Quantcast
Listening to cd's on my iPod and then came the Beatles...Weird! - Page 4 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Listening to cd's on my iPod and then came the Beatles...Weird!
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #91
Lives for gear
 
3rd&4thT's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
So much of art is about "kill the father." You could say that most of rock is.

I'm sure there was a generation of musicians who felt asphyxiated by the Beatles, and had to prove that they were worthwhile by detesting them.

James still has lots of time to figure out the Beatles, even if he isn't there yet.

You don't have to like the Beatles' production. We have some slutz who hate it.

But you can't ignore the songwriting, which is the most significant body of work since The Great American Songbook of the years between the two World Wars (Gershwin, Berlin, Porter, etc.). Seems strange to lump Lennon and McCartney in with the older bunch, but we are talking about 40 years ago. It was a different world.

Whether you can use the word "lame" in connection with the Beatles is another question. Time has already washed away most of their competitors and consigned them to the Nostalgia bin. But the best of the Beatles stuff is sturdy enough to last indefinitely into the future. You can call Revolver or Sergeant Pepper a lot of things, but "lame" ain't one of them. That's as strong as songwriting gets.

Cheers,
3rd&4thT
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #92
Gear Guru
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
3rd&4thT- I agree. It's important to distinguish between good/bad and like/don't like. I'm not a big Elton John fan. That doesn't mean I can't appreciate that he does what he does very well. I'm just not nuts about what he does.

Not liking the Beatles, while inconceivable to me, is a matter of personal taste. But it's impossible to deny their brilliance, their innovation, and the range of their influence.
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #93
Moderator
 
James Lugo's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Well so much for having an opinion around here. I can sing and play probably a 100 Beatle songs, made a living doing it for years in Florida. I've been lisnening to the Beatles since I was born, it's just not my thing. When I was 5, 1969, my brother got out of Vietman and moved back home and started a band and they did almost every Beatle song, the band rehearsed in my bedroom. Just wasn't my thing, I liked CSNY's Deja Vu'.

It doesn't make me less then anyone on this message board and I don't have to 'get it' one day to be complete.

Can we get back on topic? The topic was that the panning sounding weird in my earbuds it was not whether or not the Beatles were good.
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #94
Moderator
 
James Lugo's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I have one of the biggest days of my own songwriting career today (and that's not a jab) and this thread is kind of freaking me out and I need to consentrate and keep my eye on the ball. So I'm taking a break. Absolutely no disrespect if I don't respond anymore but I actually have to go out there today and do my thing musically and I can't be getting pissed off at this thread anymore.

Peace,
James
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #95
Lives for gear
 
3rd&4thT's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Best of luck on your thing today.

Kill 'em.

3rd&4thT
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #96
Lives for gear
 
taturana's Avatar
 
12 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
I dig 60's panning...

not that i mix like that today... as the standards change with time...

but listen to something like Cream's "I Feel Free", keeping in mind it was recorded with 4trks and no bouncing (or ping-ponging, as we used to call it) it's great, you can even know what tracked in each track...

I think the absolute panning had its time... and it's really fun to listen to .

as far as people who have speakers setup very far away from each other... it's their mistake, not the engineer.

You know James... I am a bit younger (38) and i had many walkmans since my teen years... and i used to love when a song came up and the panning was strange... maybe you just got used to the way we do things now. which is fine, but does not invalidate the earlier approach...

In that earlier approach they were probably trying to exacerbate the effect in order to sell more stereo systems, as most people wouldn't even know what stereo was. That and the technical limitations people pointed out.

A good song for listening on Phones would be Bjork's "Headphones"... amazing panning... probably done with phones... because it sounds quite binaural to my ears... and sounds quite better on phones than monitors. Put a good pair of phones, turn off the lights.. and enjoy (which is another real cool tricky production in that same album)

That said, listen to Abbey Road, for an example of an amazingly recorded Beatles LP, which IMHO is sonically superior to most anything i have heard in all these years... in almost every sense.
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #97
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by James 'LA' Lugo ➑️
Well so much for having an opinion around here. I can sing and play probably a 100 Beatle songs, made a living doing it for years in Florida. I've been lisnening to the Beatles since I was born, it's just not my thing. When I was 5, 1969, my brother got out of Vietman and moved back home and started a band and they did almost every Beatle song, the band rehearsed in my bedroom. Just wasn't my thing, I liked CSNY's Deja Vu'.

It doesn't make me less then anyone on this message board and I don't have to 'get it' one day to be complete.

Can we get back on topic? The topic was that the panning sounding weird in my earbuds it was not whether or not the Beatles were good.
James, perhaps I misunderstood, and I hope I haven't miscommunicated. Like the other guy above, I don't think anyone HAS to like the Beatles. But I do agree that appreciating their talent is almost a prerequisite for being a musician, just as an appreciation for what Miles Davis did, or George Jones or Bob Wills or Bob Marley or Bob Dylan or Beethoven or Sinatra. But, does everyone have to LIKE the music these people did? Heck, no. Including the music of The Beatles. No harm there.

I was merely suggesting that IF you had interest in knowing what Beatles fans were so wild about, Beatles LOVE and the Anthology would be the two best places to explore that. If you have no interest, no problem. I hope I wasn't miscommunicating that I thought that James Lugo HAD to love the Beatles for some reason.

Anyway, good luck with your day...
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #98
Gear Guru
 
theblue1's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRobb ➑️
No. The monos are not collapsed versions of the stereos. They are different mixes. With different balances and different amounts of effects.
I used to search for the mono mixes of records from this period in the used bins for precisely that reason.


What's generally a whole lot worse than a clumsy stereo mix derived from production multitrack masters never intended for a stereo mix are the various "stereo-ization" schemes derived by some of the labels to 'update' strictly mono recordings. Sometimes it was something simple and stupid like flipping polarity on one side (very disturbing to some of us -- I tried doing that recently with the thought of using my NFM's during vocal tracking but the discomfort it produced was simply too extreme... I didn't think I could concentrate on singing); sometimes it was different comb filtering on the two sides (a favorite tactic, IIRC, of RCA Record's budget label, Camden). I never heard a "stereoized" record that was particularly satisfying.


FWIW, I like a lot of examples of extreme stereo -- in modern mixing. I don't mind the occasional record with drums on one side and standup bass on the other (as I've heard a few times lately), although I prefer it, in that case, to sound somewhat on the natural side. And, of course, you might end up with phase issues if you were to cut that to vinyl. I think that can work quite well when the drums were recorded stereo and the pan is spread a bit across one side and the bass was either recorded stereo or was, at the very least, seated in the mix with a particularly adept hand at creating a realistic but muted stereo feel for the track. Obviously, that would probably work best with a simple mix, a la Gillian Welch or someone.
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #99
Lives for gear
 
doorknocker's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3rd&4thT ➑️
BSeems strange to lump Lennon and McCartney in with the older bunch, but we are talking about 40 years ago. It was a different world.
It's not strange at all. Lennon/Mc Cartney were very much influenced by Tin Pan Alley music. Note the use of 'verses' on Macca tunes like 'Here, there and everywhere' and others. The focus on melody/harmony (as opposed to say the Stones more blues-based writing) puts them in direct lineage to writers like Cole Porter IMO.
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #100
Gear Guru
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 ➑️
I used to search for the mono mixes of records from this period in the used bins for precisely that reason.


What's generally a whole lot worse than a clumsy stereo mix derived from production multitrack masters never intended for a stereo mix are the various "stereo-ization" schemes derived by some of the labels to 'update' strictly mono recordings. Sometimes it was something simple and stupid like flipping polarity on one side (very disturbing to some of us -- I tried doing that recently with the thought of using my NFM's during vocal tracking but the discomfort it produced was simply too extreme... I didn't think I could concentrate on singing); sometimes it was different comb filtering on the two sides (a favorite tactic, IIRC, of RCA Record's budget label, Camden). I never heard a "stereoized" record that was particularly satisfying.
Or running through graphic EQs with the even faders turned up one side and the odd faders on the other. An abomination.


Quote:
FWIW, I like a lot of examples of extreme stereo -- in modern mixing. I don't mind the occasional record with drums on one side and standup bass on the other (as I've heard a few times lately), although I prefer it, in that case, to sound somewhat on the natural side. And, of course, you might end up with phase issues if you were to cut that to vinyl. I think that can work quite well when the drums were recorded stereo and the pan is spread a bit across one side and the bass was either recorded stereo or was, at the very least, seated in the mix with a particularly adept hand at creating a realistic but muted stereo feel for the track. Obviously, that would probably work best with a simple mix, a la Gillian Welch or someone.
I think there are two separate things being discussed here. there are cases where the extreme stereo is the artist's intent and cases, like the Beatles, where it was an afterthought slapped together for the label.
Old 11th February 2009 | Show parent
  #101
Lives for gear
 
Unclenny's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I love a thread like this.

Not only do we get to hear about Beatles recording technique and ancient (20th century) panning details but we are also invited, in the process, to re-evaluate our own panning techniques.

Is this fun....or what?
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #102
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRobb ➑️
I think there are two separate things being discussed here. there are cases where the extreme stereo is the artist's intent and cases, like the Beatles, where it was an afterthought slapped together for the label.
I think it's been mentioned, but the latter half of The Beatles stereo mixes weren't entirely "slapped together"...I think they put some thought into it (more and more as it was becoming more "the thing"), and I don't think it was always headphone friendly.
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #103
Gear Guru
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by JP11 ➑️
I think it's been mentioned, but the latter half of The Beatles stereo mixes weren't entirely "slapped together"...I think they put some thought into it (more and more as it was becoming more "the thing"), and I don't think it was always headphone friendly.
Not according to The Bible (otherwise known as Recording The Beatles)
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #104
Lives for gear
 
Knox's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
James . . come on man, lighten up. Many times you get so defensive if anyone disagrees with you. I am not reading anyone saying you don't have a right to your opinion like you are saying, or that you have to 'get it'. And if they did, it was just a simple statement. Maybe off base. What I hear is people simply offering their views and God forbid, disagreeing. I have not read all the posts, but in the ones I did, I did not hear anyone say you are "less then anyone" either (a little dramatic eh?). Conversations change man . . I guess "panning sounding weird in my earbuds" just didn't have the weight in the "So much gear . . ." forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by James 'LA' Lugo ➑️
it's just not my thing.

It doesn't make me less then anyone on this message board and I don't have to 'get it' one day to be complete.

Can we get back on topic? The topic was that the panning sounding weird in my earbuds it was not whether or not the Beatles were good.
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #105
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Yup, ain't no big thang, really.
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #106
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I should also mention, hearing the final playback on a digital format is not something that existed when they made these mixes. Vinyl does have much better separation than it sometimes gets credit for, but there is obviously more channel crosstalk than digital, which has zero. So before CD, it may not have sounded quite as wacky, even in headphones. James might have a point.
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #107
Gear Guru
 
Sqye's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
.

hey james, fukk the old school [stereo] talk - let's get down to business...

...i wanna learn how to sing like chester bennington on crawling in my skin - heh

...that track KICKS SERIOUS ASS...

.
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #108
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
Hi Guys,
as it happens I was on the train to London yesterday reading George Martin's "All you need is ears". He states that when stereo recorders came in they were used primarilly as a simple multitrack. Rythm etc. on one track and voices on the other. The end result was always intended to be a mono product, but it then gave them the choice of bringing the voices up relative to the rythm section. 'Panning' on the Beatles early stuff was not intended as they did not anticipate a stereo end result.

When Capital wanted to release stereo versions of the old mono stuff, George Martin was mightily disappointed and did some filtering and panning to give a more pleasant/modern result.

For the hard panning approach on the REDD desks, I refer the honourable gentleman to Brian and Kevin's "Recording the Beatles" Book.

Incidentally, the Martin book gives a very good insight to the machinations and greed of the big record companies such as EMI and Capital.

Cheers

Mike
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #109
Gear Guru
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikethebike ➑️
Hi Guys,
as it happens I was on the train to London yesterday reading George Martin's "All you need is ears". He states that when stereo recorders came in they were used primarilly as a simple multitrack. Rythm etc. on one track and voices on the other. The end result was always intended to be a mono product, but it then gave them the choice of bringing the voices up relative to the rythm section. 'Panning' on the Beatles early stuff was not intended as they did not anticipate a stereo end result.

When Capital wanted to release stereo versions of the old mono stuff, George Martin was mightily disappointed and did some filtering and panning to give a more pleasant/modern result.

For the hard panning approach on the REDD desks, I refer the honourable gentleman to Brian and Kevin's "Recording the Beatles" Book.

Incidentally, the Martin book gives a very good insight to the machinations and greed of the big record companies such as EMI and Capital.

Cheers

Mike
Martin's book is a really good read.
What's shocking is that for most of the time he was producing the Beatles he was just drawing a salary! And it was a contract he signed just before the Beatles hit. When he wrote the strings for Eleanor Rigby, he got a check for the standard arranger's fee.
Old 12th February 2009 | Show parent
  #110
Lives for gear
 
3rd&4thT's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
And as an additional witness, the George Martin book should always be accompanied by Geoff Emerick's "All You Need Is Love.'" Producer and engineer don't always remember the same things the same way.

Cheers,
3rd&4thT
πŸ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 1115 views: 233866
Avatar for kuulart
kuulart 14th May 2021
replies: 124 views: 5469
Avatar for mike_n
mike_n 25th January 2016
replies: 2118 views: 202679
Avatar for TheShadowV
TheShadowV 1 week ago
replies: 590 views: 88741
Avatar for Phosphenetre
Phosphenetre 31st January 2021
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump