Hi,
Hopefully there are some people here that are experts on how early rock n roll sound (Buddy Holly etc) can be respectfully reproduced/emulated in a modern DAW. I have a friend who is going to record rock and roll style music and would like to get a similar sound. What kind of EQ, compression etc was used during the time?
Look forward to your advice.
1950's 1960's early rock n roll sound
-
- KVRian
- 576 posts since 15 Apr, 2004 from Sweden
I'm not a specialist in this particular field but my advice would be a lot of analogue emulation software. I bet you can find some convincing distortion plugs. Also, be sparse with other processing, focus on simple effective mixes. Your main concern will be simulating the workflow. Limitations in equipment bring about an ascetic method of thinking that, sadly, might be at loss in a more modern environment.
Buddy Holly in particular did some inventive work with slap-back delay, "automated" reverb (Peggy Sue) and some odd instruments.
Otherwise, just keep it simple, mix by ear and have the sonic characteristics of the arrangement in mind. Just general good mixing practice, really.
Oh, and a muddy, warm treble. Should come with the distortion though!
Buddy Holly in particular did some inventive work with slap-back delay, "automated" reverb (Peggy Sue) and some odd instruments.
Otherwise, just keep it simple, mix by ear and have the sonic characteristics of the arrangement in mind. Just general good mixing practice, really.
Oh, and a muddy, warm treble. Should come with the distortion though!
bleh
-
- KVRAF
- 13124 posts since 7 May, 2006 from Southern California
Keep sound sources mono and when panning in the mix, only go for hard right, hard left or center. If you use EQ, use broad bandwidth and try to boost or cut within the same frequency ranges on all tracks (most parametric EQs of that time had fixed frequency selectors as opposed to being continuously variable). Try using VCA or opto-isolated style compressors. Using short delays instead of reverb is also a good idea, something like Tal Dub that has a saturation stage would work well.
-
thecontrolcentre thecontrolcentre https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=76240 - KVRAF
- 37262 posts since 27 Jul, 2005 from Scottish Borders
-
- KVRAF
- 14739 posts since 19 Oct, 2003 from Berlin, Germany
The Nomad Factory All-Tech is a classical EQ emulation of "back in the day", as are the Motown Plugins from the same firm (see the Retrology Series).
Generally, in the 50ies and 60ies you had fixed frequency EQs (usually 2 band only! with 2dB boost/cut steps up until +/- 10dB). Only later in the mid 60ies and 70ies were more than 2 bands used, or if more bands were needed, the material was simply copied over and boosted at another frequency range. The majority of the sound came from the microphones and the mixing desk, not to mention the used tape. The 2band EQ was just additional soundshaping in a musical way.
A good start would also be "Nebula" and, like I said, the ALL-TECH EQ from Nomad Factory. Or simply use BootEQ, but only two bands at fixed frequencies like the ALL-TECH (read up in the FX section about it, there should be a thread). Or get one of the many available Pultec Emulations (free or commercial, doesn't matter - though that is mid 60ies to 70ies sound again). For tape, use either Ferox from Joeren Breebaart, FerricTDS from Variety of Sound (creator of BootEQmkII) or use one of the many available Tape presets for Nebula.
In terms of mixing, keep things simple, since they mostly had 4 track machines back in the day. So modern panning was not the case. Mostly only left, center, right. While the bass could even be on the far left. If tracks were used up and you needed more, stuff was copied over to 2 tracks (of 4) and the rest of the 4 track tape was used for additional stuff. If needed, this technique was repeated until the production was done (which resulted in additional sound degradation).
Drums were usually recorded with 3 mics only. One for snare top, one for kick outside and one for overheads. This was all there is to it. Then drown everything a bit in reverb or a good recording room IR... and you have a good start.
A good read would definitely be "Recording the Beatles". This one covers the sound from the Beatles from their first stuff until disbanding from point of view in the Abbey Road Studios. The ALL-TECH EQ from Nomad Factory is similar to the REDD37 mixing desk Pop EQ modules, even though they were created by a different firm.
If you understand what the limits were back in the day, and if you understand how to control your available tools to behave the same way (something like VST Plugin Analyser is your friend), then it should be fairly easy to pull off.
Generally, in the 50ies and 60ies you had fixed frequency EQs (usually 2 band only! with 2dB boost/cut steps up until +/- 10dB). Only later in the mid 60ies and 70ies were more than 2 bands used, or if more bands were needed, the material was simply copied over and boosted at another frequency range. The majority of the sound came from the microphones and the mixing desk, not to mention the used tape. The 2band EQ was just additional soundshaping in a musical way.
A good start would also be "Nebula" and, like I said, the ALL-TECH EQ from Nomad Factory. Or simply use BootEQ, but only two bands at fixed frequencies like the ALL-TECH (read up in the FX section about it, there should be a thread). Or get one of the many available Pultec Emulations (free or commercial, doesn't matter - though that is mid 60ies to 70ies sound again). For tape, use either Ferox from Joeren Breebaart, FerricTDS from Variety of Sound (creator of BootEQmkII) or use one of the many available Tape presets for Nebula.
In terms of mixing, keep things simple, since they mostly had 4 track machines back in the day. So modern panning was not the case. Mostly only left, center, right. While the bass could even be on the far left. If tracks were used up and you needed more, stuff was copied over to 2 tracks (of 4) and the rest of the 4 track tape was used for additional stuff. If needed, this technique was repeated until the production was done (which resulted in additional sound degradation).
Drums were usually recorded with 3 mics only. One for snare top, one for kick outside and one for overheads. This was all there is to it. Then drown everything a bit in reverb or a good recording room IR... and you have a good start.
A good read would definitely be "Recording the Beatles". This one covers the sound from the Beatles from their first stuff until disbanding from point of view in the Abbey Road Studios. The ALL-TECH EQ from Nomad Factory is similar to the REDD37 mixing desk Pop EQ modules, even though they were created by a different firm.
If you understand what the limits were back in the day, and if you understand how to control your available tools to behave the same way (something like VST Plugin Analyser is your friend), then it should be fairly easy to pull off.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 136 posts since 24 Oct, 2004 from New Zealand
excellent advice. Thanks for all the tips. I have several of the Bootsy plugins.
I noticed that the early beatles stuff is often hard panned. I like this sound. Very strange to listen to on headphones.
What kind of reverb or delay was used at the time? Is spring reverb the order of the day? Or would it more likely be plate?
Thanks again!
I noticed that the early beatles stuff is often hard panned. I like this sound. Very strange to listen to on headphones.
What kind of reverb or delay was used at the time? Is spring reverb the order of the day? Or would it more likely be plate?
Thanks again!
-
- KVRAF
- 13124 posts since 7 May, 2006 from Southern California
Plates, and often real rooms. There is a famous reverb chamber in the Capitol Records studio in Hollywood that I've been to. It had a fantastic liveliness to it, very bright but musically pleasing. Last I heard it's a storage room now.blacbeard wrote:excellent advice. Thanks for all the tips. I have several of the Bootsy plugins.
I noticed that the early beatles stuff is often hard panned. I like this sound. Very strange to listen to on headphones.
What kind of reverb or delay was used at the time? Is spring reverb the order of the day? Or would it more likely be plate?
Thanks again!
-
- KVRAF
- 11839 posts since 23 Nov, 2004 from west of east
Mono...the new black.thecontrolcentre wrote:Play live and record in mono (+ what Justin said) ...
We escape the trap of our own subjectivity by
perceiving neither black nor white but shades of grey
perceiving neither black nor white but shades of grey
-
- KVRAF
- 14739 posts since 19 Oct, 2003 from Berlin, Germany
Actually I'm not that much of an insider as you might think . I read myself into that topic for months now (Gearsluts, the "Recording the Beatles" Book, watching History Channel's "Classic Album" series), did tests myself. This is all there is to it.qa2pir wrote:seems like an elaborate insider take on the things I thought about.
You need to know the limitations of former recording equipment and environment. Nothing was as overproduced and as "clean" as nowadays. Today recording to harddisk with massive boosts is totally normal. Then on mixdown, you add even more soundshaping with the EQ. Not so back in the day - here most of the stuff was added while recording already. You also couldn't do unlimited overdubbing - tapes were expensive. While mixdown, you had to compensate the tape, and massive boosts were less forgiving (distorting sooner). So you didn't have the loudness madness of nowadays either, though they did tend to overcompress things.
The limited bands of EQ actually gave you that retro "low end missing" sound (try to massively boost around 5kHz with a moderate Q - but leave the rest alone. Know what I mean?). Another example would be vinyl recordings and their limitations. Too much low end, and the needle doesn't stay in it's track. Or the playback possibilities: small speakers, transistor radios, stuff like that - it had to be listenable to on every possible system.
Less was actually more back in the day. Really careful finetuning only came in the later end of the 60ies, and the first total overkill in terms of EQing in mid 90ies.
Like mentioned already, plates and recording rooms. Phil Spector for example was known to record the music first, then run the mixdown through his recording rooms and re-record it again on to tape to get that vulominous sound.blacbeard wrote:What kind of reverb or delay was used at the time? Is spring reverb the order of the day? Or would it more likely be plate?
Abbey Road had a specific chamber hall for that purpose (reverb), and they also utilized plates and spring reverbs.
In terms of Delay, definitely tape delay (though mono delay, no ping pong). I'd take a look at stuff like Genuine Soundware (GSi) Watkat and GS-201 Tape Echo. Both are emulations of real tape delays. The first one from the original Watkat, the GS-201 from the Roland RE201 Space Echo. This module also features a reverb btw.
Also keep in mind - nothing was synced with each other like it is today thanks to host syncronisation. Delays didn't have 1/16 and 1/8 note delays either - it was more like milliseconds or how far the tape heads were compared to each other and how fast the tape ran. This added to the more alive sound. Especially if we talk about modulation effects (flanger, chorus, etc).
A recommendation in terms of music to listen to that utilizes old techniques but in fairly modern days would be the following participants:
Lenny Kravitz - Always on the Run ("Mama Said" Album - 1991) and Are you gonna go my way ("Are you gonna go my way" Album - 1993).
Even though the Band MUSE use heavy compression, not to mention overproduction, the Album "Black Holes and Revelations" (2006, just listen to "Knight of Cydonia") or the singles "Shinking Universe" (2001, was only later used for the movie trailer "28 Weeks Later" in 2007), "Time is Running out" (2003) and "Uprising" (2009, which does have a touch of the british BBC series "Dr. Who" in it) captures the spirit of the Band Queen with their old albums "A Night at the Opera" (1975) and later even "A Kind of Magic" (1989).
IMO definitely worth a listen.
If we talk about that sound, definitely.eduardo_b wrote:Mono...the new black.