Phil Spector Wall Of Sound in a DAW

[donkey tugger]

He's also done a shitload of production;

https://www.recordproduction.com/interv ... ard-butler

[vurt]

He's also done a shitload of production;

https://www.recordproduction.com/interv ... ard-butler

yup
just giving some timescale compared to winehouse, which does bring us to ronson (mark iirc) he did a lot of that era style production early on. went a bit weird later...

[osiris]

Great article here :
[https://www.npr.org/templates/story/sto ... rol%20room.][/url]

Love this chestnut: 'Spector applied his wall of sound to this Beatles song. Legend has it John Lennon invited him to do so without the knowledge of his fellow Beatle, Paul McCartney.'

[kritikon]

He's also done a shitload of production;

https://www.recordproduction.com/interv ... ard-butler

yup
just giving some timescale compared to winehouse, which does bring us to ronson (mark iirc) he did a lot of that era style production early on. went a bit weird later...

I had a surf on YT for them, and saw they were around the noughties. TBH music went a bit off my radar that decade, so I guess that's why I never heard of them. Surprised the guitarist was from Suede - they had their noses firmly stuck in their shoelaces from what I remember? I left Blighty in 99, so new things to do, new country to explore, novelty of real live sunshine to go out in and no reason to hide away inside and make/listen to music. Actually I surfed a few of their tracks and their repertoire seemed to range from good to extremely crap. Some of it was barely disguised 70s funkeh shit. He's probably not as kissable nowadays...

[audiojunkie]

I wouldn't replicate this.
Everything is panned either hard left or hard right, with the exception of the vocal.

The only take aways from Specter's "wall of sound" for modern production would be to layer lots of sounds and use lots of reverb.

But unlike this recording, you're going to want to create unique space for each instrument within the stereo field.

This is exactly correct. Phil’s music was designed for, and sounded awesome on mono AM radio. Nowadays use thick layering to achieve the same thing while remaining in stereo.

[dave davies]

1. Orchestrate, using a wide variety of instruments in ensembles to fill the entire spectrum,

yes I hear he took that cue from Richard Wagner.

[vurt]

He's probably not as kissable nowadays...

tbf, 23 years down the line, i doubt we've improved either

i think suede, were less shoegaze (assuming that's what you meant?) and more pop indie, similar to pulp or blur in that respect, if not in sound.

shoegaze to me was more psychedelic inspired with some punk ethos.

you'd get suede played in the local meat market type clubs alongside regular pop of the time.

jesus and mary chain would be reserved for the more dive bar than wine bar clubs

[CrystalWizard]

in addition to double and triple tracking -Lots of simulated mic bleed.* There are console emulators that would make this easy, what are some examples, Slate, Harrison, i dunno. if you are tracking anything, multiple sources into one mic.
* i would make elaborate submixes with reverbs and compressors and tape simulators.
There are some books on Spectors' wall of sound. And another one, too, decade later.

[donkey tugger]

Also, importantly, get a tambourine. Like Motown too, this stuff has them all over it.

Plus, your neighbours will love it.

[osiris]

So much mic bleed in those days. Don't forget, what was he working with, 12 track mixers. I have the studio acapellas for a few Diana Ross & The Supremes tunes and they clapped doing the vocals. Talk about your double tracking.

[BertKoor]

Anyways, the Spector sound...

Noachs Ark entered the studio. Two guitars, two base players, even two drummers. But drummers did not hit that hard then as they all do now. So selecting the right sampled drum kit (only a room mike) is critical.

[osiris]

They even write songs about it.

[enroe]

Haja, opinions differ on Phil Spector's sound:

He's known for his middle, full, very dense sound - achieved by many
instruments played in unison, by layering sounds.

The counter-concept would be a lighter, sometimes rather thin and
chiselled sound, a minimalistic arrangement. When multiple
instruments are used, they play different lines and melodies.

Anyone who composes and/or produces themselves is somewhere
on the continuum between "Phil Spector soundwall" and "minimalist
concept".

You have to make decisions like this yourself: Do I want to make the
motif bold and big by having several instruments play it in unison? Or
should the motif rather remain inconspicuous - and be played around
and supplemented by other, complementary melody lines?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I myself have a lot of sympathy for Phil Spector's sound aesthetic
and his approach. Because if you want to become "more concise"
and "recognizable" as a composer, you have to concentrate on
simple motif lines - and then make them "bigger".

To a certain extent, Spector has the modern way of listening via
Walkman, ghetto blaster, mp3 player, which today's kiddies practice,
anticipated: The theme of a song must be recognizable and sound
good even on poor playback systems.

Spector's aesthetic doesn't suit everyone, but in most cases we can
learn from him.

[dave davies]

- vocals are more mixed in to the song than on top

What, panned?

[dave davies]

Layers upon layers. ABBA did the same.

Lots of guitar and piano takes kept on different channels?