Better Producers/Engineers

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

Matrixmusic <kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote:
>I am soon to teach Music theory and Ear training for students in their
>early 20's.
>I am asking for feedback for the following question.
>"Do people with a background in music such as playing an instrument,
>make better
>producers/engineers?"

I'm not sure how anyone can do any production work at all without a
musical background. At the very least they probably need to be able
to read a score, at most they may be called upon to do full arrangements.

As far as engineering work goes, it sure helps to be able to read a
score and have some musical feel. But it's nowhere near as much of an
issue as it is for the producer.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

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

Matrixmusic wrote:
>
> I am soon to teach Music theory and Ear training for students in their
> early 20's.
> I am asking for feedback for the following question.
> "Do people with a background in music such as playing an instrument,
> make better
> producers/engineers?"

Not necessarily. Someone "with a background in music such as
playing an instrument" may make a different kind of producer
or engineer for producing music than someone with a
background in theatre (diction, etc.) whose ear training is
mostly in the production of excellent speech - such as might
be necessary for V/O or narration.

Someone with a background in an instrument may actually be
doing themself a disfavor by touting that because there is a
tendency for that experience to be manifest in a preference
for that instrument to the neglect of other important
elements. I had an experience 30 years ago when applying for
a recording engineeer job at a large toy manufacturer
located in Los Angeles. They asked if I played an
instrument. When I told them my training was in vocal
production with exposure to piano, organ, woodwinds and
brass (not just listening to them, but learning to play them
with only limited proficiency), I also asked why they were
asking. They said that they didn't want someone with a
concentrated background in one instrument and they preferred
someone with either no instrumental training or very broad
exposure.

In another instance while taking some recording engineering
coursework (before the days of Full Sail, but contemporary
with IAR) in LA (anybody remember Ragu - he did some work on
some of Glen Gould's late 60s into the 70s recordings) -
during a class discussion the same question came up. Ragu
also opined that having an instrumental preference or
training wouldn't really hurt, but had to be carefully
constrained. If one's expertise is as a drummer, their
effectiveness in recording/producing a piano trio might be
compromised. When you're on someone else's clock, one can't
waste time getting on the 'net to ask "How do you guys
record a piano trio? I'm getting paid to do this and have no
idea of how to start?" The next sound you hear may be the
sound of the sidewalk slapping the soles of your shoes.

Match the skills to the job.

BTW, if you're going to be teaching early 20s-somethings,
spend a lot of time convincing them to get those ear buds
out of their ears, turn down the volume, and listen to some
real music produced by real instruments. Ear training is
vital, assuming they have any hearing left.



TM

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

"Matrixmusic" <kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:1124728193.009889.159720@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I am soon to teach Music theory and Ear training for students in their
> early 20's.
> I am asking for feedback for the following question.
> "Do people with a background in music such as playing an instrument,
> make better
> producers/engineers?"
> kevin doyle
>

I don't think a person has to be a musician to be a good producer. In fact,
sometimes it's just the opposite (if you're talking about making music for
the masses). Where they do have trouble is having the vocabulary to tell you
what they want. So I think they have to have a musical ear but not
necessarily be an accomplished performer.

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

Matrixmusic wrote:
> I am soon to teach Music theory and Ear training for students in their
> early 20's.
> I am asking for feedback for the following question.
> "Do people with a background in music such as playing an instrument,
> make better
> producers/engineers?"
> kevin doyle
>

I am a musician and a producer and an engineer.

As a musician, I understand the function of a producer, to elicit the best performance from the
musicians. And, if the producer is going for a specific "style" of musical expression, it is my
function to deliver what he wants in the way he wants. And I understand the function of an engineer,
to get the music down to tape/HDD/etc. in the best (and often least intrusive) way possible.

As a producer, I push musicians to explore different approaches to the songs they've written. I want
to help them pull the best performances out and print them to tape/HDD/etc. I have produced
players/songwriters and always encouraged them to re-think how they are approaching the song, if
only to confirm the approach they have taken is the correct one. The musician in me can often show
them my ideas -- how I hear the song -- in an effort to get them thinking outside their patterned
writing "style", to expand that style to incorporate things they might not otherwise have thought
were possible. I want to help them pull the best melodies and rhythms possible, so the song will
sound great.

As an engineer, I understand how to print music to tape/HDD/etc, getting the best levels, best sound
using the most appropriate mics and pres, etc. In mixing down a song, I understand the relationships
and interplay between instruments. While I may have a different idea of how a song should be mixed,
I don't force that upon the artist/producer. I will, however, ask if they wouldn't mind if I show
them how I hear the given song.

--fletch

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

T Maki wrote:

> Someone with a background in an instrument may actually be
> doing themself a disfavor by touting that because there is a
> tendency for that experience to be manifest in a preference
> for that instrument to the neglect of other important
> elements.

This can be very true.

A producer needs to be able to judge a recorded performance from a FAN'S
emotional perspective as opposed to a musician's technical standard.
Some factors overlap however I've run into many musicians who were prone
to overproduction because of their preconceptions about what is or is
not the right thing to do musically. Being a musician doesn't qualify
one to be a produce a record any more than being an actor qualifies one
to direct a film. Some directors have previously been fine actors and
some producers have previously been fine musicians. A lot of the great
ones also haven't. It's just a different set of experiences and skills.

--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com

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

zxffl;jsdopisfd wrote:
> As long as you're not telling all guitarists they need to be playing a
> Paul Reed Smith with .11 strings on the out-of-phase pickup position
> through a Mesa amp set thus-and-so for it to sound right. It sounds
> like you might possibly have a bit of tunnel vision about the guitar,
> dunnit?
>

I never said anything about a preference for one specific guitar setup,
and certainly didn't imply that one setup should be used for all
recordings. Quite the opposite...since I've played on so many guitars
and amps and cominations of the two, I know how to achieve a wide
variety of sounds....therefor if I want to get a twangy sound, I might
use an older tele through a 59 bassman, if I want a lot of crunchy
distortion I'll probably use an LP or SG through a JCM900, if I want a
warm jazzy sound I might pick a d'angelico through a roland jazz chorus
or even a classical guitar...likewise, if guitar isn't appropriate for a
song then take it out, replace the melody with piano or brass or
whatever is appropriate.....How is that tunnel vision?

On the other hand, a producer who doesn't play an instrument would
likely have no idea how to achieve the sound they are aiming for with
that specific instrument, and therefor would just have to trust in the
musician's judgement to make it work....not always such a bad thing, but
it can be.

Jonny Durango

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

In article <jTxOe.656876$cg1.554846@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> olh@hyperback.com writes:

> A producer needs to be able to judge a recorded performance from a FAN'S
> emotional perspective as opposed to a musician's technical standard.

But doesn't a musician, too? If he can't judge his own performance
from the perspective of the audience, how does he know what makes them
enjoy what he's doing?

But I agree that the ability to play an instrument, even an instrument
that's part of the production, doesn't necessarily help a producer do
his job better. But on the other hand, I know that some producers have
been hired because they can play well and may be expected to play some
parts on the project for the sake of efficiency, or at least as an
illustration of where he's trying to move the sound or arrangement.

There have been times where, when my role was engineer but nobody was
the producer, I've picked up a guitar when the group seems to be stuck
on a song and suggested something like "Why not try playing the rhythm
this way instead of how you're playing it?" and that turned the light
bulb on.

--
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

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

I ihtink that you must be a musician to be a good producer, maybe not
to be an engineer in the classic sense, but modern engineering often
crosses that line.

For me musician means a specific thing. You can play an instrument
without being a musician. You can play an instrument extremely well and
not be a musician. It's possible to play an instument technincally
poorly and be a musician.

It's all another way of saying that to be a good producer or engineer
you have to be an artist.


I would strongly encourage anyone who wants to produce or engineer to
play an instrument and for that matter play in a recording session
where you are produced and/or recorded.

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

On 22 Aug 2005 09:29:53 -0700, "Matrixmusic"
<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote:

>I am soon to teach Music theory and Ear training for students in their
>early 20's.
>I am asking for feedback for the following question.
>"Do people with a background in music such as playing an instrument,
>make better
>producers/engineers?"
>kevin doyle

Sometimes musicians (and I can think of a recent example) make pretty
shitty producers.

Case in point, I had a session where the entire vibe of the producer
was "a big positive musical experience!" But what the band needed was
discipline, responsibility to the budget, practice and a sense of
direction. They knew when they played something well - they didn't
need him to tell them.

Not much actual help came from the guy who waved his arms around,
smiling, while the clock ticked. He'd miss the productive trajectory
of the session with anecdotes and musical ideas that interrupted the
flow. He'd play a bass part for the bassist that the bassist obviously
couldn't play, etc.

It's easy to blab about music and vibe and the song and all that
because most everybody has read the book or had a good experience with
someone who did that.

But the best producers see what is needed to "produce" (i.e. FINISH) a
recording that gives the best presentation of a band or individual. It
involves a lot of skills that may not be readily apparent to the
artist, but work in the service of the session and final product.

A lot of successful bands speak in retrospect about how clueless they
were for their first album and how there were various tricks pulled on
them to get great music out of their young asses.

The more bands and artists you work with, the better you get at
direction. It's not all about the notes you choose or the tone you get
- often it's about whether or not the producer let you record tired or
whether he won't let your girlfriend talk to you on the phone in
between solo takes.

Small stuff that adds to a bigger picture . . .




Kurt Riemann

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

"Rob Reedijk" <reedijk@hera.med.utoronto.ca> wrote in message
newsf2fir$jmu$1@news1.chem.utoronto.ca...

>>>But when it comes to picking takes, arrangement, making mixing decisions,
the producer leaves that to the musicians since they know what they are
doing. <<<

Where is that guy!!!? <g>