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
Big Band Jazz Studio recording
Old 2 weeks ago
  #1
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Big Band Jazz Studio recording

Hi gang, I just recorded a new CD with a 16-piece jazz band. 5 reeds, 4 trumpets, 3 trombones, and 4 rhythm.
The recording process was a hybrid between a classic 1960s-era recording style, but with modern gear. Here's a link to the studio website. Oktaven audiO
I cannot say enough good things about Oktaven and the owner/engineer Ryan Streber. First of all, the space was designed for acoustic music to be played live in the room, so there are no weird nodes and frequencies bouncing around in there. Also, Ryan is a Juilliard trained classical composer, so he knows music.

We mic-ed everything, as opposed to a 50+ year-old big band date where fewer mics would have been used. However, we used minimal micing on drums and piano. In the piano we had a single M49 (like they would use at Columbia 30 street) and a Schoeps in one of the holes (like RVG). In the mix, I blend the two mics. On the bass, we used a RCA77DX on the strings just above the bridge, and an EV664 on the bass body, G-string side, just below the F-hole. (that last phrase sounds a bit naughty;-)) No DI of course. The guitar player brought an archtop acoustic with bronze strings that we mic'ed with a KM-84 or something like that. He played and electric archtop on two tunes, and we mic'ed the amp with an early U87.

The drums had a single C-12 to capture the whole set. Also, we added a Schoeps CM6, or something like that for the snare/hi-hat area. An AKG D12-e is on the bassdrum but not really needed because the bassdrum leaks into the other drum mics.

If you look at the Oktaven website, you'll notice they have a nice mix of vintage mics and new mics. I don't really care about vintage mics, I mean if a new LDC tube mic sounds great, like a Lawson L-47 as an example, then who needs an old U-47? I love old RCAs but new Royers, AEA, and Coles are just as good, maybe better.

Anyway, some photos from the session can be found here https://photos.google.com/search/_tra_

Here's a quick mp3 temp mix of one of the tunes. https://soundcloud.com/ajfarber-1/do...to-do-tk3-mx-1

This one is a WAV file of another piece: https://soundcloud.com/ajfarber-1/feet-frames-edit-2

Last edited by ajfarber; 2 weeks ago at 05:43 PM..
Old 2 weeks ago
  #2
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
In case anyone is interested, here is the mic list from the session.

Room L & R Neumann M49 (x2)

alto saxophones Neumann M49
tenor saxophones Neumann U47
baritone saxophone AEA R84

trumpets 1 and 4 AEA N8
trumpets 2 and 3 Royer R121

trombone 1 RCA77D
trombones 2 and 3 Coles 4038

acoustic guitar Neumann KM84
electric guitar amp Neumann U87

piano Neumann M49 and Neumann KM84

bass RCA77DX and EV664

Drums AKG C12 for oh, Schoeps CMT 56n for snare/hh, AKG D12e for bass drum

soloists played on RCA44BX or Oktaven C12 built in-house on original AKG schematic, Tim Campbell CT12, AMI T14, GE 5-Star 6072 tube

mic pres include RED 47, Fearn VT2, and a bunch of other stuff. Desk was a Studer 903.

Recorded to ProTool as 24/96

I'd like to dump my final mixes to a tube 2-track like an AMPEX 300, 350, or 351. Anyone got one in or near NYC?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3
Lives for gear
 
jimjazzdad's Avatar
Great stuff. Really enjoyed the tracks - thanks for posting. Hope you find your 2-track tape machine for your final mix.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #4
Gear Maniac
 

With all due respect to the work and the vintage mix style, the extreme separation leaves a hole in the center to my ears. Makes it really hard to listen on headphones for me. Particularly for Don't Tell Me What To Do.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #5
Gear Nut
 

Very nice sound, I like the clarity and transparency, the panning not so much. The hole in the middle is a bit disturbing. Nice mic collection there

Ronald
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6
Lives for gear
 
jimjazzdad's Avatar
The extreme panning reminds me of the late '50s stereo recordings (L-C-R works for this style of music)...maybe just pan the main pair a bit towards centre to close up the hole? Or work on centre-panning the spots that are more or less centrally located? Assuming that bleed doesn't fight you on this...

But I really dig the BIG big band sound you captured. The music and performance trumps any technical issues IMHO.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #7
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Yes, I know there seems to be a hole in the middle. When I master it, I will bing in the "wings" a bit, if you know what I mean? If I adjust the L-R spread to 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock, the extreme panning works very well indeed.
In my home studio, I monitor through an analogue console, so I can change the stereo spread with pan knobs. I suppose I can also do that in Logic as well.

Anyway, I'll spin out a new mix of something with a more condensed spread.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #8
Lives for gear
It is hard to assess the recording as presented. I THINK all the instruments sound clean and natural. BUT... for example, the horns playing right with the room mics (I think) sounding like a slap verb back to the middle is very distracting. Likewise, "drums right" is something I haven't heard since early Beatles US releases. When the bottom of the drums and the bass are not sharing both speakers or headphones, I don't hear a satisfying low end, although it may be there. It almost sounds like parts of the band are in two different rooms with a little "room" in the connecting hallway. I would love to hear this in a much more normal presentation where the rhythm elements anchor the middle and the instrumental spread is enough to give some separation without instruments seeming to be isolated in corners of the mix.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #9
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushman View Post
It is hard to assess the recording as presented. I THINK all the instruments sound clean and natural. BUT... for example, the horns playing right with the room mics (I think) sounding like a slap verb back to the middle is very distracting. Likewise, "drums right" is something I haven't heard since early Beatles US releases. When the bottom of the drums and the bass are not sharing both speakers or headphones, I don't hear a satisfying low end, although it may be there. It almost sounds like parts of the band are in two different rooms with a little "room" in the connecting hallway. I would love to hear this in a much more normal presentation where the rhythm elements anchor the middle and the instrumental spread is enough to give some separation without instruments seeming to be isolated in corners of the mix.
The photos of how we set up are linked in the first post. I have piano left, drums right and bass in the middle. I did this so that the rhythm section is panned with audience perspective. It's pretty common to do this. RVG used to have drums right and bass/piano in the middle on most stereo recordings he made for Prestiege, Blue Note, and Impulse. Columbia records would often do piano and drums in opposite channels and bass in the middle like on Dave Brubeck "Time Out", Miles Davis "Kind of Blue", or any other late '50s, early 60s acoustic jazz record.

Again, this mix may sound awkward with cans, but when listening on speakers, at least in my livingroom, it seems very similar to classic big band mixes from the early 1960s.

Here's a Basie record with the saxophones and drums in the right, Brass left, and piano, bass, and gtr in the middle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4v7tIw8FZ4
This is the Ellington band at 30th Street. Reeds left, brass right, rhythm in the centre. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB6PnBLQhh0
This is my last CD, from 2010. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkBu7q3Ty5I
I like the way this sounds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Anea12NOG0M
Old 2 weeks ago
  #10
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Okay gang, here's another mix.
I made the stereo spread a bit mare narrow.
I also rebalanced the rhythm section to sound more natural when monitoring in mono.
I changed the bass compressor a bit, and removed the eq from the bass mic.

I still have the imaging pretty much the same, but I moved the alto solo to the middle and shoved the clarinet solo over to 9 o'clock.

https://soundcloud.com/ajfarber-1/do...what-to-do-mx5
Old 2 weeks ago
  #11
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajfarber View Post
The photos of how we set up are linked in the first post. I have piano left, drums right and bass in the middle. I did this so that the rhythm section is panned with audience perspective. It's pretty common to do this. RVG used to have drums right and bass/piano in the middle on most stereo recordings he made for Prestiege, Blue Note, and Impulse. Columbia records would often do piano and drums in opposite channels and bass in the middle like on Dave Brubeck "Time Out", Miles Davis "Kind of Blue", or any other late '50s, early 60s acoustic jazz record.

Again, this mix may sound awkward with cans, but when listening on speakers, at least in my livingroom, it seems very similar to classic big band mixes from the early 1960s.

Here's a Basie record with the saxophones and drums in the right, Brass left, and piano, bass, and gtr in the middle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4v7tIw8FZ4
This is the Ellington band at 30th Street. Reeds left, brass right, rhythm in the centre. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB6PnBLQhh0
This is my last CD, from 2010. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkBu7q3Ty5I
I like the way this sounds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Anea12NOG0M
Thanks for the detailed response and examples. The historic mixes are as you say they are, and my memories of them are incorrect. My expectation was that the placement would attempt to be correct for how it would sound and seem to a live listener 30' or more out from the band. It isn't at all. It is more like what the conductor would hear, or even an exaggeration of that. I had forgotten that many early multitrack or "stereo" boards had L/C/R switches, not sweepable pan controls. Thanks for the education. Your 2010 mix certainly sounds competitive with the examples you provided.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #12
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushman View Post
Thanks for the detailed response and examples. The historic mixes are as you say they are, and my memories of them are incorrect. My expectation was that the placement would attempt to be correct for how it would sound and seem to a live listener 30' or more out from the band. It isn't at all. It is more like what the conductor would hear, or even an exaggeration of that. I had forgotten that many early multitrack or "stereo" boards had L/C/R switches, not sweepable pan controls. Thanks for the education. Your 2010 mix certainly sounds competitive with the examples you provided.
The mixes from 2010 were mastered but the new mixes haven't been to the mastering engineer yet. The mixed from 2010 were done with only L/C/R and not pan pots. The 2010 recording was done at Sear Sound Studio C, which is actually smaller than the room we used for the new album. Also, I mixed it in Logic with the final mixes bounced to an AMPEX 351 through a couple of ALTEC 1567 tube mixers. This last stage may seem gratuitous, but it seems to have a "glueing" effect on the mix. I can't put my finger on what the tubes, and tape do, only that it makes **** sound better.

Anyway, the reason I do the old-school panning of L/C/R is because the orchestrations seem to blend better for me that way. The mix seems to be be less "crowded", if that makes any sense. And since I wrote every note of this music except for the improvised bits, I feel that this type of mix makes the ensemble sound more homogeneous. Maybe it's because I grew up listening to old records from the golden age of Hi-Fi, but I prefer that sound to contemporary jazz recordings. If I had the money, I'd record to analogue tape with all tube gear and have audiophile quality vinyl records pressed. Also, I'd record in a classic studio like United or EastWest. All the classic rooms in New York are gone.

Photos from the session are now on my band FaceBook page. https://www.facebook.com/pg/andyfarb...55607408239374
Old 2 weeks ago
  #13
Lives for gear
 
boojum's Avatar
AJ, you know you will never please all of us. That is a given. The recording is great. I wish I could do work like that and maybe in 20 years I will be able to. I would like a little more spread but only a touch. I am very happy with the way it is. Great band, great musicians and a great capture.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #14
Lives for gear
I like the 'vintage panning' irrespective of how wide the extremities of left and wide might be, but one or more aspects of "Time Out" or "Kind of Blue" deserve a little study and could be helpful here.

In those records (admittedly with a much smaller ensemble than yours) the centre image has a lot more solidity and presence than yours...that's to say it exists as a monolithic presence, just as do the left and right, in equal measure. I don't know if the use of goboes was helpful in attaining that ?

Another aspect was the nature of the reverb bleed across the stereo spectrum, and how the ambience of each side's sound was reproduced in the opposite speaker. I'm guessing it was chamber delay or echo plates being used ? There will be literature around pertaining to that, and it would be good to find out in more detail how they attained that.

Finally the close miking of the 50's was probably closer to 'area' miking, in the sense that a distance of a few feet was the norm, unlike current studio approaches (in the rock sense) of sitting right on top of the instrument.

I like your recordings, and there's no such thing as a consistent "50's/60's jazz sound", more like trends...of which yours is one. Rudy Van Gelder got a different sound than Columbia, for example.

Here's a reference, and I'm sure there are multitudes of others : Remastering Three Jazz Classics: The Dave Brubeck Quartet, Art Pepper, and Sonny Rollins - ProSoundWeb

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/remo...ding-jazz.html

and Sandy tracked down a photo here: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/12402415-post9.html

another couple here: http://store.acousticsounds.com/imag...Out8192-45.jpg

http://kevinbaker.net/wp-content/upl...io-733x450.jpg

Last edited by studer58; 2 weeks ago at 03:17 AM..
Old 2 weeks ago
  #15
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
I like the 'vintage panning' irrespective of how wide the extremities of left and wide might be, but one or more aspects of "Time Out" or "Kind of Blue" deserve a little study and could be helpful here.
Yes, Kind of Blue has the bass AND trumpet in the centre. Again, I believe that the analogue tape, and all tube gear, plus mastering for a phonograph record, tends to "glue" the music together better than a rough mix from Protools.

Here is a track I just mixed with a slightly more narrow stereo spread. Again, the only instruments in the middle are the bass and guitar. If you check out the photos from the session, you'll notice that there were almost NO go-bos. Just one between the bass and drum set, and one that shielded the piano mic from the drums.

This is a blues I wrote nearly 10 years ago called "Air Check". There are two edits in the mix because I used a tenor solo from another take.
https://soundcloud.com/ajfarber-1/air-check-mx4

I'm mixing in Logic. I'm pretty good but not a "ninja" like a full-time, professional engineer, so please forgive the sloppy edits. Hopefully some of the weirdness can be fixed in the mastering.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #16
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post

Another aspect was the nature of the reverb bleed across the stereo spectrum, and how the ambience of each side's sound was reproduced in the opposite speaker. I'm guessing it was chamber delay or echo plates being used ? There will be literature around pertaining to that, and it would be good to find out in more detail how they attained that.
Ah, yes. This is what I've done in my mix. RVG used to have instruments dry in the left channel with their echo returning to the right channel and instruments dry in the right channel with their echo returning to the left channel. In instrument in the middle (usually piano and bass) would have no echo. In the early 1990s, I used to call Rudy to pick his brain, but he wouldn't tell me ****. By the time I went to RVG studio as a sideman, he wasn't recording the way he did in the '60s. In fact, I don't care for RVG recordings after 1971 or so.

I have no idea how RVG handled the opposite channel reverb thing back-in-the-day. In logic, I just use Space Designer, but on my last CD I had access to Altiverb, which is better.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #17
Lives for gear
The software tools we have at our disposal today allow almost every conceivable permutation and adjustment of space 'in the box' whereas the guys back then had to make do with real spaces, plates, chambers and tape echoes !

I've noticed in some of the vintage photos, especially of the Columbia Studios, that they had the luxury of space....at least width and length, rather than ceiling height, and so physical separation of sources was easily attained. In today's project studios that factor (space, distance) is the one that's typically in short supply

At the end of the day, if you can make a sound which pleases you..as well as the musicians, customers, listeners...you have won. The end justifies the means...and today we have many means available !

Just a plug for another good GS Remote chat thread on jazz here: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/remo...cord-jazz.html
Old 2 weeks ago
  #18
Lives for gear
a few more gems prised from the vice-like grip of RVG * about the mono-stereo transition days, and why the double bass moved into the middle....https://londonjazzcollector.wordpres...ono-to-stereo/

In the above article, I find the letters/correspondence section to be just as illuminating...for example a reflection by Australian jazz producer Mal Stanley:

"Hello…just came across this discussion…I’m a great fan of rvg…have listened to many b.notes..I am a recording engineer specializing in jazz for many years and present a jazz program here in Australia…one interesting aspect of mono vs stereo recording is the issue of spatial cues as has been raised…with mono it is often a front to back presentation…the ear will often assume a darker sound is further away..less high frequencies as would occur in nature..hence the way older mono recordings give us the sense the drummer is further back because often they weren’t closer miked compared to the front line…stereo is often more a horizontal experience if that makes sense…our cues more left and right…
That’s why it can help in modern recording to keep this in mind especially with jazz to not keep everything so bright as it can make for a one dimensional experience…reverb can help to an extent but can’t really replicate the subtle audio cues that the brain uses.."

This to me presents a strong case for setting up all your miking balances, distances, assessing musical interactions, mic bleed etc while monitoring in mono (you're recording multitrack anyway, right ?) ...so as to get the front to back depth cues and relationships right...and when that's locked in, switch off the Auratone and start working on the stereo spread via your NS10, Genelecs, etc
Mono as the reference...stereo as the casual afterthought ! That's what Rudy did (if he's telling us the truth !)...makes you think eh ! Mal's last sentence is critical..if everything is bright, clear, in focus, modern.....that's a bad thing (or at least the hallmark of a newbie, a rookie). Discuss and debate

* a nice video, with him being interviewed by Michael Cuscuna...what a work schedule, optom by day, recording engineer for multiple labels by night ! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naK0qaUVSqc

Last edited by studer58; 2 weeks ago at 05:56 AM..
Old 2 weeks ago
  #19
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
This to me presents a strong case for setting up all your miking balances, distances, assessing musical interactions, mic bleed etc while monitoring in mono (you're recording multitrack anyway, right ?) ...so as to get the front to back depth cues and relationships right...and when that's locked in, switch off the Auratone and start working on the stereo spread via your NS10, Genelecs, etc
Mono as the reference...stereo as the casual afterthought ! That's what Rudy did (if he's telling us the truth !)...makes you think eh ! Mal's last sentence is critical..if everything is bright, clear, in focus, modern.....that's a bad thing (or at least the hallmark of a newbie, a rookie). Discuss and debate
MONO! Yes indeed. That's actually how I start my mixes. I make sure the balances are correct in mono and then go to stereo. I also think the "front/back" imaging is still very important but the leakage takes care of that.

RVG monitored everything in mono when he was is Hackensack. I believe he used an Altec Big Red. Once he made the move to Englewood Cliffs, he was set up for stereo but he must have monitored in mono as well. In those days, (1959) many record labels had separate releases for mono and stereo.

I'll read the RVG article a bit later. Must dash.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #20
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
I just read the article on RVG. The bit about his panning choices is not correct. Every stereo LP I own that RVG recorded has bass in the middle, and all but a couple of albums that feature a singer, also have piano in the centre. The drums are always in the right channel and the horn player is in the left channel. On the Cannonball Adderley "Somethin' Else", both Cannonball and Miles are in the left channel but by 1960, two horn dates were usually recorded with the leader/horn player in the left channel and the sideman/horn player in the right channel with the drums. Obviously there would be multiple horns in each channel if there were 4 or more horns on the date. This seemed to be RVG's usual procedure from late 1959 until '68 or '69, as opposed to Columbia 30th Street where, as on Kind Of Blue, the three horns are spread with the saxophones on either side and Miles in the middle.

The only records I've got with the bass in a side channel are from very early stereo recordings where the engineer had no channel selectors. They probably had two mono mixers, each feeding a single channel on a 2-track deck. Like this record done at Universal in Chicago recorded by Bruce Swedien. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPb6TdYlBn0
I don't know Bruce, but I do know Ed Cherney pretty well, and Ed stays in touch with Swedein, so I may be able to get some information about 1950s era dates at Universal. I also seem to remember hearing an early Riverside date that had nothing in the middle.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #21
Lives for gear
Yes I always assumed the 'bass in the centre' or summed bass was never an aesthetic decision, but one enforced by the need to avoid groove jumping by stereo playback...and that it was pretty universally applied across all companies very quickly ?

Orchestral recordings were excluded of course, as the bass was never close miked enough to cause that sort of problem
Old 2 weeks ago
  #22
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
Yes I always assumed the 'bass in the centre' or summed bass was never an aesthetic decision, but one enforced by the need to avoid groove jumping by stereo playback...and that it was pretty universally applied across all companies very quickly ?

Orchestral recordings were excluded of course, as the bass was never close miked enough to cause that sort of problem
Yes, I think that's true. On the old recordings that have bass to one side, it is always eq'ed with a 120hz roll-off, or something like that.

I do like bass in the middle for aesthetics though. Most jazz rhythm sections set up with bass in the middle, piano to one side and drums on the other, so it does make good sense to put bass in the centre channel.
Old 1 week ago
  #23
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajfarber View Post
Yes, I think that's true. On the old recordings that have bass to one side, it is always eq'ed with a 120hz roll-off, or something like that.

I do like bass in the middle for aesthetics though. Most jazz rhythm sections set up with bass in the middle, piano to one side and drums on the other, so it does make good sense to put bass in the centre channel.
I do the same but for some reason I really like the sound of a particular recording with the bass panned left - The Bill Evans Vanguard recordings. I'd love to know more about that session. I always assumed there was a Mike by Scott's bass and one by the piano, with the drums bleeding in to both going to 2-track. There's a decent amount of detail in the drums though so it wouldn't surprise me if there was another mic mixed in.

I've tried to kind of recreate that sound with hit or miss results.
Old 1 week ago
  #24
Lives for gear
dear ajfarber,

I just listened to the MX1 and MX5 on Genelec 1032A's.

For me, the MX1 sounds absolutely amazing. The musicians are top. The drumsound is top. It's punchy, clear and natural, greatly balanced, and the differences in L and R players are really cool. Solos are fantastic too.
I enjoy the big stereo sound, it sounds like my favorite jazz CD (reissued LPs) sound like.

I would check if panning some solo inwards improves the mix, but would keep the hard L R panning as much as possible. Maybe giving the solos some verb in the other channel helps (as you mention somewhere in the thread)

Thanks for sharing all the info!
Old 1 week ago
  #25
Lives for gear
 
Wyllys's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajfarber View Post
Okay gang, here's another mix.
I made the stereo spread a bit mare narrow.
I also rebalanced the rhythm section to sound more natural when monitoring in mono.
I changed the bass compressor a bit, and removed the eq from the bass mic.

I still have the imaging pretty much the same, but I moved the alto solo to the middle and shoved the clarinet solo over to 9 o'clock.

https://soundcloud.com/ajfarber-1/do...what-to-do-mx5
Getting there, sounds nice. As a bass player and BB fan, I'd put the bass more "in the room" rather than the focused, close miked sound. I prefer it to be more the canvas than a detail in the painting...
Old 1 week ago
  #26
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyllys View Post
Getting there, sounds nice. As a bass player and BB fan, I'd put the bass more "in the room" rather than the focused, close miked sound. I prefer it to be more the canvas than a detail in the painting...
Interesting. The bass was actually in the room without any isolation. It should be leaking well into the saxophone mics and the 2 room mics. I did, however, roll off 60hz in the room mics. I suppose I could do a mix with the room mics flat.
Old 1 week ago
  #27
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyllys View Post
Getting there, sounds nice. As a bass player and BB fan, I'd put the bass more "in the room" rather than the focused, close miked sound. I prefer it to be more the canvas than a detail in the painting...
Actually, I think you were right about "Don't Tell Me What To Do". I had the bass a bit hot and I eq'd some of the cymbal leakage out of the bass mics.

Here is a mix of another tune. How does the bass work for you here?
https://soundcloud.com/ajfarber-1/air-check-mx4
Old 1 week ago
  #28
Lives for gear
 
Wyllys's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajfarber View Post
Actually, I think you were right about "Don't Tell Me What To Do". I had the bass a bit hot and I eq'd some of the cymbal leakage out of the bass mics.

Here is a mix of another tune. How does the bass work for you here?
https://soundcloud.com/ajfarber-1/air-check-mx4
I'm still hearing it "up close" with a lot of the body. I'm not saying that's a bad thing or wrong, just that my preference is to have some "bloom" to a an upright.

The mixes have a nice balance among the instruments, but each one is coming primarily from just one spot with no reflections to bring the audio to full life. Bleed doesn't have much of a pre-delay.

In the end it's a matter of preference, I suppose, but even with close individual miking I still shoot for the room resonance you'd get in a nice hall. IOW, I like a little more "time" in the mix for dimension.
Old 1 week ago
  #29
Lives for gear
 
ajfarber's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyllys View Post
I'm still hearing it "up close" with a lot of the body. I'm not saying that's a bad thing or wrong, just that my preference is to have some "bloom" to a an upright.

The mixes have a nice balance among the instruments, but each one is coming primarily from just one spot with no reflections to bring the audio to full life. Bleed doesn't have much of a pre-delay.

In the end it's a matter of preference, I suppose, but even with close individual miking I still shoot for the room resonance you'd get in a nice hall. IOW, I like a little more "time" in the mix for dimension.
Please post some examples of big bands recorded/mixed in the manner you're describing. I kinda modeled my mixes after late '50s/early 60s golden-age-of-stereo big band records, particularly ones put out by Mercury, Command, Reprise, or Columbia records. Also, as discussed in earlier posts, the van Gelder type approach to opposite channel echo returns.

Here's another big band recording I dig. This one has vocals on it, but the mix sounds good to me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpB-P2XvS_M

Here's some Duke Ellington recorded at RCA in NYC. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGNS9flNwiU
Old 6 days ago
  #30
mal
Gear Head
 

[QUOTE=studer58;12730006]a few more gems prised from the vice-like grip of RVG * about the mono-stereo transition days, and why the double bass moved into the middle....https://londonjazzcollector.wordpres...ono-to-stereo/

In the above article, I find the letters/correspondence section to be just as illuminating...for example a reflection by Australian jazz producer Mal Stanley:

"Hello…just came across this discussion…I’m a great fan of rvg…have listened to many b.notes..I am a recording engineer specializing in jazz for many years and present a jazz program here in Australia…one interesting aspect of mono vs stereo recording is the issue of spatial cues as has been raised…with mono it is often a front to back presentation…the ear will often assume a darker sound is further away..less high frequencies as would occur in nature..hence the way older mono recordings give us the sense the drummer is further back because often they weren’t closer miked compared to the front line…stereo is often more a horizontal experience if that makes sense…our cues more left and right…
That’s why it can help in modern recording to keep this in mind especially with jazz to not keep everything so bright as it can make for a one dimensional experience…reverb can help to an extent but can’t really replicate the subtle audio cues that the brain uses.."

This to me presents a strong case for setting up all your miking balances, distances, assessing musical interactions, mic bleed etc while monitoring in mono (you're recording multitrack anyway, right ?) ...so as to get the front to back depth cues and relationships right...and when that's locked in, switch off the Auratone and start working on the stereo spread via your NS10, Genelecs, etc
Mono as the reference...stereo as the casual afterthought ! That's what Rudy did (if he's telling us the truth !)...makes you think eh ! Mal's last sentence is critical..if everything is bright, clear, in focus, modern.....that's a bad thing (or at least the hallmark of a newbie, a rookie). Discuss and debate"

*************
I'd forgotten about that post..but yes holds true..I was especially reminded of it when my jazz program was for a few years also broadcast on AM mono radio here in Australia as well as in stereo on our digital jazz station ABC Jazz...when mixing checking in mono was essential....and I'd find myself using the mono balance in terms of volume levels and frequency relationships
of instruments so very helpful..then switch back to stereo..makes mixing more consistent...
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+  Submit Thread to Reddit Reddit 
 
Topic:
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
Forum Jump