\"hair\" on early Beatles, Zeppelin tracks?

[PC]

Hi, Can anyone explain the nature of the internal sounding distortion on early drum tracks by Beatles and Zeppelin stuff (just to name a few). The distortion doesn't seem to be on top of the sounds, it seems to be within the sounds. Specific examples are:

Saffoy Truffle (spelling?) White Album--drums
Any of Zeppelin II--drums

these may be rookie questions, but I wonder if it is tape saturation (selective to the instruments?) tube pre's or classic compression units...

any help would be appreciated
PC

 

[svs95]

Hi, Can anyone explain the nature of the internal sounding distortion on early drum tracks by Beatles and Zeppelin stuff (just to name a few). The distortion doesn't seem to be on top of the sounds, it seems to be within the sounds. Specific examples are:

Saffoy Truffle (spelling?) White Album--drums
Any of Zeppelin II--drums

Well, a good processor will put the distortion into the sound. I don't know what the lads at Abbey Road were using on the White Album, but certainly the compressor could have created a large part of that sound. And no doubt tape saturation contributed as well (may have helped glue the sound together). But the bigger part is probably the compression.

As for Bonham's kit on all the Zep stuff, it's no longer a secret how that sound was crafted (well, aside from the tasty licks themselves, and the bodacious mic job), as their main engineer happens to have been interviewed by UA for their premiere issue of the Webzine!

Here's a link http://www.uaudio.com/webzine/2003/apri ... tent8.html

these may be rookie questions

No such thing. Anybody who respects quality when he (or she) hears it, and wants their recordings to sound that way is showing the "right stuff" IMHO!

Good luck!

svs95

 

[MPC]

...also you may want to check out gear by Chandler Ltd

http://www.chandlerlimited.com/

They copied and created pre's and limiters inspired by much of the Abbey Road Studios equipment. A little expensive but great sounding....the limiter is killing and REALLY captures the sound of later Beatle stuff if used in the right way.

 

[Eurocide]

As for Bonham's kit on all the Zep stuff, it's no longer a secret how that sound was crafted (well, aside from the tasty licks themselves, and the bodacious mic job), as their main engineer happens to have been interviewed by UA for their premiere issue of the Webzine!

Here's a link http://www.uaudio.com/webzine/2003/apri ... tent8.html
svs95

In this article it is very interesting to see how he layers several tracks of the same drum instrument.
How did they avoid phase problems? :-s

 

[svs95]

In this article it is very interesting to see how he layers several tracks of the same drum instrument.
How did they avoid phase problems? :-s

I think he means he fed the same drum tracks to multiple mixer channels, and on one he'd have no compression, while on another he'd have compression, and he'd cheat the compressed tracks into the mix. Pretty common idea before mixers had dedicated send loops. It's not the same as using less compression. You can use a heavily compressed track and cheat it into the mix, and it will alter the sound less destructively than using lighter compression on the main tracks. The impact of the uncompressed attack and sustain is there, while the tonal bloom of the compressed sustain and decay fill out the sound, make it "hairy," give it a sense of room and make it bigger than life.

svs95

 

[svs95]

In this article it is very interesting to see how he layers several tracks of the same drum instrument.
How did they avoid phase problems? :-s

Oh, you mean the room mics? If I read him correctly, I think he's saying that he uses room mics specifically to get phase decorrelation, which on drums makes them sound bigger. He doesn't mention phase, per se, but apparently he was digging the sound he got from drums bleeding through other mics, and was turning those up a lot to get the effect, which led him to put up a pair of room mics from then on.

It would have been too much work to delay everything else to match the delay in the room mics. I think if he was bothered by that, he just wouldn't have used it. So it must have been essential to the sound he was after.

In a DAW, you can just slide the tracks to line 'em up. But maybe you don't want to do that, if this is the sound you're after!

svs95

 

[PC]

very interesting...
many of my questions have been answered and thanks for the replies. Any other articles that might be of service?
PC

 

[baikonour]

This late beatles drum sound is legendary right? the secret seems to be coming from the EMI mixing desk from Abbey road... different version has been used during the 60's, the original ones where valve based then they switch to the transistorized version around 69. The american company Chandler made some outboard gear faithfully based on these designs ( you can get the pre, the mono comp and the amazing stereo limiter TG...) it's not cheap stuff but it's really well made (point to point etc.. and british military spec electronics) On the new version of the limiter (which is the key element in this british drum sound) you can even increase the overall saturation level...What get me real excited is the fact that they are going to release a 16x2 (6000$) mixer using the same class A circuitry...it will be a great companion to a DAW running the UA plugs.
By the way, this original desk has been used to record Echoes and Dark side of the moon too...as well as some other great late 60's recordings.
It is now siting in Mike Hedges' studio in France.

 

[svs95]

I don't want to hijack this topic, but I have an interesting tangent. Skip it if you're not interested!

the original ones where valve based then they switch to the transistorized version around 69.

...and according to some people that was "the day the music died," the beginning of the end of good recording. Within a couple of years, tube gear was considered crap, and the pro studios wouldn't go near it. Transistors had conquered the world! Of course, they were VERY GOOD transistors. And hooray to Chandler for reissuing that stuff!

But there were curmudgeons then who said the same thing people are saying today about "digital." Of course there was some crap transistor stuff and some crap tube stuff. Just as there's crap digital and good digital.

If you want an illuminating illustration of this mindset, from a surprising source - I mean an otherwise respectable engineer who just went on a wild rant one day. It was Walter Sear in Pro Sound News about seven or eight years ago. The article was "Look What They've Done To My Craft" or something close to that. It began with the rant about transistors, then digital, then project studios, etc., and there was a parallel rant about the demise of artistic talent as well. I mean it was just ugly. Coming from a guy whom the industry had been very verry good to, it was a very unflattering peek into a sour psyche.

This really put it all in perspective for me, that all this noise is really about resistance to change. I think Walter enjoys the notoriety that article brought him. Of course it didn't win him any new business.

You have to adapt to change, and if you're really good at it, you can actually influence its direction. The essential thing is to cope with it and find ways to make it not adversely affect the quality of your work. The even better way is to find ways to allow it to improve the quality and efficiencyof your work. That keeps you mentally sharp, in demand, and happy all at the same time!!!

The silly thing is that Walter Sear knows that, and is one of the ones who's very good at it. But after the article, we all know he's holding his nose as he does it. What a sad existence!

svs95

 

[svs95]

very interesting...
many of my questions have been answered and thanks for the replies. Any other articles that might be of service?
PC

Yes, a bunch of them, but I can't remember where they were.

You might try here http://static.highbeam.com/p/prosoundnews/ and use the Research bar. It will return articles from Mix, EQ, and a bunch of others. Just enter drums mic compression or some such combination, or drum tips - anyway you get the idea.

Good luck!

svs95

 

[baikonour]

Yep, you're right, there's no ultimate technology and the music business is really conservative.
to comeback to the transistor vs valve debate, you're right again, there are a lot of misconception about it. And yes transistor can sound wonderful, the only exception seems to be with guitar amps though!
i really fancy this Chandler mixer now...

 

[akisd28]

And yes transistor can sound wonderful, the only exception seems to be with guitar amps though!

There's also an exception to that: Randall. Very specific sound, though.

 

[nowhereman]

Yeah, I always loved that nasty sounding snare of Ringo's. I have gottne sorta close using a distortion plug, but it just ain't the same. the overcompression idea intrigues me. Any suggestions on where to start as far as plugs go, LA2A or 1176 or fairchild, or does it really require hardware Tube compressor?

 

[Ashermusic]

Perhaps my very favorite sounding snare is Ringo's on \"Run For Your LIfe\".

 

[Eurocide]

Yeah, I always loved that nasty sounding snare of Ringo's. I have gottne sorta close using a distortion plug, but it just ain't the same. the overcompression idea intrigues me. Any suggestions on where to start as far as plugs go, LA2A or 1176 or fairchild, or does it really require hardware Tube compressor?

Have you already tried the 1176 in all-buttons-mode? Sometimes difficult to tame, but great results.

 

[nowhereman]

Yeah, I always loved that nasty sounding snare of Ringo's. I have gottne sorta close using a distortion plug, but it just ain't the same. the overcompression idea intrigues me. Any suggestions on where to start as far as plugs go, LA2A or 1176 or fairchild, or does it really require hardware Tube compressor?

Have you already tried the 1176 in all-buttons-mode? Sometimes difficult to tame, but great results.

No I haven't tried that. Any suggestions on atack and release settings? I will play around with that tonight.

 

[nowhereman]

Yeah, I always loved that nasty sounding snare of Ringo's. I have gottne sorta close using a distortion plug, but it just ain't the same. the overcompression idea intrigues me. Any suggestions on where to start as far as plugs go, LA2A or 1176 or fairchild, or does it really require hardware Tube compressor?

Have you already tried the 1176 in all-buttons-mode? Sometimes difficult to tame, but great results.

Tried it last night and it works like a dream. Crank the input knob and the nastier it gets. Thanks so much for the tip. I used it on a snare in BFD that I just really wasn't thrilled with. It really makes the snares and drags come alive.

 

[Eurocide]

Fine, to help musicians of a completely different music style from mine.

 

[nowhereman]

Fine, to help musicians of a completely different music style from mine.

Hey man, that's what it's all about 8)

 

[akisd28]

1176LN is always my first choice for BFD snares, its fast attack and release times give a snare the perfect punch. Now, crank it up and you get the \"hair\" you want!