We live in an incredible age where technology does so much for us that we can automate tasks without even having to think about it.
Over the past few years, I’ve been working on projects in multiple languages and I’ve never had to worry about a lack of comprehension. While I’ve been very lucky to work with excellent translators, problems can obviously arise if I’m left to figure things out by myself during a session. That’s where Google Translate comes in. If there’s anything I’m unsure about, Google Translate is now so good, that I can translate everything I need and get an audio example of the exact pronunciation in seconds.
It’s an amazing resource but I’ll never truly learn another language fluently as long as I can lean on it. I should really have a deep understanding of a language and use Google Translate as a tool to correct me as I go. However, I use it as a tool to get me out of a bind in a hurry.
The same can be said for our music. There are plugins and tools that do any number of things automatically for us. Just look at this comment I got on my How to loudness match a mixing reference set (Part 2 of 2) video:
Yes, plugins can do it for you, but that whole exercise is more about using your ears and your taste than anything else.
What happens if we remove the technology? If you don’t have that plugin when you’re working in another studio, can you rely on your ears to do the job for you?
It’s like tuning a guitar. A tuner will get you 100% accurate, but you should also be able to tune by ear when you don’t have access to a digital tuner. You might not be as accurate but it’s better to get most of the way there then to have your guitar completely out of tune.
The point I’m trying to make is that the great innovators in music don’t rely on technology but they use it as a tool to improve their music in unique ways. A lot of the time, innovation comes from bending or breaking the rules and pushing the envelope to try new things.
There are so many examples out there of unbelievable innovation in music but I’m going to stick with the guitar theme and use one of the greatest of all time, if not the greatest of all time – Jimi Hendrix.
There can be no doubting that Jimi was an innovator. If I was to count the number of ways, I’d be here all day. So, I’ll focus on a select few.
The most obvious is the fact that Hendrix almost exclusively played right handed guitars that were turned upside down and restrung so that he could play them left handed. Jimi’s main guitar was a Fender Stratocaster and the bridge pickup of that model of guitar is designed to give the high E string a bright sound and the low E string a dark sound.
Since Jimi played right handed guitars that were flipped around and restrung, the opposite effect was true. The low E string had a brighter sound and the high E had a darker sound. It goes completely against what someone would expect but it created a very appealing sound.
There are many other ways in which Jimi used this style to his benefit – including better access to volume, tone knobs and his pickup selector. He was, of course, an innovator in many other ways. His use of the UniVibe pedals and effects pedals in general paved the way for very creative guitar playing and without his influence, we wouldn’t have unique styles like those of Tom Morello or John Frusciante to name but a small few.
So you take Jimi’s innovative style of playing with the ‘Jimi Hendrix Experience’ and blend that with Eddie Kramer’s taste as an engineer and you get many examples of brilliance, just like this…
We’re talking bout some really beautiful panning right there!
It could be argued that it wouldn’t be difficult to replicate this type of panning nowadays with the ease of modern automation. But this was completely different. The engineer was actually “playing the board” during mixdown. There were no safety nets or ’Session File Backups’. The mix was a true performance and it made them think a lot more musically. If you’ve ever had to mix like that, it’s a real challenge. While their technical knowledge still had to be great, everything they did was a performance and intended to compliment the music.
This actually led to greater creativity in performance. There are many stories out there about how The Beatles and George Martin worked together on the console during mixdown. There are many more stories out there from countless engineers about “playing the board” and they’re all worth hunting down and listening to.
So how does this apply to your music?
Well, it’s a little bit strange but some of the most musical mixes you’ll create are made when you’re starting out. The main reason for this is that your technical knowledge is so limited that you’re thinking solely about the music and trying to stand out creatively.
What I find interesting is that creativity and real musicality can diminish over time as the technical aspects of mixing become more interesting or appealing. Learning a new trick and implementing it can sometimes take precedence over creating a unique, musical mix. It’s quite funny that we’re all guilty of it but it’s incredibly important that we keep using our musicianship and creativity to craft our mixes while our technical knowledge and ability improves.
You could try all day to replicate Eddie Kramer’s style of mixing and his panning choices on a record like ‘May This Be Love’. While you might get similar results, they’ll never be exactly the same. That’s because you don’t have Eddie Kramer’s taste, life experiences and background. You’re unique, your music is unique and the results you create will be unique. Whether that’s good or bad is down to you.
Excellence and true expression of a unique talent develops over time. To be able to create masterful productions like those of Eddie Kramer or George Martin takes not only incredible taste, passion and talent but it also takes an incredible amount of dedication. They broke the mould and quite often broke the rules.
But the real question is whether you need to know the rules in the first place to break them? If some of the most musical mixes you create are when you first start out, shouldn’t you stop at that point?
Well, the short answer is no.
As I mentioned above, incredible musicians, engineers and producers get better over time. That’s because they use the tools and technology at their disposal to help them realise their creative vision. Not the other way around.
Even though we live in a rapidly advancing world where we have incredible tools like Google Translate and a plethora of audio plugins at our fingertips, it doesn’t mean we should rely on them to do our job for us. If you want to learn a new language or become a truly great music producer, there are no shortcuts.
Make sure to use technology to your benefit and not as a crutch. The next time you start to throw the technological kitchen sink at a mix, think of George Martin or Eddie Kramer playing the mixing board beautifully like an instrument.
Stay true to your gut, your taste and the reasons why you began creating music in the first place and you will be rewarded as your technical ability develops and improves over time.
Now, I’d love to know…
What one piece of modern technology makes your music production so much better? And on the flip side, what piece of technology makes you a more lazy producer?
Leave a comment below!
professional sounding mix every time...
By the plugin that has made my life much much easier is ezdrummer. What a blessing not to have to bring in a full drum set and then Mike it up and then worry about getting the mix to sound good with all the inherent problem a phase cancellation, and bad acoustics causing modal issues. And the plugin that has caused me to be lazy is Nectar 3. All you have to do is Wink your eye and push one or two buttons and you have a perfect vocal it’s amazing. I know how to do each step that it was to create such an expert sounding vocal but she don’t want to take the time to do it anymore when it’s just provided on a silver platter and has become so easy. Don’t get me wrong I have absolutely nothing against this plug-in it’s phenomenal, but I could see how a young engineer just starting out would no longer be required to take the time to learn what’s involved in sculpting that vocal, and will take a lot of things for granted.
Thanks Pat. EZdrummer is for sure very versatile. I use Studio Drummer a lot when there isn’t the budget for live drums. But I still love live drums! That’s interesting what you have to say about Nectar. You know all the steps the plugin is taking to get you there, so you use it to make your life easier. A good point about taking shortcuts when starting out. If you don’t know what you’re doing with it, a plugin like that can harm a mix even more than stock plugins or individual plugins stacked to achieve the same effect. Great points! Thanks for sharing.
Having access to professional tools as plugins, is amazing. Learning how to use compression and being in control to the attack and release times etc… is fun! Having AI plugins doing it for you would in my mind diminish the fun. I like to learn the sound relationships between parameters and have a say in how it is going to sound. Midi drums is a downer and a real weakness in my songs/productions. Even with all the parameters and tools to help sculpt the ‘feel’ it is difficult. However, that technology is improving too and maybe my program isn’t as good as say easzydrummer mentioned above. Good article Stephen and I like to point you make about taste and style. Thanks
It’s pretty clear from what you say that you’ve got a real passion for figuring out how things work and making things sound as real as possible. That’s awesome!
It’s ironical. Everytime a new tool appears, it turns into both a curse and a blessing. Multitrack recording, synths, MIDI protocol, samplers, drum machines, sequencers, DAWs, tuning software, plugins…the list goes on and on. The overuse of any of those tools has contributed to the recording of very bad music. But in the hands of gifted and visionnary artists, the same tools have pushed the boundaries a little further and prooved to be fascinating and creative devices.
Personally, I’m currently re-discovering the pleasure of twisting knobs by re-amping tracks with analog hardware and guitar pedals that were gathering dust in my studio. I don’t know if the music I make is better, but the fun is definitely back!
Amen! Very happy to hear you’re having fun making music. That’s what it’s all about. Keep it up Daniel 🙂
Pro Tools. I can’t afford an analog board, 16 track tape machine or the tape! Much less all the outboard gear.
Having Pro Tools, I can take my real instruments and record and create!
100% – I’d be lost without Pro Tools.
Waves adt reel software cuts down the time on double tracking
Great! I’ll have to check it out.
Hello Stephen,
One piece of technology the really helps me is the micro-keyboard / controller, it’s a space saver and offers access to countless perimeters within my DAW.
One piece that makes me lazy are the various plugin mastering programs, you can just drop one on the master and scroll through the presets until you find one you like, yeah not very productive for training your mixing / mastering skills.
Did you cut down from a bigger keyboard to a micro version? I’ve never owned an all-in-one mastering suite but I can see they could make me a very lazy man. Thanks for the comment, Xavier.
Well, for me, what makes me lazy are EQ and Compression digital plugins. I loved working with analog gear……then, it was really ‘playing’ the gear, using groups and faders…..it was a dance and an experience as if it were another instrument. You really affected the tune with your engineering.
Now I’m experimenting with being all ‘in the box’, so I just bring up my EQ and Compression plug ins and I’m done once I’ve found the sweet spots. Boring but affective.
What makes my mixing so much better now is quantizing, smart tempos, arrangement shortcuts, automation etc…..in other words, all the editing available in digital and having all those smart, ‘extra’ hands to help with the final mix/dance……love it, love it, love it…..
I’ve been doing this for 50+ years……..this article is spot on in it’s observations……………
and it IS good music that always makes the mix worthwhile……(invest a lot of time there).
Well Done Stephen!
Cheers
That’s interesting what you say about analog vs. difficult. Do you not think the workflow is the same?
Thanks for the kinds words and support as always, Dave 🙂
No, the work flow has different moving parts. The work flow might be in the same order, but, how you use analog vs digital is a different mind set for me.
The difficulty for me is that in an analog setting, everything is ‘in your face’…..you know right where the piece of equipment is…..you make your adjustment and you’re done.
With digital, you have to bring up screens individually and close them…..not really a big deal, just a different requirement.
Old habits die hard…….I’m now working totally ‘in the box’ expressly to change my old mind-set. I’m not adverse to change. It just takes commitment, focus and discipline……just got to buckle down to get it right.
Great to hear your thoughts on this. Old habits most certainly do die hard but you’re a committed student of life and music, sir 🙂
I agree with Pat…programs like EZ Drummer (an others) have been a godsend to the recording guitarist like myself.
As far as a negative technology…DEFINITELY Auto-Tune. Yes there are times it has been a savior way after the fact when getting the singer to come back in and re-cut is not an option. But I can’t count how many times I’ve had a vocalist in and I ask them to do another take and I get…”can’t you just auto-tune it?”. NO…how about you re-singing it. On a side note to that I also get singers that I ask…can I just sing the chorus once and you copy/paste it into the other sections of the song? Again, how about nooooooo….you just sing each chorus. Sorry but some of this has really made vocalists lazy.
Thanks Chris. That’s a really interesting point about Auto-Tune and copy/paste. Do you think next time you might be able to point out why a retake is more valuable to the vocalist and the song rather than using Auto-Tune and copy/paste?
Sometimes it’s worth sticking on the producer hat to see if a talented singer is open to some valuable advice.
Thanks for the comment and your thoughts 🙂
Sure, a re-take is going to sound more natural and the reason I don’t copy/paste repetitive lines is each one has it’s own unique personality and doesn’t end up sounding “sterile”. I also feel the singer’s confidence is boosted when they do a re-take and every time I’ve had a singer do that they were thankful in hindsight.
“Sometimes it’s worth sticking on the producer hate” … was that a Freudian Slip LOL…pretty sure you meant hat…see what Auto-correct can do…much like Auto tune ;). Just kidding but thought it was funny. I am always very tactful with how I communicate to sessions musicians ESPECIALLY singers…I know my post may have come across a little harsh but I try to keep things warm and fuzzy 🙂
Haha producer HAT! Producer hate is a much different thing 🙂
I don’t think your comment came across harsh at all. It’s very real and it’s awesome that you keep it warm and fuzzy. That’s what it’s all about. Thanks Chris!
LOL Thanks 🙂
i was using ozone elements for mastering for a while but over the last month ive stopped for this very reason, i don’t want to rely on tech to do my job, it takes some of the pride away, so im using the new abbey roads master chain at the mo which is fantastic and creative , and great sounding , plus there are no right or wrong ways to use it , loving it , but like i said at the mo, i might try something else in a few weeks 🙂 thats the beauty of this game hey
You know, I’ve always wanted Ozone but never got around to buying it. When I was younger, I couldn’t afford it and I just learned other ways of doing the bulk of what it does with different plugins. I’ve seen it used by a lot of my friends and it seems incredibly powerful. I don’t want to knock it at all because it’s become a bit of an industry standard but I do see how it could make you lazy if you didn’t quite understand the nuts and bolts of what it’s doing.
Sounds like you’re well aware of this already, Pete. Keep having fun!
The advent of amp simulation (i use Guitar Rig) really worked for me. Just hook up the guitar, find a nice sound and record.
As my editing skills developed, I tended to get more lazy in laying down the ‘perfect take’. Lately, I have been stepping away from minute editing, and I try to record in single takes as much as possible again.
This one really resonates with me. I never thought amp sims were all that good and continued to record with guitar amps. But, they’re a lot better these days and if you can play, you can make it sounds good.
The ‘perfect take’ bit definitely sounds like me too. It’s very positive that you’re back to recording single takes because it will definitely serve your playing better.
Nice work Marcel!
Hello Stephen! Sorry for the long silence… Only now I managed to leave a reply although I`ve read this post of yours last week!… (guess I`ve been doing more things that what I can actualy handle)
Hopping that I`m late but not too late and after taking a look to what`s already written in this comment section, must say that I totally agree with mr. Chris Dunnett adout the copy / paste issue. Years ago I saw this approach being doing right before my eyes in a home studio while recording some songs for a band`s project and the stupidest thing was the responsable (let`s call him the guy who weared the producer`s “hate” 😉 didn`t even ask the band`s members if they wanted to make different takes for the various sections of the arrangement, he was simply recording (a take that he finded “good enough”) and then copying it along the song… ain`t that lazyness…?
Another excellent article, Stephen. All the best from Portugal!