"Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

Well maybe links was a bad choice of words. I just meant some kind of proof in one way or another. I have no personal knowledge of the list you have given. Musical listening preferences and all that. So we seem to have little common ground upon which to base a discussion.

And you can think all you want...won't help you know me or what I know. My knowlede is considerable as a musician of 20+ years, hundreds of gigs and hundreds or hours of recording experience.

I'm not knocking producers or engineers. Good ones are worth their weight in gold. It's always good to have an impartial set of ears to help keep you grounded.

But the statement...."artist picked ones generaly sound like ass." ...paleeze...unless you can saythat you were there...how could you know?
 
Last edited:
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

I talk to several engineer's on forums, and 3-4 on AIM and MSN, notable ones being Andy Sneap, James Murphy, Neil Kernon, 2 of the guys who did the Roadrunner United disc, and most recently, Flemming Rasmussen.

All the discs they did where they didn't have a final say in the tone ended up with asstastic tone.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

I won't take an absolute stance on this issue, because it is not that simple.

However, insistence that "your" amp is best for the mix can be a risky proposition. You have to know how the rest of the mix sounds.

Example: An endorsee of Line6 once reported that he recorded a GREAT bass tone using a particular POD setting. It was one of the best he'd ever recorded, in his opinion. Then he continued recording the other instruments. When he was almost finished, he realized that his "killer" bass tone was muddying the mix and NOT contributing. He changed the amp setting on the POD Pro, and cleaned it up.

It is not enough to sound good; it must sound good relative to the rest of the mix.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

What is re-amping? Do all the gutar tracks have to be recorded again?
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

Jeff Dunne said:
I talk to several engineer's on forums, and 3-4 on AIM and MSN, notable ones being Andy Sneap, James Murphy, Neil Kernon, 2 of the guys who did the Roadrunner United disc, and most recently, Flemming Rasmussen.

All the discs they did where they didn't have a final say in the tone ended up with asstastic tone.

This sounds more like hero worship to me. I have heard a few of those records they are hardly examples of good guitar tone.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

Kyuss_Rock said:
What is re-amping? Do all the gutar tracks have to be recorded again?

My understanding of re-amping is when you record the guitar straight. Then patch it onward to an amp. This way you can play-back the pure signal, into different amp, each day of the week. It leaves a major door open as the sound can be soooo tweaked while you're not there. But it can save you if the performance is killer, but the tone is bad.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

LesStrat said:
I won't take an absolute stance on this issue, because it is not that simple.

However, insistence that "your" amp is best for the mix can be a risky proposition. You have to know how the rest of the mix sounds.

Example: An endorsee of Line6 once reported that he recorded a GREAT bass tone using a particular POD setting. It was one of the best he'd ever recorded, in his opinion. Then he continued recording the other instruments. When he was almost finished, he realized that his "killer" bass tone was muddying the mix and NOT contributing. He changed the amp setting on the POD Pro, and cleaned it up.

It is not enough to sound good; it must sound good relative to the rest of the mix.

this is wisdom.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

If you want to use your amp, that should be fine. If its not, then that is the producers problem and he can deal with it how he likes. Giving in to His demand that you Not use your amp, isn't an issue of Pride. Its an Issue of artistic integrity. As an Artist you should be Doing Whatever YOU feel is necessary you the point of YOUR song across. And if that means using a Freakin Gorilla practice amp for part of one song, Then so be it. A Good producer will understand this, cause they're job is To make sure To do justice to the song. And As an Artist That is your Job to.
Just like the Producer Should understand that sumtimes The Crappier Idea is actually The Better One (in terms Of what will make the song work best). An artist needs to also understand that Sumtimes YOUR idea isn't the BEST idea. Just because you wrote the song Doesn't mean you really know whats best for it. Once you play a song for a single other person it ceases to be yours, and it Belongs to the world. Don't worry about whats Right for you, but whats right for the song.
If someone suggests "This amp might work better for this part" Then try it out. If it does work better, Then it should stay. Pride should have nothing to do with this. If it doesn't work, It should go No matter who's amp/idea it is.



And also, Who ever said (basically) "if you wanna Be in the big leagues you gotta play the game, and give up your pride". That is the Single stupidest thing i have ever read on this forum.
If you want to Be part of a passing trend, and Be famous for 3 years, and then disappear into no where. Then Yes You should most definitely Give up all self respect and suck some corporate Chicken.
But If your making art, For the sake of making art (which is the Only real reason to do it). Then you should NEVER give up your vision. If you Truly Believe That Sumthing isn't working, Then You shouldn't Let it be. If it Really truly isn't right for the song, then Fight To keep it out.
Look at the Most Important Musicians/artists. And you'll see The ones Who Truly changed the world, and really had an effect on music. Are the ones who were making music Because they loved it (money just happened to be a nice side effect). I mean Even the Beatles, The Biggest band in the world at they're time, the most famous people on the face of the earth, STILL did what ever they wanted.
You think the record company wanted them to Release Revolver? No F**Kin way! The record company would have LOVED if they'd continued making Hard days night, and Love me Doo, Over and over and over. But the Beatles did what they wanted to do, and made the music they wanted to make. And STILL sold millions of albums.
Now on the other hand you have Poison, or any other 80's metal band, who Did basically whatever it took to Get famous and rich. Without really caring What kinda of music they had to make. Most weren't making music Because they loved it. They were making music because they wanted money, and chicks and to be on television.
Now That they aren't "the big thing" anymore. They are Basically a Joke to most people. They gave Up artistic integrity For the sake of making a buck, and being on t.v. And They influenced Basically No one in the long run.
Playing the Record companies games will get you signed faster, and get you famous faster. But just as fast as that fame and money and contract comes, It goes away again.
If your playing music, It should be To play music. Anything else that happens because of it should simply be a side effect. I respect a guitarist in a bar band that Never gets signed substantially more than I respect some jacka** on Mtv who sold his soul to get on television.
If your playing music to make money, You should really get into real estate instead. You'll have a much longer career.

thats it.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

I think this is a great thread because I wish I had something like this to help me when I started out.

It comes down to this - philosophies and opinions aside. A player is rarely both player and coach (unless your name is Bill Russell).

When Pat Riley or Phil Jackson call the plays - you shut up and play them, and play them right or you hit the bench (worse, you hit the showers). So think of it that way.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

Jeff Dunne said:
The Metallica DVD covers the Black album... and honestly, I don't see why it's so revered for it's production. The only things I like are the drums to an extent, and the vocals... the guitars are way too thin/quiet, and the drums are toooo ****ing loud.

Whenever I listen to the Black Album(not often), I end up having a headache. I don't know what it is, maybe some harsh frequencies coming out? I can only listen to 1 or 2 songs in headphones.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

Personally i love the Black Album sound. Its not a sound i particularly want but i think it is well produced, and to me the sound on that album can only be Metallica.

Anyways, on topic, if i had a producer give me some amps to use, hell yea i would have a field day playing with them seeing what i can do. If i dont like the sound coming out of the moniters though i would wanna try my amp aswell though.

Jeff
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

I would ask if we could do both at the same time on seperate tracks. Use a splitter or stereo chorus pedal to split the signal to both amps. It never hurts to have options...

I don't think most producers would have a beef with my amp. It's a classic design and they probably wish they had one in their studio just like it.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

Jeff Dunne said:
I talk to several engineer's on forums, and 3-4 on AIM and MSN, notable ones being Andy Sneap, James Murphy, Neil Kernon, 2 of the guys who did the Roadrunner United disc, and most recently, Flemming Rasmussen.

All the discs they did where they didn't have a final say in the tone ended up with asstastic tone.

I guess the part I don't understand is if these guys are such masters why are they needing to reamp things? They should be getting it right the first time. How much talent does it take to keep redoing things until they guess right?

I have always recorded a direct track along with the amp for exactly that purpose. But, if these guys are going to tell me my gear isn't up to snuff sight unseen and insist on their stuff they better damn well get it right the first time.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

TheArchitect said:
If I am paying for the session, I will use what I want. Unless we are talking about obviously inferior or broken gear its all about the engineers ego and comfort zone. Its one thing for me to know a Vox would be great on a track but not own one and use the studio's amp. Its quite another for an engineer to say "I don't like Marshalls, your going to use my Mesa" He has no idea what my artistic intent is, he is just being lazy. The one single possible exception to this would be if the money is really tight and there is no time to get sounds. Using gear the engineer knows will save time.

Read an interview in Guitar Player with Paul McCartney....it was about the recording of his latest album. The producer discouraged Paul from playing the guitars Paul wanted to play and over and over encouraged him to play guitars he didn't want to play. In the end, I think Paul agreed with the producer...

Lew
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

Lewguitar said:
Read an interview in Guitar Player with Paul McCartney....it was about the recording of his latest album. The producer discouraged Paul from playing the guitars Paul wanted to play and over and over encouraged him to play guitars he didn't want to play. In the end, I think Paul agreed with the producer...

Lew

That's a gutsy move to make.

Can you imagine being in that position?

"Yeah Rev Gibbons...sounds decent....but I'm not sure 'Pearly' is cutting it the way I'd like to hear it. Got any others that maybe we could compare it to?"

....balls the size of Rottweilers to be able throw out that line.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

Skarekrough said:
That's a gutsy move to make.

Can you imagine being in that position?

"Yeah Rev Gibbons...sounds decent....but I'm not sure 'Pearly' is cutting it the way I'd like to hear it. Got any others that maybe we could compare it to?"

....balls the size of Rottweilers to be able throw out that line.
:laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

Lewguitar said:
Read an interview in Guitar Player with Paul McCartney....it was about the recording of his latest album. The producer discouraged Paul from playing the guitars Paul wanted to play and over and over encouraged him to play guitars he didn't want to play. In the end, I think Paul agreed with the producer...

Lew

And this is why we have cookie cutter BS for new music. Artists allowing producers to shape them into the same comfort zone as all the other acts they work with. At what point was it decided that it was necessary to hand over the family jewels to record an album? Since when have musicians become so inadequate and brainwashed that they can't think for themselves anymore and have to relay on everyone else to make decisions for them?? I'm not interested in the producers vision. I am interested in the artists' vision. We aren't talking about rap albums after all. So Paul was happy with the album. Great! Do you really think he would have been any less happy with it had he used different instruments? Highly unlikely but we would have heard what Paul McCartney was wanting to do. Instead we hear what the producer wanted.
 
Re: "Not in my studio!" / "I want this sound."

TheArchitect said:
I guess the part I don't understand is if these guys are such masters why are they needing to reamp things? They should be getting it right the first time. How much talent does it take to keep redoing things until they guess right?

I have always recorded a direct track along with the amp for exactly that purpose. But, if these guys are going to tell me my gear isn't up to snuff sight unseen and insist on their stuff they better damn well get it right the first time.


The only album I mentioned that was reamped after recording it with the artist was Kreator's Enemy of God - originally recorded with a Recto, but it ended up sounding muddy and overgained in the mix. Reamped with a 5150, problem solved.

The other albums were recorded by other engineers, direct tracks sent to them along with the bass, drum, and vocal tracks. It allows them to not have the mix ruined by **** guitar tones that they'd otherwise have no control over.
 
Back
Top