What is "good production"?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Go ahead.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Friday, 25 August 2006 08:59 (nineteen years ago)

i think heavy compression is the key, nick.

― Bashment Jakes (Enrique), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:00 (nineteen years ago)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v48/w1nt3rmut3/i16.gif

― Dan I. (Dan I.), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:05 (nineteen years ago)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v48/w1nt3rmut3/Garethandthecat.gif

― Dan I. (Dan I.), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:06 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.hboasia.com/images/posters/378x195/groundhog_day.jpg

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:12 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.sonicwavemagazine.com/imag/es/0111/ramones-2.jpg

― animal bitrate (Enrique), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:15 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.hboasia.com/images/posters/378x195/groundhog_day.jpg

Is that Strongo in the middle?

― StanM (StanM), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:21 (nineteen years ago)

for me it usually seems to mean backing tracks which would make for stimulating listening with and without vocals. of course vocals are part of and require production too but you can talk about them as separate entities as well, applying the same criteria when judging tracks intentionally instrumental and those with vocals.

so what makes me think 'good production' is hearing ideas, events, patterns, arrangements and changes in a track that I find exciting or interesting in some way. if a track is heavily compressed or some elements of it are mixed in badly in relation to others (i.e. vocals too low or whatever) this doesn't necessarily ruin the whole thing if the concepts/ideas being put across are ones that appeal to me. it's the concept as well as the execution and how they balance each other.

― Konal Doddz (blueski), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:23 (nineteen years ago)

this indicates how i don't really care HOW things are made, just what the end result is and the effects it has on me personally.

― Konal Doddz (blueski), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:25 (nineteen years ago)

basically you should be able to hear it in your stomach.

― animal bitrate (Enrique), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:36 (nineteen years ago)

http://i20.ebayimg.com/03/i/06/f5/51/6e_1.JPG

― dud Hab 'C' dEva (Dada), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:37 (nineteen years ago)

otm

― animal bitrate (Enrique), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:38 (nineteen years ago)

http://eil.com/newgallery/Go-West-We-Close-Our-Eyes-301186.jpg

― animal bitrate (Enrique), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:39 (nineteen years ago)

"We Close Our Eyes" is a fucking great tune.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 25 August 2006 09:41 (nineteen years ago)

anything that results in "good music."

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Friday, 25 August 2006 15:59 (nineteen years ago)

Good production makes you feel good

― Mr. Que (Mr.Que), Friday, 25 August 2006 16:01 (nineteen years ago)

This isn't answerable. What good poduction is depends on what the music is.

― Steve Go1dberg (Steve Schneeberg), Friday, 25 August 2006 16:05 (nineteen years ago)

Good production just makes you feel good, happy inside. Like warm fuzzies and stuff.

― Mr. Que (Mr.Que), Friday, 25 August 2006 16:06 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.fao.org/ag/aga/agap/frg/feedsafety/present/Speedy%20India/speedy-india/img034.jpg

― trees (treesessplode), Friday, 25 August 2006 16:30 (nineteen years ago)

LOCK THREAD

― trees (treesessplode), Friday, 25 August 2006 16:31 (nineteen years ago)

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y176/edwardiii/pg_rightnow.jpg

― Edward III (edward iii), Friday, 25 August 2006 16:33 (nineteen years ago)

Konal Doddz COMPLETELY OTM upthread. I don't care how things are made either, as long as they sound great. I don't give a toss if someone's an unbelievably brilliant guitarist and the 'purity' of his playing is overshadowed by flanging or effects pedals or whatever. I don't CARE if Pro Tools were involved, honestly I don't. What matters is that the resulting soup of noise is pleasantly surprising, stimulating or intriguing (preferably all 3).

― Scourage (Haberdager), Friday, 25 August 2006 16:37 (nineteen years ago)

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/3840/untitledik1.jpg

― jimnaseum - formalist rigour! (jimnaseum), Friday, 25 August 2006 16:41 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.massenburg.com/gml/images/naras_panel/steve_albini.jpg

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Friday, 25 August 2006 16:54 (nineteen years ago)

I've heard of him.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 25 August 2006 16:56 (nineteen years ago)

is he producing something with his right hand?

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Friday, 25 August 2006 16:58 (nineteen years ago)

"SLEEEEEEEEEEEEEP!"

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 25 August 2006 17:00 (nineteen years ago)

"Good production" = "production" that is "good".

― Jesus Dan (Dan Perry), Friday, 25 August 2006 17:01 (nineteen years ago)

Props to Dan for the CoolEdit pic. Represent!!!

― Adam Bruneau (oliver8bit), Friday, 25 August 2006 17:07 (nineteen years ago)

he's tweaking the room acoustics by hand, the old-fashioned way.

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Friday, 25 August 2006 17:07 (nineteen years ago)

or tune in tokyo.

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Friday, 25 August 2006 17:10 (nineteen years ago)

Simple. Good production:

- Suits the song
- Arranges instrumentation in a way that supports the melodic and harmonic structure of the song
- Uses the right microphones to capture the instruments and voices in a way that suits the song
- Uses rooms in a way that adds natural ambience/space to the song
- Uses effects in a way that suits the song
- Uses the stereo field to enhance the song

― Brooker Buckingham (Brooker B), Friday, 25 August 2006 17:26 (nineteen years ago)

1) Ribbon mics
2) through tube preamps
3) and a mackie
4) into a Studer
5) recorded in a room out in the woods somewhere
6) or one used by a band that recorded an album you loved 40 years ago
7) with organ
8) and no DI on the guitars or bass
9) and just stereo mics on the drummer
10) and the vocals recorded in a bathroom.

Voila, "good production."

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 25 August 2006 19:14 (nineteen years ago)

a mackie?

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Friday, 25 August 2006 19:19 (nineteen years ago)

Is that Strongo in the middle?

and Dan Selzer on the right?

― Sir Dr. Rev. PappaWheelie Jr. II of The Third Kind (PappaWheelie 2), Friday, 25 August 2006 19:20 (nineteen years ago)

mackie?
-- fact checking cuz (factcheckingcu...), August 25th, 2006. (fcc)

jah dude you meant "Neve"!

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Friday, 25 August 2006 19:25 (nineteen years ago)

You have passed the TAPE OP CHALLENGE

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 25 August 2006 19:35 (nineteen years ago)

I'm a subscriber! I like that magazine...even if I don't know half of what they are talking about....but I like hearing old dudes talk about old sessions, like they had an awesome piece w/Rudy Van Gelder talking abt Parker and Miles and shit....there's a lot of cool stuff if you can wade through the tech stuff which is pretty dense at times.

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Friday, 25 August 2006 19:39 (nineteen years ago)

there's a lot of cool stuff if you can wade through the tech stuff which is pretty dense at times

that's the one thing that bums me out about tape op. it used to not be dense at all. they used to have features where they'd tell you exactly what model microphone or effects unit or whatever to buy, and exactly where to turn the knobs ("set the attack at 3 o'clock, and the release at 9 o'clock"), stuff like that. it was the recording magazine for people who didn't have a clue what all the other recording magazines were talking about. now they sort of read like all the other recording magazines, except they write about more interesting artists and engineers. this not-so-subtle shift is the subject of a lengthy and interesting exchange in the (always great) letters section of the current issue, and larry crane makes it quite clear that the change was intentional.

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Friday, 25 August 2006 19:53 (nineteen years ago)

yeah i guess i didn't start getting it until after the change....but they do have a real cool mix of people...there was an article w/Hank Shocklee from the Bomb Squad talking about five dudes doing Nation of Millions mixes in real time with all their hands on faders that was so amazing!

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Friday, 25 August 2006 19:56 (nineteen years ago)

"Production" to me is a very "know it when you hear it" thing, as opposed to "engineering", which is much more to do w/"we know that this sound will do this thing to this microphone, therefore, because we can't have the sound modified in such-and-such way, we are placing the microphone at location X, and turning up knob Y." Production, as I see (hear?) it, is less married to the physics of sound, or the intended use of equipment (or even the songs themselves), and is more conceptual. My personal "strategies" for producing music usually are: does this sound as "good" as I want it to? does this effect enhance what I'm trying to do (emotionally, artistically, whatever) or not? If it doesn't, do I mind that, and can I exploit the effect in another way? Is there a general acoustic neighborhood that I want several songs to share, or do I want to model the overall contour of my CD in a way such that enhancing aspects of individual songs will capture?

More practically, I think it's generally important that all the instruments/voices in a performance are captured well in the recording -- again, IMO this straddles a blurry divide between what I condsider engineering work and production work.

but then it's not like I'm "producing" anyone other than myself at the moment!

― Dominique (dleone), Friday, 25 August 2006 20:06 (nineteen years ago)

http://rateyourmusic.com/album_images/s3392.jpg

― DJ Martian (djmartian), Friday, 25 August 2006 20:14 (nineteen years ago)

http://rateyourmusic.com/album_images/s12569.jpg

― DJ Martian (djmartian), Friday, 25 August 2006 20:16 (nineteen years ago)

http://rateyourmusic.com/album_images/s10505.jpg

― DJ Martian (djmartian), Friday, 25 August 2006 20:17 (nineteen years ago)

http://rateyourmusic.com/album_images/s3137.jpg

― DJ Martian (djmartian), Friday, 25 August 2006 20:19 (nineteen years ago)

and the last example for now:

http://rateyourmusic.com/album_images/s26361.jpg

― DJ Martian (djmartian), Friday, 25 August 2006 20:21 (nineteen years ago)

Brooker has already stated the objective truth here.

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Friday, 25 August 2006 20:57 (nineteen years ago)

Well of course you'd think so, good production is production that suits the song. I don't think anyone would argue with that. Then some bumf about melody.

― jimnaseum - formalist rigour! (jimnaseum), Friday, 25 August 2006 21:00 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.sundayherald.com/img2339

― Christopher Costello (CGC), Friday, 25 August 2006 21:55 (nineteen years ago)

funny, i was about to post psychocandy as an example of why i would argue with the previous post's assertion that nobody would argue with the proposition that good production is that which suits the song. one of the great charms of psychocandy is that the production doesn't suit the songs at all, isn't it? and that is an example of great production.

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Friday, 25 August 2006 23:03 (nineteen years ago)

Psychocandy flirts with the necessity of its own production. At the same time it aspires to a deliberately low fidelity. At the same time again it laughs at the notion of celebrity. And condoles it. You don't get Fine Fair.

Bye, Seven Do-er

― Pier Paolo Semolina (noodle vague), Friday, 25 August 2006 23:32 (nineteen years ago)

I'm not so sure about the first side of Hounds Of Love being such a great example!

Good production should have sound all over it I think.

― bad hair day house (fandango), Friday, 25 August 2006 23:45 (nineteen years ago)

It's hard to argue against Albina's ethical sense of transparent production somehow.

I think I recognise bad production more than good... you know when something has been robbed of some percentage of the life it should have had. Bad production can sometimes just be not letting bands make enough mistakes for the final mix though. There's such a thing as being TOO perfect. "The Bends" is one of those records with a lot of transparent moments, but the actual performances in the final product are a little on the sterile side.

― bad hair day house (fandango), Friday, 25 August 2006 23:59 (nineteen years ago)

It's good to see you posting, DLeone!

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Saturday, 26 August 2006 01:40 (nineteen years ago)

whatever andrew prinz produces

― keyth (keyth), Saturday, 26 August 2006 02:26 (nineteen years ago)

Psychocandy!? Oh, damn you itnernet irony! Damn you straight to hell!

― Cunga (Cunga), Saturday, 26 August 2006 03:21 (nineteen years ago)

I'm not so sure about the first side of Hounds Of Love being such a great example!

The second side is a lot better. Side one has the drums too dominant in the overall sound.

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Saturday, 2 September 2006 15:34 (nineteen years ago)

Good production is production that either never jumps out at you in a bad way or specifically jumps out at you in a good way. Bad production isn't so much a matter of "using Pro Tools" as "overusing Pro Tools inexpertly as a cheap route to masking flaws." Bad production can just as easily result from foolishly assuming that if you use tape and a bunch of old tube pre-amps and mics it's automatically going to make your shit sound good.

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Saturday, 2 September 2006 22:21 (nineteen years ago)

OTFM

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 2 September 2006 22:37 (nineteen years ago)

Indeed.

― Steve Go1dberg (Steve Schneeberg), Saturday, 2 September 2006 22:40 (nineteen years ago)

THIS IS EASY. BAD = MAKE YOU EARS GO EEEK. GOOD MAKE YOU EARS GO = AHHHHH.

― chaki (chaki), Saturday, 2 September 2006 22:45 (nineteen years ago)

People loved Steve Lillywhite's and Phil Collins' production in the 80s. Both have been slated as terrible at various times/places on ILM.

― i'll mitya halfway (mitya), Sunday, 3 September 2006 00:38 (nineteen years ago)

Production where the coolness is not in the riff or the vocals or the chops, but in the overall sound of the instruments or the atmosphere of the tune. See: everything John Bonham ever did ever, Pink Floyd's The Wall, most Kanye, every techno song ever

― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Sunday, 3 September 2006 00:57 (nineteen years ago)

making the recording sound the way the musicians heard it in their heads

except for psychocandy, if that's what they wanted

― mookieproof (mookieproof), Sunday, 3 September 2006 01:26 (nineteen years ago)

Arthur Baker on Dylan's Empire Burlesque.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Sunday, 3 September 2006 01:33 (nineteen years ago)

KLC

― psycho pete (pete38), Sunday, 3 September 2006 01:37 (nineteen years ago)

copious Auto-Tune, suggest the powers that be

― Roque Strew (RoqueStrew), Sunday, 3 September 2006 11:26 (nineteen years ago)

Bump.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Friday, 8 September 2006 09:33 (nineteen years ago)

You're right. Good production = needs to bump.

― Konal Doddz (blueski), Friday, 8 September 2006 10:57 (nineteen years ago)

You asked me to answer it, I am pondering.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Friday, 8 September 2006 11:36 (nineteen years ago)

one year passes...

I never did answer this.

― Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 11:51 (seventeen years ago)

and you still haven't!

― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 12:42 (seventeen years ago)

good production = clarity.

― titchyschneiderMk2, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 12:55 (seventeen years ago)

everything clearly defined. like stevie wonders early 70s albums or the beatles' revolver/rubber soul etc.

― titchyschneiderMk2, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 12:56 (seventeen years ago)

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 12:57 (seventeen years ago)

http://shop.abp.me.uk/images/product_pics/RTS%20-%20Poing.jpg

― blueski, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 13:02 (seventeen years ago)

Good production compliments the music / arrangement / tune / sentiment/ etc in such a way that I want to listen to the song / piece repeatedly, and find new sonic and emotional layers in it every or almost every time. It creates an experience with depth that I want to repeat, for whatever reason (joy, catharsis, beauty, etc).

― Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 13:10 (seventeen years ago)

i think good production can be defined very simply: it is making a distinct direction for the sound of a record. rick rubin is an obvious and easy example, the kinds of things he did for the beastie boys are different from what he did for johnny cash, which is different from what he did for the red hot chili peppers. sometimes it involves being lo-fi, sometimes it involves being really detailed and complex. it is a vision for the total overall feel of the music being recorded.

― pipecock, Thursday, 24 April 2008 04:31 (seventeen years ago)

have Rick Rubin and good production ever been in the same room?

― Curt1s Stephens, Thursday, 24 April 2008 04:56 (seventeen years ago)

if you don't like the production of BloodSugarSexMagic, johnny cash's "American" records, or "license to ill" i think you are probably retarded.

― pipecock, Thursday, 24 April 2008 04:58 (seventeen years ago)

and "reign in blood" too! come on, now. the guy is obviously fucking good at what he does.

― pipecock, Thursday, 24 April 2008 04:59 (seventeen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.