1. Angela Desveaux – The Mighty Ship (it’s just beautiful and great on vinyl)
2. The Arcade Fire – Funeral (if you don’t respoond to ‘wake up’ you could be lifeless and dead)
3. Britta Phillips and Dean Wareham – L’avventura (again, it’s a beautiful record)
4. The Dismemberment Plan – Change (my dc friends make their perhaps last and greatest record)
5. Mike Doughty – Rockity Roll (no over-thought tunes. i wish this was longer.)
6. Duffy – Rockferry (what a voice!)
7. Eno and Byrne – Everything That Happens Will Happen Today (two of my favorites yet again on a record together this time writing great songs)
8. Godspeed You Black Emperor – Lift Your Skinny Fists Like Antennas To Heaven (the soundtrack to the first have of the decade for me)
9. Kanye West – Late Registration (that kanye certainly has something to say)
10. Kadman – Sing To Me Slower (if dave never wrote another song other than diesel and honeymoon’s end, we’d be ok)
11. Keane – Perfect Symmetry (stellar pop)
12. The Killers – Hot Fuse (see above)
13. Leisure Icons – Leisure Icons (angular mathy locals that has been in heavy rotation here)
14. Low – The Great Destroyer (dave fridmann + low = happy mat)
15. Luna – Rendezvous (i used to put my daughter to sleep to this record)
16. Mouse On Mars – Idiology (Mmmm, stomp pedals)
17. N.E.R.D. – In Search Of… (more drums please)
18. The Octopus Project – Hello Avalanche (my band opened for them this summer. i can’t stop playing this record)
19. Parts and Labor – Stay Afraid (new york’s finest)
20. Saint Etienne – Finisterre (sarah cracknell’s voice is to die for)
21. Sam Prekop – Who’s Your New Professor (i love the beats on this record)
22. Katy Perry – One of the Boys (good production, songwriting and a pretty face don’t always equate to crappy pop music)
23. Prince – The Rainbow Children (prince did have some good records this decade, and this is his finest)
24. Rod Lee – The Official (rod is a genius and you’ll be hearing more about baltimore club very soon)
25. Shakira – Fijación Oral Vol. 1 (that shakira can do anything)
26. Sigur Rós – Takk (birthing sounds)
27. Austin Stahl – The Things You Carry (austin can write about heartbreak like no other)
28. Radiohead – I Might Be Wrong (one of my favorite live albums ever and i am not a huge radiohead fan)
29. Rilo Kiley – More Adventurous (jenny lewis.)
30. Justin Timberlake – Justified (pharrell williams is one sick drummer, JT is someone who i’ve yet to get sick of)
31. Tokio Hotel – Schrei (they were everywhere in europe. who cares if they play their instruments.)
32. Trans Am – TA (my dc favs… they can do no wrong)
33. Wendy and Lisa – Girl Bros. (see above, they can do no wrong)
34. John Zorn – Live at Tonic 2001 (john zorn would be in the supergroup in my head. acharei mot is my jam in this set.

Adapting Your Song Structure for the Studio
Your band has just finished listening to a studio mix of the song that is most requested by live audiences. As silence descends, everyone looks kind of confused. It’s just not happening. Everything is played “correctly”, but it doesn’t really pop and snap like it does on stage.

Maybe that long build between the verse and the hook sounds repetitive. The volume increases, but there’s no crowd egging you on, no wave breaking into the chorus. Maybe the abrupt halt between the end of the chorus and the instrumental breakdown sounds forced and kills the momentum; the wowed audience – waiting breathlessly to hear you come back in right on beat – is not there to cheer when you do.

Whatever the specific problem may be, it’s only a matter of time before you realize an old favorite needs to be reworked if it’s going to sound good on an album. Of course, rarely do you have unlimited time in the studio and as such it’s rarely worth sitting around in the studio addressing a problem of this magnitude. If you get stuck on a song that is integral to the album you’re producing, it’s often best to move on to something else for that session. It will save a lot of aggravation and wasted money.  Instead, set up a rehearsal to focus on resolving the issue, whatever it may be.

Once again, there are innumerable hypotheticals that could exemplify this problem and its solution. Here is a solution to one of those described above:

The Build that Built Too Long
In a live setting, it’s the hottest part of your show. The band hammers out eighth notes together, all the while building from the subtlest pianissimo to a thunderous fortissimo before crashing wildly into the band’s best hook. The crowd loses its collective head and rose petals and panties shower down on you from all sides. In the studio, it just sounds…dumb. Everyone agrees. You decide to take 5, set up a rehearsal, and agree on a new direction for the day.

That night, you all get together to work it out. It can be difficult to conceive of a better way to play what has worked well for a long time and a good place to start is by identifying what’s wrong so you can do the opposite. You may not end up liking the opposite, but it will get you out of your rut.

If you’re dealing with a long build that relies on live dynamics, try going with something shorter that relies on musical cues to propel the song. For instance, if the build is typically four bars long, try going with one or two; instead of hammering out the same chord using eighth notes, write a 1-bar line or play a passing chord on the “and” of “3” that resolves to the chorus.

Once you’ve taken this first step, you will very likely be inspired and have some fun figuring out how to bring excitement to the song in a studio setting. Who knows: you may find that it brings new life to an already-reliable show stopper.

In all cases, it’s important to remember that this is about the songs and how they work in a given setting (in this case, the studio). This isn’t about individual musicians or even songwriters (although care should be taken not to dilute the songwriters’ vision). And, while these issues can be frustrating and difficult to resolve, they are also fertile ground for creative inspiration. That’s the beauty of creating and sustaining musical entities such as songs: what stumps you today often results in new directions tomorrow.

Some musical elements notoriously stand out in the studio: audio bleed, tempo, precise playing, being in tune, etc. But others are not as well known. In particular, and to the surprise of many artists, the songs themselves may not work in the studio like they work conceptually or even live.

Because each song is a unique creature, it’s difficult to list universal tips for reworking them in the studio. Instead, think of songs as living, breathing beings that react to drastic changes in their environment. Be flexible enough to hear where an arrangement might be well-served by subtle changes like removing a measure or adding a turnaround.

The following are examples of how songs might be forced to evolve in the studio.

Fills and Leads
Probably everyone who plays music — myself included — has at least a touch of exhibitionism within them. Why else would we get up onstage and play music for as many strangers as we can? For most of us, message matters and communing with a sympathetic audience is often paramount. Yet there’s a definite jolt of adrenaline when you’re onstage and the audience is feeling what you’re laying down. If you’re laying down your favorite guitar lead or drum fill and the audience cheers, it’s even better.

Unfortunately, on tape, that same momentous measure may just sound out of place at best, obstructive at worst. For instance, if you’re playing your lead back-to-back with a singer as she wails the hook to a screaming audience, it won’t matter too much if her exact words are lost. In the studio, you’re going to want to hear those words. There is no one way to fix this hypothetical problem, but here are a couple of options:

Option 1: Ditch it. This is drastic and it can feel like a huge sacrifice. After all, this is the “official” documentation of a song you love. If you find yourself reflexively opposed to ditching a favorite lead or fill, try to think about the issue in terms of what the song needs. Is the song better served by the confluence of melodic leads (the guitar line and the singer’s line) or by clarity of message?

Option 2: Alter the instrumental arrangement. Does it matter which instrument is playing that lead? Can a mighty drum fill be replaced by a subtle conga line (rimshot!)? Can the guitar part be played instead by the keyboardist? Here, you can really use the studio to your advantage. Timbre (pronounced ‘tahm-ber’) — a sound’s “character” — is important live, but in the studio it can play an enormous role due to the microsonic lens. Sounds that might come off thin live can become integral parts of the studio mix while staying out of the way of a more important melodic element.

Coming up…. Adapting Your Song Structure for the Studio.

1. Practice! If you don’t practice you won’t sound good. Bottom line. If you are planning to use a click in the studio, learn how to play with one.
2. Tune, tune, tune! If you don’t know how to tune, check out this link or ask a friend who does. When going to record in a studio, work with an engineer who knows how to finely tune your kit.
3. Put new heads on. That said, if the existing heads aren’t excessively worn or dented and you like the way they sound, they are probably ok. Keep in mind new heads may need a couple days of playing to break in. Check and tune as needed in between takes/songs just like a guitarist would.
4. Try tuning the drums to the fundamental key of the song played on. When drums ring in the key of the song, the ring is more pleasing to the ear.
5. Lube your kick pedal. No one likes a squeaky kick pedal unless you are listening to Zeppelin.
6. Tighten up the nuts and bolts of your lugs and make sure nothing is loose.
7. Pick up new sticks. Try wood and nylon tips. Sometimes the song warrants one or the other. Or one wood and one nylon in different hands.
8. Use gaffers tape and a bit of a sponge and/or wallets placed on a snare to provide some muffling as needed. Ringo used a pack of smokes. Moon Gel works great too and doesn’t cause cancer.
9. Change the tension of the snares to fit the song. If you have more than one snare, don’t be afraid to use them at different times to fit the song.
10. Move your kit around the room. Drum sounds vary depending on how they are bouncing off the walls. Experiment.

Some folks are surprised that mixing requires that much of an investment. After all, you spent all that time tracking to make sure you got just the right sound. Isn’t it now just a matter of twisting some pots and sliding some faders?

Well, no. First, it depends on the quality of the recorded tracks. It’s true that a mixing engineer can’t polish a turd and most of the time garbage in will be garbage out. But there are basic techniques to make a mix shine. Secondly, even when the tracking is glorious, there is a myriad of variables to consider when mixing the final sound. Just as a film editor can make or break a great movie, a mixing engineer can be either the barrier or the stepping stone to the sound you hoped to achieve.

And then there’s the question of who will mix your record. This can play into your budget as much how much time it takes. A good engineer should have not only good ears and knowledge of his/her gear, but an understanding of the band’s vision and where to place the sounds. When hiring a mixing engineer, listen to their previous work and talk about what your goals are. Be specific. Cite your influences and inspirations and what really resonated with you in your favorite records. The engineer can then take that feel and translate it into “more bass here, less reverb there, add a tape delay on that, and pan this hard-right”.

A byproduct of placing an emphasis on mixing is, of course, a greater need for time and money. Keep this in mind when you’re planning. If you don’t have the ideal budget for mixing, consider doing a shorter record or an EP. It’s better to have a fabulous short record than a mediocre long one. Some bands even get away with doing an incredible single and touring on that until they’ve raised the funds to make the full-length that they want. You may also want to consider a digital-only release to avoid pressing costs. And make efficient use of your tracking time by rehearsing, rehearsing, rehearsing before you get in the studio. Mixing is as much a part of the creative process as tracking is and you don’t want to end up rushing through it because you ran out of resources.

I came across my friend’s record a year ago and loved the way it sounded. It turned out that it was mixed by Jason Martin. Now it’s not every day that you hear of a small band hiring a mixing engineer with credentials like Jason’s. This caught my attention.

I asked Ed (the songwriter) why he decided to hire Jason. He said he wanted cohesiveness to his record. In the rough mixes, vocals popped out of nowhere; drums were distracting; the bass was too loud; and the guitars were thin. Of course, this was what Ed was expecting to hear when he received the rough mix. But he wanted to go in a different direction for the final mix. He wanted to be able to pull out different sounds and create a feel that was a little more sophisticated than what was usually done. And by budgeting for the mixing process and hiring a good mixing engineer, he had a record that did his music justice. Take a listen…

Below you’ll hear the rough mix and the final mix of one of my favorite songs from Ed’s record entitled “Changing Trains”.

Changing Trains (Rough Mix)
[See post to listen to audio]

Changing Trains (Final Mix)
[See post to listen to audio]

You can hear more of Ed’s music here. And I encourage you to pick up a copy because it’s both sonically and musically engaging (i.e. It rocks!).

You don’t have to break the bank to mix a record. You don’t need to spend 4 years doing it either. But you do need to budget and plan for a good mix.

1. 1. Angela Desveaux: The Mighty Ship – I played a show with a band a few weeks ago. We opened for them. And they had their record on vinyl. It’s insanely good. The drummer is mind blowing. I’ve not seen a drummer lean in to his hits in forever. I’ve never seen someone so expressive. Oh and the music is beautiful. And Angela’s voice is wonderful.
2. 2. MGMT: Oracular Spectacular – While the album does fall apart after “Time To Pretend,” the record is totally a stand out for what’s on the radio these days. And their beats are super fun and spacey.
3. 3. Dennis Wilson: Pacific Ocean Blue- Why it took this long to be re-mastered is beyond me. This is such a gem of a record. I use it as a reference CD at the studio. If you don’t include Brian Wilson’s SMiLE it’s my favorite solo Beach Boys record. Hands down.
4. 4. The Felice Brothers: Adventures of The Felice Brothers Vol. 1- Listened to heavily on our trip to North Carolina this summer. Fit the ride tremendously. While we only listened to it once. It was listened to and not simply heard. I need to listen again.
5. 5. David Byrne & Brian Eno: Everything That Happens Will Happen Today- Just breathtaking. Also this record solidified the fact that I am no longer a kid. I liked the record after a few listens. But I didn’t begin to love it until I got a note from my friend that he was going on tour with David playing keys. Once I saw the show I got it fully. It’s been in heavy rotation since.
6. 6. Eureka Birds: s/t- Local kids gone awesome. Yet they are still unsigned. I was supposed to see these guys open for a friends band, but just got to talk with them right after their set I missed. I did get to eventually see them a few weeks later. Their record is awesome and so un-Baltimore. It’s a record to listen to on headphones.
7. 7. The Ting Tings: We Started Nothing- I think I first saw them on the European MTV Awards at my parents house because they have cable TV. I think I like them because they are different. And catchy as hell. Women singers who don’t sing slow sad songs with a lot of acoustic guitars really stand out for me. Not that I don’t like women who sing slow sad songs.
8. 8. Vampire Weekend: s/t- The record really should have been called “As Indie As You Wanna Be”. But whatever, I really liked the record as much as I want to punch them all in the neck.
9. 9. K-Swift: K-Swift Club Queen Jump Off Vol 10- Baltimore Club queen. RIP. Solid club. And my little girl loves dancing to her.
10. 10. She & Him: Volume One- This record was non-stop for a long while. Then it stopped to breathe and now it’s back again. Such a sweet and fun record. Completely looking forward to Volume Two.
11. 11. E. Joseph and The Phantom Heart: All The Medicine In The World- A total stand out record. Awesome production from the Starflyer 59’s Jason Martin. And incredible songs that pull from a lot of the best bands of the 1980s with out being derivitive or cliché.

So the first thing we did was hit the books. We spent a lot of time researching how to acoustically isolate the live room and control room to get rid of noise both coming in and going out. It turns out that two of the biggest factors in sound isolation are mass and air gaps. So we had a couple things working to our advantage right off the bat. First, the walls separating us from our neighbors and the exterior world were laid about 120 years ago and comprised of 8-10 inches of stone and brick. That’s some serious mass. We also had four-foot hallways between us and our neighbors on either side. Built-in air gaps. Plus, our ceilings were over 10 feet high, which left us with quite a bit of headroom for treatments.

To determine how many decibels (dB) we really needed to get rid of, we conducted a few tests. Our high tech evaluation consisted of one person banging the hell out of a drum kit in what would become the live room while another person recorded dB levels from next door with a $40 sound level meter from Radio Shack. We then compared that to the dB levels of the everyday noise level in that building to determine how much noise we were adding without any sound treatments at all.

We then performed a few variations on the test. We tried it with a keyboard playing various notes through an amp. (This gave us an idea of how the volume changed with different frequencies.) We tried it in different rooms to learn whether the hallways made a difference. (They did.) And we tried it closer to the windows to see how they factored in. (Cold air isn’t the only thing getting in.) And then we did the same thing with the meter in our own space to see how many db the buses and trains sent into our space as well as people walking upstairs.

What we found was that the buses outside actually contributed more noise next-door than our drummer and the weakest link was definitely the old windows. But the prize for most dB went to the people walking upstairs. This impact noise was actually louder than the trains. But while impact noise is notoriously tough to get rid of, so are super-long low frequency soundwaves, which is what the train’s low rumble traveled over.

So after doing some math, our course was set. We had about 40 dB to get rid of as well as some troublesome impact noise. For you acoustical nerds out there, this meant that with the 20 or 25 db our existing structure was already eliminating, we needed to up the Sound Transmission Coefficient (STC) for our new construction to about 60 or 65. Oy!

The key with the live room was going to be building it as a “box within a box” or, in other words, framing and building out four walls, a ceiling and a floor without having any rigid connections between the new inner room and the old external room. Sound travels really well through continuous rigid structures. It does not travel as well through air. (Remember yelling to your parents in the basement through the heat ducts? Your voice was actually resonating through the metal ductwork rather than through the air space inside them.)

So the solution is lots of rubber, lots of air gaps and a type of hat channel called resilient channel (RC) that attaches to the old structure on one side and the new structure on the other and allows give between the two to absorb sound vibrations without passing them through to the rest of the building.

The rest of the construction was fairly traditional, except that we doubled up layers of materials to add mass, packed everything with insulation and allowed for an air gap between walls to allow sound waves to bounce around and diminish. (Ok, not so traditional.) In the live room, we floated the floor on top of the existing floor by resting the new joists on rubber “U-boats” (essentially engineered hockey pucks). This allowed the floor to be anchored without being rigidly attached. Then we packed insulation between the joists and topped it with two layers of plywood, underlayment and a bamboo finished floor.

In the control room and the live room, we floated the ceiling by applying the same concept but in reverse. The framing was attached to the existing ceiling with construction adhesive and long screws and packed with insulation, allowing space for a small air gap. To then separate the rigid attachment from the new ceiling, RC was attached and then a sandwich of drywall and soundboard was attached to the RC. The idea here is that the screws going through the drywall do not penetrate the ceiling joists, only the resilient channel, so there is no rigid attachment. (Note: If you use our plans and the ceiling falls on your head, don’t sue us. We’re neither architects nor engineers. This part we kind of winged. Though we did manage to get all our stamps and permits.)

To take detail to the extreme, the drywall boards were all staggered so there were no consistent seams from one side of the ceiling or floor to the other. And finally, a 1/4″ gap was left between the walls and the floor and between the walls and the ceiling. This was later sealed with a non-hardening acoustical caulk. Fortunately, our contractor was as anal as we were.

We replaced all the old windows with triple-glazed windows and sealed them with caulk. The window in the control room was replaced with glass block, which has a Sound Transmission Coefficient in the 50s. (That’s good.) And we divided the front room into a lounge and a live room, which provided an additional buffer from the traffic outside as well as some chill-out space.

In the name of saving some cash, we decided not to float the floor in the control room. There is very little recording done in there and we agreed it was a realistic compromise. What that means today is that when the train goes by, you can stand in the office in the rear of the building, which has no acoustical treatment and hear the rumble fairly well. Then you can walk into the control room, close the doors, and just feel the bass in your chest. Finally, you can step up into the live room, close the doors and not hear a thing.

It was a good feeling to hear that silence after all the blood, sweat and fears of planning and construction. And it proved that you don’t have to blow your budget on name-brand acoustical materials when layers of plain vanilla drywall, fiberglass insulation and (the cheapest of all) air will suffice.

Once a band or artist is done tracking and overdubbing the parts of a song, an engineer will mix it. This is the time when all the levels of all the individual parts (instrumentals, vocals, etc) are adjusted up and down to find the perfect mix. Reverbs are added, where necessary. Vocals are compressed if they pop out at certain points. Bum notes are muted, if they distract.

Mixing is essential. Getting the right mix can make or break a song. You don’t want everything loud. And you don’t want everything soft. Some parts you want quiet, and others you want to pop. You want to be able to hear everything cohesively as one complete piece, while also being able to discern the individual parts and create a ride through the song that carries the listener through varying ups and downs, ins and outs.

Beyond cleaning up the sound on a technical level, mixing can also be a crucial creative step, which is why one mix (or re-mix) can have a completely different feel and sound than another. Mixing can be a time to move parts of the song around, consider all the variables, and use the tools of the studio to add another layer on top of the recorded tracks. With some artists, the engineer or producer mixing the song is like an additional member of the band in terms of creative input.

Mastering is what happens when you are done mixing. It’s a process to tweak all the songs of a record so they jibe as a whole. It’s a subtle process and takes time and concentration on many different sound sources. The process is not that far from that of mixing, but it’s more global. The goal is to refine the overall sound of each song so that the album works as a unit and sounds more cohesive and pleasurable overall.

Mastering isn’t always essential, most notably for a single, depending on who your audience is and where it’s being played. Many times mastering can muddy up a record. It can make certain elements of a song harder to hear when the author of that song had different intentions. That said, mastering often has benefits and can add shine and a feeling of completion and unity to a record.

Simply put, mixing is bringing the individual parts of a song together to work as one. Mastering is bringing the individual songs of an album together to work as one. Mixing is something that should always be planned and budgeted for whereas whether to master is a decision that should be made on a case-by-case basis. Above all, there is an artistry to both processes and it’s important to choose an engineer who not only knows his/her tools, but understands the artist’s creative vision and the final goals for the album and knows how to use his/her tools and ears to achieve them.

Producer, musician and analog fundamentalist Steve Albini (Big Black, Rapeman, Shellac) and Kim Deal (The Pixies, The Breeders) have been busy constructing an all-analog concept of recording music: The All-Wave Recording Movement.

Their creed is loosely stated as “everything should be an analog sound recording of someone playing or singing, rather than using a computer to generate or digitally manipulate sounds separated from the dimension of time in which they were performed.” Basically, to record All Wave one must use no computers, no MIDI, no samplers, no digital recording, no auto-tuning, or any other mainstays of contemporary production.

The 2008 Breeders album Mountain Battles was recorded using the All-Wave philosophy, and Deal designed a logo (above) to be voluntarily used (like the Parental Advisory stickers of the ’80s) if one chooses to record their record in this way. (I assume she used an X-Acto knife and tape to create the logo.) The goal, Steve Albini writes, is to create a movement that is “at least as significant as the Ska revival, or perhaps the WNBA.”

Wow.

I believe analog recording is a great tool. It’s tried and true. There are many tools I utilize in the analog world. When it suits the project. The hole in the nostalgic all-analog concept is that it only applies to the rock genre, which is what Albini typically records. Steve is not only talking about eliminating digital recording techniques but composition and instrumentation tools as well, which have long been a part of other genres outside of rock. It’s elitist and narrow-minded to imply that music can’t be created with a computer.

The second issue here is that there are those who follow Albini like he is an engineer-god and will take this to mean that all other methods of recording are inferior and the only correct way to record is with an all-analog method. Yet this is far from the truth. There are many possibilities and permutations when it comes to choosing equipment and techniques.

When analog tape first appeared on the commercial market after WWII, people scoffed at it, saying that direct-to-vinyl was the only real way to record. And the same thing happened in the ’80s when digital recording first came to the forefront. History repeats itself. Luckily most formats and technologies only improve with time. Vinyl is still a wonderful and viable format. It is not the only format.

So my question to Albini and Deal would be this: Is technology that is 70 years old really a factor in making a record sound good? It’s one thing to be a purist (ahem: obsessive-compulsive) in your methodology, but to believe that the methodology above all else is a factor in creating a superior sound is another. I just haven’t found this to be the case.

Otherwise, why stop at tape? Let’s make all future music using dijeridoos and wax cylinders. I mean, really, tape is far too clean sounding. I need the grainy artifacts of carved wax to forge true music.

Seriously though, like analog tape recording, other methods of recording seem to sneak their way back in to the main stream. For a while 12bit samplers were all producers had. 16bit came and now we’re well past 24bit. But there are many producers who now strive to have that crunchy 12bit drum sound. Which leads me to believe that at some point in time, Alesis ADAT’s will be sought after for their distinct 16bit sound. It’s all about finding the sound that works for a particular project at a particular time. Analog fundamentalism is just an exercise in intellectual masturbation.

That said, Albini and Deal have constructed an interesting concept for capturing music. All analog. Go for it! Maybe for your next record you should try it. Break out that old 4-track or the Tascam 388 8-track. But let’s not stop there. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid. Recording in analog isn’t the only way to record and I hope home recordists get this and pass it on. After all, the digital revolution has only made music production and recording more accessible for more people, just like the 4-track did in the ’70s and ’80s.

Just keep hitting record, with what ever you have, no matter what good ol’ grumpy Albini has to say.