|
|
Post by stormymondays on Apr 27, 2019 3:31:41 GMT -6
I’ve been listening a lot lately to the various “Blood On The Tracks” reissues, and I was impressed (again) by Dylan’s acoustic guitar sound. Mostly in the 60s recordings, but it’s there in the naked BOTT performances. It’s a sound that’s common to a lot of records from that era, for sure.
Usually when I’m recording an acoustic I want piano-like lows, sweet midrange with no abrasiveness and detailed highs. That’s a great sound but it’s the opposite of what I’m talking about here.
This acoustic guitar sound is deep, not hyped, with sweet highs, warm and not lo-if. And it can sometimes sound like it’s a 12-string guitar playing, when it’s definitely not (I should search for examples and post them).
So what is it? The mic, the console, the tape, the guitar, the pick, the strings, the performer? Yes, of course it’s all of the above. But how to get close to that? And - did I make a decent job of explaining this? 😄
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2019 3:47:57 GMT -6
There was a whole long thread on this over at the other place a while back. Gotta be a combo of all those things you mention.
|
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Apr 27, 2019 4:01:30 GMT -6
Found some audio examples:
The vocal in this version is incredible, by the way. If the first couple verses don't give you goosebumps, I don't know what will!
And this short snippet, jacket buttons bumping against the guitar and all:
|
|
|
|
Post by theshea on Apr 27, 2019 6:15:27 GMT -6
yes, plektrum clicking against the guitars wood, warts and all :-) keep it raw!
i can get pretty close to this sound with my sigma j45 copy guitar, a heavy plektrum and the warbler 127 c-flat mic. the rest is not that important. those 3 things set the sound.
|
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Apr 27, 2019 9:48:34 GMT -6
i can get pretty close to this sound with my sigma j45 copy guitar, a heavy plektrum and the warbler 127 c-flat mic. Well, I can't with my Gibson Hummingbird, heavy plectrum and a KM84!  I can get a fantastic sound, but not THAT sound. I have some studio pics from '64 that show a U67 on vocals and a Shoeps CMT 20 on guitar, pointed to the soundhole! I think the guitar and strings play the bigger role here. I might need to try some regular bronze strings instead of my preferred Phosphor Bronze (Martin SP). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2019 10:09:33 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Apr 27, 2019 10:58:22 GMT -6
Not sure if that other thread talks about this so I’ll talk about it here. If you listen closely to that example, and a lot of examples from 60s - early 70s you might be able to pick up a very faint fast vibrato kind of sound, pitching up and down rapidly and kind of randomly: that’s the tape making its way through the transport, as you probably know. To me it’s a huge thing as it gives everything a nearly in audible gentle vibrato. The tape is kind of like dragging on certain peices on the tape path, getting stuck and unstuck every few ms, -well not really stuck, more slowing down/speeding up- this gentle flutter when it’s dialed out way quiet always sounds really cool to me. I’ve tried to make plugins do this but never seem to be happy with the result.
The other part where pitch shifts around slightly is when the reels are turning. It’s usually not a perfectly round experience. Maybe the reel flange is rubbing on the tape slightly in one part of the turn, or the tape pack isn’t totally perfectly reeled up in a small section. This is where the pitch will very gently shift up and down, nearly inaudibly every few seconds or so, and also it seems kinda random at times. When it’s really subtle practically undetectable, it adds this something special that’s kind of beyond real., .. we don’t hear it as shifting pitch but it is shifting around ever so slightly, sometimes quite a bit.
These two things are IMO why it’s really hard to fake 60s sounds authentically. tape formula, tape electronics, technique all add to the sound but I can fake that or run the same tape. The old pro level fluttery transports are hard to nail
|
|
|
|
Post by craigmorris74 on Apr 27, 2019 16:50:18 GMT -6
I hope I don't hurt your feeling by saying this, but the Hummingbird isn't going to get that sound. It's a thin sounding guitar. Keith Richards plays it on several mid to late 60's Stones tracks its qualities through nicely there. Now, it sounds awesome with Keith Richards playing it one those songs with those guys, but it's not the sound you're looking for.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 27, 2019 16:50:44 GMT -6
i can get pretty close to this sound with my sigma j45 copy guitar, a heavy plektrum and the warbler 127 c-flat mic. Well, I can't with my Gibson Hummingbird, heavy plectrum and a KM84! I can get a fantastic sound, but not THAT sound. I have some studio pics from '64 that show a U67 on vocals and a Shoeps CMT 20 on guitar, pointed to the soundhole! I think the guitar and strings play the bigger role here. I might need to try some regular bronze strings instead of my preferred Phosphor Bronze (Martin SP). How close are you micing the guitar? Most of the older studio shots I've seen of Dylan playing acoustic the mic is somewhat to significantly farther back than the close micing than most people seem to default to these days, usually at leat 18", sometimes a bit more. It's also usually an SDC mic, although a KM84 should work just fine.
On his earlier stuff he seems to have mostly played smaller body Gibsons, although in some cases he used Joan Baez's antique Martin (i'm not certain of the model). By Nashville Skyline he was (obviously) playing a (late '50s, maybe a bit earlier) J-200. Later than that I really don't know.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 27, 2019 17:14:57 GMT -6
Not sure if that other thread talks about this so I’ll talk about it here. If you listen closely to that example, and a lot of examples from 60s - early 70s you might be able to pick up a very faint fast vibrato kind of sound, pitching up and down rapidly and kind of randomly: that’s the tape making its way through the transport, as you probably know. To me it’s a huge thing as it gives everything a nearly in audible gentle vibrato. The tape is kind of like dragging on certain peices on the tape path, getting stuck and unstuck every few ms, -well not really stuck, more slowing down/speeding up- this gentle flutter when it’s dialed out way quiet always sounds really cool to me. I’ve tried to make plugins do this but never seem to be happy with the result. The other part where pitch shifts around slightly is when the reels are turning. It’s usually not a perfectly round experience. Maybe the reel flange is rubbing on the tape slightly in one part of the turn, or the tape pack isn’t totally perfectly reeled up in a small section. This is where the pitch will very gently shift up and down, nearly inaudibly every few seconds or so, and also it seems kinda random at times. When it’s really subtle practically undetectable, it adds this something special that’s kind of beyond real., .. we don’t hear it as shifting pitch but it is shifting around ever so slightly, sometimes quite a bit. These two things are IMO why it’s really hard to fake 60s sounds authentically. tape formula, tape electronics, technique all add to the sound but I can fake that or run the same tape. The old pro level fluttery transports are hard to nail. The modern thing about "fluttery" transports is mostly a myth, spread by people who never really worked in an old tape based studio and therefore have never worked with a properly maintained machine. I know that if I hear any noticeable flutter on my Studer rthat I can't take care of myself I'm on the phone to my Studer mechanic ASAP. And major studios in those days ALWAYS kept at least one qualified tape machine tech available 24 hours a day.
If the slight diameter variations in the tape pack make an audible difference you have either a problem with your pinch roller or your capstan motor needs a rebuild - unless you happen to have a (very rare) Stephens machine which did not use a pinch roller/capstan system to determine/stabilize tape speed, in which case you either have a problem with the servo control circuits controlling the reels or have a motor problem.
Or your tape guides are out of alignment. Or your tape path is just dirty. A tape machine needs its tape path cleaned at least every couple of hours, sometimes less - especially if yo're using old tape - certain formulations (such as 456) are particularly bad.
All of these things you're talking about as charictaristics of recording on tape are either operator error or maintenance issues - you should not have these issues on a well maintained professional quality tape machine.
Consumer/prosumer quality machines are a somewhat different story.
The tape formulations used on the older recording definitely had a different sound than the newer "rock and roll" formulations designed for highert recording levels, which likely had somerthing to do with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 27, 2019 17:25:01 GMT -6
I hope I don't hurt your feeling by saying this, but the Hummingbird isn't going to get that sound. It's a thin sounding guitar. Keith Richards plays it on several mid to late 60's Stones tracks its qualities through nicely there. Now, it sounds awesome with Keith Richards playing it one those songs with those guys, but it's not the sound you're looking for. Older Hummingbirds sound better, although they're not usually my choice. By the mid to late '60s the quality of wood - esopecially spruce top wood in Gibson guitars had deteriorated significantly. At the time people often blamed the Vietnam War consuming most of the high quality spruce for helicopter blades, but it's equally or more likely that the great increase in demand for Gibson guitars in that period simply outstripped the available supply of quality wood. Whatever it was, the difference was visibly obvious - starting around '66 the grain of the wood used in Gibson guitar tops was much wider than the close grained wood used in the very early '60s and before.
I've never heard a mid '60s or older Hummingbird that I'd describe as "thin sounding" unless it had the wrong gauge strings.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Apr 27, 2019 17:48:06 GMT -6
None of the ‘Birds I’ve strummed could be described as “thin”. The knock on them by people who don’t dig them is usually that they’re muddy.
|
|
|
|
Post by yotonic on Apr 27, 2019 20:22:22 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Apr 27, 2019 20:57:36 GMT -6
Not sure if that other thread talks about this so I’ll talk about it here. If you listen closely to that example, and a lot of examples from 60s - early 70s you might be able to pick up a very faint fast vibrato kind of sound, pitching up and down rapidly and kind of randomly: that’s the tape making its way through the transport, as you probably know. To me it’s a huge thing as it gives everything a nearly in audible gentle vibrato. The tape is kind of like dragging on certain peices on the tape path, getting stuck and unstuck every few ms, -well not really stuck, more slowing down/speeding up- this gentle flutter when it’s dialed out way quiet always sounds really cool to me. I’ve tried to make plugins do this but never seem to be happy with the result. The other part where pitch shifts around slightly is when the reels are turning. It’s usually not a perfectly round experience. Maybe the reel flange is rubbing on the tape slightly in one part of the turn, or the tape pack isn’t totally perfectly reeled up in a small section. This is where the pitch will very gently shift up and down, nearly inaudibly every few seconds or so, and also it seems kinda random at times. When it’s really subtle practically undetectable, it adds this something special that’s kind of beyond real., .. we don’t hear it as shifting pitch but it is shifting around ever so slightly, sometimes quite a bit. These two things are IMO why it’s really hard to fake 60s sounds authentically. tape formula, tape electronics, technique all add to the sound but I can fake that or run the same tape. The old pro level fluttery transports are hard to nail. The modern thing about "fluttery" transports is mostly a myth, spread by people who never really worked in an old tape based studio and therefore have never worked with a properly maintained machine. I know that if I hear any noticeable flutter on my Studer rthat I can't take care of myself I'm on the phone to my Studer mechanic ASAP. And major studios in those days ALWAYS kept at least one qualified tape machine tech available 24 hours a day.
If the slight diameter variations in the tape pack make an audible difference you have either a problem with your pinch roller or your capstan motor needs a rebuild - unless you happen to have a (very rare) Stephens machine which did not use a pinch roller/capstan system to determine/stabilize tape speed, in which case you either have a problem with the servo control circuits controlling the reels or have a motor problem.
Or your tape guides are out of alignment. Or your tape path is just dirty. A tape machine needs its tape path cleaned at least every couple of hours, sometimes less - especially if yo're using old tape - certain formulations (such as 456) are particularly bad.
All of these things you're talking about as charictaristics of recording on tape are either operator error or maintenance issues - you should not have these issues on a well maintained professional quality tape machine.
Consumer/prosumer quality machines are a somewhat different story.
The tape formulations used on the older recording definitely had a different sound than the newer "rock and roll" formulations designed for highert recording levels, which likely had somerthing to do with it.
The thing I'm referring to is "inaudible" amounts of flutter. Unfortunately, people don't take much time to consider it and jump to conclusions: tape was old tech> therefore all messed up> they think it should be totally audible part of a flawed tech. Its not really audible.. its more a 'feeling' and its really specific to machines before mid 1970s, before SMTPTE, synchronizers, and crystal oscillator speed control. I know MCI used crystal clocks pretty early, synchronizers hit the scene in the 70's and this made speed much more improved. The earlier models (like A80) used the same motors and speed controls from 1/4" decks for their 2" models as multitracks expanded used. They struggled very slightly with the heavier reels. By the early 70's they realized there was room for improvements. MCI seemed to like crystal speed control pretty early, my 110-A's use it and its rock solid against digital. The 1978 Studer a800's beefed up the reel motors, and Studer had the TLS 2000 earlier in the 70's and it could sync machines together, basically computer control of the transport. Anyway, there was a time before all this stuff when tape speed was referenced off the 60Hz AC voltage. "wild" capstan. And its awesome. think of a violinist.. one take allowed to use gentle vibrato, one without any whatsoever. We naturally want to hear the one with a gentle vibrato, even though its probably not audible as vibrato. Then think of an orchestra of strings... |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,941 
|
Post by ericn on Apr 27, 2019 21:31:26 GMT -6
I remember Robert Scoviall who mixed FOH for a couple of Dylan tours saying 99% of his guitar tone was his playing style, you could pretty much do what you wanted and it just had the sound of the old recordings. This from the guy who once took a rack of about 10 Purple MC77’s on a Petty Tour.
|
|
|
|
Post by craigmorris74 on Apr 27, 2019 21:56:14 GMT -6
Hmm. I guess mine or Keith's or the other mid-60s Hummingbird I've played must have been flukes. Carry on.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 27, 2019 23:11:10 GMT -6
Hmm. I guess mine or Keith's or the other mid-60s Hummingbird I've played must have been flukes. Carry on. Probably the wrong strings. Gibson jumbos (dreadnaughts and J-200s) don't like strings that are too light. Also, setting the action too low kills the tone.
You've played Keith's?
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 27, 2019 23:31:52 GMT -6
The modern thing about "fluttery" transports is mostly a myth, spread by people who never really worked in an old tape based studio and therefore have never worked with a properly maintained machine. I know that if I hear any noticeable flutter on my Studer rthat I can't take care of myself I'm on the phone to my Studer mechanic ASAP. And major studios in those days ALWAYS kept at least one qualified tape machine tech available 24 hours a day.
If the slight diameter variations in the tape pack make an audible difference you have either a problem with your pinch roller or your capstan motor needs a rebuild - unless you happen to have a (very rare) Stephens machine which did not use a pinch roller/capstan system to determine/stabilize tape speed, in which case you either have a problem with the servo control circuits controlling the reels or have a motor problem.
Or your tape guides are out of alignment. Or your tape path is just dirty. A tape machine needs its tape path cleaned at least every couple of hours, sometimes less - especially if yo're using old tape - certain formulations (such as 456) are particularly bad.
All of these things you're talking about as charictaristics of recording on tape are either operator error or maintenance issues - you should not have these issues on a well maintained professional quality tape machine.
Consumer/prosumer quality machines are a somewhat different story.
The tape formulations used on the older recording definitely had a different sound than the newer "rock and roll" formulations designed for highert recording levels, which likely had somerthing to do with it.
The thing I'm referring to is "inaudible" amounts of flutter. Unfortunately, people don't take much time to consider it and jump to conclusions: tape was old tech> therefore all messed up> they think it should be totally audible part of a flawed tech. Its not really audible.. its more a 'feeling' and its really specific to machines before mid 1970s, before SMTPTE, synchronizers, and crystal oscillator speed control. I know MCI used crystal clocks pretty early, synchronizers hit the scene in the 70's and this made speed much more improved. The earlier models (like A80) used the same motors and speed controls from 1/4" decks for their 2" models as multitracks expanded used. They struggled very slightly with the heavier reels. By the early 70's they realized there was room for improvements. MCI seemed to like crystal speed control pretty early, my 110-A's use it and its rock solid against digital. The 1978 Studer a800's beefed up the reel motors, and Studer had the TLS 2000 earlier in the 70's and it could sync machines together, basically computer control of the transport. Anyway, there was a time before all this stuff when tape speed was referenced off the 60Hz AC voltage. "wild" capstan. And its awesome. think of a violinist.. one take allowed to use gentle vibrato, one without any whatsoever. We naturally want to hear the one with a gentle vibrato, even though its probably not audible as vibrato. Then think of an orchestra of strings... You do have a point - however it's worth bearing in mind that those older machines mostly used lighter reels - 1/2" and 1" before the '70s for the most part. |
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Apr 28, 2019 2:22:28 GMT -6
Very interesting discussion. And I need to get that book now!!! Can’t see the guitar mic on those cool studio pics. Most likely tube SDC on those, for sure. My Hummingbird is not thin. It’s a peculiar model, I think it was called the Artist, the shoulders are slightly more rounded. It bested a J200 in the store, so I bought it. I’ve recorded a couple of J45 in my studio as well and I’d be hard pressed to tell the difference. I’m down to strings and mic distance/position then. Out of laziness I’ll try with the current strings first |
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Apr 28, 2019 3:36:06 GMT -6
I found this very interesting and nicely done comparisong video. I think Silk & Steel strings might be the ticket, at least for fingerpicking style.
|
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Apr 28, 2019 3:48:29 GMT -6
Speaking of guitar strings, I found this great video by the masterful Joe Gore. I think I might need to pony up for a set of expensive Thomastik Infeld strings!
Please listen to his solo rendition of Wichita Lineman starting around 1:50 - at your own peril. I'm still picking up my jaw from the floor. The Ear Trumpet Edna mic sounds great too!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2019 4:38:33 GMT -6
Those TIs do sound good and are luckily not quite that expensive here in France, but I wish he'd left the reverb off his demo! I think those Martin Silk & Steels get closer to the Bob Dylan sound you are after, I thought they had gone from Martin's new line-up but luckily they are still there, it's a shame they only come in one gauge though, as I prefer 13s.
|
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Apr 28, 2019 5:55:33 GMT -6
The angle on that 77 is interesting, makes me suspect it’s a posed shot. |
|
|
|
Post by theshea on Apr 28, 2019 5:59:18 GMT -6
the spill from the vocal mic and it's mixing eq and compression is certainly a major factor contributing to the tone. |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,941
|
Post by ericn on Apr 28, 2019 7:25:20 GMT -6
The angle on that 77 is interesting, makes me suspect it’s a posed shot. Fucking Art directors! |
|
I can get a fantastic sound, but not THAT sound.
