Bring Them On Back Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 How did they get that sound on Heartbreaker, when they're all pounding their instruments after the solo, and for a couple of seconds it sounds like the speakers are gonna blow, and I don't think they just played loud and heavy coz I've heard other songs where they do that and the sound still stays pretty clean. I love it though. And are there any recording companies still around that do it like that, instead of cleaning everything up into little even boxes and perfect notes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpat Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 How did they get that sound on Heartbreaker, when they're all pounding their instruments after the solo, and for a couple of seconds it sounds like the speakers are gonna blow, and I don't think they just played loud and heavy coz I've heard other songs where they do that and the sound still stays pretty clean. I love it though. And are there any recording companies still around that do it like that, instead of cleaning everything up into little even boxes and perfect notes? No. ProTools does not allow for any dirty sounding music. But seriously, I kid. I'm sure they are out there. The much-maligned "grunge sound" sometimes was able to capture that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlanetPage Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 Couple Articles here: Eddie Kramer/Chris Huston Led ZEP II http://forums.ledzeppelin.com/index.php?showtopic=10606 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonzoLikeDrumer Posted May 29, 2009 Share Posted May 29, 2009 How did they get that sound on Heartbreaker, when they're all pounding their instruments after the solo, and for a couple of seconds it sounds like the speakers are gonna blow, and I don't think they just played loud and heavy coz I've heard other songs where they do that and the sound still stays pretty clean. I love it though. And are there any recording companies still around that do it like that, instead of cleaning everything up into little even boxes and perfect notes? How did they get that sound on Heartbreaker, when they're all pounding their instruments after the solo, and for a couple of seconds it sounds like the speakers are gonna blow, and I don't think they just played loud and heavy coz I've heard other songs where they do that and the sound still stays pretty clean. I love it though. And are there any recording companies still around that do it like that, instead of cleaning everything up into little even boxes and perfect notes? Hmmm.. That's a good one! This song was recorded back in 1969 (late) and the type (sonically) of recording gear that was around was very common from studio to studio. You see, there were very few studio's out there that could/would do what was done on that album. In fact I would say that no one (at that time) had tried a lot of what your after, if you want to try a duplicate it. There where typically only 2, 4, 8 and some 16 track recorder's back then, there where sync machine's that would allow more that one tape machine to work together, you will lose one track from each recorder in the process. But if you have two 8 track machine's you can still get 13 usable audio (one needed for test tone's) track's. The thing is that Page was using multiple track's for his guitar(s) to give it a big, full sound! So, if you have 3 double guitar track's, well, that's 6 track's right there, so you can see that with all the other instrument's and singing track's you can run out of track's real quick if you only have a dozen or so to work with. That being said and being that 16 track tape machine's where brand spanking new in 1969 (only some studio's had them) this sort of thing was unheard of at that time. As far as gear goes A&R had 4 different studios in New York at that time and I don't know witch one they made the tune at. There was a lot of info I found doing a few web searches saying that one of the studios had an Altec board one had a custom (made by CBS's tech's) console and the other had a Neumann desk and I couldn't find any more than that about console's. To me it sound's as there is a lot of compression/limiting going on in there, a few different brand's of unit's around in the late 60's included Uri, Universal Audio, Focusrite and and some others. As far as studio's around now that still do analog (high end), most still use that same gear but other thing's have changed the way recording's are made now a day's. It's all about how it's used! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ro_a Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 How did they get that sound on Heartbreaker, when they're all pounding their instruments after the solo, and for a couple of seconds it sounds like the speakers are gonna blow, and I don't think they just played loud and heavy coz I've heard other songs where they do that and the sound still stays pretty clean. I love it though. And are there any recording companies still around that do it like that, instead of cleaning everything up into little even boxes and perfect notes? That occurs at the end of the solo, where the instruments stop and just before they come back in with Robert, right? I've thought about that many times. It sounds like an B-3 organ noise but there is no organ elswhere on the track. It also sounds a bit like a reverb spring, not like the one in a Fender Twin but one of those plate reverbs that's installed in the building and rather large.. I dunno. I've never seen one. Good question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evster2012 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Hey Rokarolla! Yeah, Page has said that the plate reverb was all over those albums. The question can be raised if it was even one session. We know the acapella solo was doved in (even in a different tuning/tape speed). Take 4 meets take 8 so to speak, with some tape manipulation in the mix. What I find fascinating is how some things we pick up on their albums are contrived, and others are glitches they just left in. Chatter and all. That's the fun of it really, innit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Hartman Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Hey Rokarolla! Yeah, Page has said that the plate reverb was all over those albums. The question can be raised if it was even one session. We know the acapella solo was doved in (even in a different tuning/tape speed). Take 4 meets take 8 so to speak, with some tape manipulation in the mix. What I find fascinating is how some things we pick up on their albums are contrived, and others are glitches they just left in. Chatter and all. That's the fun of it really, innit? Welcome back. I agree, tubes and titties and beer ELLO? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonzoLikeDrumer Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Hey Rokarolla! Yeah, Page has said that the plate reverb was all over those albums. The question can be raised if it was even one session. We know the acapella solo was doved in (even in a different tuning/tape speed). Take 4 meets take 8 so to speak, with some tape manipulation in the mix. What I find fascinating is how some things we pick up on their albums are contrived, and others are glitches they just left in. Chatter and all. That's the fun of it really, innit? Yes, it may have been a strong reverb on a track that was bleeding over from another. In fact, I think I remember being able to adjust the head stack on the tape machine to practically "ghost" one track that was adjacent to another, via calibration change's. But I still go with a strong compressor, leveler or limiter setting with a time based effect (witch would be a reverb or short delay/ecco) to set it out from the other tracks. I really have not touched an MTR in many years, most of the hi end analog recorders I used was when I was in college in the late 1990's so I'd have to go back and ask some one or check some of my note's from tape calibration class to be 100% sure. I did read that the part in Whole Lata Love where you can hear Robert's voice in a double before he scream's "Loooooovvvvveee!" Was indeed from a previous take that was bleeding thru and they liked it and kept it in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evster2012 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 WLL has both backward echo and bleed from bed tracks. Robert sang with the bed tracks, which were performed live in the studio. You can hear lots of examples on the first album. Essentially what you're hearing is Robert's voice coming through the drum and ambient mics in the room. Since they got onto the instrument tracks, they couldn't be scrubbed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonzoLikeDrumer Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 WLL has both backward echo and bleed from bed tracks. Robert sang with the bed tracks, which were performed live in the studio. You can hear lots of examples on the first album. Essentially what you're hearing is Robert's voice coming through the drum and ambient mics in the room. Since they got onto the instrument tracks, they couldn't be scrubbed. How would they get into the instrument tracks? Unless there where live monitor's in the other room's and they didn't edit any of it out or do any over dubbing at all. I would hate to think how loud headphone's would have to be set to get that much bleed into an open microphone at least 10 feet away. I would also think that being that Bonzo was such a hard hitting and loud drummer that the spot microphones would have been set sorta low. Maybe I'm wrong but, when I think of live in the studio I think, separate all the instruments/singer(s) in different room's and keep all the track's as one stereo mix to the tape machine (like a front of house mix). I'm not trying to be an ass here but I think what I read about tape bleed thru or adjusting the head stack to get a ghosting effect would be a good explanation, with what they had to work with at that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evster2012 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 How would they get into the instrument tracks? Unless there where live monitor's in the other room's and they didn't edit any of it out or do any over dubbing at all. I would hate to think how loud headphone's would have to be set to get that much bleed into an open microphone at least 10 feet away. I would also think that being that Bonzo was such a hard hitting and loud drummer that the spot microphones would have been set sorta low. Maybe I'm wrong but, when I think of live in the studio I think, separate all the instruments/singer(s) in different room's and keep all the track's as one stereo mix to the tape machine (like a front of house mix). I'm not trying to be an ass here but I think what I read about tape bleed thru or adjusting the head stack to get a ghosting effect would be a good explanation, with what they had to work with at that time. Photos from the studio sessions show them all in one room with simple baffles between them. Crude and primitive perhaps, but that's how they did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonzoLikeDrumer Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Photos from the studio sessions show them all in one room with simple baffles between them. Crude and primitive perhaps, but that's how they did it. OK I see now, I sure am glad I didn't come up recording in that studio! You just have to just hope for the best I recon. Thanks for the pic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evster2012 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 OK I see now, I sure am glad I didn't come up recording in that studio! You just have to just hope for the best I recon. Thanks for the pic! No prob! There are some better ones, but my scanner and all my pics are in storage. I'm sure there's plenty here who could post a wider view that actually shows all the gear in its collective cubbies. But yeah, what a sound they got with that! Especially when compared to the sounds of the day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonzoLikeDrumer Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I remember seeing some old pictures of the Beatles in a studio (Abby Road ??) in England, when they where doing some of there mid/late 60's recording's and it was quite the same type set up, one big room and some gobo's (sound proofed divider's) separating the areas that the different microphones where set up in. Maybe this is the same room at A&R's New York studio where Paul McCartney did "Uncle Albert", that's what I found when I was doing the web search for the OP in this thread. It states here http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_paul_mccartneys_uncle/ that there was a custom made Altec vacuum tube console. I didn't find any pics of the McCartney "Ram" session's but it is the same studio so odd's are good that that's the same room "Heartbreaker" was recorded, just a little more than a year later as McCartney's "Ram" LP was done in early 1971. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evster2012 Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I'd have to check if they ever recorded at A&R. but you can be certain the setup was similar at Olympic, Electric Ladyland, or Sunset. Regardless, it was always in a big room, and that's where the bleed comes from. As for "Woman, you need..." "At one point there was bleed-through of a previously recorded vocal in the recording of “Whole Lotta Love.” It was the middle part where Robert [Plant] screams “Wo-man. You need it.” Since we couldn’t re-record at that point, I just threw some echo on it to see how it would sound and Jimmy said “Great! Just leave it.” Eddie Kramer I hope that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonzoLikeDrumer Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I'd have to check if they ever recorded at A&R. but you can be certain the setup was similar at Olympic, Electric Ladyland, or Sunset. Regardless, it was always in a big room, and that's where the bleed comes from. As for "Woman, you need..." "At one point there was bleed-through of a previously recorded vocal in the recording of “Whole Lotta Love.” It was the middle part where Robert [Plant] screams “Wo-man. You need it.” Since we couldn’t re-record at that point, I just threw some echo on it to see how it would sound and Jimmy said “Great! Just leave it.” Eddie Kramer I hope that helps. Yes they did record part of Led Zeppelin 2 at A&R and I'm sure I read that "Heartbreaker" was one of the song's they did at A&R New York. Apparently they where doing a lot of live show's in 1969 and recorded that album on the road style, at different studio's. Thank goodness for test tone's and VU meter"s! http://discography.ledzeppelin.com/disc_lz2.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timothy5151 Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 I'd have to check if they ever recorded at A&R. but you can be certain the setup was similar at Olympic, Electric Ladyland, or Sunset. Regardless, it was always in a big room, and that's where the bleed comes from. As for "Woman, you need..." "At one point there was bleed-through of a previously recorded vocal in the recording of “Whole Lotta Love.” It was the middle part where Robert [Plant] screams “Wo-man. You need it.” Since we couldn’t re-record at that point, I just threw some echo on it to see how it would sound and Jimmy said “Great! Just leave it.” Eddie Kramer I hope that helps. When I first heard Whole Lotta Love I thought that bleed through was intentional and not accidental. I like in the song. It show just how different and diverse Zep material was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.