Production : How can one tell if a record is badly / well-produced?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Teach me.

cuba libre (nathalie), Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

If you like, you can also do a search & destroy of course.

cuba libre (nathalie), Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Err not to be flip about it, or anything, but "well-produced" = "it sounds good" and "badly-produced" = "it doesn't sound good." The only additional complexities I can think of are to substitute "interesting" for "good" and to note that terrible terrible songs can still sound impressive (and brilliant songs can still sound like crap).

(I offer the obvious answer in an attempt to clarify what you have in mind by asking the question.)

nabisco%%, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

(Apologies if you're asking about personal preferences, e.g. airy / crisp / well-defined versus dense / thick / hazy.)

nabisco%%, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Bowie's job on Raw Power seems to be pretty accepted as "bad production." It can also be technical problems though. I've albums where the distortion is clearly not intentional, like on the new Neil Halstead record, there is a moment where his vocals are obviously crossing the red line on the mixing board.

bnw, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

How can you tell if production is bringing out the best in the band? I am very naive about the whole production process. What does it actually involve?

cuba libre (nathalie), Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Sitting in a room, saying "great, great", and nodding. Engineers do all the work.

J Blount, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Unintentional distortion = bad *engineering* (someone should be watching those meters). Bad production - a series of creative decisions which squeeze all the life out of the material (unless that's what you wanted, of course). Good production - a series of creative decisions which enhance the material. But, as recorded artefact and 'material' may be indivisible, it's a bit difficult to tell.

I really have no idea, and trying to think of examples will only confuse me further.

Michael Jones, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

To me bad production usually means that I can hear *something* in the track which is buried and should be brought out, either by simply making it louder or separating it in the mix. The opposite can apply - how many 80's tracks were ruined by excessive snare sounds?

I particularly hate over-busy tracks with too much going on/too little space - this is an example of how sometimes arrangement and production are inseparable - how often and at what point in a track something is used can be as important as *how*.

Dr. C, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Actually, Dr C is OTM here.

Arrangement is the key - there probably is a perception of producers as folks who take the suggestion of 'an arresting intro' from some poor unfortunate band on their first day in a fancy studio as an excuse to conjure up luminous fogs of bereaved piano over distant church-bell mandolins (or insist that the engineer spends four hours creating that) until there is no longer any element of the original song left (I quite like this idea, btw). I think it's more a case of taking the existing elements and placing them just so - timing/spatial issues and whatnot that may not have occurred to the band.

Getting the recorded sounds in such a state that this arrangement is possible blurs the role between engineer and producer (it's all fluid, innit) - I guess the engineer has to pay a great deal of attention to the producer/band's vision of the final product in order to set things up correctly in the first place (or waste a lifetime afterwards EQing and compressing to order).

This is all a bit live band-centric anyway. What defines a good hip- hop or electronic producer?

Michael Jones, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

But production means something entirely different in the hip-hop world, in which the "producer" is "the guy responsible for the music." Or so I think. Ethan?

matthew m., Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Bowie's job on Raw Power seems to be pretty accepted as "bad production." Not everyone thinks so.

Billy Dods, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Well, yeah.... "production" is synonymous with the actual music or the beats in dance/hiphop genres. Also, a good hip hop or electronic producer often handles a lot of the technical engineering stuff as well as the creative endeavors. For instance, in something like drum and bass, it's crucial to get certain levels right so that they deliver properly on dance floors.

Honda, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Try listening to the Fall: Dragnet has about the worst production i ever heard. (but still a damn good record)

Baxter Wingnut, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Well, I think the 'new' version of 'Raw Power' is a desecration. Absolutely bloody awful. Sounds like they filled up that bottom-end space by cranking up one of the 'ambient' tracks with the studio's air-conditioner hum on it.

dave q, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I read in 'Sound on Sound' (I think) that engineers are getting increasingly fed up with 'artists' bringing in a handful of samples, saying "Make a track for me" and getting all the credit and props for the result - RFI?

dave q, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I read in 'Sound on Sound' (I think) that engineers are getting increasingly fed up with 'artists' bringing in a handful of samples, saying "Make a track for me" and getting all the credit and props for the result

I'm still coming to grips with this even being considered an artform. (If the samples were ambient sounds being assembled into rhythms, I would call tapelooping art. But assembling rhythms into rhythms I would call lazy and uninspired.)

(So I think anyway) The engineer does the mixing, bringing out this or that. The producer recommends changing this or that (like using a different instrument, different key, tempo, etc...) Think of Phil Spector, Martin Hannett ... The engineer is technical, the producer is musical (to boil it down to an oversimplified generalization.)

Dave225, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The engineer might do all the knob-twiddling, but the a good producer will help set the tone for the album. He might suggest changing a key so the singer isn't straining, putting in a key change mid-song, or bringing in the Chemical Brothers to remix. The last thing thing is probably the most important: getting somebody hot to remix so you'll sell more units.

Andy, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

this board is pretty much in agreement that 'since ...' by the avalanches is an apalling production job. it just sounds wrong. like a tv picture slightly fuzzed up or out of focus, you just know it's...wrong. great songs masked/marred/hidden/buried by ...horribleness.

terrible production - flaming lips' opening track off 'soft bulletin' ('race...') and 'yes' by bernard butler.

piscesboy, Thursday, 16 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

There's such a range of things a producer can do - the arrangement, the balance of the sounds in the recording, adding sound effects, suggesting different ways of singing a line or playing some sequence of notes, the quality of the sound - or another producer might have little to do with any of this. The range of what they do is huge, the range of ways of doing it equally so - this is like asking us to define what good music is.

I particularly value the producers of whom I think "Nobody else has ever made records like this," when I have cause to think that's down to the producers.

Some examples of my favourite producers at their best: Willie Mitchell on Al Green's How Can You Mend A Broken Heart - great musicians (it's been said that he more or less brought the Hodges Brothers up to sound how he wanted), a great singer, but listen to the restraint, note the shimmering violins at just the right moment.

George Shadow Moreton on the Shangri-Las. The nerve of releasing what was little more than Mary Ann Ganser talking over (I think) Beethoven on Past, Present and Future. For me, the great pop producer, even more than Spector.

Norman Whitfield on the Temptations. The producers rather ruled at Motown, a company devoted to perfect pop singles. The astounding intro on Papa Was A Rolling Stone (and everything they were recording around that time) still sounds wonderful.

Phil Spector, obviously, but I'm particularly thinking of when he worked with the Ramones. He knew how the first chord of, I believe it was, Rock 'n' Roll High School had to sound. He locked them in the studio and wouldn't let them out until they did it right. It took them eleven hours to produce this one chord to his satisfaction.

Brian Wilson, of course. Singles like Heroes And Villains and Good Vibrations are extraordinary pieces. Try to listen to Good Vibrations afresh - forget the million times you've heard it, and notice how astonishing it actually sounds, how the different sounds are so gorgeously blended, sinuously moving in and out of the front of the mix. That he could make such a radical, complex record into a near- universally loved summery pop classic is almost beyond belief.

I could go on and on, but I expect everyone has skipped to the next post by now anyway...

Martin Skidmore, Friday, 17 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I believe Bowie was brought in to remix the Raw Power sessions after the fact; he didn't produce the album.

Sean, Friday, 17 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

or bringing in the Chemical Brothers to remix. The last thing thing is probably the most important: getting somebody hot to remix so you'll sell more units.

That's more the a&r dept's job. Like artists, a lot of producers aren't that keen on remixes - see them as a necessary evil. If the remix turns out a lot better than their mix it puts them in a bad light...possibly.

David, Friday, 17 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Jeff Lynne - leaver of most obvious production stamp ever?

static, Saturday, 18 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Aside from Phil Spector and Butch Vig maybe.

Mr Noodles, Saturday, 18 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

scratch Butch, Steve Albini I meant, thats it off to bed it is for me. The suburbs are getting to me.

Mr Noodles, Saturday, 18 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I believe Bowie was brought in to remix the Raw Power sessions after the fact; he didn't produce the album.

I'd love to hear a mix somewhere in between Bowie's and Iggy's newer "over the top" one. But hell, I guess that's what an equalizer is for.

bnw, Sunday, 19 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

five years pass...

I would like to submit Disfear - Live the Storm as an example of how to do it exactly right.

http://www.hcsanomat.fi/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/disfear.jpg

Fucking rules. I was torn between whether to post about this album on this thread or this one, but among a lot of other stupidly fuckingly awesome things about this record, the perfection of the production stands out for me. Am I right in thinking that metal, in general, should be produced sharp and squeaky clean? Because me, I want to hear every rumble and OH GOD every snare hit.

kenan, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 00:15 (seventeen years ago)

Am I right in thinking that metal, in general, should be produced sharp and squeaky clean?

i don't know, i might go ahead and say the obvious counterpoint that something about, say, 'transilvanian hunger' would be lost if the production was sharp and squeaky clean.

but i've never heard the album you're talking about. in general, the issue of production values, absolute ones, at least, is kind of a hard debate for me. there's lots of albums that are produced 'horribly,' but sound great for one or another reason. i can't imagine sebadoh's 'freed weed' recorded on anything but a four-track in barlow's bedroom, but the production is pretty shitty, you know? i'm sure many have made this point. but i would like to hear what people think, as i really don't have any knowledge about what it takes to produce a record.

Mark Clemente, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 01:12 (seventeen years ago)

guitar wolf

El Tomboto, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 01:13 (seventeen years ago)

I like so many things that are "badly" produced I'm not sure I can answer this at all. Quite a few black metal records sound like the microphones are buried six feet under ground. I guess it's down to whether the production compliments the musician's intention. If you want a claustrophobic feeling then muddy and sludgy fit the bill.

leavethecapital, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 02:05 (seventeen years ago)

You guys should read the Mixerman Diaries.

Discussed on ILM here but the current link is here.

felicity, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 02:34 (seventeen years ago)

Yeah it's a stupid damn question and I should have asked it better or not phrased it as a question. Here's what I mean: this record sounds like it was recorded under the supervision of a small team of world-class Swedish scientists and mathematicians who spent days calculating the precise setting for absolute maximum attack on every instrument, all the time. Yeah, of course that would make most music sound totally wrong and cold and thin, but it's exactly right here. The record is loud at any volume, which is an engineering trick I admire.

And um... yeah. Love this record.

kenan, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 05:29 (seventeen years ago)

http://www.stylusmagazine.com/articles/weekly_article/imperfect-sound-forever.htm

Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 06:59 (seventeen years ago)

Which means that... I've not heard the record in question, and have no desire too, because the "loud at every volume" thing drives me potty when it's done in the wrong context to the extent that no context is now the right context for me. I have no interest in metal at all.

But which also means that... I think people misuse the word 'production' when they actually mean engineering or mixing. Production is... "no, play that drum part on a broken radiator" - engineering makes it 'sound' good and mixing makes it work.

Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 07:02 (seventeen years ago)

Yes, production is the big picture stuff. I think what OP means is recording.

A lot can be changed in the mix but no amount of mixing can save poorly engineered recordings.

felicity, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 07:06 (seventeen years ago)

I know what records I think sound good, but that's not always down to the production. The Power Out by Electrelane sounds incredible, but isn't really 'produced' even - Electrelane wrote and arranged the songs and Steve Albini recorded them.

A producer... holds the budget, manages the recording of an album/ set of songs / piece of music. Depending on the artist, their management, their record label / A&R, that can mean a huge array of things. I had some interesting conversations with someone from a band about this at the weekend, how the band had 'self-produced' most of the time, and in their early naivety this had caused some bad decisions - paying Andy Wallace tens of grand upfront to mix their debut album and then panicking when they heard the first song and using someone else for the rest; talking to Steve Albini about recording their album and then getting cold feet and getting some local dude to do it.

A producer can be just an advisor in the studio, or they can be a total svengali / bully. An album can be more to do with a producer than with the band / artist at times. Or they can just sit in a chair nodding and saying "yeah, yeah, sounds wicked man".

Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 08:21 (seventeen years ago)

An album can be more to do with a producer than with the band / artist at times. = 4 point producer

Or they can just sit in a chair nodding and saying "yeah, yeah, sounds wicked man". = 3 point producer

felicity, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 08:32 (seventeen years ago)

I want Jonesy on this thread again.

We were messing about with some mixes of this band on Saturday night, the band and their 'producer' asking me what I thought. I'd spent the evening playing them the Mark Hollis album and Long Fin Killie and Bark Psychosis and Rita Lee and stuff. And so I'm like... "this is good, but there's a lot going on; how many tracks are there?" And the producer/engineer/manager/svengali replies "well, we put twelve mics on the drums..."

My instinct these days is to minimalism, I think. I want to hear every element, all the way through. If I can't hear it, it may as well not be there. Like... I suggested dropping the acoustic guitar from the verse because it was taking up space where there's a voice. And changing the EQ on the bass cos when he goes up the neck it just vanished behind the guitar and keyboards. They had a wicked middle eight with some strings and another layer of percussion which was played on the aforementioned broken radiator, but you couldn't hear it for the three layers of electric guitar and two of keys and one of acoustic. And each track played back individually sounded beautiful - the lone acoustic strum was rich and warm and lovely. But stick them all together and... if you mix all the colours of paint in your pallete it goes brown. But if you place them all carefully in different spaces, you can see them all, and what's more draw the eye from one to another in a certain order or pattern to accentuate them. Same with sounds, surely? So we took out everything but the bass, the radiator, and the strings. And it sounded radical, as well as good. Really odd and shocking.

I could go on about this... and probably will throughout the day.

x-post; yes, quite! I heard a rumour that Eno asked Coldplay for £1m upfront and something ridiculous point-wise as well, and Coldplay just relented cos they're all so loaded now they don't care.

Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 08:40 (seventeen years ago)

Didn't he want (but not get) credit on Talking Heads albums, like: "Talking Heads and Eno" ?

Mark G, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 08:48 (seventeen years ago)

Which would make them sound like "Rud Hull and Eno" but they wouldn't have known that...

Mark G, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 08:49 (seventeen years ago)

It would make sense if £1 million was the total recording budget and the producer's advance came out of the budget. Some producers insist on a massive budget to make sure the record has the producer's trademark sound.

The producer often has to wait for the whole recording budget to recoup before getting points (beyond the advance). Most records don't recoup but Coldplay probably will.

felicity, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 08:50 (seventeen years ago)

Most records don't recoup but Coldplay probably will.

I hear / read this all the time, and have done for years, as I'm sure lots of people do / have, and it still sounds mental. Does the Coldplay record really sell enough to pay for all the records that don't recoup? I'm assuming Coldplay become superduper St Tropez coke-face millionaires by playing enormodome gigs rather than by selling that many records...?

Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 08:53 (seventeen years ago)

I want Jonesy on this thread again.

I'm still 'ere.

The brown palette thing pretty much sums up all my experiences of mixing more than about eight tracks (unless half of them are vocal). And if you get a really nicely balanced submix and then, at some future date, add more bloody guitars - well, I can never get this to work. It's all about EQ and I doff my hat to people who can mix a dozen different elements with clarity and coherence and colour.

Michael Jones, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 08:53 (seventeen years ago)

The recoupment point depends on how many units sold and the budget. Most deals have albums cross-collaterizated so they'd have to sell enough units to offset the losses of any unprofitable records as well. If Coldplay's total units are in the millions they are probably recouped.

Most artists whose records are released by major labels never recoup.

felicity, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 08:59 (seventeen years ago)

Has anyone read Kill Your Friends by John Niven?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Kill-Your-Friends-John-Niven/dp/043401799X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208941677&sr=8-1

Ignoring the murder and that nonsense, it's absolutely terrifying at the sheer bloody-minded idiocy of the music industry at that point.

Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 09:09 (seventeen years ago)

The reason most major label releases don't recoup has much more to do with label spending "habits" (no pun intended) than with the true cost of making a record.

xp No, but I have read Please Kill Me by Legs McNeil which is terrifying in its own punk rock way.

felicity, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 09:16 (seventeen years ago)

The Power Out by Electrelane sounds incredible, but isn't really 'produced' even - Electrelane wrote and arranged the songs and Steve Albini recorded them.

Cummon Nick this is bollocks.

I'm assuming Coldplay become superduper St Tropez coke-face millionaires by playing enormodome gigs rather than by selling that many records...?

Hard-Fi are currently making their cash by playing tons of corporate events. No pressure, easy money.

Raw Patrick, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 10:05 (seventeen years ago)

Todd Rundgren's intro to "Breathless" to thread.

Geir Hongro, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 10:15 (seventeen years ago)

If you can hear tape hiss, this means it has been well produced.

TomDeath, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 10:19 (seventeen years ago)

The Power Out by Electrelane sounds incredible, but isn't really 'produced' even - Electrelane wrote and arranged the songs and Steve Albini recorded them.

Cummon Nick this is bollocks.

But it's not bollocks - I've not got the sleeve to hand but I'm pretty sure no one is credited as 'producer' other than the band themselves; Albini insists on being credited as engineer and never asks for points. By "not produced" I man there's no outside influence on how to make the record; just the band and their ideas and Albini (+ assistants) as engineer.

Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 10:33 (seventeen years ago)

Albini gets credited how he does coz thats how he wants it and he's powerful enough to get it. It's nuts to suggest he doesn't do production.

Raw Patrick, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 11:31 (seventeen years ago)

Why does the last Electrelane record sound like (although not identical to) the previous two then when they recorded it with someone else? Having read a lot of Albini interviews and the like, and particularly that infamous gambling forum thread, and having spoken to people in bands who've worked with different producers, my understanding of what Albini does is TOTALLY different to what, say, Youth does. Or Graham Sutton. Albini doesn't produce a record in that he doens't say "make the beat 4/4 and simplify it, sing it like you've just ben told yer mum's got cancer" etc etc. He sets up mics and records to tape.

Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 23 April 2008 11:40 (seventeen years ago)


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