Production/mixing question

[Dudbean]

Can someone tell me what it takes for an album to sound good? Is it money? Is it technical knowledge? Both?

I ask because early Melvins albums had huge sound. Bullhead has my favourite guitar sound, ever. Some people say the drums aren't crisp enough, but if you just turn it way up they sound wicked to me. Eggnog is raw and loud, just like it should be. Lysol (bass on Sacrifice) blew the speakers in my car. G.P.T. and Ozma pound my eardrums nicely. So if they got sound like that when they were on small labels like Boner and Alchemy, howcome their stuff on Ipecac sounds sort of 'cheaper'? 'Thinner', maybe? H.A.T. sounds pretty good, but whenever I hear the trilogy I start wishing Joe Barrisi (sp?) or Billy Anderson had a hand in making them. Especially amazon from the Maggot - Dale is buried in the mix. If I were to try and play along, I wouldn't know what the hell to do, because his toms and bass drum are a muddled thud at best. I guess it's mostly that song that bugs me; I can hear Dale pretty well on the rest of the Maggot. Aw hell, I guess the trilogy doesn't sound that bad. But I still say their earlier stuff kills. I remember the first time I heard Boris on headphones..."Holy shit, that is so fucking heavy".

[Reverend Ebeneezer]

The combined technical and creative knowledge of a producer or engineer creates a good sound. Mind you, money comes into it as you can't create a very great sounding record on a 4-track, can you? It's all about the producer figuring out the sound, attitude and feel of the music and work his magic around the band, sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. For instance, Mark Deutrom must have been severely underpaid for his services due to the shocking job he did on Ozma.

[The Piss-Machine]

The dound of an album, regardless of the money involved in making said album is largely a deliberate aesthetic decision made on the part of (hopefully) the band and (often) the producer. In my home recordings I've been able to achieve monstrous drum sounds using only three, maybe four strategically placed microphones (and cheap ones at that); i.e. money comes second in the fashioning of a particular sound.
With respect to the Melvin's catalog, I would wager that the choice to present a 'thinner' sound was a conscious one on the part of the band, and had little to do with th material constraint s of the working environment.
Personally, I think that HAT, in terms of sound quality is somewhat more of an agressive album than even something like Bullhead or Houdini, insofar as the thinness is a means by which the guitars are made more abrasive and grating, whereas , while a throbbing low-end guitar sound may be prefferable in terms of creating something ominous and ponderous, the HAT style makes things somewhat more in your face. A good example of the way an abrasive guitar sound can be used to it's fullest would be the early Jesus Lizard stuff they did with Albini, or even some ofthe Big Black material.

[Dudbean]

Good point, Piss Machine. For a great, great abrasive guitar sound, check out "Moonlight on Vermont" by Captain Beefheart. It sounds like the strings are made of barbed wire.

I still say, though, that Dale should've been way louder in amazon. I think the sound of Stoner Witch made my standards too high, even if it was on a bigger budget. Also, I've never thought the production on Ozma was bad, I guess because the music is so good. The bass is pretty reedy, but it twists my panties nicely anyway.

[eddie]

"Goat" by The Jesus Lizard is awesome; love the tightness of the rhythm section! Good bass line in "Monkey Trick." Also I love the bass in We All Love Judy. Throbbing!

[beee]

The dound of an album, regardless of the money involved in making said album is largely a deliberate aesthetic decision made on the part of (hopefully) the band and (often) the producer. In my home recordings I've been able to achieve monstrous drum sounds using only three, maybe four strategically placed microphones (and cheap ones at that); i.e. money comes second in the fashioning of a particular sound.
With respect to the Melvin's catalog, I would wager that the choice to present a 'thinner' sound was a conscious one on the part of the band, and had little to do with th material constraint s of the working environment.
Personally, I think that HAT, in terms of sound quality is somewhat more of an agressive album than even something like Bullhead or Houdini, insofar as the thinness is a means by which the guitars are made more abrasive and grating, whereas , while a throbbing low-end guitar sound may be prefferable in terms of creating something ominous and ponderous, the HAT style makes things somewhat more in your face. A good example of the way an abrasive guitar sound can be used to it's fullest would be the early Jesus Lizard stuff they did with Albini, or even some ofthe Big Black material.

thats interresting because i'm going to record drums using only 3 mics, 2 to stereo and 1 for mono. How should i place them ???
1 to bassdrum, left to snare and right to right toms ?

[melon]

if you are going to be using three mics, id suggest micing the bass drum, the snare and toms..and an overhead for you cymbals....dont worry about the hi-hat cuz your overhead will usually pick that up nicely...just mic on the hi hat side...either that or get two more mics..one for your toms and the other for the other side for you overhead....

[The Piss-Machine]

With three mics (or any number for that matter) I always dedicate at least one to the kick. Take all the padding out of the drum and fly the mic inside so it's around six inches from the inside of the beater head, just off center, ie. not directly in front of the contact point of the beater to the skin. Sometimes, if I want more attack as well (and I have the resources) I'll mic the front skin too, pointed directly at the contact point. You might have some phase problems like that but it's worth a try.
If you only have three to work with, you can get a sweet sound by using one for the inside of the kick and placing the other two further back in the room, parallel with each other and around chest height. The effetiveness of that depends on how high you set up your drums. I play everything really low so it works for me. It's really just trial and error. Personally, with only three microphones, I wouldn't close mic enything (except the kick drum).
PS, if you want to get some really interesting sounds, set one of the room mics about three feet back from the other, that way the sound hits the first mic a few microseconds before it hits the other. Pan one signal hard left and the other hard right...and voila, fucked up room sound.

[melon]

i would say that micing that far away would depend on the room...i wouldnt do it if it wasnt an ideal recording space with good acoustics...i would mic them close...then, for some good room reverb, i would place i mic in a room with great acoustics, get rid of one of your corners, and place the mic facing the cut corner to catch the reflections...
then, what you do is, play your drum mix through a any speaker you have in that same room....add that track into your mix and you'll have a decent somewhat articifial room reverb...
i intern at a studio..thats one of the cool tricks i learned...

really as far as placement, just play around...mess with the mic settings...read up on different micing techniques...youd be suprised how much you can get out of so little....
ive really learned to squeeze a cup of water from a damp cloth with the little equipment i have....

[beee]

thanks ! nice idea with placing the other two further back in the room.
I wouldn't even think of that

[The Piss-Machine]

i would say that micing that far away would depend on the room...i wouldnt do it if it wasnt an ideal recording space with good acoustics...

I both agree and disagree with you. Yes the room comes into play, but only insofar as i can't be wood or glass panelled, ie. covered in reflective surfaces. If you are working with mics that have a standard cardioid pattern and they're pointed at the drums, the actual acoustics of the room around going to come into play as severly as one might think. The sound makes contact with the diaphram directly and rejects the rear reflections. Obviously you wouldn't put the mics like twenty feet away, but if you're eight or ten from the front of the kit, the acoustics aren't going to bother you. True, a nice room is ideal, but I think that the last time I had an oppurtunity to work in a nice room was at school, ie. they're few and far between.
I guess you just gotta make due with what you've got. If you can get a nice sound coming out of the drums themselves than you can do whatever your heart desires with the mic placement and it's still going to sound cool.
The reverb trick that you suggested is great in principle and sounds really killer when it works, but it's hard, damn hard to do properly. It's sweet to try it, even if you don't get exactly what you intended because sometimes the little mistakes work out in favour of the overall product.