mikeweil

Okay, please tell: Who are your top five favourite living (!) jazz pianists? I repeat, alive and playing. We all love Bud and Tatum and you know who, Bud (Note: this is such a nice Freudian Fehlleistung that I do not want to edit it out) I want to talk about those who are alive and kicking! My top five: 1. Herbie Hancock 2. Geoffrey Keezer 3. Marcus Roberts 4. Ahmad Jamal 5. Mulgrew Miller

So here is the thread that became a victim of the BNBB resizing, please continue here! mikeweil Member Member # 1606 posted February 09, 2003 10:50 AM Dear Jim Anderson, as the audio engineers thread that you contributed so much to is obviously gone, I take liberties to suggest this new thread. Of course, every audio engineer is invited to take some time and post a few remarks. But it was so great to change ideas with and get info from someone like you that I think we must continue this in some way or another. To put your name in the topic's title is my way to say thank you to you for sharing some of your insights with us board members .... For starters: Yesterday I put on Henry Butler's second Impulse album, The Village, recorded in 1987 by some Jim Anderson. I was always curious how the overdubs were made in one track, Expressions of Quietitude, where Butler used Jack deJohnette's Korg synthesizers set to guitar sound, with some piano fills and solo overdubbed. But the synth sounds different in the left and right hand playing. Now do you perhaps remember the order in which this was recorded after all these years? As always, thanks for your reply. Posts: 594 | From: Germany | Registered: Mar 2001 | IP: Logged jim anderson Member Member # 2634 posted February 09, 2003 03:25 PM Mike, Thanks for the invitiation. I'm honored to be "in conversation" with y'all. It's always been my pleasure to respond to comments from members of the BNBB. On other bulletin boards, many times, you're stamping out fires, instead of having civil conversation. In the studio, there's a bit of a vacuum from reality: the listeners, the ultimate consumers (and I mean that in a good way) of what we do. I'll talk to some of my audio friends and I'll encourage them to contribute to this thread in the future. I have to thank Mike for bringing up the Henry Butler "The Village" session (1987). I haven't had a chance to hear it in years. I've been enjoying Henry's recent work and saw him when he played New York's Jazz Standard, a few months ago. This was my first session for Impulse! and you can't imagine how happy/excited, etc. to get the call from Ricky Schultz. It was one of the first times that I had a real budget for the recording. It was my first all digital recording. The Sony 3324-24 track digital recorder-was $1000/day to rent (1987 dollars!). This was bleeding edge technology, at the time. The studio was A&R's R-2 on West 48th Street, one of my all time favorites. A moderately small studio with 2 very well designed booths, concrete floor (still my favorite for a studio, rather than wood), flourescent light and acoustic tile-like an old time new york studio. The console was a 32 channel Neve 8068 with the dreaded Necam One automation. Some great classic stuff came out of there long before I stepped into the place: Billy Joel (Just the Way You Are), Phoebe Snow (Poetry Man). The studio sessions for Paul Simon's movie One Trick Pony was shot in there, rent it and get a sense of the studio and the control room. In the left isolation booth is Jack DeJohnette, in the right Ron Carter. Both are facing the control room. Henry on piano to my left and the horns are to his left, slightly across the room and turned back to see Jack and Ron. All of the instruments were tracked live, with a couple exceptions. Expressions of Quietitude being one of them (you probably never thought I'd get around to talking about this, did you Mike, but look what you started). The tracking on that was Bass, Drums and Korg, with the all of the acoustic piano overdubbed. The Korg had some PrimeTime delay/chorus effect to give the sense of stereo from the different hands. (This is really primitive, compared to what we can do these days.) If you're interested: the recording of Ron has no microphone, it's all Barcus Berry pickup and the piano was using the B&K 4007's on the house Yamaha C7. Henry's vocal on the later track was a live track with a Beyer M500 Ribbon microphone. It was one of the last times that I used Yamaha NS 10's for monitoring (although in my listening, today, it didn't sound all that disapointing). It was the first time that I got to work with Bob Ludwig for mastering. As I've said, I learn more by going to the mastering session than by anything else. I can see what they have to do to make a recording get across and then when I go back to the studio, I can incorporate what they've done into my next recording; leaving them to do less, the next time. That probably makes a short story long, but I'm happy to fill you in. Did I tell you that the piano tuner couldn't be found because he was in the hospital and had his appendix removed and Henry ate a whole mound of wasabi by accident? I guess there's more to tell about that session. JA [ February 09, 2003: Message edited by: jim anderson ] Posts: 147 | From: brooklyn, new york | Registered: Jan 2002 | IP: Logged mikeweil Member Member # 1606 posted February 10, 2003 03:00 PM Jim, this is georgeous .... your memory is about to outdo your engineering skills ... that about answers my question and goes way beyond! It would be great if you could talk some of your colleagues into participating here! Regarding the Henry Butler session, I always disliked the Barcus Berry sound. I have an audiophile recording from a French label that recorded Ron Carter without a pickup using B & K microphones in an artificial head, a duo with pianist Michel Sardaby, and he sounds totally different from what we are used to. Much warmer. More "wood". And I'm afraid I don't know what wasabi is. These stories are great to read, please: more of this! Posts: 594 | From: Germany | Registered: Mar 2001 | IP: Logged fc Member Member # 267 posted February 10, 2003 07:07 PM japanese horseradish, popular with sushi Posts: 313 | From: montreal, canada | Registered: Mar 99 | IP: Logged mikeweil Member Member # 1606 posted February 11, 2003 04:54 PM Now how many fire extinguishers were there in the studio ....? before and after? Posts: 594 | From: Germany | Registered: Mar 2001 | IP: Logged mikeweil Member Member # 1606 posted February 11, 2003 04:57 PM To get back to audio business: It's almost impossible not to stumble over some Jim Anderson engineered disc each day. Today it was John Hart's "Trust" for Blue Note. Nice sound. Now how did you record Mike Formanek's bass on this one? And did you ever record Ron Carter without the pickup, and what was the difference to your ears? Posts: 594 | From: Germany | Registered: Mar 2001 | IP: Logged jim anderson Member Member # 2634 posted February 14, 2003 11:14 PM Ron has a very specific thing he's trying to show with the pick-up, and his sound in general. The bass (any bass) speaks slowly and the pickup works at the speed of light (or the speed of electricity). He wants to show where the time is and the pick-up is much more responsive in that respect. Now, here we have two opposed things we're trying to record: a beautiful, but slowly blooming sound, and a pointed direct pulsing sound. All of these pick-ups, like the basses that they're attached to, have a specific sound, too. Schetler, Underwood, Barcus- berry, Gage, etc. All have a characteristic sound and the engineer has to be careful how that's captured and then used in the mix (if it's to be used at all). Many of the reasons producers, musicians, listeners don't like the 'dreaded bass direct'(now there's a phrase that I think is downright silly and I'll say no more) is because of some basic mistakes that engineers have made. Some direct boxes load the pickup, thereby changing the frequency response; making it thinner (you know the sound). Or have not corrected for the polarity of the pick-up versus the microphone; causing a cancellation, or nulling, of the low frequencies; making it thinner, etc. Now with the correct direct box, the proper polarity, and the proper amount in the mix, the 'dreaded'- ness will go away. Mike's sound was captured with a couple of microphones that I like, and use, a lot. Sanken is a Japanese microphone company that makes microphones that I respond to. I used 2 CU-41's and my favorite AMB Tube buffered DI box. I've used this combination on many of my recordings: "Cafe Blue" and "Modern Cool", a couple of recordings that have been noticed for their bottom end. The Henry Butler recording, for me, is an unusual recording as far as the bass is concerned because it has no microphone on it, only the di. I wouldn't do it that way, these days. but that was the style (or a style), back then. Now, Ron and I get an acoustic sound that we like and then blend in the amount of direct that seems correct. There's another thing that I've noticed and should mention here: like many instruments, the bass is a complicated acoustic with notes appearing all over the place. Some notes will appear on the left of the instrument and likewise some on the right and then some only come out the direct. If you have a chance to listen and watch the meters, you'll see them appear all over the place and I feel that if you don't take in the direct, there may be a component in the players' sound that's missing. We've just finished a recording with Ron's trio: Ron, Russell Malone and Mulgrew Miller. It'll be out in Japan, first on Somethin' Else, and eventually out in the states on BN. As always, the latest project is always the favorite and this is no exception. Although "When Skies are Grey" and "Stardust" are pretty good sounding recordings, as well as the "Classic Jazz Quartet" cds. By the way, Mike Formanek is teaching at Peabody Conservatory, in addition to his recording. A good question, hope this helps. Posts: 147 | From: brooklyn, new york | Registered: Jan 2002 | IP: Logged Gerry Member Member # 1718 posted February 17, 2003 10:38 AM Thank, Jim, for your eloquent and informative reply. All too often, it seems, we listeners want to dictate the methods used in the production of the albums we purchase without understanding what, or how many, factors play in to the decisions made regarding those methods. Most of the best-centered and most golden-eared audiophiles I know are old- timers who hark back to the days of building their own gear (if only from kit form) and schlepping their own Revox/Ampex/whatever to record a their own, or their friends', chamber music/jazz combo/etc. I've become convinced that they hear more, yet (assuming reasonable proficiency is displayed) they seem to comment less. Posts: 85 | From: Frederick, MD | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged mikeweil Member Member # 1606 posted February 18, 2003 04:50 AM I think there's some truth in what you say, Gerry, but I know as well that your listening tastes have very much to do with your (past and actual) feelings, memories - nostalgia plays an important part in what sound you like, I am convinced. And the sound you get at home depends as much on the playback equipment you have. It all gets very intricate. The way an instrument sounds live or on a CD depends on so many factors, basically I had to learn, and this was not easy for me as a musicician, that a good live sound and a good CD sound are totally different things with different aesthetics involved. And these veterans you mention have their aesthetics shaped by their listening experiences, which are sure a lot different from ours. Jim mentioned - in the deleted thread - some of his learning experiences. And these commentaries are of invaluable help in the never ending search for good sound. Thanks again, Jim! I should have named this thread "Questions for Jim Anderson", there'll be some more of these for sure. I'll get that new Ron Carter disc with Mulgrew Miller and Russell Malone as soon as it's available, as these are all players I like - very interesting about his idea of getting that rhythmic attack with the help of a pick up. Similar to how guitarists use amps or singers use microphones. I get the idea ... There was a German musicologist writing his dissertation on the swing concept in jazz and the slighty ahead timing many musicians use to generate swing. One of the onjects of his research was a McCoy Tyner Trio recording (Trident on Milestone) which had some bars of unaccompanied bass that he analyzed, finding the attack was slightly ahead of the metronomic beat. Now I wonder what his conclusions would have been if Ron had not used his pickup that day ... Posts: 594 | From: Germany | Registered: Mar 2001 | IP: Logged jim anderson Member Member # 2634 posted February 18, 2003 07:20 AM There's a lot to talk about, here. All of us started as an amateur of one sort or another and we've all gone thru our minimalist phase, too. In fact, Revox was the home version of Studer. (I remember recording at the 2nd Jazz and Heritage Festival in New Orleans and everyone who thought they knew anything about recording came by asked us how we liked our Revox tape machines. They were Studer B67's!) As you go along, you adapt the techniques that you need to get the sound you're going for (it's a given that you'll have the tools as your disposal) and keep the good basic technique that either you read about or learned by listening (and I can't stress that strongly enough). Sometimes we throw out the baby and the bathwater, in search for a new sound. That's the danger. There's so much going on in a session and many times it's out of the control of the engineer. There have been times that the thing that the artist wanted, either in the sound of their instrument, or in the arrangement and was eventually criticised by a reviewer was the very thing that the artist or producer wanted to do! Some of the recording techniques we use: booths, headphones, multitrack, even pro-tools are the very things we need to acomplish the date because of schedule; difficulty of the music- for the musicians or the engineer, and a million other reasons (or excuses). The trick (or the talent) of the engineer is to create an aural impression that none of this trickery (chicanery) took place! Vincent Canby of the New York Times called it the "plausables". It's the same in any art, movies, books, etc.: if it seems plausable, the audience will 'buy' it and it won't distract from the final impression. It should enhance it and propell it forward. At the end of it all, the recording made with 2 microphones, should be able to stand up next to the one with 48. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what the technology used to make a recording, to paraphrase James Carville: "It's the music, dummy." Some of my favorite recordings were by Robert C. Fine of the Eastman Wind Ensemble with 2 or 3 microphones. Put the microphones in the right place (and this is a given that the group you're working with has a perfect balance as the Eastman did). The rule here is: the simpler the recording technique, the better the group has to be (and the room, too), if you're expecting a great sound. Also, the more experienced musicians tend to be less 'in the face' of the engineer and the producer. It's hard to divorce the experience of playing an instrument to listening to a playback. I remember Phil Woods making a comment after a first take: "The headphones aren't perfect, but let's go and hear what the paying public is hearing." A good, if not great attitude in the studio. We were working 2 track (the whole band direct to stereo) and he could make the mental jump from a so-so headphone mix to a good recording. If only everyone were so forgiving. Posts: 147 | From: brooklyn, new york | Registered: Jan 2002 | IP: Logged jim anderson Member Member # 2634 posted February 18, 2003 07:20 AM There's a lot to talk about, here. All of us started as an amateur of one sort or another and we've all gone thru our minimalist phase, too. In fact, Revox was the home version of Studer. (I remember recording at the 2nd Jazz and Heritage Festival in New Orleans and everyone who thought they knew anything about recording came by asked us how we liked our Revox tape machines. They were Studer B67's!) As you go along, you adapt the techniques that you need to get the sound you're going for (it's a given that you'll have the tools as your disposal) and keep the good basic technique that either you read about or learned by listening (and I can't stress that strongly enough). Sometimes we throw out the baby and the bathwater, in search for a new sound. That's the danger. There's so much going on in a session and many times it's out of the control of the engineer. There have been times that the thing that the artist wanted, either in the sound of their instrument, or in the arrangement and was eventually criticised by a reviewer was the very thing that the artist or producer wanted to do! Some of the recording techniques we use: booths, headphones, multitrack, even pro-tools are the very things we need to acomplish the date because of schedule; difficulty of the music- for the musicians or the engineer, and a million other reasons (or excuses). The trick (or the talent) of the engineer is to create an aural impression that none of this trickery (chicanery) took place! Vincent Canby of the New York Times called it the "plausables". It's the same in any art, movies, books, etc.: if it seems plausable, the audience will 'buy' it and it won't distract from the final impression. It should enhance it and propell it forward. At the end of it all, the recording made with 2 microphones, should be able to stand up next to the one with 48. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what the technology used to make a recording, to paraphrase James Carville: "It's the music, dummy." Some of my favorite recordings were by Robert C. Fine of the Eastman Wind Ensemble with 2 or 3 microphones. Put the microphones in the right place (and this is a given that the group you're working with has a perfect balance as the Eastman did). The rule here is: the simpler the recording technique, the better the group has to be (and the room, too), if you're expecting a great sound. Also, the more experienced musicians tend to be less 'in the face' of the engineer and the producer. It's hard to divorce the experience of playing an instrument to listening to a playback. I remember Phil Woods making a comment after a first take: "The headphones aren't perfect, but let's go and hear what the paying public is hearing." A good, if not great attitude in the studio. We were working 2 track (the whole band direct to stereo) and he could make the mental jump from a so-so headphone mix to a good recording. If only everyone were so forgiving. Posts: 147 | From: brooklyn, new york | Registered: Jan 2002 | IP: Logged jazzhound Member Member # 294 posted February 18, 2003 09:48 AM Hi, Jim.I have a basic idea of what mastering engineers do to make a master tape more appealing in its final form in the pop world, but what did you find them doing to your recordings, particularly before you got more experience? Posts: 635 | From: merrick, new york, usa | Registered: Sep 99 | IP: Logged michel devos Member Member # 2523 posted February 18, 2003 09:57 AM [ [ February 18, 2003: Message edited by: michel devos ] Posts: 11 | From: brussels | Registered: Jan 2002 | IP: Logged michel devos Member Member # 2523 posted February 18, 2003 10:16 AM

I counted 14 or 15 sessions Lucky did during his first stay in Paris, recorded between February 22 and May 11, 1956, issued on 9 different LP's or EP's, all of them issued under his name! More than pretty much any other American in Europe did in such a short time! His second stay yielded 12 more sessions between June 1957 and Spring 1961, not counting those in other European countries (another 3 or 4), but this time only 4 were released under his name. There was another stay between 1968 and 1970 with LPs in Germany and Spain and live recordings from Switzerland. B-3er, Lucky quit playing music because of his frustration with the business side of music. For a while he lived in a cabin in the woods, even on the streets of Seattle; last report I found was he was in an insititution in the Seattle area with no more remembrance he once was a great jazz musician. But it's hard to find definite details. There were some (probably deleted) posts on the BNBB about this.

Lucky will always be among my top five tenor saxists. I recommend: - Tricotism (Impulse) - his complete ABC sessions, either trio with Pettiford and Skeeter Best, or quintet with Jimmy Cleveland and Osie Johnson added; the trios are sublime - the Paris dates, especially the ones with Emmett Berry and Guy Lafitte on the recent Americans Swinging In Paris CD; - the sessions with Kenny Clarke and Martial Solal in the same series - the session with Solal recently reissued on High Note - the unearthed Candid session with Solal and Klook - the Groove Merchant sides - the sessions with Milt Jackson, two each on Atlantic and Savoy, the latter scattered over four LPs - his late 1940s / early 1950s sides for RCA Victor and Decca but I never heard him play a bad note ....

Don Patterson is among my top five favourite organists. Never heard a bad recording of his. I always found him the closest to Horace Silver of all organists, especially as a composer. I think he inspired Sonny Stitt to some of his best playing. B-3er, what do you think of the take on The Good Life on the Muse LP with Richie Cole?

Yeah, that's really cool and radically democratic! This is it: Ask the people instead of deciding over their heads!"

I hung around at the All About Jazz Forum for a few days, probably will continue, but I just voted for this forum as the prime successor to the Blue Note Bulletin Board. I'll try to lure as many people over here as possible. I requested an Audio Talk department a scant 12 hours ago, and there you are: this is board maintenance. The longer I think about it, the angrier I get: It is their board ... would be nothing without us posters. No creative input into the board by the Blue note people themselves ... okay, they have work to do, but they could have cared just a little more. Just to remove that stuff without warning is to destroy an enormous wealth of valuable information. Thanks a thousand times, welcome at the new home.

The only thing missing is a type of "Audio Talk". Maybe we title it "Jazz Engineering" and try to lure Jim Anderson over here ...

Great Job! Now let's see which is going to be our safety copy, this or All About Jazz ..... All a-board here as well: our gateway to the world of real music ..... B)