Sinatra's Vocal Chain

[cschuby]

Originally Posted by Mo HGTR

Here's a great pic of history I thought I would add to this thread. Frank and nat sang on this particalur mic a few times. If I can dig up any pics,I will add them later. It's in great condition and I still use it in my studio quite often. Never modified and sounds amazing! P.S,it's not for sale. Great thread ladies and gentlemanthumbsup

Yes, please post if you get a chance! Where did you come upon such a mic and what make/model is it?

[cschuby]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

People didn't use monitors. They didn't use stage monitors either. Things actually sounded a lot better and more in tune without them!

Thanks, Bob. So could you clarify: did they simply hear what they were putting through the main speakers? If so, where would they have typically placed such a speaker? Seems like it would have been difficult to hear what you were doing with an orchestra blasting behind you.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by cschuby

Thanks, Bob. So could you clarify: did they simply hear what they were putting through the main speakers? If so, where would they have typically placed such a speaker? Seems like it would have been difficult to hear what you were doing with an orchestra blasting behind you.

There were no speakers in the studio other than for playing back takes to the musicians in order to catch any mistakes before everybody left. The playback speakers were also used for overdubbing. Headphones weren't all that common before the mid '60s.

Everybody played with natural dynamics. With big bands, nothing but the vocal was amplified and that often with little more than a guitar amp. The musicians played softly enough that everybody could hear each other. And when they punched an accent, it would bowl people right over. Probably the first use of stage monitors was when the Beatles played Shea Stadium and found out they couldn't hear themselves over the crowd.

[butterfly]

On the other hand.....the overall musicianship (certainly in Jazz and Classical music) far exceeds the standard of 40 or 50 years ago, at least on a technical level. Many great musicians and vocalists are out there today, (literally too many) working away at their craft. One just has to make more of an effort to sort through the sea of mediocrity and the pop culture sheeplike mentality to discover them.

....................Technique has certainly improved amongst musicians but i'd be hard pressed to think of singers in the jazz world (classsical, yes,) who can match Mel torme or ella for tone and phrasing, maybe it's because different qualities are prized to-day.

This is a great thread as Ubk said a lot of the sound of these records is down to the room.......give a decent voice a bit of space and you will hear overtones, which I think you miss with close micing.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by Dave Ferris

...On the other hand.....the overall musicianship (certainly in Jazz and Classical music) far exceeds the standard of 40 or 50 years ago, at least on a technical level...

People keep saying this yet I honestly have not had that experience. And believe me nobody wants today's overall level of musicianship to be as good or better than it was 40 years ago than I do. Unfortunately wanting it doesn't make the school music programs and plentiful paying music gigs that supported the young musicians of 50 years ago come back.

[Steve G]

I don't think the musicians 40 years ago were any better than the musicians of today, but there were a lot more great musicians back then. There was a lot more work, which means more working musicians, which means a greater pool to choose from. The greats of today are just as good, if not better than the greats of yesterday, there are just fewer of them.

Also I think the way we record today as a whole is so much different. Musicians are not asked to play with the same dynamics, because we just give people headphones or isolate quiet instruments so they will be heard. I think if you asked engineers back then, they would have loved to have more control over there recordings. Also remember that the equipment musicians use today is setup for modern recording, not to play in large dance halls. They whole recording process is different.

Steve

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by Steve G

...there were a lot more great musicians back then. There was a lot more work, which means more working musicians, which means a greater pool to choose from. The greats of today are just as good, if not better than the greats of yesterday, there are just fewer of them.

Exactly.

The older engineers and musicians I've asked seem to agree that a lot went to hell when headphones were introduced. I never asked Al but I'll never forget the tears streaming down his face while some of the Henry Mancini tracks he recorded were played on a vintage three channel Mac 30/604 monitor setup at an AES convention.

When Vinyl Ruled, 2000-09i

Incidentally, Voyle Gilmore told me that a lot of the Capital Sinatra albums were actually recorded at this same studio, Radio Recorders, because Sinatra preferred it. It was originally built by RCA Victor.

What I heard there changed my entire outlook on recording. I fear we've let the desire to "fix-it" walk all over both the music and the audio quality.

[cschuby]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

Exactly.

The older engineers and musicians I've asked seem to agree that a lot went to hell when headphones were introduced. I never asked Al but I'll never forget the tears streaming down his face while some of the Henry Mancini tracks he recorded were played on a vintage three channel Mac 30/604 monitor setup at an AES convention.

When Vinyl Ruled, 2000-09i

Incidentally, Voyle Gilmore told me that a lot of the Capital Sinatra albums were actually recorded at this same studio, Radio Recorders, because Sinatra preferred it. It was originally built by RCA Victor.

What I heard there changed my entire outlook on recording. I fear we've let the desire to "fix-it" walk all over both the music and the audio quality.

Thanks, Bob. This is fascinating. Do you know if they videotaped this session and if it can be viewed?

[retractablezing]

Originally Posted by cschuby

Thanks, Bob. This is fascinating. Do you know if they videotaped this session and if it can be viewed?

+ 1

[Bob Olhsson]

It was an exhibit at the 2000 AES in Los Angeles. Nobody was videotaping it while I was there but there could be tapes somewhere.

Part of the impact was the fact that the sound quality was dramatically better than anything else at the convention including Sony's SACD exhibit in the next room. I can't imagine the folks hawking gear were very happy about having been upstaged by a typical monitor system from three decades earlier. I was willing to write my opinions off to nostalgia before I heard it and realized things really did sound lots better back when I was first hanging around studios.

[cschuby]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

It was an exhibit at the 2000 AES in Los Angeles. Nobody was videotaping it while I was there but there could be tapes somewhere.

Part of the impact was the fact that the sound quality was dramatically better than anything else at the convention including Sony's SACD exhibit in the next room. I can't imagine the folks hawking gear were very happy about having been upstaged by a typical monitor system from three decades earlier. I was willing to write my opinions off to nostalgia before I heard it and realized things really did sound lots better back when I was first hanging around studios.

This is great. Can only hope they may repeat this or something similar again at AES in the future. Couldn't find any video, but found a few more nice images.

[IMG]file:///C:/Users/Chuck/Desktop/img06.jpg[/IMG][IMG]file:///C:/Users/Chuck/Desktop/img06.jpg[/IMG]

[u b k]

Parking my ass in front of the speakers and listening to anything on vinyl from before 1980 usually results in a heady mixture of awe, inspiration, and depression for me.


Gregory Scott - ubk

[Karloff70]

Originally Posted by u b k

Parking my ass in front of the speakers and listening to anything on vinyl from before 1980 usually results in a heady mixture of awe, inspiration, and depression for me.


Gregory Scott - ubk

Depression? Oh dear. Well Greg, if this depression is part of your drive to come up with sweet toys for us all to battle its reasons with, I'm afraid I am not inclined to suggest any other remedies .....

[PRobb]

Originally Posted by Dave Ferris

I'll second that amen.

On the other hand.....the overall musicianship (certainly in Jazz and Classical music) far exceeds the standard of 40 or 50 years ago, at least on a technical level. Many great musicians and vocalists are out there today, (literally too many) working away at their craft. One just has to make more of an effort to sort through the sea of mediocrity and the pop culture sheeplike mentality to discover them.

If by "technique" you mean the ability to go wheedely-wheedely-wee really, really fast, then maybe. But there is a hell of a lot more to technique than the ability to go wheedely-wheedely-wee really, really fast. In fact, that would be pretty low on my list. If I want to hear scales run at high speed, I can program that in a computer.

[soundbarnfool]

Originally Posted by cschuby

One question Steve: did Capitol build their own desks like Abbey Road or did they modify stock consoles? Would love to see pictures if you have access to any.

No such thing as a stock console in those days. That would have been like building a stock lunar landing module.

Inglewood SoundBarn

[Bob Olhsson]

Stock consoles came in with 16 track around 1969 or so. Studio shops capable of building and modifying stuff remained SOP through the '80s.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by PRobb

If by "technique" you mean the ability to go wheedely-wheedely-wee really, really fast, then maybe. But there is a hell of a lot more to technique than the ability to go wheedely-wheedely-wee really, really fast. In fact, that would be pretty low on my list. If I want to hear scales run at high speed, I can program that in a computer.

Or hang out in the practice rooms of any music school.

[vernier]

.


----> YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.


.

[Bubbakron]

...

[cschuby]

Originally Posted by vernier

.


----> YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.


.

Ah, beautiful...Nat had such a smooth voice....a true instrument.. soothing, kinda like being in the womb again.....

[SeniorityFedup]

Originally Posted by Empty Planet

Not to put too fine a point on it, but I think the tunes were more arranged than mixed to feature the vocals. No amount of mixing is going to create that kind of spaciousness, particularly if instruments are competing for the same range. Listen to the way the horns and strings get out of the way of the vox when Frank comes in. No accident, that. Particularly with Nelson Riddle's work, it's a real ballet. God knows, modern rock bands could learn a tip or two from listening to Riddle arrangements. I'm with the OP: What a marvelous thing to hear those tunes.


Cheers.

Bump! thumbsup

[thiagoabreu]

im sure whiskey was pretty high there on the chain

[chris319]

Here is my question: Was there any discussion of the difference between the crystalline sound of the Neumann condensers used at Capitol vs. the warmer, smoother sound of Frank's 546 or even 44s and 77s? I have listened to recordings of Mr. Sinatra with their clean, pure sound and wondered how those recordings would sound if he were on a little more "ragged" sounding mic such as a ribbon. Nowadays I'm curious how he would sound on one of the Beyerdynamic ribbons which can be handheld in a live performance venue.

And you can't mention Nelson Riddle's beautiful arrangements without also mentioning Billy May.

[vernier]

Originally Posted by chris319

Here is my question: Was there any discussion of the difference between the crystalline sound of the Neumann condensers used at Capitol vs. the warmer, smoother sound of Frank's 546 or even 44s and 77s? I have listened to recordings of Mr. Sinatra with their clean, pure sound and wondered how those recordings would sound if he were on a little more "ragged" sounding mic such as a ribbon. Nowadays I'm curious how he would sound on one of the Beyerdynamic ribbons which can be handheld in a live performance venue.

And you can't mention Nelson Riddle's beautiful arrangements without also mentioning Billy May.

His 40's recordings at Columbia look to be a ribbon. Then, onto Capitol with the condenser.

And yep, Billy May wasn't no slouch either.

[loujudson]

I don't remember where I found these, but here's Frank using a C-37A at the Sands:

I wonder if this was what he used n the record...

Lou

[GotGear?]

Great thread. Though I admire Sinatra as a singer, I never really listened to any of his recordings until now.

I'm listening to the outakes on the link that was posted a few pages back.

The room sounds amazing. No comp, no reverb, no nothing but Frank, the mic, and the room.

[McPhaul]

Originally Posted by loujudson

I don't remember where I found these, but here's Frank using a C-37A at the Sands:

I wonder if this was what he used n the record...

Lou

I had to put the "Sinatra at the Sands" CD on while reading this thread. No that is not the mic in the pics in the CD artwork. It looks more like an SM57. Sorry for the crappy pic.

Will

[loujudson]

Originally Posted by McPhaul

I had to put the "Sinatra at the Sands" CD on while reading this thread. No that is not the mic in the pics in the CD artwork. It looks more like an SM57. Sorry for the crappy pic.

Will

Well, Will, that is the 546 spoken of above, not a 57, but does anyone knwo if this is a stock photo or actually from the Sands shows?

I wish I knew where I got that pic, but it was implied (or maybe I made it up?) that the C-37A was the mic they used for the live recording. In my pics, note how he holds it away from not in hius mouth!

<L>

[vernier]

Originally Posted by GotGear?

Great thread. Though I admire Sinatra as a singer, I never really listened to any of his recordings until now.

I'm listening to the outakes on the link that was posted a few pages back.

The room sounds amazing. No comp, no reverb, no nothing but Frank, the mic, and the room.

Yep, Frank, mic, room, tube mixer and tube Ampex.


. . . . . ------> YouTube - All of Me (Frank Sinatra)
.
.
.

[McPhaul]

Originally Posted by loujudson

Well, Will, that is the 546 spoken of above, not a 57, but does anyone knwo if this is a stock photo or actually from the Sands shows?

I wish I knew where I got that pic, but it was implied (or maybe I made it up?) that the C-37A was the mic they used for the live recording. In my pics, note how he holds it away from not in hius mouth!

<L>

Yes, I know that it's not a 57. I said it looked more like a 57. I typed that before I took the picture.

The front cover is Frank Sinatra with the same mic standing between Count Basie and the crowd during a show. I can't imagine that they would stage that photo just to put a different mic in the picture.

There are several other pics in the book all with the same mic.