Nice man. Can't wait for proper releases. Vinyl please.

 

Hey Dave!! The recordings sound great, man! I love the live sound. It's so much more real. You can tell it's you guys, playing in a room, simply laying down the jam. I feel like this aspect really speaks to your musicianship. However, if i may add a little constructive criticism, it seems that the trumpet sounds a little "closer" than the sax (mostly on hard times). Meaning that the sax seems to have a little more room sound than the trumpet. It might just be a slight mixing fix, maybe a touch of 'verb. Unless that's what you're going for, in which case it's word. And, i think i heard a certain distinct girggle in the R7's 'RNA.
'

But, seriously, great tunes, man. I'd love to get a copy when they're done. Non of this digital shiv, though.
I'm the type of guy that likes to hold a new album in his hands, you know?

Very ironicly, I've got two albums coming out as well. A ska ablum, and a jazz album. The Dendrites' "mountain standart time" is now out via Megalith Records, and The Pawn Ticket Trio, has finished tracking and mixing at the Blasting Room here in Colorado.


Mountain Standard Time was completely singletracked, which, in retrospect, was a naggy bitch. It was all done in shitty conditions too. A small garage/bedroom here in south Denver. The final product really speaks to the enginiering ablities of Kyle and Keith, our two guitar players.


The Pawn Ticket Trio's album was done semi-live. The rhythm section tracked all together in the same room, no baffling. Then the two horns were layed on top, then the vocals. The sounds are fantastic. The blasting room is like heaven. I even got to take a much needed shower our first day. But, it's not completely live. There are some picture of the setup we used on the Pawn Ticket myspace, and mine.


So, this is where I come to an impass of opinion. Having had experience in the studio as well as the stage, I appreciate different aspects of recording vs. playing, and how one must talor one's playing in these different situations. A premo studio album is always premo. The music will stand as perfect as it could be with all the tools and talent from those involved, but, it seems that live recordings, even if they're of poorer quality, really showcase the musicians for better or worse.


For example, the on the old Charlie Parker recordings, you REALLY hear the horns, not so much the rhythm section. While listening I'm naturally blown away by the shreading horns, but, at the same time, I know the rhythm parts are sweet, and want to hear more of them.


In contrast, let's look at "why do they rock so hard?" by Reel Big Fish. Though this album is the epitome of 3rd wave ska, it's a solid recording. The songs flow well, and the tones are clear and effecticve. But, this was one of their only albums with the 4 peice brass horn section (2 trumpets, 2 bones). Its a huge, wonderfully encompasing sound.
Maybe a little
'marching band,' but still done well. I've only seen them once with that ensemble. They still play those some of those tunes with the lesser section...

So, here is where I reach the impass. Now, I'm not trying to put the RBF on the same level as Charlie Parker, cus that's just silly (and unfair cus Bird was that much of a badass).
Which recording can you say is "better?"

My big question for you, my friend, is: how much should we use these amazing tools of ours, and, how do we use them tastefully in concert with our musical abilites?
 

Interesting question.

Let's forget which bands we are talking about for a sec. cause thats a loaded topic.


I think that one of the things that bothers me about jazz recordings a lot of the time is that you dont hear the rhythm section that well. bass solos disappear and need to get turned up. piano solo is half the volume of the sax solo...etc etc.


On the blue greens, I have put the rhythm section out a lot louder.
im used to hearing reggae so a lot of bass doesnt bother me y'know?

by the way, an aside, for good sonic charlie parker- check out the original "confirmation" and "nows the time"...they are on verve...and they sound amazing. sax is up front but you can hear the other parts pretty well.


Also, because the recording are in digital. I can take 1 track and make two out of it. Adjusting the volume of the sax in the section vs. during the solo. even eq them a little different.


I dont have a problem with this. they are relatively minor adjustments.


Jazz is easier for this, because there is more sonic space. snare, ride cymbal/hi hat, bass, horns, and guitar are all in different areas.


with reggae you got to layer it more. bass vs. kick drum. guitar vs. organ or piano skank.
which horns you want to hear more?

For me, the beautiful thing about live recordings is that you play stuff that is idiosyncratic. its not necessarily worked out. its not exactly what you intended but its still cool. you have to learn to live with a fluff here and there.


At the same time Im not above adjusting volumes so a mistake isnt as pronounced...or just cutting it completely if I can get away with it.


As for the trumpet on the blue greens. yeah, me and rolf have very different sounds. His is small, mellow, and focused. mine is broad and all over the place.
I think that he was playing more on the mic than i was, so its just the way it came out?

let me know what you think of these answers.

 

Word on, Dave, word on.




I guess musical innovation CAN be watered down by the digital tools, but, as with any tool, it depends on who wields it.




That's an interesting point about you and Rolf. His sound is directional (because of the bell) and yours is bigger and wider (cus of the keys). When I play live I try to use the directional aspect of the trumpet a lot. When I want to get big and blasty, I step back and try to fill the entire room. When I want to get sweet, I step in real close. This seems to drive sound guys crazy, but, it can be really effective when done with care.




I am used to the reggae as well, and love to hear full rhythm sound. Lot's of bass. I seem to remember many mixing sessions for The Dendrites' album that involved balancing guitar skank vs. organ, bass vs. kick etc. This also comes into play when you have a moderately large (3) to large (4 or more) horn section. When a section plays live, they endeavor to balance, blend, and articulate. I feel that this is what gives a section its power when it is heard live. The air actually moving and resonating, and, if done in an expert way, creates the overtones that make the section sound even bigger. BUT, the question for me is: "how do I translate that feeling to a recording?" It might not be possible.




In addition to eq and volume balance, I've run into the problem of panning. First off, I'm totally a mono kind of guy. To me, it sounds like more of a 'birds eye' view of the music, as opposed to the 'standing in the band' sound. I like the fact that I can hear all the parts equally. I am a fan of panning a rhythm section out, but panning horns (especially when playing as a section) seems to destroy the sense of verticality to harmonies, or even unison/octave parts. I've worked with a number of engineers who warn me of the dangers of phase cancelation and various other recording pit-falls, and use these as reasons to pan out a horn section. Every time I hear it, unless its obviously done for effect, it bugs the hell out of me.




How about you? How do you feel about stereo horns?
 

I am in favor of panning the horns.



especially for solos. its makes them "jump out" a little more.






because with digital you can have as many tracks as you want, I separate the solos from the horn section.



for the section, i have it going right down the middle on about half of the tracks. panned on the others. then for the solos, I almost always have them panned.

 

Those Russian microphones you used weren't Oktava mics were they?

I work in a studio and would love to use some of them myself.


Thanks for the lowdown on your recording procedure, it's nice to hear it from a musicians POV sometimes!
 

yeh. i think some of them were.

 

Cool tip about Protools and Cubase. Never used them myself, but the video for Protools 8 at www.digidesign.com makes it look extremely rad (!).