Who does what?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike wrote:
> Hello -
>
> I've always been curious about the different roles of the people
> involved in the production of a recording:
>
> Producer - does this person actually have input into the music? What
> else?

A producer (as assigned by the label) oversees the project and oftentimes helps choose music (if the
artist does not write), makes sure the sessions are flowing well and offers input, which means he is
anywhere between a Nazi -- making it sound like HE wants, to a guiding influence (helping the band
achieve the sound THEY want/were signed for in the first place)

As a producer myself, I seek to help the artist by drawing them out of their comfort zone into a
place of creative excellence, either in writing new material or at least re-examining their current
material. If they still want to maintain their "vision" or whatever, I say okay and then strive to
help them achieve that. If they are open to new directions, I help guide them that way, too. And I
try to keep the sessions from bogging down. Sometimes I will hire players/singers to back up a solo
artist and that means writing charts, too, which I'll do if I need to. My job can also be
recommending a specific studio and even a specific recording engineer and mixing engineer (not
always the same person).

> Engineer - Is this the person running the big board?

Recording engineers capture the performances of the musicians; but they also are responsible for
dropping a part into the right place (unless you're doing cut and paste editing in digital realm).
For digital drop ins, they only need capture the "part" for later editing. They have assistants to
help them with the mic setups (where they direct assistant to find the right placement for a given
instrument), cueing the tape deck, getting levels and a bunch of other stuff, too.

Mix down engineers take the captured musical performance and work their skills at creating great
mixes, using eq to open up holes to drop sound into so there are no clashes of frequencies making a
muddy mess. It's their job to avoid the muddy mess -- unless you want that. Whether digital or
analogue, their job is to make a song sound the best it can, based on the material they have to work
with. This is the primary function, but there are other things they do, too.

And the unsung heroes of all studios that can afford them, the tech engineers, who keep all our gear
running and sounding great. They know this stuff the way a doctor knows the inside of the human
body. The studio is alive to these guys and they are charged with keeping it that way. God bless 'em
all!

> Person that does the "Mastered by" - this person sets all the levels?

The mastering engineer takes a "finished" mix of a song or group of songs and run them through some
really esoteric, often hand built one of a kind processing, all designed to help "sweeten" the sound
and balance the frequencies, essentially polishing that "diamond" to a brilliant lustre. From here
it will go to the manufacturing process.

These are, of course, the short answers and there are often many other functions these folks cover
during the course of a session.

--fletch

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 9 May 2005 10:22:26 -0700, "Mike" <tetrickm@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Hello -
>
>I've always been curious about the different roles of the people
>involved in the production of a recording:

> ...

Question not answered by others, and presuming this is a musical
recording (as opposed to spoken word, Foley, nature, or whatever else
kind of recording there might be):

>I'm sure there a few other that I can't think of right now, but what
>specifically is the job of each of these? Who else is involved in this
>process (generally speaking)?

One or more musicians, hopefully.

>Thanks a lot!
>
>Mike

-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>Has anyone directed him to the Mixerman Diaries?


No one has mentioned that yet. Maybe I'll google it.

Thanks!

Mike

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 10 May 2005 11:33:50 -0700, "Mike" <tetrickm@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>One or more musicians, hopefully.
>
>That was utterly useless.

You'd be amazed at how many recordings would just as well have not
been recorded because of not only lack of good musicians, but als lack
of a musical composition good enough to be worth recording. I've read
so many others talk about it here and found it to be true.


>>http://mindspring.com/~benbrad­ley
>
>So is this. Nothing there.

See what I mean?

-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <apd281llq4sqifvcrkike41mviirbkto9i@4ax.com> ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net writes:

> You'd be amazed at how many recordings would just as well have not
> been recorded because of not only lack of good musicians, but als lack
> of a musical composition good enough to be worth recording.

True, but that's what the producer is supposed to take care of -
fixing the songs so that they're good and getting musicians that can
play them well. There's a small problem with bands not wanting to give
up control though, because they think they're great when they're not.

I just heard a bluegrass band in a bar last night. They'd be pretty
good if the all learned how to play backup, if the guitar player
didn't write (and insist on singing) such dumb songs, and if at least
one of them learned how to play a lead. I didn't buy their CD.




--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo