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
Over produced, well produced, and under produced Effects Pedals, Units & Accessories
Old 9th August 2018
  #151
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

A combination of the radio and dancing with friends to 45s on a changer. Hi-Fi didn't hit until the '70s.
Old 9th August 2018
  #152
Gear Guru
 
Brent Hahn's Avatar
 

With my parents, who were Depression-era teens, my mom bought records from the time she had her first job. I don't think my dad bought one ever.

He was good friends in high school with June Christie. And through her, he became a big fan of Tommy Dorsey. She'd comp him tickets when they played in Chicago or St Louis and he'd hang out with her and the band's boy singer, this skinny Frank guy. Never bought a record by any of them.
Old 10th August 2018
  #153
Lives for gear
 
Funny Cat's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
We had a 6x9 speaker on the console and a little radio transmitter that could barely reach a car parked in the driveway of one studio. That said, it's important to understand that most records were sold to women prior to the '70s albums.

Is that not the case now? If not I'd be very surprised.
Old 10th August 2018
  #154
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by robert82 View Post
That's a fascinating stat! What were women listening on? I'm thinking the little 45 rpm players.
First record I remember, a neighbor girl invited some of us over and she had one of those suitcase type record players. She played Snoopy vs the Red Baron (1966) for us.

First record I bought was likely Chick A Boom (1971). My mom threw it away because it was too suggestive with the bikini strip tease in the lyric, but she vehemently denied doing so.
Old 10th August 2018
  #155
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Funny Cat View Post
Is that not the case now? If not I'd be very surprised.
I don't know what's currently happening but it was mostly men buying albums during the '70s and '80s.
Old 10th August 2018
  #156
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
I don't know what's currently happening but it was mostly men buying albums during the '70s and '80s.
I dunno, I had a girlfriend back in the day who brought her own records and danced naked on the coffee table...
Old 10th August 2018
  #157
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
A combination of the radio and dancing with friends to 45s on a changer. Hi-Fi didn't hit until the '70s.
You're off by about 20 years, Bob, Hi Fi began in earnest in the early 50's thanks to interest from ww2 soldiers having come home and finding prosperity from the emerging middle class - and wanting a piece of the tech they experienced during the war; guys like my dad who worked in radar. It was mono up until the late 50's, yet the first hi fi magazines appeared, books, hifi clubs etc. Then stereo hit and bam!! I have a terrific early edition Hi Fi bible here (1956) - it details placement and practice of the single speaker cabinet for maximum effect in a room, it also has chapters (an neat pics) on power amps, tape machines, turntables etc from the era.

Mitch Miller set up the 30th street Columbia as a studio for artists to make recordings for the new era - he wanted the artists to be "away" from the suits uptown. Mitch, himself was the godfather of the concept album with "theme-based" recordings, you know the ones with busty women on the album covers featuring drinks in summer, holiday cheer, music for parties, etc. Mitch also spent hours getting a vocal sound for Johhny Mathis - there are pics documenting sessions where Miller experiments with how to mic the vocalist for a "pop" sound. Mitch Miller was a very prescient fellow, and we owe him an awful lot.

By the late 70's, Hi Fi was nearing the end of its reign, the last of the best receivers, amps, turntables etc were being subsumed by cheap gear - and by the mid 80's, it was pretty much over. Only the real high end remained - depressing, but that's how it goes.
Old 10th August 2018
  #158
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

I was one of those hobbyists as a kid, however, albums and hi-fi only became a mass-market item in the late '60s largely in response to the success of Sgt. Peppers.
Old 10th August 2018
  #159
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
I think the original 'hi fi' movement involved folks building from kits like heathkit in the 1950s. IIRC, the cost of such an amp was something like a month's wages for the average worker, so not a mass market thing. This vacuum tube hi fi history stuff is documented in the Vacuum Tube Valley magazine which is defunct but the pdfs of it are available in various places on the internet--a real delight to read for tube fans.
Old 10th August 2018
  #160
Lives for gear
 
robert82's Avatar
Spent many hours drooling over these:

1961 Allied Radio & Electronics Catalog
Old 10th August 2018
  #161
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
I was one of those hobbyists as a kid, however, albums and hi-fi only became a mass-market item in the late '60s largely in response to the success of Sgt. Peppers.
That may be your personal experience Bob, but the industry had its own history.

The entire Columbia Records organization was formed on the promise of the invention of the High Fidelity LP, record sales ( and equipment) soared in the late 50's. Two magazines that became staples of the industry were founded in the 50's; "Stereo Review" in 1958, and "High Fidelity Magazine" in 1951.

This is well documented .... everywhere. Here's a link with a brief description, but for anyone interested - but there's plenty to read elsewhere - and should be required reading for people in our industry.

Hi-Fidelity Receivers - A History of Home Audio Systems | Complex

From the above link:

Circa: 1958

Bell Laboratories, RCA Records, and amateur violinist Avery Fisher all played pivotal roles in developing high fidelity. The purpose of the technology was to improve home-audio quality and provide a listening experience that duplicated the resonances of a live orchestra. Harman Kardon stepped up the challenge by developing the first-ever stereo receiver that stuffed a radio tuner with wider FM bandwidth, plus an amplifier and pre-amplifier, into a complete chassis.​ Thus ushering in what is known as the Golden Age of Hi-Fi.
Old 10th August 2018
  #162
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

The "golden age of Hi-Fi" was still very much an upper-middle-class hobby. Another major factor in the rise of album sales was the requirement of separate programming for FM licenses in 1967 that put rock albums, rather than singles, on the air for the first time. This was followed by stores refusing to stock both mono and stereo records which was the end of people using record changers.
Old 10th August 2018
  #163
Gear Guru
 
Brent Hahn's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
This was followed by stores refusing to stock both mono and stereo records which was the end of people using record changers.
I forget -- at what point did 45 rpm stereo singles come in?

I think my mom was the only person I ever saw use a a changer with LPs. She just wanted music of whatever kind going, and didn't care that you couldn't play both sides of an album.
Old 10th August 2018
  #164
Lives for gear
 
norfolk martin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Hahn View Post
I forget -- at what point did 45 rpm stereo singles come in?

I think my mom was the only person I ever saw use a a changer with LPs. She just wanted music of whatever kind going, and didn't care that you couldn't play both sides of an album.
This page indicates that they were being released as a early as 1959 in the US, although on a very irregular basis

Early Stereo Singles Discography (1958-1961)

As a kid in the UK , I don't recall a stereo pop single much before about 1970, however..
Old 10th August 2018
  #165
Lives for gear
 
norfolk martin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
The "golden age of Hi-Fi" was still very much an upper-middle-class hobby. Another major factor in the rise of album sales was the requirement of separate programming for FM licenses in 1967 that put rock albums, rather than singles, on the air for the first time. This was followed by stores refusing to stock both mono and stereo records which was the end of people using record changers.
I still remember my dad changing the cartridge in the family record player to a stereo one ( with L+R shorted together) I continued to use the good 'ol autochanger until my older brother got a Garrard turntable with a magnetic cartridge and a Leak stereo 70 amp. Then the "record player" with its 4X6 speaker didn't sound so good, and I was reduced to begging my brother to use his gear.
Old 10th August 2018
  #166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Hahn View Post
With my parents, who were Depression-era teens, my mom bought records from the time she had her first job. I don't think my dad bought one ever.

He was good friends in high school with June Christie. And through her, he became a big fan of Tommy Dorsey. She'd comp him tickets when they played in Chicago or St Louis and he'd hang out with her and the band's boy singer, this skinny Frank guy. Never bought a record by any of them.
My dad's part of the record collection seemed mostly 78s from his college days before and after WWII (maybe more before, I think he was bulleting through after, eager to get a biz degree and join the growing economy). But after my folks divorced he bought a little record player (with a quad-capable cassette and four ticky-tack speakers, he apparently didn't pick up much hi fi consciousness from me). His taste ran along the lines of his earlier enthusiasms, big band, some classic jazz vocalists, some classical.

But one record he liked from my teen years: Harry Nilsson's first record (Pandemonium Shadow Show), probably because of the sharp brass arrangements but Nilsson's well-controlled, traditionally-informed singing probably helped. In the same period, my mom kind of liked the folkie parts of the first Jefferson Airplane album. (Buoyed by that, a few years later I bought her Carol King's Tapestry but it went right past her. She liked Neil Diamond a lot in the 70s, though. Go figure your folks' taste, eh?)
Old 10th August 2018
  #167
Lives for gear
 
Old Goat's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Hahn View Post
I forget -- at what point did 45 rpm stereo singles come in?

I think my mom was the only person I ever saw use a a changer with LPs. She just wanted music of whatever kind going, and didn't care that you couldn't play both sides of an album.
We always had a stack LPs on the changer at bedtime, ranging from Marty Robbins, Tom Jones, and Ray Price to the soundtrack from Jungle Book.

At one point, my brother and I crawled under the house to run a speaker wire to Mom's bedroom so she could hear without the volume on 9.
Old 10th August 2018
  #168
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
The "golden age of Hi-Fi" was still very much an upper-middle-class hobby. Another major factor in the rise of album sales was the requirement of separate programming for FM licenses in 1967 that put rock albums, rather than singles, on the air for the first time. This was followed by stores refusing to stock both mono and stereo records which was the end of people using record changers.
You're confusing "hi fi" with the explosion of FM in the late 60's. If that's what you meant, that FM radio drew a certain "new" market, I agree, but that's wholly separate from the golden era of Hi Fi, which was firmly rooted in the mainstream.

Whether it was "upper middle class" or not wasn't in your original assertion, plus, i'd argue there were plenty of "middle class" people participating in the lower end of the market at the time - driven by record clubs and mainstream media, like Broadway cast albums, and jazz recordings - Columbia being a pioneer. Everyone wanted in on the stereo craze, whether or not they were actually "in" is questionable.

I'd also argue the whole notion of the 70's as some sort of golden age of anything hi fi a total myth - sure, more males bought expensive stereo systems fueled by FM and concept albums - however, they took these systems home, in untreated listening environments, strung speakers any which way and set plants on them, put stuff in front of them - especially if the wives wanted them "hidden" These folks didn't really know what good sound was, nor care, as long as the systems played loud, and had a lot of boom and sizzle, they were happy.
Old 10th August 2018
  #169
Lives for gear
 
norfolk martin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
The "golden age of Hi-Fi" was still very much an upper-middle-class hobby. Another major factor in the rise of album sales was the requirement of separate programming for FM licenses in 1967 that put rock albums, rather than singles, on the air for the first time. This was followed by stores refusing to stock both mono and stereo records which was the end of people using record changers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
You're confusing "hi fi" with the explosion of FM in the late 60's. If that's what you meant, that FM radio drew a certain "new" market, I agree, but that's wholly separate from the golden era of Hi Fi, which was firmly rooted in the mainstream.
I think you're maybe discussing different eras. At least in the UK, Hi-Fi was regarded as a very non-mainstream pursuit until the late 60s /early 70s.

The "Hi-fi freak" was the butt of much British satirical humor in the early 60s

To quite form Flanders and Swan's "Song of Reproduction" (1958)

High fidelity,
Hi-Fi's the thing for me.
With an LP disk and an FM set,
And a corner reflex cabinet.

High frequency range,
Complete with auto-change.
All the highest notes neither sharp nor flat,
The ear can't hear as high as that.
Still, I ought to please any passing bat,
With my high fidelity.

Flanders: Who made this circuit up for you, anyway? Bought it in a shop? Oooh, what a horrible shoddy job they fobbed you off with with.
Surprised they let you have it in this room anyway, the acoustics are all wrong. If you raise the ceiling four feet... put the fireplace from that wall to that wall... you'll still only get the stereophonic effect if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard.

I see... I see you've got your negative feedback coupled in with your push-pull-input-output. Take that across through your redded pickup to your tweeter, if you're modding more than eight, you're going to get wow on your top. Try to bring that down through your pre-amp rumble filter to your woofer, what'll you get? Flutter on your bottom!


As for middle class......When I cleared out my in-laws house I found exactly one year of "hi-fidelity" magazine (1961) Why it was there became clear after a little thinking.

At this point, my father in law was a successful young doctor who was building his first (and only- he lived in it for 50 years) dream house. What does a successful young doctor need in a dream house in 1962 - a "hi fi" system! He was doing his research.

He ended up with 2 12" University sound drivers with co-axial tweeters in large built in enclosures, and a Bogen RP60 receiver, (22 tubes and a stereo decoder, in 1962! ) I also found several of the usual culprit early 60s hi-fi records ( "Profiles in Percussion" etc.)

Oddly enough, I don't recall my father in law ever liking "hi-fi" or music much. He mostly listen to Am radio with the tone control all the way down.

I still have the Bogen.
Old 10th August 2018
  #170
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
...She liked Neil Diamond a lot in the 70s, though. Go figure your folks' taste, eh?)
My mom too. My uncle was into hi-fi and my dad got some hand-me downs including a heathkit mono amp --best guess ac-9 with two 6l6 output tubes, and of course a single speaker to go with it--best memory it had an altec driver. Well, there was also a turntable that took 5 minutes to reach full speed--this was not a problem as my folks spent exactly zero time using this rig during my childhood.
Old 10th August 2018
  #171
Gear Guru
 

I sort of remember two "waves" of Hi-Fi

there was the 50's wave which was all about grownups with a lot of money and the big Macintosh amps and giant speakers. Usually a focus on classical or jazz.

Then there was the 70's wave which was still components but more about younger people into rock. Fisher amps and AR speakers! I agree with Bob this was more of a guy thing. And totally an album thing. I think I purchased one 45 after 1968.

Whereas in the early 60's it struck me at parties and such that a female was the owner of most of the popular single records and of course the owner of the 45 changer that folded up into a suitcase.
Old 10th August 2018
  #172
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
My dad was definitely in the '70s hi fi wave. I think he had some big Polk speakers or something. One of the Technics turntables is still around here. I still have his LP collection. And the CD collection from the '90s, when we also had a massive sub-woofer for a while. Definitely rock-genre stuff. Classic rock.

My mom was more about cassette tapes and CDs, completely different genre more of ballads and folky types of things, some classical.
Old 10th August 2018
  #173
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mahler007 View Post

Questions:
1. What is the *creative* role of a producer, and where, as an artist, does one draw the line for creative control?
Okay, here's my opinion that I've held firm since beginning to record in 1958......

The creative role of a producer is exactly the same as the title "executive producer(s)" on shows/movies I'm involved with. Specifically... some executive producers get their name on the credit cuz they introduced someone to someone, have been granted a little piece of the action, no nothing about producing in the slightest sense, or... know a lot and are/were very hands-on at various levels......

same randomness in record producing throughout the history of history.

But let's say in a recording project situation, a guy is designated as producer in creative totality.... he/she has final say on what's happening as soon as "record" is punched.

What's that guy's role? He's the driver. He decides where the track goes ....

.....maybe he decides that the song in demo form was perfect as is..... he'll do whatever he thinks needs to be done (ie... telling the engineer how he wants the track approached)......or...... the creative "in-charge" producer may decide that the artist's track needs a different speed, horns, strings, lead guitar instead of the artist demo harmonica..... and this type of producer generally, probably, maybe, imo... has done a bazillion sessions and as such, has a bazillion finished track memories in his head (and how he got those to sound that way) .... and..... the artist/record company/etc.... sought out this producer because of those abilities to sound such and such a way.

As with the tv/film "executive producer" analogy, you also have guys who have no idea how to produce a record and on a fluke....do a great job for "artist Bill". Or conversely, are such bad guides, that the so-called producer brought in simply and absolutely screws up the entire project in the artist etc mind and never works again in this town once the reputation gets around.

Where is the line drawn in regards to the "say" of a producer in relation to the artist desires?

That one is the simple one. Read the contract.
Old 10th August 2018
  #174
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
I sort of remember two "waves" of Hi-Fi

there was the 50's wave which was all about grownups with a lot of money and the big Macintosh amps and giant speakers. Usually a focus on classical or jazz.

Then there was the 70's wave which was still components but more about younger people into rock. Fisher amps and AR speakers! I agree with Bob this was more of a guy thing. And totally an album thing. I think I purchased one 45 after 1968.

Whereas in the early 60's it struck me at parties and such that a female was the owner of most of the popular single records and of course the owner of the 45 changer that folded up into a suitcase.

My dad owned a chain of stores in the 1950s (sort of like I guess what Sears became) and as such, we always had cool stuff in our home.

In circa 1958, hi fi was a huge thing and there were numbers of fantastic...and very loud.... stereo (yes stereo) systems flying out of those stores into middle class homes.

The behemoth Zenith sf177r for example .... which looked like two very large pieces of furniture... in white wood..... was around 100watts, several 12", 5" and tweeter combinations between the twin powered cabinets.... a cobramatic record player (stereo) and built in am radio (no fm tuners in the family stores until 1966).

The record companies were also dumping h-u-g-e numbers of albums and singles out to my Dad's stores...to of course showcase the music being played on the gorgeous range of stereo "furniture". Also of course, to play on the littler stuff.

I couldn't keep up with listening to/deciphering all the records....although their presence... and the massive presence in the stores of tape machines by VM (after all, taping birthdays out of sync with your super 8 silent movie film was a thing in the 40s/50s)..... was the primary reason that I developed the engineering bug. I was a guitar player, I had all this music, all these tape machines, all this film equipment, and these incredibly loud, beautiful sounding hi-fi stereos at my fingertips... at home.

These were not gearheads buying this 1958 stuff. The buyers were the post-war (wwII), and post-post war (korea) families who wanted the good life in their new houses....... and there was nothing better than listening to a well-produced Johnny Mathis Christmas album in 1959...... or Percy Faith...... or even slapping on a Bobby Vee album and hearing "Take Good Care of My Baby" with the volume cranked to 11.

Yes...11. Upper and upper middle class America in 1959 knew the great effect of music at 11 on great sounding equipment.

As they also well understood watching Bonanza on Sunday nights on a color tv... even if everything on the air Mon-Sat was in black and white.

I personally don't remember Mcintosh until about 1963 and Fisher around 1961 or so. I first noticed component systems in actual guys' homes around 1965... and the people I knew with those systems were jazz guys, some of them really really in to listening to Gene Krupa on those systems.

The trickle down imo of the large, great sounding 1958 "furniture" systems with the fairly well matched components (at the time) was that I could slap on a mono 45 of say, "Sherry" by the four seasons in the summer of 1962.... and that thing at 11 was a monster sound.

By the time 1967 rolled around, and you stuck a mono 45 of say, "Baby You're a Rich Man" onto the cobramatic, the volume could be cranked to 11 and the Rik bass at the beginning of the tune could blow out windows in houses 3 houses away...... things were getting good at that point!

And then the gear just got better and better after 1967 imo..... which seemed to me to work in tandem with live pas getting better. Too bad Claire Brothers didn't get into the home stereo biz the same time they pulled their miracles on live sound...... they would've really cleaned up there as we all moved into 1969-70 and onward into the future.
Old 10th August 2018
  #175
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Hahn View Post
I forget -- at what point did 45 rpm stereo singles come in?
The first one I bought was MacArthur Park in the spring of 1968, followed shortly (June I think) by a 45 by the Fireballs called "Going Away". Those were the first two I noticed. Whatever happened earlier just slipped my radar.
Old 10th August 2018
  #176
Lives for gear
 
jmcecil's Avatar
As many have pointed out, the word "produced" associated with the word "producer" has gone an extended lifecycle to the point that the word "producer" now includes a kid with a laptop and some loops/samples trying to put them on a grid. But in the older sense, where creative packaging of the product was the main (not only) connotation, I found pretty much everything done in the 80s to be overproduced. IMO it was the start of true homogenization of music as a product. Compression and EQ took the breath/life out of recordings and left a flat, dead mishmash of same sounding crap across the dial.

In the original post, Steely Dan was mentioned as being well produced. I would argue that although the results are incredibly good, it was a result of over production, i.e. that's not what it sounds like. It has to be processed to death to get it there. I'm not saying its a bad thing by the way. I am a SD fan. As the use of studios grew, the use of the studio as a part of the creative process grew. And more of those guys who supposedly knew how to create and package a sound (producer) grew as opposed to the producer who was there to get it ready for broadcast. Those may sound the same, but the knowledge and purpose associated with each is completely different. To me, this was a very 70s thing. And as I stated earlier, taken to the point of musical destruction in the 80s. Although I'm mostly a late 60s through the 70s music lover, there is music I like musically from the 80s that I can't stand sonically due to how awfully overproduced they sound. You can literally tell that the song was redone after it was recorded. I'm a huge Rush fan, and Power Windows has some great songs. But the album just sounds dead and lifeless. That's just one of a thousand examples. Of course a bunch of people will chime in with it's the best sounding rush album I'm sure. LOL
Old 10th August 2018
  #177
Lives for gear
 
robert82's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by norfolk martin View Post
Flanders: Who made this circuit up for you, anyway? Bought it in a shop? Oooh, what a horrible shoddy job they fobbed you off with with.
Surprised they let you have it in this room anyway, the acoustics are all wrong. If you raise the ceiling four feet... put the fireplace from that wall to that wall... you'll still only get the stereophonic effect if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard.

I see... I see you've got your negative feedback coupled in with your push-pull-input-output. Take that across through your redded pickup to your tweeter, if you're modding more than eight, you're going to get wow on your top. Try to bring that down through your pre-amp rumble filter to your woofer, what'll you get? Flutter on your bottom!
I imagined this being spoken rapidly by John Cleese.
Old 10th August 2018
  #178
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post

there were plenty of "middle class" people participating in the lower end of the market at the time - driven by record clubs and mainstream media, like Broadway cast albums, and jazz recordings - Columbia being a pioneer. Everyone wanted in on the stereo craze, whether or not they were actually "in" is questionable.

This is absolutely true. But a high percentage of the middle/upper class were plowing insane amounts of money into high-end (at the time as long as it was basically shaped like a color tv) stuff.

Columbia was shipping 30-40 demo albums/singles per week to my Dad's stores. The other companies were doing it too, but Columbia dwarfed everyone else.

And 30-somethings, Vegas rat-pack-minded 40-somethings...... ate this stuff up.

As we know, that entire thing was Clive Davis' brainchild and he was running that entire Columbia operation and its record club thingee (that by the way, was almost impossible to get out of once you joined). My Dad's stores, which also carried other records, would experience massive record sales of the other stuff there.....after all, Clive was providing a lot of great variety..... in high fidelity stereo..... but he/Columbia didn't have everything.
Old 10th August 2018
  #179
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mahler007 View Post

Well Produced
Steely Dan- the songs are impeccable, and perhaps perfect. Great, musically interesting songs and arrangements. Pristinely recorded and presented without any sort of pretentiousness. I like 'em, although I wouldn't consider myself a "big fan."
Soooo..... here is something you can explore in your mind.

Gary Katz was calling the producer shots within the foursome team of Gary, Roger, Walt, and Don. And then he exited after Gaucho, still friends with the guys.

What do you notice about SD tracks that Gary produced? What do you notice about SD tracks that Gary didn't produce?

What did Gary actually do in the day-to-day work, considering the autonomy and vision that Walt, Don often directly conveyed to Roger? After all, Gary wasn't even there a lot of time.

This can be an example of how indefinite the definition of producer can be.
Old 10th August 2018
  #180
Lives for gear
 
jmcecil's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenoodle View Post
Soooo..... here is something you can explore in your mind.

Gary Katz was calling the producer shots within the foursome team of Gary, Roger, Walt, and Don. And then he exited after Gaucho, still friends with the guys.

What do you notice about SD tracks that Gary produced? What do you notice about SD tracks that Gary didn't produce?

What did Gary actually do in the day-to-day work, considering the autonomy and vision that Walt, Don often directly conveyed to Roger? After all, Gary wasn't even there a lot of time.

This can be an example of how indefinite the definition of producer can be.
This is a great example of the loose use of the word "producer". And it's even worse now than before. I consider SD songs to be over-produced in the context of using studio production techniques as opposed to just recording a great band. SD just happened to be great musicians, using great studios with great engineers. And for some reason got the latitude to "produce" (re-engineer) the recordings.

While the "producer" was likely just there to coordinate release marketing, single select, b side selection, touring promotion events etc. In other words, there to represent the label instead of actively involved in the recording process. Although for some reason, I thought Gary was actually more involved with the "sound" of SD as they polished the multis. But, I'm not googling anything .. just going off recollection which is probably faulty.
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
EthanBass / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
4
jdjustice / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
8
trickydicky / The Good News Channel
4
indie / The Good News Channel
6

Forum Jump
Forum Jump