Three Budgets

Ever since we hosted the Pre-CMJ09 event, “Ask the Producers”, we have had numerous discussions internally on how artists budget for sessions and trying to see from the clients’ perspective the difficulties they face. In one of these conversations, Roy Hendrickson (who was one of the panelists for the CMJ event) told us about how he advises his clients to make up three different budgets - low, medium and high and write down the pros and cons of each option. This seemed like a very sensible suggestion. Roy is particularly sensitive to these types of decisions because he has to mix what has been recorded, often after poor choices have been exercised. If one thinks through all the choices and implications of choosing one over the other with both eyes open, at least there won’t be too big a surprise, i.e. budget overruns.

Because of financial limitations, there are tradeoffs and it is important to understand what the consequences are. Assuming that you had plenty of rehearsals and the songs are fully fleshed out, the first big branch in the decision tree is how large the room should be and how many booths you need. The key decision is isolation. Do you want to play together or will you record one instrument at a time? If the former, can you get enough isolation between each member? If you can’t get enough, it will be very difficult to “fix” things later. If you use a one-instrument-at-a-time “overdub strategy”, you will obviously be spending more time recording. Time, in this case, adds up to more money even though you've opted for a lower room rate.

Can your band members play well enough? Do you plan to do a lot of “fixing” later? Will you be using session players? Will they be “first call” musicians or someone further down the list?

If you are playing together, does the studio have enough (of the right) microphones, mic stands, outboard gear...etc., all the items you need? Even if there is enough gear, do they work?

Add up all the time in the studio. How do the figures compare? We haven’t even begun to discuss the sound of the room.

Now, let’s look at post-tracking activities. Was the singing / playing in tune and in time? Does each track sound good and clean? You will begin to see the effects of the tradeoff you made in the room sound and quality of recording at this point. Will the tracks require a lot of “fixing”? Who will do it? Unfortunately, much of the “fix” time is hidden in the mixing process, especially if the mixer wants the end result to sound halfway decent and is not willing to deliver a sub par mix. Many artists do not realize how quickly the mix can happen if you have well recorded tracks.

Now add up all the time. I hope you are not under a deadline.

When money is tight, usually time and someone else’s effort substitutes for actual out of pocket expenses. Maybe the end result is good enough for your fans as a MP3 download.

At the end of the day, it is all about efficiency in the studio and the ease in which mixing is done. There are hidden costs, whether it is quality or the amount of time spent. A chart comparing dollars, time, effort with pros and cons is a very useful tool to plan out your sessions and be aware up front of what the tradeoffs are.

*****

Update on History of Recording Studios

As I was researching recording studios, I found a site that had a pretty comprehensive history of recording studios in the Pacific Northwest. I thought I’d share the link with you.

*****

From the Hip Predictions

In less than a couple of years, the average number of tracks per song will reach 200 and it will take at least a week for a mixer to sort out all the tracks. If tuning / fixing is required, add an additional 3 - 5 days. This is all before the actual mixing takes place. Artists who are organized will be able to finish a mix in third of the time.

Avatar, A Resource Center for Indie Bands

On October 20th, 2009, Avatar Studios hosted a pre-CMJ panel discussion called "Ask The Producers" with Steve Lillywhite, Kevin Killen and Roy Hendrickson. We held this event in the spirit of CMJ to open a dialog with independent artists and to share some of the knowledge we utilize daily as a professional recording studio in the hope that the information might be helpful to artists.

People were asked to submit their questions for the panel in advance when they registered for the event. There were basically three broad categories of questions. The first type of questions had to do with production - e.g. trends, lo-fi, workflow, home vs. studio recording. The second had to do with how technology impacts production - e.g. the use of click tracks, Autotune, grids, ...etc. Finally, the third had to do with the role of a producer and how he or she interacts with the artists.

I won't repeat the specific questions here, but you can watch the six-part video series of the panel discussion on Avatar’s YouTube channel.

The panel discussion was followed by a one-on-one consultation session between the lucky participants and one of the panelists. It was not unlike "speed dating" where the artists were given 15-minutes to ask any questions or pitch any project they have worked on. It was a unique event and presented a rare opportunity for artists to interact and receive advice directly from experienced producers. It also gave us a glimpse into how resourceful and creative artists are in getting their projects done.

When I asked Kevin Killen for hints on how artists should prepare for a consultation session like the one we had, he gave me the following pointers. I thought Kevin's hints were a good checklist for artists in evaluating their own production direction and would like to share them with you.

In no particular order.

1. How should you maximize your budget?

2. How should you record with your budget?

3. Can good production or arrangement alter your song for the better?

4. How can you maximize the assets (i.e. gear, space, instruments, …etc.) you have?

5. Who should you collaborate with for the best results? – e.g. producer, engineer, songwriters, arranger, other musicians

6. What are the strengths and weaknesses of your act?

7. Do you have a sound or are you searching for a sound?

8. Where do you want your musical career to be in a year? What do you need to get there?

9. Are you truly motivated for success? Will you do whatever is necessary to achieve it?

In the past, we as a studio did not get too involved with specific production issues other than how to set up, get gear that was needed and record the session well. We felt that production concerns should be addressed by the producer and/or the artist. Based on the questions we received for the panel discussion, we found that we could offer a lot of suggestions based on our experience so that artists are aware of what options they have. Production decisions will still have to be made by the producer / artist, but at least they can do so armed with more information.

As stated in past entries, artists should view us as a resource center. We strongly encourage you to tap into our knowledgebase and have an interactive dialog with us. Avatar happens to be a vibrant community of professionals working in the industry. We have tenants in our building who are musicians, songwriters, producers, engineers (including mastering) and people involved with specific expertise from record distribution to music for advertising and films. We deal with session musicians, freelance engineers, arrangers, gear manufacturers, guitar & drum techs, rental companies and other professionals who provide support us on a daily basis. Part of the value we bring (included in the cost of our rooms) is the opportunity to pick our brains for your session. You should take full advantage of it.

Check out our Indie Zone page where we will post info specifically of interest to indie bands.

Secrets of Avatar

What makes Studio A sound good?

Another AES Conference in New York has come and gone last month. The last time AES was held in New York in 2007, it was the 30th anniversary of our studio (Power Station + Avatar). To commemorate the occasion, there was a Grammy Recording Soundtable with the founders and staff from The Power Station as panelists.

During the panel discussion, Tony Bongiovi, the designer of the studio, explained how Studio A was conceptualized and designed. During the '70s, most studio live rooms were designed to be dead mainly because of the need to do multitrack recording. In these rooms, musicians had a hard time hearing themselves or each other when they performed. Tony's design goal was to create a reverb time based room for multitrack recording. If you look at Studio A's live room, the dome shaped surfaces are curved in to create a space where reflective distances are no greater than 30 msec from the sound source. The space was designed specifically for musicians to hear each other play and not have them play hard, all for the sake of capturing a better performance. That is why the room is great for horns and strings and the players like it.

To preserve the need for isolation, booths were added to the side, which was being done at Motown Studios in Detroit at the time.

The great drum sound that the room became known for was an accidental by-product of the design. The drums were originally meant to be placed and recorded in the rear "rhythm room" isolation booth. One day, as an experiment, the drums were brought out into the main room (“string room”) and that is when the massive room sound was discovered.

As for the control room, the common control room design at the time was to build a concrete bunker with lots of bass traps, which effectively made the space smaller. The Power Station control rooms used a diaphragmatic absorption technique where the rooms adjoining the control room, e.g. lounges, machine shop in the rear, were used as bass traps. Instead of being sound barriers, the sound passed through some of the walls by design. Yet the control room still maintained a 35dB separation from the live room.

All control rooms - A, B, C and G – share the same design philosophy and dimensions. The idea was to be able to hear the tracks the same way from room to room.

Want to get the "Motown Sound"? Do it with Avatar's Chamber #2.

In the '60s, everyone was fascinated by the "Motown Sound" including Tony Bongiovi. In fact, it was what got him interested in audio engineering. He wanted to unravel the mystery of that distinct sound. He knew part of it was the live echo chamber they used, which had an extremely short decay time. He suspected that it was "designed wrong" or they made a mistake when it was built. To prove his theory, he built a 4-channel mixer in the garage and tried to replicate the sound by adding the echo to an already existing Motown record modifying the signal going into the garage. When Tony discovered that one of the bathrooms in the basement of the then Power Station had a short decay time, he took what he learned from experimenting in his garage and was able to recreate the Motown live chamber sound pretty closely. The bathroom is still an active live chamber today and is used a lot by clients who know about it. If you want the "Motown Sound", just ask for Chamber #2.

The audio recording of the Grammy Recording Soundtable panel discussion from AES 2007 was available from the AES site (cannot seem to find the item since the site redesign) or you can watch the video at the Grammy Web site under the P&E Wing section.

When is the Best Time to Record?

Radiohead's Thom Yorke recently announced that they have no plans to release another long-playing album. Instead, they would release instantly available singles and quick EPs.

With the exception of artists with an expansive vision to record a cohesive concept album, there are several reasons why this approach might make sense. Not all bands are like Radiohead, with an established name and track record that can afford to make an album by themselves and sell the completed product to the highest bidding record label. Many bands are unsigned, and even if they are signed, production budgets are shrinking by the minute. By reducing the number of tracks to record at any moment down to one (single) or just a few (EP), the up front production costs due at any given time do not have to be large. Some of the production cost can be recouped right away by making the tracks available for download. The cycle would thus be shortened from the time the recording investment is made to when the recordings can start being monetized.

Another benefit is that bands are not forced to come up with more than ten tracks or 50 minutes of music for an album. Instead, they can focus their efforts on their strongest tracks and maybe take a little bit more time and care in polishing the production (including recording), arrangement and performance. Buyers probably would not mind paying for quality tracks and the complaint of paying for "fillers" would become a non-issue.

As for the timing of when to record and when to release the completed recordings, there is no longer a set rule. Instead of a band touring to support their record, a band puts out a record to support their tour. Of course, a band wants to have a record to sell, preferably one that contains some of the songs that were performed, when they tour. The concertgoers' need for obtaining mementos of the performance and to get instant gratification means selling records (CD, EP or vinyl) at the venue. At a very minimum, you want to make sure the tracks are available for download and the fans know where to get them.

It is not uncommon for bands to "test" out a new song during live shows. In fact, the more times a song is performed, the band has the opportunity to work out all the kinks with that song. A different key / tempo may be tried, a different arrangement applied and instrumental solos can be perfected. Better to work out the bugs this way than in the studio. Re-recording for these reasons is wasteful.

It is interesting to watch a well-rehearsed band come in to record. We have seen many such examples during the sessions that we host for World Cafe and Lillywhite Sessions. Wilco recently came in during a hole in their tour schedule and performed five songs live in four hours from their new album. The performances were great and the recording came out fantastic. Goldfrapp performed their atmospheric songs live and did them well in one or two takes. A well-rehearsed band could save a ton of time in the studio, especially one that is in the midst of their tour or towards the end of their tour.

If a band is well rehearsed, it is not inconceivable that an entire album worth of music can be recorded in a day. It only took Ron Carter and his Quartet five hours to track 7 songs, recording over 50 minutes of music. By the end of the day, the entire album was mixed and in the can. They rehearsed the day before they came in, but the band also had performed some or most of the songs many times during their tour. I know what you're thinking - you can do that because it was Ron Carter, that it was jazz. Admittedly, it is a somewhat different process for rock or pop, but the point is that preparation and rehearsal can shorten the time in the studio significantly.

That begs the question, when is the best time to record? That answer might be before a tour and after a tour. As stated earlier, a band wants to have a recording to sell during their tour. A single, an EP or a few downloads could do the trick. Then, after many live shows, the band might be ready to record tracks for posterity, perhaps document the polished, definitive version of a particular song. Another answer might be frequently and often in order to have a constant stream of material to keep your fan base engaged.

Doing shorter, maybe more frequent sessions may be the way of the future. How many tracks should be recorded per visit? If you are going into a recording session, there is probably a sweet spot in terms of number of tracks to record to take advantage of economies of scale. You might as well spread the cost of the session over a few tracks since you will be going through the time and trouble to set up a session. From our experience that number is somewhere between three and six depending on how well rehearsed you are, how different the set up is for each track and how much overdubbing you need to do.

Investing less in album creation is not altogether a bad idea. It is financially a healthy strategy for bands. For studios, it would mean shorter and hopefully more frequent recording sessions. Our hope is that whatever investment is made for production, more consideration be given to the quality of recording and not just the quantity.

A Short Survey of Resources About History of Recording Studios

Maybe because I am reminded every day by ghosts of so many sessions past, I have an appreciation of other studios with long histories, particularly those that came before us. I suppose we are just one link from a long chain of recording history that is still evolving right before our eyes.

It is not easy to operate a studio, much less keep it running for many years. I hear a lot of stories from the "old days" from clients, engineers, musicians and vendors reminiscing about their experiences and memorable sessions they've had here and at other studios in town. New York used to have so many studios.

Are any of these stories documented? There have been a few books written specifically about recording studios and I'll introduce some of them in this entry. I feel there has not been enough documented and many people who actively participated in the "golden age" of recording are getting on in years.

I am by no stretch a historian or an archivist, but I am an enthusiast and would like to share with you what information I have collected.

The book that covers most of the famous recording studios throughout the country is Temples of Sound by Jim Cogan and William Clark. The book covers the late '40s into the '70s and includes studios like Capitol, United Western Recorders, Stax, Sun Studios, Chess, Motown, Sigma Sound, Atlantic, Columbia, Criteria and others. I would say it is required reading.

Starting regionally with New York, one of the best and concise history of recording studios in New York that I have run across was a September 1999 article in Studio Sound magazine written by Dan Daley called "New York New York." Unfortunately, the magazine no longer exists and I cannot provide links to the article.

The best book (the only one I know of) dedicated to New York recording studios is Studio Stories by David Simons. The book covers the period of the '50s through the mid-'70s. At the AES Conference held in New York in 2005, there was a historical panel called "History of the Grand Recording Studios of New York City" (scroll down a bit) which featured representatives from many of the studios highlighted in the book including Mira Sound, Fine Recording, Columbia 30th Street, Bell Sound, A&R, Record Plant and Mediasound. The audio of the panel discussion can be purchased from the AES store. The recording is a little disjointed and you have to guess which panelist is speaking, but it is still pretty interesting. I recreated the map of studios (circa 1962) from the book in Google Maps and updated it with a few more studios.

To AES' credit, they run great historical panels, which are recorded, and they serve as a great source of information. There were two other historical panels at AES 2005 and AES 2007 that covered the history of other New York recording studios. Also at AES 2007, a Grammy Recording Soundtable panel on The Power Station was held. This event was videotaped by The Grammy Foundation. The video can be seen here. It is fascinating to watch and listen to Tony Bongiovi explain in his own words his philosophy / approach behind the design of the rooms.

For Nashville, there is a book called How Nashville Became Music City, U.S.A.: 50 Years of Music Row by Michael Kosser. It is on my list of books to read. Another source of information is an AES 2007 historical panel which traces the history of The Quonset Hut and RCA Studio B.

As far as the Los Angeles scene, I am not aware of any publications specific to that area. There is certainly a lot of rich history there. Maybe someone ought to write a book. There is a memorial / archival site of A&M Studios that is maintained by Stephen Barncard where you can browse Web pages as it were in 1998.

San Francisco Bay Area's recording studio history is lovingly and painstakingly detailed in Heather Johnson's book, If These Halls Could Talk. The book is very thorough and comprehensive of the studios in the area.

For books on overseas studios, there is Abbey Road by Brian Southall, Peter Vince and Allan Rouse. At AES 2006, there was a historical panel called "The Abbey Road Sound - 75 Years in the Making". Of course, a number of books about The Beatles have been published recently, the most notable among them is the monumental and definitive Recording The Beatles by Kevin Ryan and Brian Kehew.

Just as a side note, you can also hear Malcolm Addey's own version of his time at Abbey Road as well at Bell Sound and A&R Studios on our Oral Studio History podcast. I think oral histories are a great way to document studio history. A great application of this methodology is AES Historical Committee Oral History Project where experts in the audio field are videotaped talking about their expertise.

By no means is this list exhaustive and if you know of more resources about studio history, please send them in. I'll add them to the list of resources as I get them.

Other Resources:

Too Hot to Handle: An Illustrated Encyclopedia of American Recording Studios of the 20th Century by Randy McNutt

AES 2003 Panel "Temples of Sound" with Cosimo Matassa from J&M Studios in New Orleans and Joe Tarsia from Sigma Sound.

AES 2006 Historical Panel "San Francisco Studio History"

Masters of Thriller

We stared in awe at the contents of the opened box that was just delivered. In the box were several masters of Michael Jackson's Thriller. They were sent here for us to do digital transfers from 2” tape as preparation for the remixes for the 25th Anniversary edition of Thriller.

The client in charge of the process was verifying that the transfers were done properly in our Studio B when we checked in with him. He asked if we would want to hear some of it. Who would say no? He played us the track "Beat It." He soloed the famous Eddie Van Halen guitar solo, then just the lead vocal (which was fantastic!) followed by a lot of other individual tracks giving us an idea of how intricately layered the song was with a lot of different types of sounds and instruments. It was a song we have heard a thousand times, but the experience was still eye-opening and hearing how meticulously crafted it was.

I am always intrigued when a hit song is deconstructed as sometimes demonstrated in the video series, Classic Albums. It would be great to see one for Thriller. Each show has the artist and/or producer & engineer replay tracks from the hit album with running commentary on how much care and craft that went into the playing, shaping and mixing of each song. Showing more of this process would certainly raise the amount of appreciation people have for what professionals do in the studio. Think of the PR value that would have.

When I get the chance, I always ask engineers who have worked on hit songs / albums whether they knew at the time they were working on something special. (If you ask the producers, they'll always say yes). Most of the time, the answer I get is that they knew the music was good or the performance special, but most of the time, they were too busy making sure that everything was being recorded properly and the clients were happy. How can you foresee that the project you are working on will become a mega-Platinum hit? Sure, if the artist is currently hot and their career is on an upswing, you can predict that it will do pretty good, but for the songs on the album to become a sound track to the lives of thousands worldwide and become a cultural phenomenon, that is a little bit harder. That is why you have to treat every session like it will be a hit, because it just might become one. You never know.

Despite the splintering of attention and overabundance of content to consume, it is really encouraging to see that the experience of music can be ubiquitous. This certainly has a lot to do with the genius performer that Michael Jackson was. The sad thing is that people do not realize how important a part of life music is until an unfortunate event such as this occurs. It is a sign that with the right music and performer, there is still value in music and its impact can be powerful. Many people are saying that this phenomenon - the magnitude of talent, the mass appeal and worldwide reach, the record sales, the timing in history - can never be repeated. I would like to believe otherwise. You never know which masters in a box will change the world, again.

Cell Phone Etiquette

Besides the nuisance of phones ringing during takes or the distraction that texting and message checking can cause, there is another reason for requiring everybody involved in a recording session to actually turn off their cell phones. Switching cell phones to vibrate mode will not help in this case.

It is bad enough that studios have to contend with all sorts of RF in the air that show up on microphones and other recording gear. It certainly does not help matters if the RF sources are cell phones of the players in the session.

Every cell phone emits a "homing" signal to the nearest cell tower on a regular basis to let the tower know that it is still within range. When this happens, the cell phone will boost its RF output power up to 1W to make the connection. Normally, the output power is much lower at around 1mW.

If the cell phone is in close proximity to a microphone, it will result in noise. If the cell phone is left on top of or near the recording console, it might show up as noise on one of its channels. Cell phones have been known to interfere with outboard gear as well.

The last thing you need is somebody's cell phone ruining a perfect take. We understand that people want to be accessible so they do not lose a gig, especially in this economy. You can always retrieve and reply to messages during breaks. Most of the time, cell phone reception can be spotty anyway, e.g. in a building like ours that used to be a Con Edison power substation.

As a business that provides room and service, we cannot force people to turn off their cell phones. Unlike smoking, it is not against the law. We can only recommend that they do so. Enforcement will have to come from the producer or someone who is in charge of the session. Don't say we did not warn you.