Another suggestion from the man who just has to say blue when everybody else say's red.
And this is for people who track bands.
Next time you've got a band to record.
1. Get them all (amps,etcl) in the same room.
2. No headphones (well maybe just for Talkback and click (even if you just use click at the beginning; i.e. running a few bars to refresh the tempo and then muting it once everybody starts to, play).
3. Set up the bass player next to the drummer...use a goboe (some sort of barrier.)between the drums & bass.
4. A-Piano- next to the bass, if it's a grand. face it so that the lid opens away from the kit. Also, if it's a grand...use mic the sound holes. Even '57's and 421's will work (if you don't have enough condensers).
5. set up gtrs, leslies, etc. opposit from the drummer.
6. find a good spot for one room mic (everybody elsis a little bit of a room mic...what with all of the good bleed you have.)
7. Good time to use my OH technique:
(Dead Link Removed)
after that, kick, snare, hat (optional) and toms (optional)
8. Close mic the bass (&/or DI), gtrs, etc,
9. Horns too, if your using them. Them (horns) and gtr amps can face the kit (semicicrle works)
10. Record several takes of the basic's. After doing the basic's for one song, punch any bad bass parts on the best take. If your using a DAW this is all real easy. If it's tape, wait until you edit together your takes (if you need to) then do you Fixes & OD's . DON"T MOVE YOUR BASS,GTR AMPS,etc until you have approved and touched up any problems ( for consistency of these tracks.) Also...if you punch any gtr's, etc. you'll need two tracks. one for the direct, and that Mono room mic I asked you to put up. This'll add abience to the overdub/punch that'll put it into the same land as the original.
Why do this exercise?
Well if you get it down (recording this way) you'll benefit in these ways:
1. The band we'll be playing more like they always have...they'll hear each other better and b e more on top of their game.
2. The tracks, with the bleed, will generally sound fatter with more vibe than the new traditional discrete OD sound.
3. Poinmts 1& 3 will make things gor fasterin the later OD & mix because you might tend to do less. Won't need to add as much verb to the drums, etc.
your results may vary but
have some fun..experiment.
Comments
That's pretty much what I did on my last rock band project and I
That's pretty much what I did on my last rock band project and I loved it! Only caveat is that because we did lead vocal overdubs later, I wished I had done a better job of keeping the scratch vocal out of the OH's. Lower vocal level in the room and aiming the PA speakers away would have helped. No biggie. Still came out great. The band was more relaxed for the absence of headphones and no sight lines blocked.
-kent
Originally posted by snappy: That's pretty much what I did on m
Originally posted by snappy:
That's pretty much what I did on my last rock band project and I loved it! Only caveat is that because we did lead vocal overdubs later, I wished I had done a better job of keeping the scratch vocal out of the OH's. Lower vocal level in the room and aiming the PA speakers away would have helped. No biggie. Still came out great. The band was more relaxed for the absence of headphones and no sight lines blocked.
-kent
Yeah..I didn't go into that....either the band plays with no vocals....or the singer sings in the control room and the other musicians who need to hear him/her wear cans(headphones). I know that this kinda goes back on the no cans thing but it's not too bad actually. You only have to dial in a little vocal, since there's nothing else going to the cans...besides click.
In the same scenario....I'd have the singer do all of the overdubs in the control room with the monitors...loud cans make people sing sharp. So for studio newbies, singing without them
can outweigh the benifit of singing with them.
If this is a rock band we're speaking of...then an sm57 is a great mic for vocals anyway.
Good idea! This singer was also a guitarist and I definately wa
Good idea! This singer was also a guitarist and I definately wanted to keep him in the same room, or I'd have done that. Another trick that has worked well is to route the vox to a small guitar amp or powered speaker run just hot enough to be heard by the players. Pretty much all of them benefit from some cues from the singer, vocal and visual. I've even done the screw-the scratch-vocal-belt-it-out-in-the-room-with-no-mic-etc. If you've got a real strong singer who can do it without blowing his or her voice out, this can be the best option for minimizing bleed; as long as you're not too big on keeping the scratch vocal. Rare is the one I've ever kept.
-kent
In response to RecorderMan's original post: I have worked as a m
In response to RecorderMan's original post: I have worked as a musician (well, drummer!) in this sort of setup, many years ago with one Tony Cohen who maybe some of you have heard of.
We were a very (very) raw band at that point, yet it enabled us to get surprisingly good recorded results onto the mutitrack. The whole session was really viby and we got it down with only a few takes. After that the project went down the tubes, but that't another story on which the statute of limitations has not expired.
The point is, it can put the band right at ease in what may be a very unfamiliar environment, which saves everyone a lot of time and aggro, and moves the focus from the room and the gadgets to the performances, which is what you want.
The trick is to keep the bleed between the instruments small enough that you can still mix it properly.
One variation we had was that a guide vocal went down with the track, and we used cans. However, this was only to hear the structure and emotion of the song, and the band performance was still essentially live. Worked for me...
chuck
Originally posted by max: tony cohen is my hero i definitely
Originally posted by max:
tony cohen is my heroi definitely go for the vox (+base) in the cans, and i find it very handy to talk the band through the song (eg "here comes the bridge", or "let's do that chorus again", or "your fly's undone", or whatever)
Yes Max. Again I also usually use cans. Too many benefits. But Since every body pretty much hears there instrument near them, it's way more familliar. (That's a good thing...no?)
:D
Any method that produces the desired results is good. For blueg
Any method that produces the desired results is good. For bluegrass, for example, no phones is usually the only way to go. You can often get great results with just a couple of mics, but sometimes close miking of each instrument will work better (if the players aren't that strong and some of the parts will need to be redone later).
Many different approaches can produce excellent results if you leave yourself open to all the possibilities.
I got a CEE DEE for you then.. Addy?? Well I did it this w
I got a CEE DEE for you then..
Addy??
Well I did it this way...
I recorded them live...two mics and full boar.
Then I put the headphones on the drummer of the two track raw. (remember..I had him do a 8 count start live for cue purposes..)
He payed with the phones..while I recorded him 2 track only..the whole album.
Then.
Live guitars and bass...playing to drum track...with 4 count..follow?? 2 track recording again. (3rd with di on bass..(cheating) Stereo ryth. guts/lead guts.
Next..the vocalist..no punches.
Vocal harm next.
Simple 7 track mixdown.
Master.
Good CEE DEE...real good CEE DEE!!!
Any you think you are a nut..
Now want me to describe that live 104 track recording I did?? (i hope not)
That bass rig in your description certainly excited the hell out of the snares.....zzcchhhuuuuuuzzzzzzzzzzz