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
PT Ruined The New Queens Of The Stone Age Control Surfaces
Old 1st October 2002
  #151
Gear Addict
 
mixer's Avatar
 

most studio complexes these days don''t want to devote the room for a chamber .the one at media in n.y. was famous....and fab. and emt plates are hard to find and tune....but when you can get a good chamber or plate you realize the limitations of modeling....i use outboard and plugin verbs at my house....and even most of the times in the studio...but miss the sound of a great chamber.....even used to love the sound of akg 20 spring reverb....all can give a great palate of sounds using delays and eq. tension adjustments...
Old 1st October 2002
  #152
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by lflier
Like I said, I like reverb plugins or hardware for certain sounds. But for the overall verb, it usually wouldn't be my first choice. But that's just me.
thats because you dont use a MAC and have altiverb... i dont like algorithmic verbs either, plugin or hardware. next time you come up here i will demo it for you... it will flip your mind. it simply adds space. its amazing.
Old 4th June 2009
  #153
Lives for gear
 
JoeyM's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianT View Post
Talking about Jack Joseph Puig.

I've known dude for about what, 16-18 years? Not well, but aquainted. We've worked on the same record a time or two. We were both punks back when.

The reason Puig sounds great is not the gear, though that's nice to have. It's his apprenticeship and background. It's all about the reference points.

Puig paid the fairly high price of being Bill Schnee's assistant for some years. For those who don't know who Schnee is, I'll not take the time to elucidate, but suffice it to say that Bill Schnee is one of the older guys from a time when men where men, did friggin' direct- to-lathe recordings for Sheffield Labs and printed the most amazing sounds ever, which most people have never heard, unfortunately. Life changing, from a sonic "what's possible" standpoint. Schnee also has well over 100 Gold and Platinum frames hanging around. You get the idea.

Schnee is a good friend of mine. But I would *never* have worked for him. Sheesh. Old school, brutal drill sargeant scene. Way tough, awesome talent and non stop purgatory for an assistant. I remember hanging out a bit and thinking (along with many others), "Gee it's the same EQ knobs when *I* turn them. What the hell does *he* do with them to get that sound?" Schnee would eat most current 1st engineers alive as losers, just trying to be his 2nd. I lie not. And by the time he was finished doing his thing, they would agree with him.

So that's where and how Puig learned his craft, in a room full of the best tube electronics, custom made console ( 3 990 discrete opamps in the whole signal path), ultra hottrodded 2" analog decks (I sold him one of them) and probably the finest mike closet on the planet. So many C12s, C24s, Elam 251s, 47s, 49,s 67s, etc, etc, etc it would make you cry. I've worked in that room, and they don't make them like that anymore.

What I'm attempting to say is, Puig would make good sounding records on whatever you gave him. Because his reference points are already set to a remarkably high standard, passed down to him from a Grandaddy of sonic goodness. No shortcuts either. He spent 5 -10 years in 2nd engineer hell in a very, very tough gig to get it. He earned it.

BUT, and again I say BUT, the fact that he knows enough to pick great sounding gear that will work *with* and *for* him sonically is a part of the wisdom gained.

The current zeitgeist is to trade pure sonic performance for increased speed and options. IMHO, that is the very mantra of Pro Tools. I've never heard any credible audio pro with the balls to say, "Hey, Pro Tools is a sonic *improvement* over what we had!" Because it's not. Digi has fought tooth and nail trying to establish that Pro Tools sounds "as good", without ever convincing most professionals to date.

It comes down to this, IMO. There is a tradeoff to be made. On one hand you have the increased speed, greater retained options, and functional superiority (including full mix recall) of Pro Tools over traditional methods. And that may well be a plus on the musical side. But you are fighting to attain sonic results that are not a step back in terms of air and dimensionalty. Come on, be honest. It's a tradeoff.

OTOH, you have in the best of traditional gear, which is much more limiting musically speaking (arrangement tweaking, timing, tuning, etc), but which is handling much of the task of sonic excellence just by being in the chain. It's helping you, not fighting you in your sonic pursuits of punch, openess, etc. But it's inarguably inferior for editing and manipulating options.

Which is better? Whichever one covers your *particular* shortcomings the best while emphasizing your *particular* strengths. There is no one answer at this point. I've been very vocal that I think my DAW of choice, Paris, is simply better sounding than Pro Tools. Hey, it just is. I've traded off some functionality that Pro Tools has to hit a balance between the two choices outlined above. That works for my *particular* style.

Someday, maybe soon, the two choices will coalesce into one system. It's still not PTHD, by itself. Better, but not "there" yet. Some innovation will solve the sonic issues eventually and this discussion will become a moot point. But at this time, it's still a choice and a tradeoff with no "right" answer.


Regards,
Brian T
I'm 44 now, but you brought tears to my eyes in appreciation for my Dad who passed on in 1980. He wasn't a studio guy, but owned some record/stereo stores and raised us kids on very large class A amplifiers and lots of Direct to Disc and Original Master recordings. And SFX records for the neighbors at 3AM of submarines etc LOL

That Sheffield name, I cringe to mention this because maybe not everyone would appreciate this, but does anyone remember one Lincoln Mayorga? He did this direct to disc called The Missing Link, and though we had great mainstream music, I LOVED Peace Train (Cat Stevens own version paled in comparison IMHO). I've had that scratched album in a case for may years, waiting to get a phonograph worthy of digitizing it and (remove some scratches, but) listen to it and love the live jams.

One year for a family vacation my dad asked "where do you want to visit? I said Thomas Edisons home in Ohio. I still have a THICK record I bought there, though a crack has developed over the years.

Thanks for the memories BrianT, even if not directly
Joey
Old 4th June 2009
  #154
Lives for gear
 
NYMo's Avatar
 

Hi there,

Yeah..I used to love those Lincoln Mayorga things..there was also one with a Thelma Houston song on it as well.

This was a big turnaround from my Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple ,Black Sabbath rock that I started with ....after Lincoln I then found the CTI label !

At the same time I was listening to Krautrock (Neu, Cluster, Klaus Schultze etc)

Eventually ended up with a d2d with Eric Gale, Lee Ritenour etc

Anyways...its been a strange road ;-)

Cheers

John NYMO Nyman
Old 4th June 2009
  #155
Lives for gear
 
KevWind's Avatar
PT ruined the QOTSA ???????????????????

is this like saying "The gun killed the victim" ??????????????? Would it not be more that
ALL things considered and being equal " At the End of the Day" its the Carpenter , not the tools ,that makes the project beautiful or ugly !!!!!!! and then of course there is perspective
Old 4th June 2009
  #156
Lives for gear
 

Well, since we're revisiting an almost-seven-year-old thread, did this happen?

Quote:
2003 will be the year that DAW mixing will come of age I predict
It should also probably be mentioned, for those who skip to the end of the thread, that the album under discussion here is "Songs for the Dead"...
Old 12th August 2014
  #157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duardo View Post
Well, since we're revisiting an almost-seven-year-old thread, did this happen?



It should also probably be mentioned, for those who skip to the end of the thread, that the album under discussion here is "Songs for the Dead"...
Ha! It sure happened, didn't it?!

Now people are stuck on the autotune vs. natural performance debates. Funny ain't it?

Some in this thread particularly like to talk **** on the band and this album, and then in later threads kiss Qotsa's asses as well as the producers' for their next following records. Very
entertaining. As well as stating how the "sample replacement" is god awful, though through every source as far as I know, there was NO replacement, albeit the cymbals were overdubbed.

"ANALOG IS KING", scream the biased dorks who ignore the fact that tools are tools. At the end of the day only engineers care about other engineers' work. Everyone else watches/listens to the musicians.

BTW, it's crushed and loud as hell but this is probably my 2nd favourite QOTSA album, it has unique tone and IMO it still kicks major ass, 14 years later
Old 12th August 2014
  #158
Gear Maniac
 

Wow: excellent conversation.. Like almost a 'historical document' now!
Old 13th August 2014
  #159
This thread confuses me, because I *think* that OP was talking about "Songs for the Deaf" (he never actually named it, did he?"), and that's the only QOTSA album that I like to listen to...
Old 13th August 2014
  #160
Lives for gear
 
GeorgeHayduke's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by D34d_Ledger View Post
..
"ANALOG IS KING", scream the biased dorks who ignore the fact that tools are tools. ..
I'm not discussing whether digital suxx or not, or whether it can compete 100% with analog, or whether it's better, but this phrase: "tools are tools" is a meaningless and pointless phrase unless we know without doubt that the tools are exactly equivalent.

This is a bicycle:


This is also a bicycle:


I know which one I'd take if I wanted to win the Tour.
Old 13th August 2014
  #161
Lives for gear
 
Slug1's Avatar
Hmm. Well if I was in Martha's Vinyard with my wife and 15 yo daughter I'd take three of the other bikes. So which would provide the most satisfaction. A relaxing bike ride with family along a beach trail on an old cruiser, or going up a steep incline <snip>trying to win bike race. Horses for courses. A great digital mix can be just as sonically pleasing as a great analog mix if the songwriting, production, and performance are great, and if mixed by the right person. Period.
Old 13th August 2014
  #162
Gear Guru
 
kafka's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeHayduke View Post
This is a bicycle:


This is also a bicycle:


I know which one I'd take if I wanted to win the Tour.
Neither of those bikes are suitable for the mountains.
Old 13th August 2014
  #163
Gear Addict
So wait, this 12 year old thread started because someone was bitching about "Songs For The Deaf" (I'm assuming) sounding like it was all ITB and sample replaced and digital blah blah blah, right? And then a couple years later Eric Valentine has a Q&A on here where he states (I need to re-read it to make sure) that it was 100% analog to tape and 100% real drums....

I can't help but laugh at this.
Old 13th August 2014
  #164
Lives for gear
This one sounds so much better to me than the last. It is right up there with SFTD to me.
With songs like this,... everything else is a distant second.
Mics, pres, eqs, daw, engineer, second, runner,.... who cares, except the ego.
When the art is "tits" these roles are relegated to where they should be, irrelevancy.

I am glad they put out something that shows we and our technology don't matter.
That means the songs are good.

With that said, slammed and dry seem the perfect way to produce QOTSA polka metal IMO.
Seems some here are just opposed to slammin' sh!t on principle.
I don't get it. So misdirected.

Also, I would hate being any drummer that worked on a project with Grohl,... surely to have all I did attributed to him.
I bet he would hate it worse, cause I suck.


D
Old 15th August 2014
  #165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Revson View Post
So wait, this 12 year old thread started because someone was bitching about "Songs For The Deaf" (I'm assuming) sounding like it was all ITB and sample replaced and digital blah blah blah, right? And then a couple years later Eric Valentine has a Q&A on here where he states (I need to re-read it to make sure) that it was 100% analog to tape and 100% real drums....

I can't help but laugh at this.
Exactly. Gearslutz hasn't changed much in the last decade or so, has it?
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
Infernal Device / So much gear, so little time
26
KoMa / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
0
NetworkAudio / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
0
Ray Sigmond / So much gear, so little time
42
Tote / So much gear, so little time
1

Forum Jump
Forum Jump