Vocal mix by Bob Margolin
SUPPORTER
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sep 27, 2014
This is from Bob's Facebook page, I found it Incredible interesting and true. Iam not sure the link works correctly, so here is a copy of his text:
By Bob Margolin
“I CAN’T UNDERSTAND THE WORDS!” I hear a trend in modern recordings. I find it baffling and frustrating. Vocals are mixed low UNDER the music and so processed with detail-sucking compression that on mega-hits and some new music from friends, I can’t even guess what words they’re singing, let alone appreciate poetry, emotion, beautiful singing or follow a story. By the time I can guess at “What was that?” the next mystery phrase comes at me. I usually just shut it off and listen to something I enjoy.
Does that bother you too? Is this a Geezer Rant? (Of course it is, but that doesn’t mean I’m wrong) And what do you think about the trend of cheesy synthesizer washes burying vocals deeper?
My hearing is good and I listen on high quality speakers and headphones that deliver abundant, even extreme clarity if I set them for that and I can set volume to what’s right for me. As a pro musician, producer and music lover, I often analyze mixes. One helpful, revealing procedure is to compare a mix to a song that is acknowledged to sound great, where the mix serves the musical experience.
A couple of years ago, I was listening to mixes of new music by a friend who’s a great, emotional singer but I had extreme trouble understanding her lyrics because of slight under-enunciation and low vocal mix. I tried to suggest she might want to raise her voice level to showcase her beautiful, sensual tone and I sent her a link to a classic Etta James song everyone admires. The difference was stark but nope, she and her producer wanted the vocal mix as it was. I respect their choice but don’t agree.
I first went into a modern New York studio in 1967 with a band called The Freeborne and experienced multi-tracking and the control it brings to make a recording the way the producer wants it to sound. But at the same time, as I fell in love with Blues music, I noticed that many recordings had particularly beautiful tone and mixes. They sounded natural. In 1973 when I joined Muddy Waters’ band — and his early recordings are clear and warm and enhance rather than hide the transcendent music — I took the opportunity to ask him how those recordings were made.
Short List GOAT Force-Of-Nature singer Muddy was very aware of the recording techniques. For his early recordings, he said Chess Records used 3 microphones into an Ampex tape recorder. One mic was near the singer, one near the piano, one near the upright bass. Louder drums and instrument amps were picked up ambiently. I think the producer and engineer had golden ears. The vocal is way up front but not too loud and I can hear every word and nuance of a special singer. The amplified instruments don’t sound harsh, like your ear is next to the speaker. The drum sounds sound like drums in a room, not over-detailed as can happen with multi-track miking.
In 1976, Johnny Winter produced Muddy’s “Hard Again” album and told me he wanted it to sound like the old recordings. He used both close and ambient mics in a large, warm-sounding room, very little baffling between the musicians and amps and drums. People love the way the album sounds as well as how it enhances the sound of the listener being a room with a band having fun. Last time I saw Derek Trucks he told me he tries to make his home studio and recording sound like that album.
But back in 1969, The Rolling Stones presented their classic album “Let It Bleed” with a low vocal mix. Perhaps they thought it made the band sound more powerful. I love the music but I feel like the vocal and lyrics are obscured. I talked about it a few years ago with Don Was, who produced 8 Stones albums. He told me Mick regretted the low vocal mixes.
The buried vocal trend is back in the last few years. Listen to Muddy “Hard Again” or the early Chess masterpieces. Listen to Etta James, Billie Holiday, Louis Armstrong, Frank Sinatra, Big Joe Turner, Jimmy Rogers, Otis Spann. Then listen to Taylor Swift, Beyonce, Billie Eilish, current Country hits, Hip-Hop.
WTF? Don’t the songwriters want their soulfully crafted lyrics to be understood without a lyric video? I truly don’t understand.
I appreciate YOU — that I can post these thoughts I put together today and read your comments and learn what it’s like for you.
https://www.facebook.com/BobMargolinFanPage/posts/pfbid02gjDRmRGNRaaSYMU85tPHt2sS8W3WWo9hPAwP1MQk4ArXpMJDJ2yJYa1vDXDvNofVl
By Bob Margolin
“I CAN’T UNDERSTAND THE WORDS!” I hear a trend in modern recordings. I find it baffling and frustrating. Vocals are mixed low UNDER the music and so processed with detail-sucking compression that on mega-hits and some new music from friends, I can’t even guess what words they’re singing, let alone appreciate poetry, emotion, beautiful singing or follow a story. By the time I can guess at “What was that?” the next mystery phrase comes at me. I usually just shut it off and listen to something I enjoy.
Does that bother you too? Is this a Geezer Rant? (Of course it is, but that doesn’t mean I’m wrong) And what do you think about the trend of cheesy synthesizer washes burying vocals deeper?
My hearing is good and I listen on high quality speakers and headphones that deliver abundant, even extreme clarity if I set them for that and I can set volume to what’s right for me. As a pro musician, producer and music lover, I often analyze mixes. One helpful, revealing procedure is to compare a mix to a song that is acknowledged to sound great, where the mix serves the musical experience.
A couple of years ago, I was listening to mixes of new music by a friend who’s a great, emotional singer but I had extreme trouble understanding her lyrics because of slight under-enunciation and low vocal mix. I tried to suggest she might want to raise her voice level to showcase her beautiful, sensual tone and I sent her a link to a classic Etta James song everyone admires. The difference was stark but nope, she and her producer wanted the vocal mix as it was. I respect their choice but don’t agree.
I first went into a modern New York studio in 1967 with a band called The Freeborne and experienced multi-tracking and the control it brings to make a recording the way the producer wants it to sound. But at the same time, as I fell in love with Blues music, I noticed that many recordings had particularly beautiful tone and mixes. They sounded natural. In 1973 when I joined Muddy Waters’ band — and his early recordings are clear and warm and enhance rather than hide the transcendent music — I took the opportunity to ask him how those recordings were made.
Short List GOAT Force-Of-Nature singer Muddy was very aware of the recording techniques. For his early recordings, he said Chess Records used 3 microphones into an Ampex tape recorder. One mic was near the singer, one near the piano, one near the upright bass. Louder drums and instrument amps were picked up ambiently. I think the producer and engineer had golden ears. The vocal is way up front but not too loud and I can hear every word and nuance of a special singer. The amplified instruments don’t sound harsh, like your ear is next to the speaker. The drum sounds sound like drums in a room, not over-detailed as can happen with multi-track miking.
In 1976, Johnny Winter produced Muddy’s “Hard Again” album and told me he wanted it to sound like the old recordings. He used both close and ambient mics in a large, warm-sounding room, very little baffling between the musicians and amps and drums. People love the way the album sounds as well as how it enhances the sound of the listener being a room with a band having fun. Last time I saw Derek Trucks he told me he tries to make his home studio and recording sound like that album.
But back in 1969, The Rolling Stones presented their classic album “Let It Bleed” with a low vocal mix. Perhaps they thought it made the band sound more powerful. I love the music but I feel like the vocal and lyrics are obscured. I talked about it a few years ago with Don Was, who produced 8 Stones albums. He told me Mick regretted the low vocal mixes.
The buried vocal trend is back in the last few years. Listen to Muddy “Hard Again” or the early Chess masterpieces. Listen to Etta James, Billie Holiday, Louis Armstrong, Frank Sinatra, Big Joe Turner, Jimmy Rogers, Otis Spann. Then listen to Taylor Swift, Beyonce, Billie Eilish, current Country hits, Hip-Hop.
WTF? Don’t the songwriters want their soulfully crafted lyrics to be understood without a lyric video? I truly don’t understand.
I appreciate YOU — that I can post these thoughts I put together today and read your comments and learn what it’s like for you.
https://www.facebook.com/BobMargolinFanPage/posts/pfbid02gjDRmRGNRaaSYMU85tPHt2sS8W3WWo9hPAwP1MQk4ArXpMJDJ2yJYa1vDXDvNofVl
+2
SUPPORTER
Posts: 860
Joined: Feb 14, 2018
Good one!
And as one of Bob's commenters said, it's a problem in film as well. I learnt elsewhere that they probably mix for these 250,000$ Dolby Atmos theaters, and not so much for our small stereos or headphones anymore...
And as one of Bob's commenters said, it's a problem in film as well. I learnt elsewhere that they probably mix for these 250,000$ Dolby Atmos theaters, and not so much for our small stereos or headphones anymore...
+1
Harley Benton G112 Celestion V30
Cabinet for Electric Guitar
169 €
iThis widget links to Thomann, our affiliate partner. We may receive a commission when you purchase a product there.
Visit Shop
SUPPORTER
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sep 27, 2014
I have a real problem understanding what they say when I watch Netflix on my TV, the sound is terrible and then they mumble, too. So I crank up the volume but then they have loud music and explosions and it's too loud. really annoying. So I tend to watch it on lower volume with sub titles on...
+1
wikiloops online jamsessions are brought to you with friendly
support by:
The thing about wikiloops is the incredible people willing to share their creations with the world purely for their love for music. It's priceless!
Riky