"Pro" vs "Non-Pro" Sound

One of the few advantages of “ deluxe editions “ of one’s favorite albums is seeing the evolution of a track and some of what was left in the studio. As a non musician or writer it often fascinates me to see how sometimes a single bar from an abandoned song is what makes another a hit.

Not just when, but how.  You might read about guys "compressing" things but rarely do we see/hear about the particulars.  It took me years to learn that lots of folks aren't using compression to get level increases.  They're using it to modulate the attack and/or body of the signal.  It's almost never about "leveling" at all, but about adding or taking away attack.  

It also took me years to realize that what people say is not really what they do.  "Adding a little compression" can me 1dB to someone just reading this online, but the pro might in fact be doing 10dB+.  I watched Andy Wallace do a video a long time ago and this was the case.  He clearly said "I'm going to add a little compression" and the needle was hitting 15dB of compression on whatever it was he was doing.  I started to notice that CLA and just about whoever else with videos that I watched were doing the same thing.  I'd also say that EQ was the same situation.  "A little EQ boost" could very well mean 15-20dB boost...

As I've gotten better at mixing, and just getting tones and recording in general, I don't find myself using compression much.  The little I do use has a purpose.  I might use Arouser on the drum bus to flatten the attack a little to get more body from the snare and kick.  I might use 1176 on the drum parallel to get that pumping-yet-flat tone to support the body of the drums so that they don't get lost in heavy sections.  I always use SSL native bus on the master bus, but always with HPF above the kick drum so that it's not pumping.  This gels things a little better but I'm never doing more than about 4dB GR and by this point it's pretty much only ticking on the snare hits.

So for me, a pro has a purpose for everything he does.  Everyone implicitly *knows* this, but the practice is quite different as you gain knowledge.  When I was first starting out, I knew that compression has a purpose, but I also put a compressor on every channel simply because I wanted everything I do to have purpose.  I hadn't yet figured out that WANT and NEED are not the same thing in audio engineering.

It also took years for me to unlearn some bad habits.  Compression-wise, one of them was the "always use slow attack and fast release to create transients" when I thought I wanted harder hitting drums or pick attack or whatever.  I almost never turned the attack knob away from the slowest setting.  After watching some peers and pros work, I realized that I had totally screwed myself by doing this religiously.  It only fucked up the envelope of the signal and made me work harder to control the resulting mess.  Only after years of trying the same things did I finally break down ego barriers and seek education.  To find the tone I had been attempting to create, it only took turning that attack knob to a faster setting.

Moose, agree 100% but I’m going to add a point: Creations in a Vacuum. So often nobody else lays ears on or provides an opinion on most of this home tools stuff till it’s “ finished “. The creative process is an evolution of ideas, very little of old school releases were a first draft. Some times the guy who tears you to shreds is the most important person in the process.

This is a nice summary, if I might cherry pick! And another key is knowing with certainty which tools at hand will serve that purpose.

I'm trying not to make this too much about myself, but I know that I sit in a weird middle. I make music with world-class pros and with amateurs. An understanding of the foundations of engineering isn't my strength. But knowing who to ask when I need advice IS a strength. I have a small army of allies who will listen to a mix, or suggest an arrangement tweak. I've got many wonderful musicians to choose from when a song needs that special something. I do most of my work at home in a studio that still looks like it was once my wife's office, because it was. Thank god for foam panels from Amazon, right? But the music I release - for the most part - does sound good.    

My two most recent CD purchases are Steely Dan's Can't Buy A Thrill and A Tour Of British Duck Ponds by Fran Ashcroft. I needn't say a word about the former, but Fran's approach to his own record is as impressively far from what we'd call "proper," at least by a certain imagined industry standard. 

Here's a curious interview with Fran. 

www.recordproduction.com/interviews/fran-ashcroft

The question is far too general to have a true answer, but knowing what gear to use and how to use it is a big part. It's a little easier to sound pro with songs that have few elements, like a piano + vocal track, but once you get into a production with lots of elements, understanding what to do with them can make all the difference.

If I had to say what makes the biggest difference to me, I'd say it's the room it was recorded in.

i think with all the close miking today ...[/quote]

Had to take these few words out of context to add a somewhat cogent point.

The whole really close-mic'ing thing really gained traction in the early 80s when many of us first went from high school bands to playing clubs and with all the hard rock and NWOBHM stuff being part of the playlist, close mic'ing only and a lot of EQing became the norm and as we got studio work, we saw the patterns continued there.

Anyone see that pattern?

Of course there are hundreds of thousands of examples of a "pro sound" using close miking. I was thinking more of the ways I like to record. I prefer musicians playing together, don't mind some bleed and as far as room sound. I've found it's more important on lead vocals than drums. A great classic mic selection and high end hardware compressors can contribute greatly to getting that sound too.

Here's a pretty fascinating piece on Steely Dan's musical/studio idealism. Fits the theme of this thread well, I think...

slate.com/culture/2023/05/steely-dan-perfectionism-katy-lied-quantum-criminals-excerpt.html

I’ve heard some mixes recently where the lead vocals sound disconnected.. like they were added on top of the rest of the mix instead of a congruent part of the song. It’s painful to hear and I feel bad for the artists.

i guess it might WAS mixed on top of the instrumental track. hell - there‘s people on youtube asking for tutorials how to MIX a stereo instrumental track to put some vocal/rap on top of it later in the comment section!!!

Certainly how many singers want to hear it.

the band drama over automation and levels can be crazy. Let’s just say the singer is usually wrong and I usually prefer a tucked in vocal if it’s not some glorified karaoke pop or rap thing with a backing track. Also if you tuck the vocal in, you can do some crazy stuff and get away with it without the singer noticing until they’ve signed off on the mix and get the stems.