Hey yah,
Producers can take a lot of credit for shaping the way a band sounds- I mean, we've all heard before/after examples and sometimes it's like night and day- the producer, almost without fail, gets the sound that puts the band on the map.
Sometimes their influence is so strong, you'll hear very little recognisable contribution from the band/artist anymore- but you couldn't deny the quality of the finished product.
Tons of my favourite bands, particularly in NZ, are self-produced. As much as I love glossy, 'name produced' music, I love the honesty/earnestness of bands that have done it themselves- but I don't think it's always a conscious decision, more that the artist is indifferent to 'production' as a musical concept. And if we're all happy with the music anyway then there is no issue.
How many musicians here have worked with a producer before? How would you describe the process to someone who's never worked with one before?
Do any music fans here collect records made by their favourite producers?
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Technorati
As an artist - song writer - it's is ...
As an artist - song writer - it's is extremely easy to get into arguments with a good producer. The reason is a good producer will have ideas, they will want to push a drummer to try new fills, they will encourage a guitarist to experiment with different strums - they will basically try to get the musicians to try new things. Often that will result in sounds that wern't in their earlier stuff - but in the end it should always be the artist decision what stays or goes . A bad producer would either be some one who has no input at all (aka engineers) or a producer that forces their oppinions onto the band.
As far as having a favourite producer - I am a huge fan of Ben Grosse (Sevendust - Animosity, Fuel - Something like Human) and will always check out anything he is invovled with.
The thing is, what would prompt a band ...
The thing is, what would prompt a band to subject themselves to that? Most bands who have it together enough to be considering a decent recording wll have their best 12 songs so finely honed that they have effectively self-produced... How does a band come to the decision that they need a producer?
IMHO- I had a tour around one of London's best recording studios recently (courtesy of Wainuiomata, cher cher bro) and I was gobsmacked at the dizzying heights the recording process can reach in places like this- entire walls of blinking lights, cables, parameters... Then I pictured a young, freshly signed four-piece in there, with their guitars and a song or two, trying not to shit themselves... A good producer knows how to speak 'engineer' as well as they can speak 'musician', and would be absolutely invaluable in such an utterly alien environment.
The tour was a pleasure mate, you up ...
The tour was a pleasure mate, you up for that drink sometime this week . ??
Schweet... see you Tuesday. We must ...
Schweet... see you Tuesday.
We must check out that NZM chatroom thingy, dude...
For those of you who don't know, Wainuiomata does security for Air Studios, George Martin's recording studio in North London. He gave me a tour of the place a couple of weeks ago, and I'm still grinning ;-) I got introduced to Eddie Kramer. I got introduced to EDDIE KRAMER! OMIGOD!!!
i think you nail the nail here - "more ...
i think you nail the nail here - "more that the artist is indifferent to 'production' as a musical concept. And if we're all happy with the music anyway then there is no issue."
many bands here produce their own stuff because they really know the sound they're after already. or they just enjoy the producing/mixing/mastering process and will never relinquish it ("cold dead hands" comes to mind when i think of how much i enjoyed putting our album together, especially having a go at mastering my own songs).
i raise a quizzical eyebrow when some bands go with a producer not for the sound the producing might bring with him or her, but because they are a big name and people will listen no matter what. i've got a friend who was in that position a while back ... i'm not sure it worked out ... producer of the Strokes no less ...
but yeah, i've liked really like Alan Moulder - i mean, his range, from Curve's stuff, to the Clean's Vehicle - wow, he has some ears on him. holy cow. but the thing was i didn't realise i loved his work until i actually bothered to look at the thirty % of my record collection that he's done. then i realised i was a fan. but it's not like he has a definite sound ... like great movie mood music, he's in the background and you don't notice until you look at the liner sleeves.
(cleanie here waffling, as usual)...
(cleanie here waffling, as usual)
Oh no, waffle away ;-) /i raise a ...
Oh no, waffle away ;-)
/i raise a quizzical eyebrow when some bands go with a producer not for the sound the producing might bring with him or her, but because they are a big name and people will listen no matter what.
In many ways, it is a stamp of authenticity, really- I think that without even pressing 'play', producers have as much a profile/image to maintain as the bands they work with- so to have landed a session with Alan Moulder (to me) automatically spells quality, without question.
I was watching an MTV documentary the other day (embarassed to say this) about some US pop-diva's sister, who was looking to follow in her sister's footsteps and make a multi-platinum record... no doubt the show will help record sales, but I found the relationship between her and her producer really interesting: 'This is my producer, we're working on some of my songs'... from what I could see, she was the voice- that's it. No songwriting there... producer was doing the chord progressions, beats, arrangements- EVERYTHING else, yet she still thought of the songs as 'her songs'... whats up with that? Was she naive/deluded? I guess it's different for different musicians- the less you come up with, the less control there is to dispute- and if her only contribution in the first place was her voice, then she's not compromising, and maybe she can rightly say they were her songs... or can she? I don't know...
Christ, you mastered your own ...
Christ, you mastered your own material?? As far as I can tell the two key things about mastering are having swotted up on a lot of technical physics / acoustics shtuff and having amazingly accurate monitors & mastering gear. I'm very happy to have that step out of my hands, even if the rest of what I do is self-produced (sorta necessarily, as grusome points out downthread).
re mastering - i only mastered two ...
re mastering - i only mastered two tracks, and it was very heavy indeed. i used a software programme (http://www.t-racks.com) that did all of the hard work and provided an really excellent GUI that simplified a lot of things that might usually cancel/drown each other out.
but yeah, two tracks was enough - ears went un-fresh after a while. the rest of our album was done conventionally with a brilliant audio engineer and band members yelling stuff at him. + uber monitors and audio genius's training.
Mastering is traditionally something ...
Mastering is traditionally something that you deliberately pass off to someone else- I remember something Shane Carter said about getting his recordings for 'I Believe You Are A Star' to 98% bang-on using his own time & gear, then passing it off for mastering. So getting it to a point where you're as happy as you're able to get on your own steam, then letting the mastering guys do there magic. FWIW I think I Believe You Are A Star sounds absolutely fantastic.
(I think he actually talked about it here on NZM somewhere... link?)
it's absolutely incredible the ...
it's absolutely incredible the difference mastering can make, and that's why i didn't understand why it was traditionally given away to someone. i can understand it in the case of making an album sound like a unit that was recorded at the same time, but there's a weird logic involved in the mastering process that means some elements from the background of the mix suddenly leap out the front, others get compressed to hell ...
i've found that after mastering, songs hold little resemblance to the mixed version. if you are lucky and get someone skilled who knows what you're after, they will take the multeity and complication of the mix-down and pass an algorhythm over it (well not exactly that, but very close to it) that brings out exactly what you like. i'd never want mastering done by anyone who didn't have a member of the band there. it's so all-pervasive and omni-altering, the master-er ends up being a member of the band by default. in its own way, it's more sound-altering than a conventional mix.
i totally turned my nose up at mastering until i witnessed it and did a little myself. i thought it was only the icing on the cake, but it is in fact applying heat to the raw ingredients.
i'm all raving and absolutist and more idealist than usual because we were mixing some tracks last night ... holy hell i love this whole process. i feel like i've just fallen in love very hard. i feel religious. Everyone Should Be In A Band!!!!! well, at least try it.
//Everyone Should Be In A Band!!!!! ...
//Everyone Should Be In A Band!!!!! well, at least try it.
I started drafting the songs behind the song titles I have in the Rock Star Game last night when I couldn't sleep - does that count?
sure as hell does! i'm a firm ...
sure as hell does! i'm a firm believer that everyone has a hit tune inside of them, same as everyone has a novel inside too. or is that everyone has a navel?
//everyone has a novel inside too. or ...
//everyone has a novel inside too. or is that everyone has a navel?
My navel is on the outside, not the inside, although it is an inny.
i do...
i do
anchio...
anchio
Perhaps instead of calling them ...
Perhaps instead of calling them 'producers' we should call them 'airplay preparation assistants' bacause to me all they're doing is making averybody's albums more acceptable to mainstream listeners...
you ain't heard the dust brothers?...
you ain't heard the dust brothers?
yeah regularly.. they seem more like ...
yeah regularly..
they seem more like remixers than 'record producers'
but then, in electronic music, a producer is someone who makes music, i.e a music programmer/composer/not a DJ.
I don't think that's always the case, ...
I don't think that's always the case, even with producers working with bands. Did Nirvana's shift from Butch Vig to Steve Albini make 'In Utero' more radio friendly sounding than 'Nevermind'?
In general musicians who get involved in production are not trying to make something radio friendly, maybe that's a worthwhile distinction? George Clinton produced almost all the Parliament and Funkadelic recordings, but I severely doubt he was getting stressed about that kind of thing.
i think with artists who get into ...
i think with artists who get into production later on, there isn't as much of a hidden agenda, that could be the difference, but its all speculation really...
it would be interesting to know if Nirvana, The Smashing Pumpkins, U2 etc.
would have sold just as many records if they had used lesser known producers... its impossible to tell,
especially considering the current NZ number 1 single is 'Crazy Frog'...the music-buying public are way too fickle to care who's produced what - thats the job of the minority (the ones that actually listen to and appreciate music as an art form)
I also think technology has caught up with producers a great deal, it's a hell of a lot easier to self-produce a record nowadays. . . .
Um, don't think that's about being ...
Um, don't think that's about being fickle at all. Those who buy singles are generally in their early teens. Did you give a shit about who produced what when you were 12?
But yeah, the influence of producers on how something sold (rather than how it sounds) is definitely just speculation. I was thinking about U2 and their Eno / Lanois years... I'm sure that meant a lot to the critics, and the stories definitely add to the myth of the band.. but whether you care about that myth ultimately comes back to whether you care about their music in the first place, I'd say. Actually, I guess it changes how you listen though.. feedback loop..? Chicken and egg?
Actually, even Steve Lillywhite earlier on was a big name of sorts (and he started with Simple Minds at the exact same time they turned into U2 clones).
//Did you give a shit about who ...
//Did you give a shit about who produced what when you were 12?
of course not - but my point (with recent additions) was that for perhaps 90% of music buyers (of all ages, good taste or otherwise) the producer has little to do with whether they buy a record or not , at least in a conscious sense ... quite likely the production technique may enhance the songs appeal, but the person who likes the song just thinks 'i like that bands new song' and thats as deep as they go...
i'm really brainstorming out loud here .. ..
i've often thought there is a strange ...
i've often thought there is a strange dicotomy with the general public sucking up loads of cheesy crap records on one hand but on the other hand they respond to and buy the strongest 'best' records by a popular band hence say U2 - most successfull albums J-tree A-baby and ATYCLB. that has to have something to do with the producer in U2's case Lanois and Eno. the cream rises and that has to to with the producer for sure?? i think people hear that stuff on a subconcious level and they respond naturally
/'airplay preparation ...
/'airplay preparation assistants'
I think it depends on the project. You intend to record & release a single- naturally, it might need that kind of an approach, which is quite focused, quite specific, and all about matching what other bands have got on the radio. But IMHO it's the full length album where a good producer really gets to show what they're capable of. In terms of a body of work that represents a journey or singular artistic statemet, a producer can really help the consistency from song-to-song and contribute a 'sense of the whole' which can be a real challenge for any band to come to an agreement on by themselves.
first off most people in indie bands ...
first off most people in indie bands don't know what a producer is / does.... they have a vauge idear but they don't really know. Songwriters have a tendancy to be over precious, so people don't want to tell them straight. the producer is the boss, the man in charge, the guy that carry's the can, if the record sucks it's his fault. it's like the coach of a sports team, the players don't get the blame - the coach does.
producers know how to make records, or they should. Bottom line is the producer should make your song sound better than if you produced it yourself, if you don't beleive that then you should just do it yourself.
In theory the producer is a pro with lots of experiance, like an architect, lawyer, docter.....
but in some cases is more like a real estate agent.. hahaha
- says that they are working for you, but they are really working there own agenda (read, making a 'hit' record for the major label who is paying them heaps)
*disclaimer - just my opinion*
i suppose what you want out of your ...
i suppose what you want out of your recording dictates whether to use a producer, or which producer to use. . . it's just another ingredient in the cake that you present to the public...
// Do any music fans here collect ...
// Do any music fans here collect records made by their favourite producers?
I can't say I collect records by producers, but I do pay attention to various producers' outputs. Mostly that's with artists who are also producers, eg. John Paul Jones, Scott Walker, Jim O'Rourke.
Also quite like Nigel Godrich. Never ...
Also quite like Nigel Godrich. Never going to make me buy something by Travis, though. :P
[ http://www.nigelgodrich.com/discs.htm ]
Nigels been working with Paul Mc ...
Nigels been working with Paul Mc Cartney .. that should be interesting.
i think the discussion kinda falls into ...
i think the discussion kinda falls into two scenario's
1. DIY - paying for it yourself... anyone here paid an engineer and a producer too work on the same project? the producer/engineer is very handy in this instance - someone that can do both
2. record company's - they are always going to want a producer of some repute, a formula one team would not hand over the wheel to some never herd of rookie for a big event.... it's kind of like a form of insurance for there 100's of thousands of pounds. There is always the exceptions - bic runga's first album. I remember reading about the beta band getting told off by there record company for self producing a shitty debut album.... that was the story at the time
we gotta realise that in the best ...
we gotta realise that in the best circumstances, bands seek out producers to basically be another member of the band. i.e. George Martin - when you hear him talk about Sgt Pepper's, you realise he was an equal and a collaborator ...
(unless someone can come up with a quote where John bags him big time and calls him a knob-twiddler)
George was the fifth Beatle, he had as ...
George was the fifth Beatle, he had as much input into the band and the songs as the four guys had, I'm sure of that, mind you George as I'm sure you know has produced quite a few other bands. He started off at Shabbey road doing comedy records .. Beyond the fringe etc, he also did that song with Peter sellers and Sophia Loren .. godness gracious me .. he also did Blow by Blow and Wired by Geoff Beck, he's done over 700 albums .. he's retired now and more than alittle deaf .. but still a real gentleman, if he sacked me tomorrow I wouldn't say a bad word about him.
dont so much collect albums he's ...
dont so much collect albums he's produced but it just so happens that David Bottril has produced some of the finest albums I own... Mudvayne (End Of All Things To Come), Tool (Aenima/Lateralus), Muse (Origin Of Symmetry)... wonder how much it'd cost to fly him out to Karekare for a few weeks? ;)
i thoughtt rick costly did that muse ...
i thoughtt rick costly did that muse record.
I make records for a living so maybe my ...
I make records for a living so maybe my input could be helpful.
My role as producer of a record means I have some things to take care for the band in the same way that perhaps a manager takes care of things. Perhaps its not within the scope of their knowledge, or that they're busy touring, or they simply can't be fucked dealing with certain details when they have a record to write and make.
I'll talk to the band about how they want a record to sound and find and book a studio that suits the band and the budget. I'll talk to the band about gear and source kits, amps etc if they're after something they can't find. I'll go to shows and listen to demos and try to spot weaknesses/strengths so I can have a better idea how to approach the recording for the best results without wasting time and frustrating the band.
In the studio I'll try to make the band as comfortable/uncomfortable as possible....whatever it takes to get the best performance.
I'll be ready to offer advice based on instinct or experience if asked if something isn't quite right or if they're unsure. I will listen to all ideas and try to accomplish them quickly even if for the 100th time this year I hear a bass player say 'whadabout a wah on the drums?'
I will act as a go between for the band that perhaps has difficulty comunicating for whatever reason. not uncommon.
Often its not healthy for band members to be pushing other members for better drum or vocal takes....its far better for a 3rd party to take the shit and the anger and the frustration because at the end of the record the producer goes home, not back into the tour van for the next year.
Thanks Hollis, that's great stuff....
Thanks Hollis, that's great stuff.