Members nerol1st Posted February 3, 2008 Members Share Posted February 3, 2008 I'm listening to some Miles Davis for the Jazz Ensemble class that I am taking this semester (3 credits to play bass for free for the win) and I noticed that the drum set is pretty much panned all on the right and the piano is panned all the way left with the upright in the middle. Is this just old school production style or are Jazz recordings still recorded like the band is on a stage or in a room? Various solo instruments are panned in different places. The sax is left while the horn (Mr. Davis) is all the way to the right. Oh and p.s. it's 4am and I haven't been to bed yet so I know my spelling is a little sketchy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted February 3, 2008 Moderators Share Posted February 3, 2008 Coming from years of listening to rock and pop recordings, some of the classic jazz recording's panning schemes can rub a little. Some are just not thought out all that well... and some are genius. The front to back gets skewed a little too sometimes. Should Coltrane really be that upfront, while Philly Joe Jones plays from what seems like the other room? But... therein lies the charm. Combinations of natural stereo recording and close micing can reap some unnatural landscapes. My recent favorite is Everybody Digs Bill Evans. The recordist nailed it on this one. In your face where it should be, set back just enough in the drum department, and you can hear the upright bass. Brilliant. I love listening to these recordings because it teaches me not to take things for granted. The sonic world I'm about to contribute to is very much effected by choices I haven't made yet. Recording believable soundscapes requires vision and forethought. Something these guys pioneered back then. We have the luxury of enjoying and learning from their experiments. If you want to hear a great new jazz recording listen to Michael Brecker's last one before his recent death... Pilgrimage. More traditional pop panning and front to back but very much in the tradition of timeless jazz from the 50's and 60's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted February 3, 2008 Members Share Posted February 3, 2008 Some of the hard panning decisions arose because many desks (consoles) had panning controls that consisted of L, R, Center. IOW, no infinitely variable panning. Did they use these well? Read Lee's post above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted February 3, 2008 Share Posted February 3, 2008 Excellent responses from Lee and Ken. A lot of the panning may be due to the limitations of the tape deck's limited track counts - two or three tracks max, depending on the tape deck used and the era the recording is from, and the very basic mixing board features of that era. Of course, you didn't mention WHICH MD album you were listening to, so this may not apply if you're talking about some of his later recordings as opposed to something like Kind Of Blue. Even when they recorded Bitches Brew (circa 1969), they had far more advanced gear available when compared to the gear that was in use circa 1959 when Kind Of Blue was waxed. For another example of early stereo releases and OTW panning compared to modern records, check out the mid-career Beatles stereo releases of Sgt Pepper and Revolver. Again - limited board capabilities and limited (4) track counts on the tape decks. Jazz tends to be a lot more traditional in approach compared to many rock and pop records in terms of placing the musicians on a "virtual stage" with your panning and front to back depth / reverb and delay treatments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted February 5, 2008 Members Share Posted February 5, 2008 Those interested in the history and development of stereo mixing should definitely check out the releases from the various Command Performance ensembles. There were some amazing studio players, piano great Dick Hyman, notably, but also Doc Severinsen before his NBC stint -- but the real stars were the recordings. Command was all but obsessed with 'filling the hole in the middle' and used a number of approaches and technologies (one was magnetic coated 35 mm film stock running on sprocket capstans -- which a few other people adopted for a while). Command Performance records were almost always based around a sort of virtualized stereo soundstage. Drums still weren't always in the middle -- but something was. Some of the Command releases were less than compelling in artistic vision but a few of them have been rediscovered as part of the lounge underground. I think some of the Persuasive Percussion series have been rereleased. In general, drums and bass gravitated to the middle of our mixes as they became more important in the mix (ie, louder). Having a heavy bass or a very loud kick on one side could really cause problems for phonograph reproduction. Of course, many rock and pop recordings of the early 60s were never intended to be released in stereo and were recorded on three and occasionally four track machines so when they were 'remixed' for stereo release in the late 60s, there wasn't much to work with: rhythm section on one track, horns and strings on one, lead and back up vocals on the remaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Player Posted February 5, 2008 Members Share Posted February 5, 2008 I recall reading an interview of John Lennon in which he was asked why the Beatles' vocals were panned hard left or hard right, and he replied that he wasn't aware of the panning at the time. Maybe, they were listening to playback in mono and the panning was done in mixdown, or they were just not aware of the panning. I did some studio work in the late sixties, but we were in an 8-track studio (advanced for Grand Rapids, MI at the time). I'll have to get out our old 45s and see how the panning was handled. However, "stereo" was defined in many different ways then; centered vocals, drums, and wide-spread instruments (acoustic guitars for example) wasn't really a consideration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members eeglug Posted February 5, 2008 Members Share Posted February 5, 2008 From what I've read, the Beatles were only present for mono mixing sessions of their albums. Separate stereo mixing sessions would occur in the days or weeks after the mono mix and I don't think the 4 fabs weren't present for those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 That's my understanding - they were very interested in the mono mixes, but usually were not present when the stereo versions were being done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Billster Posted February 6, 2008 Members Share Posted February 6, 2008 I thought the story on those Beatles recordings was that the stereo versions were made from mono branch mixes. There was a vocal track and an instrument track intended to be level set in mono at the disc mastering, and they were never intended to be stereo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Picker Posted February 6, 2008 Members Share Posted February 6, 2008 Nice posts. I actually noticed that too about Sgt. Pepper's... Very odd panning etc. What on earth were they doing? .... but it sound sounds sooo good. :freak: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.