mediocre, some of us are just going to be good, others great and then there are those that will be in the upper 1% that make the big bucks and hit a home run more time than not. Eventually you will find out where you fit and its up to you to decide if being good and not great makes you happy. If it does than its fine. Heck maybe you do it for fun,creativity or recreation and the pressure that goes along with being up the top is not your cup of tea. You make music for yourself and your friends and that's where the circle ends. In the end this is what counts.

[PhiloBeddoe]

(Just to clarify, I was responding to the OP. I was typing at the same time as Thrillfactor)

I totally agree, but also think it takes a step beyond realizing what the whole forest (record) sounds like to know how to build the elements, even the very small ones. For example, what does a good drum room mic sound like? What does good reverb sound like? Little things like this can blow your mix completely even if the fader is barely on.

I think a lot of people, myself included for a while, assume that because they're decent musicians that AE will be easy. It is a whole different skill set that requires lots of practice.

It is important to remember in this gear madness that a whole 'golden' signal chain in no way guarantees a good sound. I run across a lot of people who post with this exact mindset. "My guitar sounds are no good so I need a new mic/preamp/compressor/strings/pickups" or whatever and then you listen to their tracks and the guy can't play or has obviously dialed in an awful tone.

[allencollins]

Originally Posted by James Meeker

[I]
However, there is really little discussion about the fundamental skill that really separates the good from the bad, and the good from the great. This skill is the ability to know what a record sounds like.

why don't you post some stuff you mixed that sounds like a record? After hearing the white stripes and the Killers 'records' I have no Idea what a record sound like these days........ I'm more confused than usual

[joelpatterson]

Yeah... yeah... yeah... you need to develop the skill of telling how it hits you.

The common "flaw" I hear in things that make me give an expression like this emoticon is that somehow, the people working on it got so swept up in their own personal emotions and excitements they lost the sense of how some stranger might react to it. Someone without their investment in it.

Someone handed me a CD they were "really proud of," and this guys is no slouch so I was expecting something pretty cool, and the very first track started off with this VERY bizarre swooping fade in. Not really a "fade in," not really a "start," just a weird compromis-i-cal WHOOPS HERE WE ARE! I'm sure in the whole scheme of the album, this was a trivial detail--sounded like they were jamming away, and decided to start the song here-- still, there's your first impression: kind of a feet-sliding-out-from-under-you introduction.

Minor, insignificant thing, but I'd say problems with imbalances and harsh tonalities follow this same logic-- never stepping back, imagining you've never heard any of it before, imagining this is a cold call--what's it like? Does it sell itself? Or does it only sell itself to the coterie of insiders who have already bought it anyway?

[robot gigante]

I think that there are lots of fundamental skills that an AE needs to possess. Knowing how a record should sound is one that everyone should have, for certain. If not, then why even bother engineering anything?

Another thing that a lot of people seem to miss is also knowing how a certain sound or part is going to contribute to the overall whole which is the sound of a record. I think it's almost the same thing as if one was cutting a jigsaw puzzle: the complete puzzle is the sound of a record, and to get a puzzle that actually fits together one has to cut the pieces just so, or they won't fit with each other. It's really easy to tell when you're mixing something if the person who did the recording and/or the person who did the arranging didn't have that vision (or didn't care, it happens).

I also agree with thethrillfactor that it really isn't a matter of analyzing things, and it really does come from interaction with people and also with the pressures of having to do it or they will get someone else that will- so you get good at it by doing it. A lot.

It's the same as being a craftsman in any type of work that takes skill; a woodcarver knows his tools and has the vision of what the finished project will look like but he doesn't shape the wood by analyzing everything- he knows what he needs to do and does it (most likely too, this has come from years of labor to attain that skill).

[James Meeker]

Heh, I think some people are missing the point. It's all about finding your voice and sound and just making sure that no matter which way you take it, it sounds like a record.

Face it, you know in your gut what I'm talking about when I say something sounds "like a record."

It can be any record that touched you. Try to get your productions to evoke that *SOMETHING* that hooked you into music. It might involve "X microphone" or "X compressor"... or maybe not...

It's not about analyzing. It's deeper than that. It's knowing in your heart when a sound has arrived. It's intuitive. Knowing in your bones what a quality production sounds like.

It's not about a generic stamped on sound, or anybody's sound in particular. It's the sound that the big records have.

I just think that it's important to remember that LISTENING is more important than knowing about every last technique in the world or owning every preamp in the universe. I think as engineers we think about techie detail too much, and the act of MAKING records more than we sit back and just LISTEN.

If you open your ears, take a listen to what you're working on, and understand how things are supposed to sound--instead of fiddling with compression and EQ non-stop... our jobs become a lot easier.

[James Meeker]

Originally Posted by PhiloBeddoe

I totally agree, but also think it takes a step beyond realizing what the whole forest (record) sounds like to know how to build the elements, even the very small ones. For example, what does a good drum room mic sound like? What does good reverb sound like? Little things like this can blow your mix completely even if the fader is barely on.

This illustrates my point exactly because if you have the sense of a record's sound you at least know when it's wrong. Eventually you'll get it right!

I'm not discounting those skills you mention, but they are secondary and relatively easily acquired if you know the range of where it should be sounding.

That's why I say it's a fundamental skill. EVERYTHING about AE centers around the ability to listen, and this process is made more powerful by *just knowing* when a sound is "pro" or not.

[T_R_S]

Originally Posted by chasman

freakin awesome ideas............thanks james

And the Skills to Create them ...

[mdme_sadie]

Thanks James, I'll never be a pro engineer, but that's still an insightful read and one of those things that are so patently obvious and necessary for anyone at any level when you actually say it, but are so easy to somehow completely miss among the trees. Useful stuff

[Unclenny]

Originally Posted by James Meeker

I think so many of us get caught up in "this gear versus that gear" and "this technique over that technique" that we've missed the forest for the trees. We've forgotten that the most important, most critical skill is to listen... and to instinctively know in your bones what a real records sounds like.

I think that, as in a great many disciplines, it is crucial at the onset to grind away learning the basics of gear and associated technique. It is that constant repetition, repeating both success and failure over and over again until those processes are an integral part of you, that eventually frees your mind to see the true forest.

I trained and eventually instructed in the art of Aikido for many years. It took me ten long years of technique practice before I could truly step onto the mat and feel as though I owned that space.

I've been seriously recording and mixing for half that time. I used to know what a record sounded like....before I started trying to make my own. I'm inching closer now to that instinctive awareness of which you so eloquently speak.

[drkdrk]

I listen to a hell of a lot of music but don't think i've really grasped the concept of analysing the music, gonna make more of an effort.
thanks for this post

[allencollins]

Originally Posted by James Meeker

understand how things are supposed to sound

supposed?

[peeder]

I think the problem is that "a record" is just irreducible to an engineer-in-training. All they can do is sit and listen and say "wow".

There is a lot of DOING that needs to be done before you can piece apart what a successful production DID. It's a dialogue between trial and evaluation.

This week, for instance, I feel I've broken through on reverb finally. I did it because a high-end reverb is about the last piece I could add to my current rig, and I'm not sure I want to spend $3000 on one. So I listened to samples of high-end reverb programs and I tried to duplicate them on my cheapo MX400. I couldn't duplicate them perfectly, but man I programmed the best reverbs of my life trying.

And now I can go back and LISTEN to great records and finally understand what is happening with the reverbs. I couldn't hear reverb as critically as I can now, having DONE something with it.

[Anonymatt]

Technique, in playing and engineering, is what gives your music free rein. Otherwise, you are bound to defining the scope of a production through your limitations. This has certainly worked for some folks, but it isn't the spirit that allows men to exceed their peers' and clients' expectations.

[Nu-tra]

I thought The fundamental Skill of an AE was to be sexy

[alcohol]

I have to disagree with the premise of the OP. Decades of listening very closely to hit records, and attempts to recreate that sound as a live performer and sometimes in the studio, have taught me that there is not consistency in making records. There is no one way a snare or bass drum should sound. No one way to balance strings or guitar. There is no one timbre that an acoustic guitar should sound like. The whole idea of mimicking another mix in an attempt to find the "should" is the wrong approach because there is no consistency in how music is recorded or mixed.

Good mix engineers have an intuitive sense for making the right decisions for how they're mixing music, just like how a performing musician will interpret a composition. Placing the constraint of how a piece of music should be performed would unfortunately limit range of interpretation a performer can embrace. Engineers should have that same freedom. The lack of success of some engineering efforts comes not from a deviation from the "should;" but from a lack of skill and taste.

Two good mixing engineers will get greatly different mixes that sound good. If there was a way a record "should" sound then there would be a consistency to their mixes.

Lastly, the way any two mix engineers would mix are likely not to be similar, since we all have are own subjective tastes and weigh them with preconceived ideas of right and wrong mixing techniques. Preconceived ideas that I'm willing to bet, you'll find properly violated throughout the history of recorded music.

[John Suitcase]

Originally Posted by alcohol

I have to disagree with the premise of the OP. Decades of listening very closely to hit records, and attempts to recreate that sound as a live performer and sometimes in the studio, have taught me that there is not consistency in making records. There is no one way a snare or bass drum should sound. No one way to balance strings or guitar. There is no one timbre that an acoustic guitar should sound like. The whole idea of mimicking another mix in an attempt to find the "should" is the wrong approach because there is no consistency in how music is recorded or mixed.

Good mix engineers have an intuitive sense for making the right decisions for how they're mixing music, just like how a performing musician will interpret a composition. Placing the constraint of how a piece of music should be performed would unfortunately limit range of interpretation a performer can embrace. Engineers should have that same freedom. The lack of success of some engineering efforts comes not from a deviation from the "should;" but from a lack of skill and taste.

Two good mixing engineers will get greatly different mixes that sound good. If there was a way a record "should" sound then there would be a consistency to their mixes.

Lastly, the way any two mix engineers would mix are likely not to be similar, since we all have are own subjective tastes and weigh them with preconceived ideas of right and wrong mixing techniques. Preconceived ideas that I'm willing to bet, you'll find properly violated throughout the history of recorded music.

I think you're actually making James' point. He's saying that there is no one right way to mix a kick drum, but there are ways that sound pro and ways that sound like a demo. The key to being a great AE is learning the differences. Why do so many self-produced records sound horrible? There are many reasons, of course, but objectivity is probably the biggest. It's terribly hard to tell whether your song is coming across when you know it intimately, and have played it a thousand times. There are a precious few artists capable of doing this at the 'big league' level, and I would say it's even more rare at the amateur level.

Having a vision for the recording is a key. Having an ear for what sounds cool and pro and interesting is key. Having the technical skills to achieve the vision is what we often focus on, without stopping to think about the vision we're creating. I know when I get a band in that I've not heard before (I try to get a demo, go to practice or a show, but sometimes it doesn't happen) the temptation is to just get good tones in a general way, then try to get a vision somewhere along the line and bend the mix to that. But that's sometimes not possible. Having the vision first is super important to making a 'record' rather than a 'recording.'

I'm by no means a top tier engineer at this point, but I feel like I'm getting closer all the time. Meditating on great records and thinking about how the artist and engineer worked together to achieve those sounds is a big step in the right direction for any AE or producer.

[corruptmary]

The best advice really is the small (yet important) things they don't teach you in school. For all the classes I had on compression, consoles, protools, etc, I don't think any ONE of my teachers ever really emphasized the importance of listening. Great point, OP.

[James Meeker]

Originally Posted by John Suitcase

I think you're actually making James' point. He's saying that there is no one right way to mix a kick drum, but there are ways that sound pro and ways that sound like a demo. The key to being a great AE is learning the differences. Why do so many self-produced records sound horrible? There are many reasons, of course, but objectivity is probably the biggest.

My point exactly.

I'm not saying that listening and understanding what a real record sounds like is the ONLY skill... it's just the most fundamental and therefore one of the most important. But it is unsung and seemingly unheeded by many. And, let's face it, except for the top guys in the biz, we could ALL get better at it.

Everything else you do and know stems from this. Okay, so you know everything there is to know about compression.... but without knowing how to apply it to a production to take it from "tracking sound" to "finished sound" is more about knowing WHERE it needs to go.

Let's face it--if you know where you are now and where something needs to go it will take you about one minute to get it happening and then you are moving on to the next thing.

I'm actually flabbergasted that some people disagree with my original point, but hey... it's the internet! Strife is the general rule. Glad some people understand what I'm talking about.

[Bob Olhsson]

What we can't do with engineering is to make one musician or singer sound like somebody else. I think one needs to work with great musicians and singers in order to understand where the line between the sound of the performer, the sound of an arrangement and the sound of a production lies.

This is a major reason why I think there really is no substitute for an internship.

[BLueROom]

Great post James. I think it is at this point where an AE in training breaks the barrier into a more pro realm.

[biggator6]

I think that the mentions above of objectivity and interaction are more key than most people realize or admit.

Back when I still did this for money (I've since relegated it to hobby) - I found that my recordings for other people always sounded vastly better than my recordings of my own music.

This could be because maybe I'm just not that talented a musician, but there's definitely an element there that I did a better job when I was being COUNTED on to make them sound better and I could sit back and see the forest, not just the trees. I didn't have the personal investment in the music like I did with my own projects.

[Tone Laborer]

It's a bit of a moving target, the sound of a record. They all sound different. Different eras, styles, artistic content, things beyond the engineers control.

But I hear you. Keeping and eye on the big picture, which is supposed to be the producers role, but when everyone self produces you know, their producer usually leaves something to be desired.

Listening--who is it that's really listeining again? One the the long gone relics from the 70s was the STEREO STORE. Now its boomboxes, TVs, car stereos, computer speakers mp3s and ipods. There's some irony in there somewhere.

[Tim Abraham]

Originally Posted by Tone Laborer

It's a bit of a moving target, the sound of a record. They all sound different. Different eras, styles, artistic content, things beyond the engineers control.

I think that the first sentence is whole point of James' post. I know that when I've been listening to alot of music I feel that a whole world of possibilities has opened up before me. I stop trying to make the drums/guitars/balances/etc sound like they're "supposed" to sound, because I have been freshly reminded that compelling recordings are those that have a strong and confident vision where recording and mixing techniques become a part of the arrangement in the presentation of the song, as opposed to merely presenting the arrangement.

So, I would disagree with the second sentence above. When an engineer/producer truly understands "eras, styles, artistic content," they can indeed "control" them and can play them like an instrument.