The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
The History of the Recording Studio
Old 29th March 2010
  #31
What!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dabigfrog View Post
I think that was MARCHING powder

peruvian marching powder, bolivian headache medicine, devil's dandruff...

makes my sinus's plug up for 3 days just thinking about it.
Look mate!, count yourself lucky you still got a sinus and what's more you can remember spelling and stuff.
Old 29th March 2010
  #32
Lives for gear
 
Sigma's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rednose View Post
Good info Lynn!
I didn't start till the mid 80s, but like you said, mic techniqs were very similar to today.
I don't recall outboard pres. The first real studio I recorded in had an SSL, and that is what we used to record everything.
I do remember a pultec eq, an h3000, lexicon, DBX 160x and the big plate reverb that took up the space of a walk in closet.
Whats different is the medium. It was tape and now its protools.
Endless editing, quantizing, and auto tune.
dude ..work on dance mixes in the mid 80's..after 9 hrs of mixing till 4 in the morning plus doing 24 track to 2 track to 24 track "fly ins"... start muting.. effecting and then recording 2 dozen or so sections of break and groove takes that then get directional arrows and notations with a grease pencil and hung on a wall..that then get taped and untaped together 50 different ways till "it feels good"..

9 AM walk out into the light.. greasy, tired and wired and look at all the coffee hopped up, cologned briefcase walkers all bright and eager to get to work...drive home to a condo that has limo tint on the windows and vinyl backed curtains in the bedroom so no light gets in where you can 1/2 sleep like a wary vampire....LOL
Old 29th March 2010
  #33
Lives for gear
 
vernier's Avatar
The problem with 70's and later recordings . . .

.
too many tracks

too many mics

too close of mic'ing

excessive overdubbing

too many transisters

lack of tube sound

metallic digital delay
.
.
Old 1st April 2010
  #34
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by steveschizoid View Post
Not to pile on, because, like you and hopefully everyone else, I have better things to do than insult and argue with people I will likely never meet, but (and you knew that was coming :o)) I too found somthing disquieting about what you had said:

..and I think I figured it out.

What any of us is able to accomplish, as musicians, recording engineers, parents or any other monumentally important endeavor, has significant correlation to what we believe we can accomplish. Combine that fact with the fact that, whatever act of genius has ever been committed, has always resulted from a novel way of seeing and/or using the resources at hand. If one has the mentality that a certain set of conditions must exist for something great to occur, I would argue that one has a mentality that will not allow something great to occur no matter the conditions.

I am not one of those guys that claims that gear makes no difference, and I totally understand and agree with what you had to say about vibe, artistic process and decision making. I just believe that "what can I do?" is a way more effective strategy for achieving greatness than "it can't be done."
I guess I put it the wrong way because I feel like I was saying pretty much exactly what you just did..hillarious.
Old 1st April 2010
  #35
member no 666
 
Fletcher's Avatar
Random thoughts on the stroll down memorex lane... the 949 quickly supplanted the 910... the 224 was like $10k [but the studio I worked in at the time had one that was rentable to the session for $50/day... which in a $35/hr. 16 trk room was substantial!!]. The 224X quickly replaced the 224 and it's "Constant Density Plate" was freakin' amazing for drums(!!)... but the "amazing for drums" thing was more of an 80's thing than it was in 1978.

I didn't get to make the move into a 24trk room until about 1982... but did tons of basics for "16 for 24" sessions at the 16 trk joint I worked in during the late 70's. "16 for 24" being that the session tracked on 16 where the reel was later moved to a 24 track room for more overdubs and mixing. It was a quite common technique in the late 70's but all but disappeared within a few years as more 24 machines were installed.

The joint where I worked at the time had an amazing sounding room, though we generally used a SMALL (like size of the kit, with just about enough room for the drummer and lots of short mic stands with 90˚ mic connectors) for "R&B" sessions where the "rawk" sessions started to take advantage of "the room".

We had things like one headed kik drums and one headed rack toms [into which a microphone was shoved for "maximum isolation"]... there were "wallets" taped to snare drums and "Kotex" [with its wonderful adhesive strip] as another "snare deadening" tool -- no fun as a teenage boy to have to go out to buy a box of "Maxi-Pads" for a session!!! ...oh the pangs of being an assistant!!!]. There were some on the 'cutting edge' who had started to de-Eagle-fy their drum sounds... but not all that many until a few years into the 80's.

U-2 and the Hugh Padgham thing hadn't really gripped the "industry" in the late 70's... but being in New England we were trying to emulate what came out of NY, which at the time was everything from John Lennon records to The Ramones to Television [etc.] while we kept a really firm eye on what was coming out of London [especially The Clash].

Miami (Criteria) was almost a footnote to the "North East" mentality at the time (with the exception of the stuff Bill Szymczyk was doing at the time!!)... "Southern Rock" was still big with the suburban kids but was starting its decent at the time and [unfortunately] places like Muscle Shoals were also kinda relegated to footnote status in the "North East - rock and roll" world where I lived at that time.

I remember you could tell from the radio is the record was from NY, London or LA as the LA stuff was "crystal clear", the NY stuff had "attitude with clarity" and the stuff from London was just aggressive as hell. They also seemed to be A LOT more adventurous with effects in London than NY [though that would soon change from the "AMS homogenization" that was soon to hit the US]... though you could definitely hear the "Ampex" [ATR-100 series] influence on the LA stuff for years vs. the NY / London love of Studers... MCI's were somewhere in between and Otari had yet to show up on the radar.

Guitar sounds seemed to be as different as drum sounds - again the sounds coming out of London being the most aggressive, LA the cleanest and NY (East Coast) being somewhere in the middle... DI bass seemed to be "THE" thing everywhere... and the MIDI "revolution" hadn't happened yet but things like Moogs and Arps had replaced piano & B-3 in a big way by the late 70's.

The LA guys seemed to all be looking toward Ocean Way (or at least that was the way we saw it from 3k miles away) while the NY sound seemed to be led by the "Media Sound" / "Record Plant" thing [there were lots of great recordings from Record Plant - LA... but it always seemed (at least from my East Coast perspective) that their stuff was always trying to keep up with the Ocean Way stuff)]... Power Station was just getting off the ground, Hit Factory was a neat footnote at the time but hardly the major force it became during the "Tommy Mattola" era of SONY.

Like I said - random recollections of a kid in his first couple of years as an assistant - in no particular order - with bloody little rhyme, reason, or actually accuracy attached.

Peace.
Old 1st April 2010
  #36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletcher View Post
Random thoughts on the stroll down memorex lane... the 949 quickly supplanted the 910...

I remember you could tell from the radio is the record was from NY, London or LA as the LA stuff was "crystal clear", the NY stuff had "attitude with clarity" and the stuff from London was just aggressive as hell. They also seemed to be A LOT more adventurous with effects in London than NY [though that would soon change from the "AMS homogenization" that was soon to hit the US]... though you could definitely hear the "Ampex" [ATR-100 series] influence on the LA stuff for years vs. the NY / London love of Studers... MCI's were somewhere in between and Otari had yet to show up on the radar.
The 910 was horrible. It was only adopted so readily because nothing else did what it did, even though it did it poorly. Imagine having a delay line today with four pushbuttons where you have to "do the math" to figure up the sum delay every time you use it.

Also, speaking of memory lane and I hadn't thought of this in 20+ years, there was a time when you could tell if something was recorded in LA or NY just by listening to the kick drum sound. Boy, that goes way back. Regional sounds--thanks for stirring that memory, Fletcher.
Old 1st April 2010
  #37
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
The 910 was horrible. It was only adopted so readily because nothing else did what it did, even though it did it poorly. Imagine having a delay line today with four pushbuttons where you have to "do the math" to figure up the sum delay every time you use it.

Also, speaking of memory lane and I hadn't thought of this in 20+ years, there was a time when you could tell if something was recorded in LA or NY just by listening to the kick drum sound. Boy, that goes way back. Regional sounds--thanks for stirring that memory, Fletcher.
Going back a little further to the sixties, it was so simple to differentiate records made in Chicago/Memphis/Detroit/New York - even for a Brit like me. The West Coast sound was a little harder - aprt from the obvious ones. Of course London had it's own vibe which was unmistakeable. Regional sounds, shame theydisappeared.
Old 6th April 2010
  #38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
The 910 was horrible. It was only adopted so readily because nothing else did what it did, even though it did it poorly. Imagine having a delay line today with four pushbuttons where you have to "do the math" to figure up the sum delay every time you use it.
I still love and use my H910 everyday. Compared to alot of modern pitch shifters today it still to me sounds better on vocals.

Subtle at times(pitch set to 1.00/ 7.5ms on the left and 15ms on the right) but when you take it out you definitely notice it.
Old 6th April 2010
  #39
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor View Post
I still love and use my H910 everyday. Compared to alot of modern pitch shifters today it still to me sounds better on vocals.

Subtle at times(pitch set to 1.00/ 7.5ms on the left and 15ms on the right) but when you take it out you definitely notice it.
Well, with those settings (Pitch at 1.00 or unity) you're using it only as a delay which it did fine. It was when pitch was being changed and specifically AS you were changing it, such as pitch correcting, when it was horribly glitchy.
Old 6th April 2010
  #40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
Well, with those settings (Pitch at 1.00 or unity) you're using it only as a delay which it did fine. It was when pitch was being changed and specifically AS you were changing it, such as pitch correcting, when it was horribly glitchy.
Pitch 1.00 definitely changes the pitch. The H910 is never pitch stable anyway(based on its design) but the fact that it changes subtly up and down is why it works great for what i use it for...chorusing lead vocals.

I would never pitch correct with it, that would be vocal suicide.
Old 3rd December 2016
  #41
Lives for gear
 
Kronos147's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor View Post
I still love and use my H910 everyday. Compared to alot of modern pitch shifters today it still to me sounds better on vocals.

Subtle at times(pitch set to 1.00/ 7.5ms on the left and 15ms on the right) but when you take it out you definitely notice it.

Cool thread I found!

I have not had the pleasure of checking out a real H910. I know the patch on the H3000 that gets used here a lot: 217 "Dual H910's".
Old 4th December 2016
  #42
Lives for gear
 
Swurveman's Avatar
I think the most relevant thing is that the song is great due to the guitar riff and vocal melody played by a tight band. As then, and now, bad engineers could have ****ed it up, but I don't think a band with as much temperament as The Police would have let that happen.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
bionic brown / So much gear, so little time
33
Recording David / So much gear, so little time
5

Forum Jump
Forum Jump