Members 144dB Posted May 12, 2016 Members Share Posted May 12, 2016 Hey all, "Thick as a Brick" is one of my favorite albums. I can't imagine what it took to write, perform, record, mix, and master that mammoth piece. As I listen to it today, I'm blown away by the separation of individual instruments, while at the same time it still sounds glued together. I think it's a great mix, but if anyone had criticism of it, it might be that it's a bit bright. But each and every instrument is clear as a bell, they all have their place in the stereo soundfield, and it's a wonderfully dynamic recording (going from -25 dBFS RMS to about-15 dBFS RMS at the loudest sections). So how the hell did they do it in 1972? How do you get these wonderfully small, clear, slivers of sound that occupy their own space in the left/right spectrum, while at the same time preserving a near perfect mono mix? I have to believe it's EQ, coupled with very good recording technique. Back in the 70's, did they chain EQs together in series? I didn't think there were many EQs available with more than three bands, and I don't see how the sounds could be EQ'd so well with just some filters and shelving. Any insight into what makes this record sound so great? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bookumdano4 Posted May 12, 2016 Members Share Posted May 12, 2016 I could never get into JT. I routinely turned my engineer and ears off whenever I heard their stuff coming over the airwaves in the 70s so this is the first time I've taken a listen to Thick. In my lowly opinion...... one reason there's nice separation and some air is because most of the time, there are only two or three things going on. Stuff drops in and out in the arrangement. Which is always good for air and giving the illusion over the course of a few minutes that you're hearing 12 things when you're really not hearing 12 things all at the same time. So someone was making some conscious choices about frequency spectrum and not overfilling it.... the exact opposite of say, what Yes was doing in 72 on Close to the Edge and later works. That flute in the first few minutes is in mono and....crucially (since no one operates this way any more), the reverb on the flute is also mono and printed right there in the same flute space. Instant pinpoint management in the spectrum.... and I notice the flute gets panned in realtime at some point or another. The mono reverb on it helps keep it in its own spatial spot. I love mono reverb printed in the same spot as the mono instrument associated with it. Takes me right back to 1959 and 1962. There are certainly other factors that make that tune sound like it does. Sounds like extremely small, damped room for the tracking. Common at that time period. Tape high-end roll-off, state of the consoles then (no one bought consoles that did 10hz-68khz like you'd shop for a laptop interface). Probably a lot of tape comping too, but I've not read detailed interviews on how JT records were made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 144dB Posted May 12, 2016 Author Members Share Posted May 12, 2016 Thanks Dano - Great feedback and observations. Not all JT albums sounded good, but this one is a standout to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 1001gear Posted May 12, 2016 Members Share Posted May 12, 2016 There's a lot to be said for using good material/arrangements/orchestrarions. Oz of prevention ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted May 12, 2016 Share Posted May 12, 2016 [video=youtube;M9JEPeeohYs] Haven't listened to that record in years, but it really is well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 144dB Posted May 16, 2016 Author Members Share Posted May 16, 2016 It's funny... Anderson wrote it as a spoof of the prog that was being done at the time, and it wound up being one of the best examples of the genre. Can you imagine trying to play it from stem to stern live? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted May 16, 2016 Members Share Posted May 16, 2016 That flute in the first few minutes is in mono and....crucially (since no one operates this way any more), the reverb on the flute is also mono and printed right there in the same flute space. Instant pinpoint management in the spectrum.... and I notice the flute gets panned in realtime at some point or another. The mono reverb on it helps keep it in its own spatial spot. All your observations were excellent but this made me really think. Haven't done mono reverb in...I dunno, centuries...I'll have to give it a try. I add very little reverb these days, usually just some on the vocal, but it will be interesting to hear if doing it in mono makes any kind of significant difference in my mixes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nice keetee Posted May 16, 2016 Members Share Posted May 16, 2016 Mono is the new Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Stereo is great, but panned mono is under-utilized these days IMHO. If everything is stereo, and panned wide, nothing really gets its own space in the mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members onelife Posted May 19, 2016 Members Share Posted May 19, 2016 Here's a radio interview with Ian Anderson, Martin Barre and Jeffrey Hammond on the making of the album. [video=youtube;WPsl77Czuw4] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.