PDA

View Full Version : Producing the next Homer album



Starfucker
May 11th, 2011, 09:29 AM
In december I'm going into the studio to record the 5th or so record of my band Homer. And I'll produce and record it myself.

Recipe for disaster, I know...

The good news is we got a good deal on studio days and we booked 2 days big room and 7 days small booth to record and then 2 weeks later 3 days SSL J control room to get it mixed by someone. Not much room for wasting time but it's more days than we ever had to make an album.

So now I start this thread to see if I can get some help from you guys.

Right now we're in preproduction, which means we're writing songs and we just started mailing around about what kind of record we would like to make (I use mail because I learned through the years that sitting down for more than 5 minutes with the 4 of us together and talking it through is impossible).
In the mail I asked opinions about the feel of the record, the sound, recording process, for who do we make it and what goal we're trying to achieve.

What I'd like to know now is, are there more questions we need to ask ourselves? What else should a band do in preproduction, and maybe more importantly: what should we avoid?

And if you have any advice song-wise, performance-wise or sound-wise, I'd like to hear about it too.

here are links to old songs
facebook, look for the Bandpage (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Homer/61991280856?ref=ts)
or myspace (http://www.myspace.com/homer666)

and a link to the recording studio
http://www.motormusic.eu/

Waltz Mastering
May 11th, 2011, 05:11 PM
Since you are not set to record until December, I would spend the rest of the spring, summer and fall writing as you say, but also performing these songs live in front of an audience.. as much as possible.

I always found the bands that tour and perform in front of an audience on the regular were the bands that can perform their best in the studio....
..also in that regard I would increase your days for live tracking and diminish the days for overdubs.. get as much live off the floor as you can. 2 cents.

PRobb
May 11th, 2011, 06:49 PM
Since you are not set to record until December, I would spend the rest of the spring, summer and fall writing as you say, but also performing these songs live in front of an audience.. as much as possible.



Beat me to it.

weedywet
May 11th, 2011, 06:55 PM
in addition:

preproduction, to me, is the time to get the bass and drums REALLY working with each other.
To focus in listening to only those two people together, and to check that each part between bass drum and bass guitar works with the other.

Even playing the songs live, valuable as that can be, doesn't always address this.
I am endlessly surprised, although shouldn't be anymore!, at how drummers and bass guitarists don't really know what the other is playing.

zakco
May 11th, 2011, 07:45 PM
I am endlessly surprised, although shouldn't be anymore!, at how drummers and bass guitarists don't really know what the other is playing.

Very true. What really gets me is how sometimes even after this is pointed out, neither one wants to adjust their parts to remedy the problem!

Z

weedywet
May 11th, 2011, 08:10 PM
I don't find that.

but I do hear all the time: "hey! I didn't know you were playing that!"

zakco
May 11th, 2011, 08:35 PM
I don't find that.

I don't find that often, but when I do it's usually a young band where the bassist is really a guitarist and by default, locks to the gtr rythmically. The explanation is generally some form of "hey man, that's my style".

Ok then...

Z

dwoz
May 11th, 2011, 09:14 PM
I suppose it never hurts to reiterate that having 15 songs to choose 10 from is better than having 9 and having to come up with one on the fly...

just covering the numbers.

dwoz
May 11th, 2011, 09:20 PM
i

I am endlessly surprised, although shouldn't be anymore!, at how drummers and bass guitarists don't really know what the other is playing.

what do you suppose this is? I mean, when I was in cover bands, fortunately with a number of pretty decent drummers, I always understood my role as bassist to be to find his kiks, and mate them up. Regardless of anything else it was the quickest and easiest way to PRETEND that you sounded like a credible rhythm section without doing any real work. When I would have to walk on to a gig where I was a substitute and didn't know the material, it was always the very first thing...check what the kik pattern was, and at least land on it half the time. You could be playing anything and if you did that you were thanked and asked back.

Not saying, however, that the drummer could necessarily tell it was happening in many stage situations.

So are kids not learning that these days?

Johnny
May 11th, 2011, 09:22 PM
I worked with a guy once who had a neat trick to teach bands how to listen to each other in prepro. Everyone went direct along with the vox into one PA speaker in the middle of the rehearsal room, drummer playing quietly or with rods. Gets everyone out of their little "bubble of me" most of them are playing in.

Bivouac
May 11th, 2011, 09:37 PM
Since you are not set to record until December, I would spend the rest of the spring, summer and fall writing as you say, but also performing these songs live in front of an audience.. as much as possible.

From a marketing standpoint, I completely disagree. New songs should be debuted live with the release of a new album for optimal excitement building and subsequent profitability.

I absolutely feel songs should be well practiced, but in front of a live audience is not the way to go about it. If you absolutely must, do it outside of your home market or as a secret show, under a pseudonym.

weedywet
May 11th, 2011, 09:40 PM
what do you suppose this is? I mean, when I was in cover bands, fortunately with a number of pretty decent drummers, I always understood my role as bassist to be to find his kiks, and mate them up. Regardless of anything else it was the quickest and easiest way to PRETEND that you sounded like a credible rhythm section without doing any real work.

the advantage to covers, and also why they can be a learning experience, is that the arrangements have already been sorted out for you.
It becomes trickier when you are trying to come up with a bass part that isn't just bum-bah-bumping along with the bass drum BUT it has to go with the bass drum rhythm... and vice versa for drum parts.
Having potentially given thought to their own parts, they often forget it has to go with the other guy's 'genius' as well.

NathanRocks88
May 11th, 2011, 09:41 PM
I worked with a guy once who had a neat trick to teach bands how to listen to each other in prepro. Everyone went direct along with the vox into one PA speaker in the middle of the rehearsal room, drummer playing quietly or with rods. Gets everyone out of their little "bubble of me" most of them are playing in.

This also helps illustrate the importance of DICTION to a mush-mouth singer.

weedywet
May 11th, 2011, 09:42 PM
From a marketing standpoint, I completely disagree. New songs should be debuted live with the release of a new album for optimal excitement building and subsequent profitability.

I absolutely feel songs should be well practiced, but in front of a live audience is not the way to go about it. If you absolutely must, do it outside of your home market or as a secret show, under a pseudonym.

because the fans shouldn't be eagerly waiting for the new record?
why?

Bivouac
May 11th, 2011, 09:50 PM
So are kids not learning that these days?

I would say mostly yes, but you have to account for how pervasive punk rock has been in popular rock music for the past 20 years. The style dictates the bass player DOES play directly with the guitar player (which is ideally following the kick itself).

And as that style got more half-time, metal, and arhythmic during the past decade, bass playing became even more disjointed.

Me? Gotta keep the bass and kick in one harmonious state.

Bivouac
May 11th, 2011, 10:16 PM
because the fans shouldn't be eagerly waiting for the new record?
why?

Ideally, they still would be; but we've all seen the declining value of recorded music to the average music fan. If you give them too much too soon, you're limiting the potential of your release event, and that's your moneymaker.

Intelligent marketing at the local/regional/small-national level would be to create mystery by dropping hints, do press, release a teaser single, and try like hell to promote a huge release show/release tour to make your money back upon a record's release.

I've seen it dozen's of times before: good band is set to release record, plays all of it's new songs at every show from the time they're written to when they're released, and the release event is lackluster because everyone's already heard it before, and maybe didn't even bother to show up.

In a world where no one is buying albums, smaller bands need to rely on events to supplement the declining income.

Johnny
May 11th, 2011, 10:45 PM
But you don't have to play all your new songs at every show. You can play one and then evaluate it after the gig.

zakco
May 11th, 2011, 10:47 PM
What about in the case of a first album, where the band has a limited repertoire and these songs are the only material they have?

Starfucker
May 11th, 2011, 10:48 PM
Since you are not set to record until December, I would spend the rest of the spring, summer and fall writing as you say, but also performing these songs live in front of an audience.. as much as possible.

I always found the bands that tour and perform in front of an audience on the regular were the bands that can perform their best in the studio....

I can't complain about how many shows we're playing. The way it's looking now, we have about 10 more lined up before october which would total 25 shows this year. The new songs aren't in the playlist yet but sometimes we play one during soundcheck or as an encore.


..also in that regard I would increase your days for live tracking and diminish the days for overdubs.. get as much live off the floor as you can. 2 cents.

Yeah, but more days in the live room would go over our budget. The studio has a great deal if you book a full 7-day week, so we booked that and there was a deal on the live room last fall because they were moving into a new building. And we booked those 2 days and the 3 mix days.

My plan is to play together in the live room and keep at least drums and bass. Then OD more guitars and vocals in the booth.


in addition:

preproduction, to me, is the time to get the bass and drums REALLY working with each other.
To focus in listening to only those two people together, and to check that each part between bass drum and bass guitar works with the other.

Even playing the songs live, valuable as that can be, doesn't always address this.
I am endlessly surprised, although shouldn't be anymore!, at how drummers and bass guitarists don't really know what the other is playing.

I play the bass and I should play alone with the drummer and it just so happens that the guitarist will be on holiday in july. I try to listen to what the drummer is playing but usually it evolves until we record it. This time though I plan to have all the parts finished on demos well before we record them for real.


I suppose it never hurts to reiterate that having 15 songs to choose 10 from is better than having 9 and having to come up with one on the fly...

just covering the numbers.

Tell me about it :) I tried to explain that but the answer I get is that it's practically impossible to make 10 more songs in 5 months. It's a slow process and I think it's because our rehearsals could be more streamlined. I think we lose too much time playing half finished songs over and over without really changing things. Maybe we should stop rehearsing and start writing.


I worked with a guy once who had a neat trick to teach bands how to listen to each other in prepro. Everyone went direct along with the vox into one PA speaker in the middle of the rehearsal room, drummer playing quietly or with rods. Gets everyone out of their little "bubble of me" most of them are playing in.

Nice, I could try that but I can already see the looks on the other guys' faces.

NathanRocks88
May 11th, 2011, 11:02 PM
If you want to make them really angry - put the metronome in the p.a.











Then run like hell

Starfucker
May 11th, 2011, 11:10 PM
We've never had problems getting people to our release show. Even if we played an occasional new song live here and there, there's always 10 other songs that they've never heard. And the album sounds a bit different from the live shows.

We know where we have to do it and if everything goes well, the people will be there because they know it will be a hell of a night.

cozmicslop
May 11th, 2011, 11:11 PM
From a marketing standpoint, I completely disagree. New songs should be debuted live with the release of a new album for optimal excitement building and subsequent profitability.

I absolutely feel songs should be well practiced, but in front of a live audience is not the way to go about it. If you absolutely must, do it outside of your home market or as a secret show, under a pseudonym.

From a marketing standpoint, I can't think of a better way to test your brand, so to speak, than to hit them with new stuff live.

It's not etched in stone, so you can make changes. If it's shit, and don't move nobody, you can save money by not recording a flop. Also, nailing your parts and all the inside interplay on stage makes you more relaxed under the red light.

I can't see one good reason not to test material on a live audience before you record it.

Starfucker
May 11th, 2011, 11:15 PM
If you want to make them really angry - put the metronome in the p.a.











Then run like hell

The metronome is in the PA. But if you turn your back for 2 seconds it's gone :)

I'm very thankful that the drummer demands to rehearse on click now because he knows he needs to be ready when it's his turn.

Johnny
May 11th, 2011, 11:28 PM
Try working the songs out with a click programmed to play one measure on, the next off. See if y'all can work up to 2+2 or even 4+4.

Bivouac
May 12th, 2011, 12:56 AM
From a marketing standpoint, I can't think of a better way to test your brand, so to speak, than to hit them with new stuff live.

It's not etched in stone, so you can make changes. If it's shit, and don't move nobody, you can save money by not recording a flop. Also, nailing your parts and all the inside interplay on stage makes you more relaxed under the red light.

I can't see one good reason not to test material on a live audience before you record it.

Don't get me wrong, there are certainly merits to testing out material in a live situation. I just think you're being anticlimactic by spilling the beans to your home audience (and thus not optimizing your earning potential), and I have plenty of experience to base that on.

On our last record, we toured to New York and back playing almost all the material we planned on recording when we got home -- couldn't think of a better way to tighten it up and get it ready to record. But more importantly, all the material was still new and exciting to our home audience and the local media during our release show, and the anticipation built up allowed us to sell-out a theatre and pay for the recording expenses in one fell swoop.

The show was huge, the write-ups were huge, and any money made from there on out was cash in hand.

Plenty of examples of bands blowing their load too soon, and watering down the potential of their recorded product -- too many to list. And I'm on that list; learned that the hard way.

New band you say? Yeah, same rules apply. If you want to practice, sit at home and practice. Know your songs, know how to perform, and then just get it done. No sense in pussyfooting around when you have a complete idea.

zakco
May 12th, 2011, 01:28 AM
New band you say? Yeah, same rules apply. If you want to practice, sit at home and practice. Know your songs, know how to perform, and then just get it done. No sense in pussyfooting around when you have a complete idea.

You don't see any value in a new band playing their strongest material in order to build up a local following?

Bivouac
May 12th, 2011, 03:27 AM
You don't see any value in a new band playing their strongest material in order to build up a local following?

Not without music to sell.

The industry just moves too fast anymore. If what you're playing is good and people are going to want to hear it, there's no reason to drag your feet. Have an EP or 7" ready the very first time you play out.

Don't waste time playing weak material just to play out and win over three fans at a time. Write 30 minutes of strong material, practice the hell out of it, record it, and then go try and take over the world.

You don't see movie directors make a film a few times before they get it right; you don't authors make several revisions of one novel before finally settling on a plot.

(Step One) Make art; (Step Two) give it to the world.

And if it doesn't turn out the way you wanted it to? Move on. There is no step 1.5 or 1.76 -- this isn't software design.

It's the same thing that we talk about with recording sounds: commit! The guys with 45 microphones on everything for more "choices" in the mix aren't creating art; they're concocting frankenstein's monster.

Same with creating music: one clear, concise artistic idea.

Record it. Go.

Starfucker
May 14th, 2011, 12:38 AM
Actually what this is, is marketing. Not production.

What I want to know, is how do I make the best record I can make with this band. What can I do now to make sure that we're ready in 6 months to make a record we can be proud of? How can I take this to the next level?

We have made all our previous albums with the same engineer. There never was a producer. We made some songs and we recorded them. And now we want something more so I will produce the album since I produced a 7" single called Vamos last summer.

Marketing is someone else's problem. Our plan right now is to start with 500 cd's and 500 vinyls+cd's. It's not much but we'll probably sell most of them.

Our goals are more shows across Europe, bigger shows in Belgium, maybe a couple of plays on the radio if we sacrifice some virgins and drink their blood, good reviews in rock mags,...


So the plan for the next weeks.

I already recorded drums for 5 songs and turned them into EZDrummer midi files so we can play with different tempos and change things without having to record them again.

Next week I'll record some basic guitars and bass and in june we'll work on the vocals for these songs. And I'll certainly try to do some drum&bass only versions too.

And I have to look around for a mixer.

Starfucker
June 11th, 2011, 12:55 PM
Alright,

I recorded demo vocals for one song last wednesday.

We spent a few hours on verses, choruses, screams and some backings and I feel we made some progress compared to the old albums. But there are a few things I would like to address in order to make this album fucking awesome.

1 Singer doesn't hit the notes dead on. He kind of floats around them until he finally gets the right tone. And I'm talking half or whole notes of floating. I've known this for years and I mailed him a link to a singing lesson video (the zen of screaming), but he hasn't watched it yet. He's also afraid of vocal trainers because they will take away the emotion...

2 Singer doesn't understand notes and he knows it. He has a hard time remembering melodies even if the "melody" is 3x the same note. I'm not writing this to make fun of him, but this is just how it is. He did try and eventually almost got it. Usually we settle for with something close enough.

3 His melody for this particular song feels too high for me. It sounds like he's pushing too hard. I didn't tell him that because we didn't have time to make up a whole new melody anyway.

4 We have a different idea of which is the chorus and which is the bridge. For me, the screaming part is the chorus cause that's where the payoff is, but he calls that part the bridge. Of course, "chorus" and "bridge" are just names but we should all agree on which part has what emotional function in the song.

5 Half the time, I don't understand what he's singing. And I'm not talking about the screaming. "Cool" sounds more like "coal", "times" sounds like "tahms", "counting" sounds like "cow nan".


So now, I'm not asking about your opinions regarding the song, so I'm not posting it if you don't mind. But I would like to know how far I can go in telling him all this without demotivating him and without losing trust and control over this recording.

Basically, what I should tell him is "get a vocal coach once a week in the next 5 months" but I know he doesn't want to. He has more of a "I know it's not perfect, I know my weak points, but this is who I am and the emotion is more important than the technicalities" attitude.

Brendo
June 11th, 2011, 02:39 PM
explain to him that nobody will hear the emotion if all they're focusing on is the mistakes...

radiationroom
June 11th, 2011, 03:14 PM
explain to him that nobody will hear the emotion if all they're focusing on is the mistakes...

Then ask him if he wants to go back to hanging drywall for the rest of his life.

NathanRocks88
June 11th, 2011, 04:10 PM
learning and knowing the basics will set you free

This holds true, especially for a vocalist.

I dealt with a similar kind of singer a couple years ago. He couldn't carry a tune in a bucket and had the usual case of diction issues that is characteristic of growing up in farmsville, usa.

5 months of weekly vocal lessons made a HUGE improvement with this singer, and contrary to what your vocalist is assuming, this vocalists' newfound control over his voice made him a more confident, and emotionally powerful singer.

Has anyone ever thought that his pitch and diction issue is because he is simply trying to oversing? Does he blow his voice out often? If he is YELLING rather than singing, that could be 89% of the issue.

As far as forgetting melody goes, maybe he is ad..h....

wanna go ride bikes?

NathanRocks88
June 11th, 2011, 04:21 PM
How can I take this to the next level?

EDIT THE LIVING FUCK OUT OF EVERYTHING

at least, that's the impression I'm getting lately. :weedstore:



500 vinyls+cd's. It's not much but we'll probably sell most of them.


Damn..I want your vinyl duplicator!!! :icon_eek:


sacrifice some virgins and drink their blood,

Couldn't hurt :grin:



And I have to look around for a mixer.

I hope you have better luck with that than I did...Evil!

Starfucker
June 11th, 2011, 05:22 PM
Then ask him if he wants to go back to hanging drywall for the rest of his life.

He actually works at an indie record store that's going out of business this week or the next. The good news is he'll have a lot more time.


This holds true, especially for a vocalist.

I dealt with a similar kind of singer a couple years ago. He couldn't carry a tune in a bucket and had the usual case of diction issues that is characteristic of growing up in farmsville, usa.

5 months of weekly vocal lessons made a HUGE improvement with this singer, and contrary to what your vocalist is assuming, this vocalists' newfound control over his voice made him a more confident, and emotionally powerful singer.

Has anyone ever thought that his pitch and diction issue is because he is simply trying to oversing? Does he blow his voice out often? If he is YELLING rather than singing, that could be 89% of the issue.

As far as forgetting melody goes, maybe he is ad..h....

wanna go ride bikes?

There might be some concentration disorder involved. We all know it, but it isn't official. When I have to sing something on the spot, I also make mistakes. But here I was, singing something like E E E D for him and he went E E D C... 10 times.

Singing songs by other bands is no problem, so he's not tone deaf. I just think he doesn't understand the concept of notes in the same way most of us do.

Diction is primarily because we are not native english speakers. We come from farmsville, Belgium. But also because he doesn't make the effort to go for the right vowels.
He does sing pretty loud, but screams rather low. I do feel like he oversings, not necessarily in volume, but he has his singing voice which is different and much louder than his speaking voice, even if he just sings along with a cd in the car.


So these are actually typical singer issues. I don't feel there's anything unusual about it. These are the issues that vocal coaches deal with all the time. But how do you get singers to take that step if you already know they don't see the point? I say things like what Brendo suggests, but it seems like it doesn't stick.


Emotional manipulation maybe. Crying, tantrums, slamming doors... Evil!

Starfucker
June 11th, 2011, 05:33 PM
EDIT THE LIVING FUCK OUT OF EVERYTHING

at least, that's the impression I'm getting lately. :weedstore:

Been there, that's why I'm doing this one



Damn..I want your vinyl duplicator!!! :icon_eek:

He lives in Slovenia or somewhere in that area IIRC



I hope you have better luck with that than I did...Evil!

I started with the best one I know. But haven't heard from him yet. We're lucky that we're not 14 year old girls, so I'm not worried about Sony.

Tim Halligan
June 11th, 2011, 05:54 PM
Emotional manipulation maybe. Crying, tantrums, slamming doors... Evil!

Just fire his ass if he doesn't knuckle under.

"Dude...either you get your shit together and learn how to sing, and carry a melody, and remember it tomorrow...or you're gone. Your choice."


:Twisted:

Cheers,
Tim

NathanRocks88
June 11th, 2011, 06:04 PM
Does he play guitar?

Even if he doesn't, it might be a useful idea to teach him to play the vocal melody on guitar?

I suggest that because it seems that he can pitch match a song that his brain is already familiar with. Maybe if you help him disassociate from the song (at least a little bit), he could come around the curve with a slingshot effect?

Cosmic Pig
June 11th, 2011, 06:05 PM
Two ways to have someone work on their shit, yell and threaten violence, or oh so gently suggest and hope.

Tragically and to the joy of cancer and high blood pressure, the latter is usually the way to go. Maintaining confidence is probably more important to performance than some minor skills improvement.

I often find getting to know the song well eventually takes care of such things, but it sounds like that might not work for your singer. I know the E E E D E ten times thing quite well and have yet to resolve it without drawing the melody on the autotune graph. Even when the singer gets lessons. The concepts of melody and harmony take time to ingest.

But getting back to the original question, thus far we have play live and drumsnbass. What other areas might there be involved in preproduction?

Cos.

NathanRocks88
June 11th, 2011, 06:07 PM
Emotional manipulation maybe. Crying, tantrums, slamming doors... Evil!

:Confused: I dunno man

eagan
June 11th, 2011, 06:17 PM
This is looking to me like taking a diversionary detour into Alchemy Discussions.


The latest stuff here translates simply to "the singer can't sing".

There is a simple fix to that.

Halligan stated the obvious since somebody needed to.

Since this is your own band you're talking about, you have choices; that, or just shrug and accept that you're a band recording including lead vocals by a singer who sucks and that's what you've got.

I mean, seriously, we have here before us a thread of ongoing discussion about producing a recording that's in progress right now... this is maybe a little late in the game to be thinking "hmm, our band's singer can't actually sing".


JLE

Starfucker
June 11th, 2011, 06:20 PM
Except he's also our label, booker, manager, our guitarists brother, founder of the band and overall nicest guy on the planet...

I think I'm the one that will be fired if I start this :grin:


The thing is that, if we want to achieve certain goals we set, there's work to be done. And he knows that, and we work harder than before. But there are certain things that I can't teach him.

Starfucker
June 11th, 2011, 06:54 PM
Does he play guitar?

Even if he doesn't, it might be a useful idea to teach him to play the vocal melody on guitar?

I suggest that because it seems that he can pitch match a song that his brain is already familiar with. Maybe if you help him disassociate from the song (at least a little bit), he could come around the curve with a slingshot effect?

Nah, he doesn't play anything but vocals


But getting back to the original question, thus far we have play live and drumsnbass. What other areas might there be involved in preproduction?

I started off with some boring questions, like: what kind of album are we trying to make? For what kind of audience? What goals are we trying to achieve after this album comes out?

Boring but in my eyes essential. Otherwise you'll just be recording a collection of whatever songs you made after the last record came out. It helps to get the producer and the members of the band on the same page.


:Confused: I dunno man

I was kidding :)


This is looking to me like taking a diversionary detour into Alchemy Discussions.


The latest stuff here translates simply to "the singer can't sing".

There is a simple fix to that.

Halligan stated the obvious since somebody needed to.

Since this is your own band you're talking about, you have choices; that, or just shrug and accept that you're a band recording including lead vocals by a singer who sucks and that's what you've got.

I mean, seriously, we have here before us a thread of ongoing discussion about producing a recording that's in progress right now... this is maybe a little late in the game to be thinking "hmm, our band's singer can't actually sing".


JLE

Recording starts in december, so we have some time. Our other records worked out fine, with a little tuning here and there, but not great.

For this record, I would like to have the vocals more solid and powerful than before.

I wouldn't say he sucks. And he comes up with melodies that are fine, but it's hard to change parts into a great song. We have people buying records and coming to see us play. He's not a Chris Cornell or a Mike Patton, but he can sing a song. It just needs to be more solid and controlled... and emotional.

Cosmic Pig
June 12th, 2011, 05:27 PM
I know a few great singers who have trouble with melodies.

Something I often try in the studio with varying degrees of success is telling the singer to over act it. Sometimes to the point where I'll get them to try and blow a take from overdoing it. Often it's the takes they try to overdo that turn out best.

radiationroom
June 13th, 2011, 12:15 AM
Diction is primarily because we are not native english speakers. We come from farmsville, Belgium.

QUESTION: Why don't you record/perform songs in your native language?

Starfucker
June 13th, 2011, 08:09 AM
Basically, mainly because if we sing in dutch, which is our native language, we limit ourselves theoretically to an area with 23 million people and in practice to an area of 6 million people.

If you sing in dutch, your album goes gold at 10,000 sales these days. Some of the artists make it, but most don't so you can imagine what kind of market this is.

If you sing in english, gold is at 15,000 sales but you have more chance to get some interest from The Netherlands, UK, and Europe in general. Plus you have more opportunities to play at the many alternative rockfestivals we have here.

That's the technical explanation.

The other one is that we grow up with (american) english bands, movies, tv shows, web pages,...

eagan
June 13th, 2011, 10:11 PM
Well, hey. This is just my own subjective personal opinion.

For you guys, considering all that, if you write and sing tunes in English, for the reasons you said, cool. Nothing wrong with that.

Given all the factors involved, my own opinion is to say that, if you're not native English speakers, and singing English lyrics, and it comes out the way it comes out because of your accent, fine. So you don't sound like you guys are from Kansas or something. I don't see this as a problem.

Diction and pronunciation are not things I would necessarily think of as an issue here. It might actually even be a positive, perhaps, in the sense that you guys might be just more genuine by sounding as you sound in these terms, rather than trying to put on a facade of Fake American (or English, or whatever..... maybe Fake Orstrylian).

The bigger issue is the singer just not being able to sing a tune as written.


JLE

Starfucker
June 14th, 2011, 12:03 AM
I always think: If Bjork can pull it off... but sometimes I feel like our singer is trying too hard to sound like a real californian punkrocker.

About the bigger issue. I would add that he's still in doubt about the melody.

The way we usually write songs is as follows. We come up with riffs and then we build on that first idea of a riff while the singer jams along. Then we basically finish the whole song before we have a vocal melody or lyric. And then it starts to feel like the vocal is just an afterthought which is totally fucked up. Even in heavier genres with funny song structures.

Bottom line is: we need to get these tunes sorted out before we go into the final rehearsals.

and I have a plan and it's called melodyne... to just work on it until we have a real song.

Ein Mangfaldig Kar
June 14th, 2011, 05:39 AM
If he can learn other people's tunes, and sing them in pitch.
Why not Have him learn the melodies in the same manner?
Either assemble recordings where he sings into the structure you want or refine his ideas, record them yourself, and have him learn "from tape"

As I also come from a heavily accented area, I understand the feeling of not being a native English speaker.
Allthough I like it when the quirkiness of the mother Tongue comes through.

Starfucker
June 14th, 2011, 08:35 AM
If he can learn other people's tunes, and sing them in pitch.
Why not Have him learn the melodies in the same manner?
Either assemble recordings where he sings into the structure you want or refine his ideas, record them yourself, and have him learn "from tape"

that's what I'll try with the melodyne.


As I also come from a heavily accented area, I understand the feeling of not being a native English speaker.
Allthough I like it when the quirkiness of the mother Tongue comes through.

Actually, I think I have more problems with a kind of "lazy" diction. Not that I'm expecting a Sinatra.

NathanRocks88
June 15th, 2011, 07:15 AM
like a real californian punkrocker.




The only mainstream punk band that I give any street cred to these days is from FLorida

http://youtu.be/c7RUeMCZL3Q

Holm
June 15th, 2011, 08:31 AM
I've had such a scenario with a singer that I have not finished approx 2 albums with. :otek:

First one, we did real prepro (the only one I have ever had a budget to do), arrangements, then recorded all the instruments properly, everything. Started doing vocals, we had a guy that has a really great knack at writing melodies, that was able to vastly improve the singers atonal rumblings. The singer, y'know, was a "feel" man. When he was out of time or out of tune he explained "I have a style". A month of doing vocals later and only properly recording one song the project got canned, money pulled and the band dissolved.

Fast forward 4 years, the singer has another band, with a really good songwriter that has a great knack on writing melodies. The rest of the band was even better than the last one. Did their own prepro, we got really good sounding bed tracks. I had learned over the years, that when the pitch and time sense is iffy and you have a "feel" singer it's better to put him in the control room with monitors blasting on full. Lo and behold, we got really good results on 2 songs and I was like "hmm, he HAS actually got better"... That was until we got to HIS song from his previous band that they had reworked to fit the new one and "everyone should have their own song too to be recorded". Well I feel like I've sucked to the black hole of deja vu reliving the pain of 4 years ago all over again. He is again tonedeaf. He can't even remember his own phrasing. 2 REALLY good singers are in the room constantly demonstrating how the phrase should be. They sing it to tape, play back. Everyone understands, that the correct way is to sing the phrase on 8, 1, 2, 4, the singer does it on 1, 3, 4, 5. And exclaims "I'm doing it exactly the same he is doing!" Something gots finally asspulled to tape and everyone goes home. I make the guitar player/boss rough mix another day, he is aghasted and tells that but for one phrase it's all garbage, and promptly writes another vocal melody for the whole song that everyone likes.

Except the singer. That positively hates it and tells "I'm not going to sing that utter garbage!" Fast forward some weeks, where he has had a few cack and amph parties completely thrashing their rehearsal room and the band agrees to play their final gig commitments and dissolve as such. The songwriter, drummer and bass player are continuing and on a lookout for a new singer.

Anyhoo. If your singer is the backbone of the band in every way except musically I guess you to have to live with him. If he is a "feel guy" with "his own style" I suggest monitors, full bleed, perhaps handheld mic and go with the flow. Structure and "learning" usually doesn't work and be prepared for a goldfish like remembering capacity. Record everything, REMEMBER everything, a totally garbage take might yield ONE syllable that you are going to HAVE to use because that is the ONLY time he made it come out passable. He probably doesn't completely suck at gigs, otherwise you would be absolutely nowhere with your band, so try to create as much a similar vibe as in gigs as possible. In every way. And hope for the best and TRY to leave EACH session with some kind of success as something you did last.

NathanRocks88
June 15th, 2011, 08:39 AM
I've had such a scenario with a singer that I have not finished approx 2 albums with. :otek:

First one, we did real prepro (the only one I have ever had a budget to do), arrangements, then recorded all the instruments properly, everything. Started doing vocals, we had a guy that has a really great knack at writing melodies, that was able to vastly improve the singers atonal rumblings. The singer, y'know, was a "feel" man. When he was out of time or out of tune he explained "I have a style". A month of doing vocals later and only properly recording one song the project got canned, money pulled and the band dissolved.

Fast forward 4 years, the singer has another band, with a really good songwriter that has a great knack on writing melodies. The rest of the band was even better than the last one. Did their own prepro, we got really good sounding bed tracks. I had learned over the years, that when the pitch and time sense is iffy and you have a "feel" singer it's better to put him in the control room with monitors blasting on full. Lo and behold, we got really good results on 2 songs and I was like "hmm, he HAS actually got better"... That was until we got to HIS song from his previous band that they had reworked to fit the new one and "everyone should have their own song too to be recorded". Well I feel like I've sucked to the black hole of deja vu reliving the pain of 4 years ago all over again. He is again tonedeaf. He can't even remember his own phrasing. 2 REALLY good singers are in the room constantly demonstrating how the phrase should be. They sing it to tape, play back. Everyone understands, that the correct way is to sing the phrase on 8, 1, 2, 4, the singer does it on 1, 3, 4, 5. And exclaims "I'm doing it exactly the same he is doing!" Something gots finally asspulled to tape and everyone goes home. I make the guitar player/boss rough mix another day, he is aghasted and tells that but for one phrase it's all garbage, and promptly writes another vocal melody for the whole song that everyone likes.

Except the singer. That positively hates it and tells "I'm not going to sing that utter garbage!" Fast forward some weeks, where he has had a few cack and amph parties completely thrashing their rehearsal room and the band agrees to play their final gig commitments and dissolve as such. The songwriter, drummer and bass player are continuing and on a lookout for a new singer.

Anyhoo. If your singer is the backbone of the band in every way except musically I guess you to have to live with him. If he is a "feel guy" with "his own style" I suggest monitors, full bleed, perhaps handheld mic and go with the flow. Structure and "learning" usually doesn't work and be prepared for a goldfish like remembering capacity. Record everything, REMEMBER everything, a totally garbage take might yield ONE syllable that you are going to HAVE to use because that is the ONLY time he made it come out passable. He probably doesn't completely suck at gigs, otherwise you would be absolutely nowhere with your band, so try to create as much a similar vibe as in gigs as possible. In every way. And hope for the best and TRY to leave EACH session with some kind of success as something you did last.

two words

Bitch Slap

Ein Mangfaldig Kar
June 15th, 2011, 09:29 AM
Three words:
Screwing the pooch

And:
I totally agree with Holm.

And remember to have fun in the venture!

Starfucker
June 15th, 2011, 09:47 PM
Well I just came back from our second session of vocal demos.

So last sunday I sent our singer a mail with the song and 2 remarks: the notes are floating from one to the other which makes the melody unclear and the articulation could be better, maybe by exaggerating and singing more relaxed.

He anwered:
1 rehearsals are so loud that the vocals drown in the noise.
2 still working on some lines
3 I'm only an average singer.
It's supercool that we're doing this preproduction etc.

and then I answered:
1 yes you're right
2 try to let the melody come from the way the words sound when you say it in real life.
3 it's not as bad as you think. some technical stuff that we never took the time to work on.


So today he actually paid attention to what I told him in the mail. He was telling me where he didn't like the way he pronounced a word. I could communicate with him about where and how I wanted to change a note etc. and he liked the result.

So we're making real progress. I think all I did was turn off the autopilot.

btw he's not an ego or diva. No dramas. thank Godô.

nobby
June 16th, 2011, 04:46 AM
He anwered:

3 I'm only an average singer.

Didn't you guys used to have a good singer, a female singer?

Or am I mistaking your band for another?

Starfucker
June 16th, 2011, 08:10 AM
This is my other band. I play bass in this one.

Ein Mangfaldig Kar
June 16th, 2011, 08:49 AM
Having everyone in the band together working out the song together with an acoustic guitar as a base might also be helpful.

Rethinking your monitoring situation during rehearsals is another thing.
Both might help with "what, is THAT what you are singing / playing?"
situations.
Try conducting the bands rehearsals using what you are discussing in these one to one demo sessions.
Recording and reviewing each song between rehearsals and giving feedback next time.

Starfucker
July 28th, 2011, 11:59 PM
Update

I didn't realize it's already been a month and a half since my last post here. I'll just keep writing my thoughts down to help myself and maybe those who are interested in bedlam of all sorts.

So,

I booked a mixer. The same guy who mixed Starfucker's Boys will be Boys and the album for those who remember that. He also mixed a Homer live dvd so he knows what to expect. We will only have 3 days of mixing so that puts some pressure on me to deliver decent multitrack sessions that already sound like songs with the faders at 0. He's expensive but he mixes real records for a living.
The best news is that he bought "Zen" after he saw a link on my facebook and told me it's the best mixing book he ever read.

I was asked to come up with some reference cd's and the band agreed pretty quickly on 2 albums. Of course I had to explain that the guitar sound should be established during tracking and that we needed to look for overall sound. Another funny thing was that our singer laughed when I said I liked the sound of a Biffy Clyro album, as if we were not worthy to aim for that.

There is a very real self-confidence problem in this band.

Vocals...
We did some more demos, and there are really cool ideas but there are a few things that I need a solution for... or a good explanation.

First of all, I still miss melody in most melodic parts. Sometimes in punk rock that might not be a problem, but I think it is when we agree that we are a melodic punk/hardcore band.
The lines are made up of a few notes, but it doesn't sound like they mean something. They are not serving the lyrics or driving the song forward... in my not so humble onion.

The other thing is that the words seem to be sung to serve the rhythm of the vocal part, but often the sentences are split up in places where it doesn't make sense to me and the accentuation is unnatural. I don't know if I should see this as "artistic freedom" or "punk" or not. I don't like it, but maybe I'm thinking too "mainstream".


Guitars...
We had a very short session of fucking around with guitar sounds. Went well, we came up with some cool ideas and effects, but didn't record it yet. Next wednesday will be a guitar only rehearsal.

One thing that bothers me is that our guitarist decided this week that his Soldano and Orange, my Mark IV and maybe an old Marshall (if we find one) will be the only amps we'll bring to the studio. There will be no need for my Egnater or Musicman amps.

Another thing is that he is very attached to his super thin tortex picks. The red ones. Of course I respect his preferred choice of picks, but I also know that picks can make an enormous difference in the attack. He's not very convinced when I tell him that we could try a harder pick for certain sections.

I'm seeing some exercises in flexibility for him and lots of patience for me in the future. He is aware of his stubbornness because he calls it his autistic tendencies.

On the other hand, he goes through amps and guitars faster than you can say hello and goodbye. Owned a Hiwatt for a few days early this month, now replaced by a Rockerverb with apparently a problem in the treble area, so I expect that one to disappear real soon (...and behold: I hate it when my predictions come true (http://www.2dehands.be:80/muziek/muziek-accessoires/gitaarversterker/orange-rockerverb-50-of-goed-bod-98404383.html?list_cat=gitaarversterker) :tinfoil:). If he'd spend as much time on actually playing music on those damn things...


General...

I'm starting to think that the guitar takes up too much space in our arrangements. It seems that the guitar is always the main focus of the music. Only the vocal takes over but it's always built around the guitar. And when the guitar takes a step back, we all follow as if we are afraid to step into the spotlights for a moment. I have a few spots where the bass takes over, but it is always accompanied by fading guitars, feedback, delays or screeching over the strings. I'm not interested in ego issues, but I need some dynamics in the arrangement to drive the songs forward.

I also abused some of my spare time to program a church choir into a long heavy outro of one of our demos. It was a good laugh and we eventually sent it to a local choir in which the father of the 2 brothers in the band happens to sing. We promoted the song to be the last one on the album with an ending that sounds like the funeral of punk rock and all signs point to church choir sessions in januari. Can't wait :vuvu:

to be continued...



PS. Mixerman, I need your next book ASAP.

Holm
July 29th, 2011, 09:45 AM
Update

The other thing is that the words seem to be sung to serve the rhythm of the vocal part, but often the sentences are split up in places where it doesn't make sense to me and the accentuation is unnatural. I don't know if I should see this as "artistic freedom" or "punk" or not. I don't like it, but maybe I'm thinking too "mainstream".

This is a thing that drives me absolutely nuts, when English-as-second-(or fourth)-language dude starts singing English that is not phonetically correct, where the accentuation is on wrong syllables etc. Yes, Maynard James Keenan CAN pull it off and some others too, but in general real English speaking singers get their accentuations spot on at all. the. times. The second language fellas that get creative usually tell with it that they don't care and/or understand the actual meaning of the lyric and treat the words only as meaningless syllables that have pitch and lenght.

So, if I have any say in a production at all, I will absolutely let it fly in any scenario, unless the singer really sells this way of singing with his delivery. These guys usually tend to be excellent singers AND speak English at almost BBC level. Your guy apparently is... not.

These fights are really hard to have at "band" level. The word "producer" makes more and more sense, y'know...

re: guitars, amps and picks, I used to be incredibly controlling and anal about the picks the guitar player used. Now... I don't give a flying fuck if the tone coming out of the amp is good. Don't worry about it, bring your Egnater and array of picks anyway, as it could come his "flavour of the week" the day you are recording. And if it sounds good, just record, don't agonize ahead these things. If something is off, start to investigate and fix.

Also. If guitar is the thing that is 'good' about your band, again it's useless to theorize about the space it takes in your arrangements. The question to ask is - would the songs be 'better' with less guitars or 'worse'?

weedywet
July 29th, 2011, 06:54 PM
... We will only have 3 days of mixing so that puts some pressure on me to deliver decent multitrack sessions that already sound like songs with the faders at 0...

that should be the goal anyway; always.

that's how you'll get the record you made, and not just a mixer's idea of what it 'should have been'

Cheebs
July 29th, 2011, 07:54 PM
If he is a "feel guy" with "his own style" I suggest monitors, full bleed, perhaps handheld mic and go with the flow. Structure and "learning" usually doesn't work and be prepared for a goldfish like remembering capacity. Record everything, REMEMBER everything, a totally garbage take might yield ONE syllable that you are going to HAVE to use because that is the ONLY time he made it come out passable. He probably doesn't completely suck at gigs, otherwise you would be absolutely nowhere with your band, so try to create as much a similar vibe as in gigs as possible. In every way. And hope for the best and TRY to leave EACH session with some kind of success as something you did last.Wow. This sounds familiar. Yes, I've done this with more than one singer myself.

Full-bleed concert environment handheld mic keep everything actually can work in these cases... but it is a huge pain in the ass. But you do what you do.

Starfucker
July 30th, 2011, 01:00 AM
This is a thing that drives me absolutely nuts, when English-as-second-(or fourth)-language dude starts singing English that is not phonetically correct, where the accentuation is on wrong syllables etc. Yes, Maynard James Keenan CAN pull it off and some others too, but in general real English speaking singers get their accentuations spot on at all. the. times. The second language fellas that get creative usually tell with it that they don't care and/or understand the actual meaning of the lyric and treat the words only as meaningless syllables that have pitch and lenght.

So, if I have any say in a production at all, I will absolutely let it fly in any scenario, unless the singer really sells this way of singing with his delivery. These guys usually tend to be excellent singers AND speak English at almost BBC level. Your guy apparently is... not.

He does speak decent English etc. but it feels to me like in his mind it's okay and artistic. But I don't hear the art in it. I think it stands in the way of projecting his message to the listener.

We changed a few melodies of other songs, but in the last one he seemed reluctant to work on it.

On the funnier side, I asked him to do his clean vocals and screams in one take so I had an idea of what goes where and his immediate answer was a very dry "No". And we did this before with all the other songs. It took a few seconds for him to remember this and then he agreed and did the take.


These fights are really hard to have at "band" level. The word "producer" makes more and more sense, y'know...

This is a typical band that doesn't really understand what a producer does and they are still a little afraid of other people messing with their music.

They agreed to let me record it because I'm one of them. They are slowly learning that in order to record a great album, I need great songs and a great performance. And so they are slowly learning that what I am doing is actually production.

BTW it's not all as bad as it sounds. We are doing cool shows, often with good crowds, always a good response, nice words from foreign headliners etc. so we must be doing something right.


If guitar is the thing that is 'good' about your band, again it's useless to theorize about the space it takes in your arrangements. The question to ask is - would the songs be 'better' with less guitars or 'worse'?

I think it would be "better" if the guitars make room now and then for another instrument to take over. Or if you turn it around, I think the other instruments sometimes need more balls to play the "interesting part" when the guitar calms down.

I will see next wednesday when we demo our first guitar arrangements. There is only one guitar, but we usually break it down in several different parts that he will never be able to pull off live on his own.


that should be the goal anyway; always.

that's how you'll get the record you made, and not just a mixer's idea of what it 'should have been'

and thank you guys for teaching me that in this forum. Still there is a bit of pressure on me because I have little room for error, they have high expectations and my ass is on the line.

Starfucker
August 5th, 2011, 04:30 PM
Did demo guitars wednesday evening.

Now my main concern is that I have to decide whether I think we need to divide the single guitar in more layers or not. How close can I stay to the original 1 guitar arrangement, because it needs tons of energy and aggression. And I need room in the middle for the vocal which I don't get from miking 2 amps at the same time and panning them L-R.

We did split it up in L and R parts with some extras on top here and there. But I think we might sometimes need more basic heavy chords and sometimes more difference between the 2. Just to keep it interesting.

Great news is that guitars go very smooth. Sound is cool with some Gibsons through a Soldano with a Bogner 212 cab (the Orange is sold and a Cornford is on the way to join the Soldano). M88TG works like a charm. Playing is tight. Vibe is relaxed and excited... and I don't have to teach him how to play. Which is nice.

eagan
August 5th, 2011, 07:39 PM
Hmm.

Thinking for a second and a thought comes to mind.

If you're doing the producer thang, in a kind of high energy rock band of guitar, bass, and drums, and thinking about the stuff you're thinking about...

You could do worse things than to assign yourself the homework of spending a couple of days listening to Led Zeppelin albums and carefully listening to what's happening in the guitars department.

This is not to suggest that you should do the guitars the way they were done on the Led Zeppelin albums necessarily.

What it is meant to suggest is that Jimmy Page knew what he was doing, and put a fair amount of thought and attention and work into it, and you could learn something just in general terms of how to think about things and put things together in what YOU and your band are doing.


JLE

Mixerman
August 6th, 2011, 06:33 PM
I tired to do the whole multiquote thing on this thread, but it got a bit unruly. I'll just make my comments from memory.

Bass and drums:

As Weedy pointed out, it's pretty common for the bass and drums to be unrefined and out of sync in their parts. This is the FIRST thing that I address in preproduction as they are the concrete that holds up the entire recording structure. And while I want to make sure the bass and drums are working together rhythmically, it's just as important to address how the bass works harmonically. Is the bass just holding down the root, or is the track in need of a more countermelodic part? Oftentimes, the bass player is working on the fly, you know, "feeling it" like your singer. This is code for, 'I haven't settled on a clearly defined part yet and may not ever unless someone actually makes me.' Just as it's important to have a somewhat defined and appropriately repetitive melody, it's often just as important to have a bass part that people can sing. The bass acts as a both a rhythmic, harmonic, and frequency anchor for the track. The drums rarely act as a harmonic instrument. If you get your bass and drums right, everything else falls more easily into place.

Playing unreleased material live:

The old argument for playing new material live, before releasing or in this case even recording a record has been presented and argued by bivouac in this thread. Two or three years ago, it's a position I would have agreed with wholeheartedly. But now, not so much.

I'm not discounting the many considerations Bivouac brought up. They're reasonable concerns. But since you're being self-produced, and since you don't have someone that can judge the way an audience might, I think the arguments for playing your new tracks live outweigh the old model.

You need feedback. Especially if you're going to self-produce. But you need also need valid feedback, and if you go to shows playing half-baked tracks, you're going to get a half-baked reaction. I would suggest you only perform finished songs with fully worked out live arrangements. Once the show is done you'll get valid feedback from your friends and fans, and you'll have some idea of which songs are getting strong reaction, and which are puttering out. This gives you the opportunity to not only choose the real winners, but to make adjustments to the songs you think SHOULD be winners, and throw away songs that seemingly have no hope.

Focusing an ADHD singer:

If your singer can't seem to nail down a part, it's probably because he needs to record a part. It's difficult for some people to evaluate what melody lines work and don't without listening back to them. So once you have a song together, record an instrumental demo, and give the singer half a day to work out his parts with you there. If you work with him you can point out which melodies are strong and deserve a spot in the song and/or bear repeating, and which don't. You might have to record ideas and parts line by line just to make sure they're preserved somewhere other than his fleeting memory. Then, once you have a rather anemic (nonexistent) performance of solid melodies, your singer can take that recording home and learn those melodies, much like learning a cover. Once he's learned the parts, he will naturally take the reigns off and begin performing the song. If he doesn't, then your job as the producer is to give him permission to do that. This way, he gets to "feel it" as he performs strong, well thought-out melodies. (Props to Ein Manfaldig for the same suggestion.)

Unneeded pressure:

Personally, I think you're making a mistake booking time and personnel, even six months out, for an album that is not fully written and worked out. Get the material together first. All of it. Then get your demo process done with solidified parts, THEN schedule your recording. Not a moment before. The pressure of a deadline isn't conducive to this particular part of the creative process. You will have limited time to make your album (seven days, right?), so it's critical that you're absolutely 100% ready. With studio time booked now, you will spend the next five months assessing how close to ready you are, and by the time you realize you're not going to make your goal, you've fucked yourself, and you can't change the booking. Then, you'll be going into a full-blown recording session only 90% ready, which means you won't have the time needed to create the masterpiece you're after. Also problematic, you could be ready sooner. You want to strike while the iron is hot. Waiting a month or more could be just as detrimental as not being ready in the first place. This should also be considered in the whole equation of scheduling.

The goal of recording in December is a reasonable one. But that should be motivation enough.

Besides, I don't know how you can determine your actual recording needs before you have a full collection of songs, and some understanding of what is going to be required to record them adequately. Once you have that collection and the demos, you might come to the conclusion that o/dubs in the small room are less important than getting a live energy from the band all at once. You might decide you have different acoustic needs for your recording. You might realize the singer works best in your bedroom with the lights out and no one around. But to predetermine how you're going to record a collection of songs that aren't even fully realized is foolish, and therefore, inadvisable.

Yes, I understand you've made a record or two before with these guys, but it seems to me you're looking to improve your results. Relying on old models that haven't worked out all that great before, rarely provide for any kind of improvement.

Enjoy,

Mixerman

Starfucker
August 7th, 2011, 01:22 AM
Thanks for the replies MM

Let me try to give some quick answers.

Bass and drums:

Drums are a little chaotic, usually not a simple solid beat. Lots of really fast punkrock things with fast tom fills, sometimes slower "interesting" rhythms with tom hits and ride bells if you know what I mean. I try to even it out with a solid bass part.
The biggest problem here is that we are completely in the dark as to what the fucking song is about and where it wants to go. We pay no attention to the functions of the parts of the songs. We're like a 3-speed automatic gearbox. There is no tension buildup and release unless it's completely by accident.
However, in the newer songs the drums are a bit more to the point.


Playing Live:

We have played a few songs live. Sometimes during soundcheck or encores. We've had some good reactions, but we've also only played songs that we really like. So maybe that says something about the other songs already.
Sadly, we always make just enough songs for a record. I tried to explain why that's not a good idea but somehow they believe it's impossible to make more.


Singer:

That's more or less what we do. Maybe I should spend even more time with him inventing the melodies from the start.
I noticed that it's hard for me to find good harmonies which I see as a sign that the lead melodies are not strong enough.


Pressure:

We booked the studio because they had a great deal back then. The guys are also used to booking early because all the other records were made in a smaller studio that was always booked. So they were getting nervous about booking a mix engineer. I've been able to delay it for 2 or 3 months. We have 9 days to record (2 hall, 7 booth), but there are 3 weeks between tracking and mix so there is time for more overdubs at home.

BTW we already had a deadline for the release, which would be around march 2012.

Punks... always doing shit the other way around... :headpalm:

We decided to go to this studio because they had this deal, because I know the owners and interned for them and because we wanted something different from where we recorded the other albums.

I am looking to improve the results and this is how I plan to do that:

- I produce instead of nobody
- I engineer instead of the project studio guy (he's not bad but let's say he should spend more time in this forum. I interned for him too BTW)
- We record in a studio with controlled acoustics and a larger mic collection.
- We focus on the songs and performance before the 3rd day of recording.
- we hire a mixer who read Zen and doesn't soundreplace by default.

I totally get what you're saying about booking when you know what you need, but sometimes thing are coming your way and you have to decide whether you'll bite or not.

And honestly, even though I am bitching and complaining here, the guys are excited about how the record is coming together. I want more but maybe I'm asking for too much for now. And I don't want to kill the excitement. Do you think I should push them harder?


Eagan, I listened to some Zeppelin songs. Conclusion: they do every trick in the book. I better get to work. But I think I need to get some basic songwriting stuff sorted out in order to decide what kind of guitars should go where. We think too much in terms of heaviness instead of emotional impact.

weedywet
August 7th, 2011, 02:52 AM
Zep records were almost always done incredibly quickly after being utterly prepared

All of the best records are recorded and mixed by the SAME person.

archtop
August 7th, 2011, 03:56 AM
7 days of "booth" recording after 2 days of hall recording does not seem "punk" to me.

I thought punk was BBBWAAAHHHH!!!! were punk, --fuck you!!!!

I'm wondering what 7 days of "performing the record" each day would sound like.

then picking the strongest ones.

We've all been tweaked to the nines.
Give us honest energy.
I think that is what is wanted today.
Everybody and their brother can make a record.
What is lacking is cat's in a room "BRINGING" it.

You got cats

You got a room.

BRING IT!!!!!!.


Fuck the perfectness.

I think the new "thing" is "anti-perfect"

but honest/real.





what?!!!! it was only three beers, sheeesh.

Tim Halligan
August 7th, 2011, 04:21 AM
- We focus on the songs and performance before the 3rd day of rehearsal


There. I fixed it.


Cheers,
Tim

Starfucker
August 7th, 2011, 10:42 AM
7 days of "booth" recording after 2 days of hall recording does not seem "punk" to me.

I thought punk was BBBWAAAHHHH!!!! were punk, --fuck you!!!!

I'm wondering what 7 days of "performing the record" each day would sound like.

then picking the strongest ones.

We've all been tweaked to the nines.
Give us honest energy.
I think that is what is wanted today.
Everybody and their brother can make a record.
What is lacking is cat's in a room "BRINGING" it.

You got cats

You got a room.

BRING IT!!!!!!.


Fuck the perfectness.

I think the new "thing" is "anti-perfect"

but honest/real.





what?!!!! it was only three beers, sheeesh.

Man, I know...

I'm trying to improve on the reality now, in preproduction. So that the recording can be as honest as we can get it.
But we will need some guitar overdubs and some time for vocals and backings. And I don't have enough cats to do it all in one take.



There. I fixed it.


Cheers,
Tim

I wish you were right, but I really meant it the way I wrote it. :headpalm:

We focus on the songs and performance before the 3rd day of recording, as opposed to NOT before the 3rd day of recording.

I may have exaggerated a bit but still, historically, the 3rd day of recording used to be the day we started to record guitars and we never prepared the doubles and harmonies. It was all on the spot. And it was also the day that the rest of us discovered the vocals for the first time.

I think we're making progress :grin:

Mixerman
August 7th, 2011, 05:58 PM
It seems to me, you're asking for advice, and using your own preordained rationalizations to defend your decisions.

Archtop is right. If you're truly a punk band, then the product needs to be more about the energy and anger than anything else. You seem to want to make it more mainstream, using techniques to force a more polished and pop leaning product (relative to the overall genre). That may or may not be a good plan. Hard to say with no music to evaluate. But it's pretty clear to me that you've got a vision for this album and I'm slightly confused as to why you're here seeking advice.

Based on everything I've read in this thread, I would say you're trying to put a square peg into a round hole (a common mistake by unseasoned producers regardless of whether they're a part of the band or not). Your attempts to make the band more mainstream with definitive melodies and through some preconceived methodology of recording a currently unprepared product seem to have no basis on market considerations. Who is your audience? By making the product more accessible, will you alienate your current market? If so, will you pick up a bigger market to replace them? Is the goal for the band to become successful, or is the goal to get an album under your belt to advance your own personal goals of producing? In other words, is your vision the right vision for the band, or the right vision for you?

I only say this because every time someone brings up a good consideration, you defend the plan you already have in your head, and you don't actually consider the wisdom of the advice you've been given. This, to me, means your intention has little to do with actually accepting good advice from people who probably know better, and more to do with seeking publicity and/or backup for your positions with the band. Harsh, I know. But then, that's what you need in a producer too. A little bit of harsh love. Someone willing to stand up to your preconceptions and guide you towards an effective product for the band, one that you would have never arrived to stuck in your own little box of preconceptions and personal goals.

If your goal is to make a successful album with the band, then you aren't doing the band any favors by producing it yourself. This has already been evidenced by your insistence to put schedule and a personal desire to record in a certain manner above the ultimate quality of the product. Case and point: some bands thrive on pressure, and in that scenario a looming deadline might not be a bad thing. That's obviously not what's happening here. The pressure of that deadline is already fucking your band up and causing them to fold rather than rise to the occasion. You aren't willing or able to evaluate that fact because you're stuck on a goal of process and timetables, rather than making the necessary adjustments based on the actual needs of the band. And budget considerations? You can't argue on the one hand that you must take this time because it's so cheap, but then on the other acknowledge that you'll likely go in unprepared with not enough material, and act as if budget is at the crux of your decision. Ever heard the phrase penny wise and pound foolish?

If I were producing your album, the first thing I'd do is have you send me all of your material--new, old, and half-baked. I'd then tell you which songs you should pursue, which ones you should bag, and send you back to writing rehearsal until you've provided me with 15 viable songs. I'd also provide you with my thoughts on what works about your new songs, and what doesn't, mostly as it relates to the strengths and weaknesses of the band itself, and partly as it relates to a defined target market. This little bit of direction alone will typically crack any communal writers block, and will often both inspire and focus your band on the task of writing. At the moment your goal is to get as much done as possible before a set recoding date. Your goal should be to create the best collection of material possible and then go record it, preferably with someone who can keep you focused on the right things, and guide you to a successful product.

Given this, one of the first things I'd have you do is cancel your time in December, because your band already feels they can't accomplish the 15 song goal, and that looming hard deadline will only reinforce those negative feelings. I mean, I've been recording for over two decades, and at most I would have nothing more than a guess as to how we would go about recording the album. Until I had all the new material, including the songs that haven't been written yet, there would be no definitive plan.

Once you gave me 15 songs, together, we'd whittle the list down to 10 at minimum with a few reserve songs, and I'd take those songs into preproduction with your band, where I would implement a plan based on what the band was, what the band is, and what the band should and can be, and I'd explain all of my thinking in order to determine whether the band was on board. All of my presented considerations would be based not on my own personal musical preferences (although there's no way to totally eradicate those influences), but on the strengths of the band itself, and with an eye on making an effective and impacting album. As an outside producer with a career of making many albums, I would be in a much better position to see and evaluate these things than you as a member of the band. This has been clearly evidenced in this thread.

Jimmy Page had many albums under his belt before he made the first Led Zeppelin album. So did the rest of the band. Even with that, he's an anomaly, but I can assure you, there was a mutual trust between Jimmy and the rest of the band, and experience played a major role in that trust. In general, it's not a good idea for the band, or even a band member to produce their own album. This is especially so if the large majority of the band are wholly unseasoned in record-making.

I realize this post may be difficult to take, and could very well have the effect of digging you further into your own beliefs. But I think you're making a ton of rookie mistakes. While you personally may benefit from those mistakes through failure, the band won't. That would make you the anti-producer.

Mixerman

iCombs
August 8th, 2011, 12:00 AM
2 ABSOLUTELY NAIL ON HEAD POSTS FROM MIXIE.

Fucking ABSOLUTELY ON POINT.

I was "that guy" in a couple of bands...and when I finally got in a project that was successful enough to warrant actually dropping good money on working with a real producer...

My level of satisfaction with the finished project went WAY up. I wasn't lost in the weeds of my own mix of my own production of my own performance of my own song...and I wasn't caught up in the politics of trying to be both the producer AND a guy in the band.

If for NO OTHER reason, I'd never self-produce anything serious...but Mixerman definitely outlined a NUMBER of other VERY compelling reasons.

weedywet
August 8th, 2011, 06:29 AM
...
Jimmy Page had many albums under his belt before he made the first Led Zeppelin album. So did the rest of the band. Even with that, he's an anomaly, but I can assure you, there was a mutual trust between Jimmy and the rest of the band, and experience played a major role in that trust. ...

and he still brought in Glyn Johns to record and mix.
He didn't figure he could also just do that job as well and then hand it off to a mixer.

Starfucker
August 8th, 2011, 09:39 AM
It seems to me, you're asking for advice, and using your own preordained rationalizations to defend your decisions.

I am asking for advice but I try to give enough info about the situation, not really trying to defend anything.


Archtop is right. If you're truly a punk band, then the product needs to be more about the energy and anger than anything else. You seem to want to make it more mainstream, using techniques to force a more polished and pop leaning product (relative to the overall genre). That may or may not be a good plan. Hard to say with no music to evaluate. But it's pretty clear to me that you've got a vision for this album and I'm slightly confused as to why you're here seeking advice.

Based on everything I've read in this thread, I would say you're trying to put a square peg into a round hole (a common mistake by unseasoned producers regardless of whether they're a part of the band or not). Your attempts to make the band more mainstream with definitive melodies and through some preconceived methodology of recording a currently unprepared product seem to have no basis on market considerations. Who is your audience? By making the product more accessible, will you alienate your current market? If so, will you pick up a bigger market to replace them? Is the goal for the band to become successful, or is the goal to get an album under your belt to advance your own personal goals of producing? In other words, is your vision the right vision for the band, or the right vision for you?

I agree with Archtop. But not everyone in the band does. We talked about sound and mood and the guys want it a bit polished but still with the punk energy. It has always been like that, but we felt we hit a ceiling with the way we did all the previous records. The guys were looking for a way to make the next album better, and my solution was to spend more time getting songwriting, demos and performance right.


I only say this because every time someone brings up a good consideration, you defend the plan you already have in your head, and you don't actually consider the wisdom of the advice you've been given. This, to me, means your intention has little to do with actually accepting good advice from people who probably know better, and more to do with seeking publicity and/or backup for your positions with the band. Harsh, I know. But then, that's what you need in a producer too. A little bit of harsh love. Someone willing to stand up to your preconceptions and guide you towards an effective product for the band, one that you would have never arrived to stuck in your own little box of preconceptions and personal goals.

Trust me, I read all of the advice and I am very thankful and try to use it wherever I can, but I can't radically change course constantly. If anything, I find that I agree with most of what has been said here, but I have to take into consideration that there is an actual band with expectations, visions, preferred ways of doing things and bad habits. And I don't want to pull them out of their space and drop them into completely unknown territory. I will however take your advice and try a bit more of the harsh love and a bit more of the unknown territory.


If your goal is to make a successful album with the band, then you aren't doing the band any favors by producing it yourself. This has already been evidenced by your insistence to put schedule and a personal desire to record in a certain manner above the ultimate quality of the product. Case and point: some bands thrive on pressure, and in that scenario a looming deadline might not be a bad thing. That's obviously not what's happening here. The pressure of that deadline is already fucking your band up and causing them to fold rather than rise to the occasion. You aren't willing or able to evaluate that fact because you're stuck on a goal of process and timetables, rather than making the necessary adjustments based on the actual needs of the band. And budget considerations? You can't argue on the one hand that you must take this time because it's so cheap, but then on the other acknowledge that you'll likely go in unprepared with not enough material, and act as if budget is at the crux of your decision. Ever heard the phrase penny wise and pound foolish?

I like to think it's one step better than no producer at all. I admit that it is not ideal. I should add that most guys in the band don't trust producers. They don't know what producers actually do. Maybe my main goal with self production is to open the door for a real independent producer for the next album.


If I were producing your album, the first thing I'd do is have you send me all of your material--new, old, and half-baked. I'd then tell you which songs you should pursue, which ones you should bag, and send you back to writing rehearsal until you've provided me with 15 viable songs. I'd also provide you with my thoughts on what works about your new songs, and what doesn't, mostly as it relates to the strengths and weaknesses of the band itself, and partly as it relates to a defined target market. This little bit of direction alone will typically crack any communal writers block, and will often both inspire and focus your band on the task of writing. At the moment your goal is to get as much done as possible before a set recoding date. Your goal should be to create the best collection of material possible and then go record it, preferably with someone who can keep you focused on the right things, and guide you to a successful product.

I really wish I could have done that with this band, but there is no old or half-baked material except the songs that are already on an album. We never have more than enough songs. I know it's fucking stupid.


Given this, one of the first things I'd have you do is cancel your time in December, because your band already feels they can't accomplish the 15 song goal, and that looming hard deadline will only reinforce those negative feelings. I mean, I've been recording for over two decades, and at most I would have nothing more than a guess as to how we would go about recording the album. Until I had all the new material, including the songs that haven't been written yet, there would be no definitive plan.

Once you gave me 15 songs, together, we'd whittle the list down to 10 at minimum with a few reserve songs, and I'd take those songs into preproduction with your band, where I would implement a plan based on what the band was, what the band is, and what the band should and can be, and I'd explain all of my thinking in order to determine whether the band was on board. All of my presented considerations would be based not on my own personal musical preferences (although there's no way to totally eradicate those influences), but on the strengths of the band itself, and with an eye on making an effective and impacting album. As an outside producer with a career of making many albums, I would be in a much better position to see and evaluate these things than you as a member of the band. This has been clearly evidenced in this thread.

I wish I started this thread a year ago...
Even if we cancel the studio, there is still the deadline of the release in march.


Jimmy Page had many albums under his belt before he made the first Led Zeppelin album. So did the rest of the band. Even with that, he's an anomaly, but I can assure you, there was a mutual trust between Jimmy and the rest of the band, and experience played a major role in that trust. In general, it's not a good idea for the band, or even a band member to produce their own album. This is especially so if the large majority of the band are wholly unseasoned in record-making.

I realize this post may be difficult to take, and could very well have the effect of digging you further into your own beliefs. But I think you're making a ton of rookie mistakes. While you personally may benefit from those mistakes through failure, the band won't. That would make you the anti-producer.

Mixerman

I'm ok :beer:
I hope my answers don't come off as if I'm trying to defend myself anymore. I just want to give you guys access into my mind and the situation at hand so we can be as specific as possible. I haven't been able to answer everything here but I'm late for work now.

Thanks MM

otek
August 8th, 2011, 04:59 PM
I have to take into consideration that there is an actual band with expectations, visions, preferred ways of doing things and bad habits.

And how well has that approach worked in the past?

You must have considered the possibility that the above could be exactly why previous methodologies have been less than fruitful? That, along with "not trusting producers"?

And assuming you actually agree with what's been said, shouldn't that incite a strong desire to break with previous patterns and try a fresh approach?


otek

eagan
August 8th, 2011, 05:35 PM
One thing I have noticed in reading this saga as I browse through the ongoing threads..

In most basic form, it reads as a story where there has been a general idea, in this herd of cats that is the band at hand, that the band will have you serve as the producer to this album project, generally motivated by a fairly vague idea of this being the way to "keep creative control".

Then, in actual practice, the impression I've gotten every time I read what's happening here is that the practical reality is that the band has made this decision without really making a definite decision and going with it, and actually letting you take any control of the whole thing.

I see stuff about the band wanting this time around to make everything just all better than previous efforts, and then anything that comes up in terms of actually making anything better, it's "oh, no, we don't want to do that.... but just make it all better!...".

It looks like a lot of what you might summarize something like "we want everything better, but we don't actually want to work at that, and we won't let anybody else either..." or something.

I honestly can't make out what the fuck these guys think is going to happen. Like, what? They think it's just a matter of sitting at the controls and pushing the "mo' better" button or something?

There's some vague idea of "better songs".... then the lead singer freaks if anything comes up that didn't come from him, personally, then when it's left in his hands, it's whatever he shits out in a few minutes and whatever comes out of his mouth is to be accepted as golden.... and around you go in circles.

Don't touch. Keep your hands off and leave us alone. Just make it BETTER.


One line caught my eye, for example. Let's see, it was...


That's more or less what we do. Maybe I should spend even more time with him inventing the melodies from the start.
I noticed that it's hard for me to find good harmonies which I see as a sign that the lead melodies are not strong enough.

OK. Personally, to me, "good harmonies" kind of boils down to a really shit simple concept in essence.

To me, harmony lines are essentially just simply alternate melody lines. They're lines that could just be regarded as second, third, options as melodies, that all work together, "good" harmonies, because, well, they're all harmonically related, and each of them individually, or together, just fit with the rest of the music happening at the moment.

In a very basic way, I read the last sentence of what I just quoted and read this as something like "it's a baffling puzzle as to why I can't come up with a good second or third melody when we haven't actually come up with a good first primary melody".


I really don't know how this is going to work out well unless a batch of really basic things change substantially.

Just in the recent batch of posts, I've been reading really solid stuff from at least a couple of guys with long careers and serious discographies of production, trying to kind of step in and provide a little remote long distance producer consultant input, giving some fairly simple and straightforward indicators of what they would be doing if you brought THEM in to produce the band, and for the most part the response is "oh, no, we can't/won't do THAT".


So..... what the fuck?

It really looks exactly like this:

1. This band REALLY NEEDS a producer.
2. This band absolutely REFUSES to have a producer (even if that guy is IN THE BAND).

Until you resolve that contradictory dilemma, you guys appear pretty fucked.


JLE

Mixerman
August 8th, 2011, 06:25 PM
One of the great Seinfeld quotes:

George: I'll ask Susan about it later.

Elaine: You don't ask...you tell.

Mixerman

weedywet
August 8th, 2011, 10:09 PM
one of the great benefits, often, of an "outside" producer is that he's NOT part of the already dysfunctional family dynamic.
Hes actually more likely to get listened to - especially if you're paying him a good chunk of money to make your record better.


I don't know who your idols, or the band's, are - but if (examples:) Chris Thomas, or Roy Baker, or Mutt Lange, or Johnny Rotten, or Mick Jones, or Billy Joe Armstrong, (or, or, or) said "hey, screw all that. why don't we try to just set up and play the songs live a few times?"... the question is wouldn't that person be likely to convince the band to give it a go?

THAT person should be producing.

Starfucker
August 9th, 2011, 01:01 AM
And how well has that approach worked in the past?

You must have considered the possibility that the above could be exactly why previous methodologies have been less than fruitful? That, along with "not trusting producers"?

And assuming you actually agree with what's been said, shouldn't that incite a strong desire to break with previous patterns and try a fresh approach?


otek

Yes. I try to break down walls one at a time. This is more psychology than "knowing how records are made". Like I said in previous posts, we have a hyper singer, a guitar player who says he has autistic tendencies, me and a drummer. And to make it even worse, all of us are Belgians...

Can you guess how long it took to convince our guitarplayer to record in a different studio with a different engineer than the usual?

8 records at least. 10 years.

Until I got that day for free in a bigger one that pulled him over the edge. (Or maybe when he recorded an album with his other band, engineered by their bassplayer)


One thing I have noticed in reading this saga as I browse through the ongoing threads..

In most basic form, it reads as a story where there has been a general idea, in this herd of cats that is the band at hand, that the band will have you serve as the producer to this album project, generally motivated by a fairly vague idea of this being the way to "keep creative control".

Then, in actual practice, the impression I've gotten every time I read what's happening here is that the practical reality is that the band has made this decision without really making a definite decision and going with it, and actually letting you take any control of the whole thing.

I see stuff about the band wanting this time around to make everything just all better than previous efforts, and then anything that comes up in terms of actually making anything better, it's "oh, no, we don't want to do that.... but just make it all better!...".

It looks like a lot of what you might summarize something like "we want everything better, but we don't actually want to work at that, and we won't let anybody else either..." or something.

That's the feeling I get sometimes. We do get to work on things, but I can only take it as far as I can. I think the singer has to work on his singing with a vocal coach. I think he has to try to write with other people. But that is not punk and not DIY...

I can change some notes and make it prettier, but I can't write a good melody for him or teach him how to sing. I need him to bring me a strong song that inspires and moves me. We have those moments, but rarely in the melodic parts.


I honestly can't make out what the fuck these guys think is going to happen. Like, what? They think it's just a matter of sitting at the controls and pushing the "mo' better" button or something?

There's some vague idea of "better songs".... then the lead singer freaks if anything comes up that didn't come from him, personally, then when it's left in his hands, it's whatever he shits out in a few minutes and whatever comes out of his mouth is to be accepted as golden.... and around you go in circles.

Don't touch. Keep your hands off and leave us alone. Just make it BETTER.

I recorded that one 7" single last year, that I posted in the sounding board. And the actual comment of our guitar guy was: "It's cool, but next time it has to be BETTER"

Last week we were working on guitar demos and he played something that probably didn't convince me, so he said "yeah but you have to hear it in the mix". I told him THIS is the mix.


One line caught my eye, for example. Let's see, it was...



OK. Personally, to me, "good harmonies" kind of boils down to a really shit simple concept in essence.

To me, harmony lines are essentially just simply alternate melody lines. They're lines that could just be regarded as second, third, options as melodies, that all work together, "good" harmonies, because, well, they're all harmonically related, and each of them individually, or together, just fit with the rest of the music happening at the moment.

In a very basic way, I read the last sentence of what I just quoted and read this as something like "it's a baffling puzzle as to why I can't come up with a good second or third melody when we haven't actually come up with a good first primary melody".

How I meant it was that, when I find it hard to come up with good harmonies, I see it as a sign that the lead melody isn't very strong. That the lead melody is not creating the energy that the song needs. For example a fast punkrock verse with a melancholic, sad, Deftones-ish vocal. I guess we're talking about prosody here. Or the tendency to end every line with lower notes and never going up.


I really don't know how this is going to work out well unless a batch of really basic things change substantially.

Just in the recent batch of posts, I've been reading really solid stuff from at least a couple of guys with long careers and serious discographies of production, trying to kind of step in and provide a little remote long distance producer consultant input, giving some fairly simple and straightforward indicators of what they would be doing if you brought THEM in to produce the band, and for the most part the response is "oh, no, we can't/won't do THAT".


So..... what the fuck?

It really looks exactly like this:

1. This band REALLY NEEDS a producer.
2. This band absolutely REFUSES to have a producer (even if that guy is IN THE BAND).

Until you resolve that contradictory dilemma, you guys appear pretty fucked.


JLE

I think I see signs of the band becoming more interested in the real deal. But there's always a sort of fear to cross the line where you're suddenly "commercial"


one of the great benefits, often, of an "outside" producer is that he's NOT part of the already dysfunctional family dynamic.
Hes actually more likely to get listened to - especially if you're paying him a good chunk of money to make your record better.

I am painfully aware of that. I hope we will be able to afford an outside producer next time. Also, I haven't mentioned it here, but our recording budget is somewhere around 4000 euros. Mastering not included. Do you think we could have found the right producer with that chunk of money? (Honest question, not trying to be smart)


I don't know who your idols, or the band's, are - but if (examples:) Chris Thomas, or Roy Baker, or Mutt Lange, or Johnny Rotten, or Mick Jones, or Billy Joe Armstrong, (or, or, or) said "hey, screw all that. why don't we try to just set up and play the songs live a few times?"... the question is wouldn't that person be likely to convince the band to give it a go?

THAT person should be producing.

But he would have to face the guitarist who has made up his mind and wants to double his parts and layer more stuff on top. Some of the guys would give the producer a strange look when he suggests to just set up and play, because certainly that's not how real records are made. It can't be, it's too simple. We always use technology! :vuvu:

I don't have many punk idols. I love how GGGarth worked with RATM and Biffy Clyro. I like old Pumpkins, Nirvana and Foo records. The band agreed that we like the sound of a Refused album and a Thrice album.

weedywet
August 9th, 2011, 01:13 AM
But he would have to face the guitarist who has made up his mind and wants to double his parts and layer more stuff on top. Some of the guys would give the producer a strange look when he suggests to just set up and play, because certainly that's not how real records are made. It can't be, it's too simple. We always use technology! :vuvu:

I don't have many punk idols. I love how GGGarth worked with RATM and Biffy Clyro. I like old Pumpkins, Nirvana and Foo records. The band agreed that we like the sound of a Refused album and a Thrice album.

but you really think the guitarist would give Butch Vig, or any of the above, a hard time about it?

someone whose expertise they might be a bit afraid to question would be a boon

archtop
August 9th, 2011, 03:33 AM
If the guitarist insist on anything.
Isn't he then producing?

eagan
August 9th, 2011, 06:13 AM
It comes down to this, and this is repetitive.

Either the band lets you take the reins of this project, and you're producing, or they won't, and you aren't.

It really is that simple.

It sounds like they have SAID that they'll have you produce the album, but then the day to day, moment by moment, item by item reality is that everybody in the band second guesses and objects to every fucking thing. They actually want a BAND as producer situation, which only works when the band can hammer out a consensus on things and move on to the next thing.

That clearly isn't in the cards.

If your bandmates say "yeah, alright, we'll have you produce this record..... but you're not the boss of us!".... you aren't the producer.

I think Sir Weed nailed a couple of things here.

Well, actually, he's nailed a whole bunch of things. I'm just talking about the last note.

First, the producer coming in as somebody outside the family dysfunction to be adult supervision.

Somebody has to take on board everything everybody in the band lays on the table in ideas and the material at hand and what everybody has in their little noggin about what they have in mind about what they want the final article to be, and then say, alright, then, THIS is what we're going to do and how we're going to do it, now get on with it.

That includes things like a gentle nudge or boot in the ass for the singer who won't even consider a melody cooked up by somebody else, yet seems unable to come up with any himself, or tying up the guitar player and dumping him in a closet if he insists on doubling every guitar part 12 times because he's got it stuck in his head that this is going to make things HEAVY, MAN, or whatever is going on.

The other thing is getting somebody who will have a sense of authority to these guys, who they trust as really getting what they're about and not trying to turn them into something totally off the rails in their minds, and they believe, this guy knows what he's doing, so we'll go along with his plan.

If there's no budget for a producer, then that is a difficulty.

But if this means that the practical necessity is that you do end up having to be the producer of this thing, then one way or another, you've got to sit down with these guys and lay it out.

Here it is.

If I'm producing this, then, I'M PRODUCING THIS. Period.

That's the only way it's going to work.

If not, then, I don't know what it will be, you know your band, I don't, I'm guessing it will be more or less random chaos that eventually gets to where everybody says "yeah, I guess we're done, at least, we don't have any time or money left".


By the way, believe me, everybody chiming in to help with this understands fully that all this is "more psychology than knowing how records are made". Well, yeah. No shit. We all SEE that. That's the whole enchilada here.


JLE

Starfucker
August 9th, 2011, 09:17 AM
I have to take a little time here to let you guys know that it all sounds a lot worse here than I really feel it. I mean, we are blowing up things that I would like to address and it sounds like I hate everything about this band and record.

I do still believe that we are making a record that our listeners will like and sometimes even love.

But there are specific issues that I need solutions for and there is an underlying general issue of the way we always did things before.

They agreed that I would record the album and they agreed to let me take the wheel, without really understanding what producers do. They're finding out about that now as we go. And now that I am behind the wheel, I need to find out how I release the handbrake.

WW I think this is the reason why there has never been a producer for this band. They are afraid someone will touch their baby. That is why we always recorded with the guy who just recorded what we did (and then edited and replaced and tuned it). Actually many times he just left and put me behind the desk...
I think if Butch Vig would produce, they would all be very quiet and obedient yes men.


BTW I just got an email from the singer to ask if we want to do a small tryout show a week or so before recording starts...

eagan
August 9th, 2011, 06:22 PM
I have to take a little time here to let you guys know that it all sounds a lot worse here than I really feel it. I mean, we are blowing up things that I would like to address and it sounds like I hate everything about this band and record.

The flip side of this is that reading the narrative from the position of neutral outside observers, I suspect several of us think more or less the same thing, which is, it's actually more fucked up than you want to let yourself believe.

The funny thing about dysfunctional families... they never believe they're dysfunctional (and the occasional case of one of the family actually recognizing it, and either trying to shine a light on it and deal with it, or just saying "fuck all this" and breaking away, probably just has the rest of the bunch viewing them as some form of "troublemaker"). That's why they're dysfunctional.



...... and there is an underlying general issue of the way we always did things before.
There you are.

Like I said.... "make it better...... just DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING".



They agreed that I would record the album and they agreed to let me take the wheel, without really understanding what producers do. They're finding out about that now as we go. That's definitely one of the biggest problems, right there in a nutshell. The "as we go" part.

None of this is going to work itself out if it just sort of wanders along running (or idling) in some weird hybrid mix of random chaos, habit, whim, and inertia.

I think I might have said this, but in case I didn't... it's bone dead obvious that one thing that MUST occur, if you actually are going to produce this and not be an exercise in chaos and frustration.

This is to call "all stop", bring the entire band together for an actual serious meeting, where you get everybody to shut the fuck up, lay this all out, and say: this is what we need to do, this is what we're going to do, this is how we're going to do it, and why we're going to do it that way. If I'm producing, then this is what we're doing and how this works.

I can tell you this right now; unless you get ahold of all this shit the way people are telling you, what you will actually have is this. The band, for all intents and purposes, still won't be working under the direction of a producer, BUT, from this stage onward, if the band gets something done, and anybody is unhappy with it, in their head, it's YOUR FAULT, because, hey, man, YOU WERE THE PRODUCER!



WW I think this is the reason why there has never been a producer for this band. They are afraid someone will touch their baby.This is the part I'm really kind of astounded by. You're PART of the band, yet, apparently, anyway, there's some weird fucking neurotic fixation that letting somebody take the controls and guide things through is going to somehow break their precious toy, even though YOU'RE ONE OF THEM.

[Just to be clear, I understand that, there, you're talking about whatever resistance the band has had about bringing in an actual outside producer, but it looks to me like there's just as much of a problem when somebody being an "outsider" is NOT a factor.]


Last note; I'll quote something back at you here and add my own emphasis to the text.


That is why we always recorded with the guy who just recordedwhat we did (and then edited and replaced and tuned it).
I'll leave that for you to think about on your own without comment.


JLE

weedywet
August 9th, 2011, 06:38 PM
fundamental in all this is the kind of Allbeano marketing meme about how producers "fuck it all up" and "take over"

believe me, John Lennon told George Martin plenty about what he didn't like.

You think Barbra Streisand is a push over in the studio and defers to a producer?


you don't lose your position as the artiste by taking on a producer partner.

It's their insecurity in their "positions" that makes them afraid to have them questioned at all.
YOU can be ridden over; they would have a harder time defending their assumptions to Butch Vig; because they are not really that deeply held or believed.

Mixerman
August 9th, 2011, 11:38 PM
Yes. I try to break down walls one at a time. This is more psychology than "knowing how records are made". Like I said in previous posts, we have a hyper singer, a guitar player who says he has autistic tendencies, me and a drummer. And to make it even worse, all of us are Belgians...

And you think this is different from other bands, how? I'm writing Zen and the Art of Producing right now, and guess what? A lot of it deals with the psychology of bands. Anyone who has been in the studio for a minute knows how to deal with a group of individuals with strong opinions.


Can you guess how long it took to convince our guitarplayer to record in a different studio with a different engineer than the usual?

8 records at least. 10 years.It took YOU that long. It wouldn't take a smart outside producer all of about two minutes. You're not quite grasping the power of that position compared to yours.


We do get to work on things, but I can only take it as far as I can.Now you're making my argument FOR me.


I think the singer has to work on his singing with a vocal coach. I think he has to try to write with other people. But that is not punk and not DIY...

I can change some notes and make it prettier, but I can't write a good melody for him or teach him how to sing. I need him to bring me a strong song that inspires and moves me. We have those moments, but rarely in the melodic parts.A punk singer and a vocal coach? Why are you even considering this? Based on your posts here, it seems his problem is a writing problem, not a singing one.


I recorded that one 7" single last year, that I posted in the sounding board. And the actual comment of our guitar guy was: "It's cool, but next time it has to be BETTER"You're still making my argument FOR me.




How I meant it was that, when I find it hard to come up with good harmonies, I see it as a sign that the lead melody isn't very strong. That the lead melody is not creating the energy that the song needs. For example a fast punkrock verse with a melancholic, sad, Deftones-ish vocal. I guess we're talking about prosody here.

Or the tendency to end every line with lower notes and never going up.Prosody is the consistency between lyric and the music. It has nothing to do with vocal lines going up or down, unless the word "up" or "down" are being used in the lyric at the time.


I think I see signs of the band becoming more interested in the real deal. But there's always a sort of fear to cross the line where you're suddenly "commercial"You're the one pushing for "commercial." Just because you hire a producer doesn't mean he's going to try to commercialize you.


Also, I haven't mentioned it here, but our recording budget is somewhere around 4000 euros. Mastering not included. Do you think we could have found the right producer with that chunk of money? (Honest question, not trying to be smart)Why not? I'm sure there are plenty of experienced producers in Belgium that could make an album for that. You don't have to have a super-accomplished producer. You just need to find someone who fits within your budget, who is capable of leading the group to the making of an effective record. Start asking around. I guarantee that you can find a young producer that's going to get you guys, and be able to lay out a plan that everyone can get on board.

Remember, as a producer, I can make the budget worth considerably more through relationships. If I need a really good studio that will fit within a limited budget, I have the ability to use those relationships to make it happen. Whereas you are looking at a one-time deal for you, a producer can get that kind of deal anytime he likes, and since many producers have their own rooms, they can probably bring the o/dub costs to nil. He makes his money out of the remainder of the budget, and his own room will cost him the same whether he uses it or not (except for electrical costs).


But he would have to face the guitarist who has made up his mind and wants to double his parts and layer more stuff on top. Some of the guys would give the producer a strange look when he suggests to just set up and play, because certainly that's not how real records are made. It can't be, it's too simple. We always use technology! :vuvu:You're talking in abstracts. There is no producer. Just you. We are talking about an unknown producer, who will have unknown ideas. If he's good at producing, he can sell his vision to you before you pay a penny. You usually get to test out the relationship first in rehearsals. It doesn't cost you anything to shop, and if you can't find anyone that fits the bill, THEN you should consider doing it yourselves. Not before.


I don't have many punk idols. I love how GGGarth worked with RATM and Biffy Clyro. I like old Pumpkins, Nirvana and Foo records. The band agreed that we like the sound of a Refused album and a Thrice album.How about you find a producer that wants your band to sound like a Homer album? Not the old Homer. The new Homer.

Again, as Elaine said in Seinfeld. You don't ask...you tell. TELL your band you're going to look for, and talk to local producers (anywhere in Europe), and that you are going to set up a rehearsal with the guy you feel fits best with the band. There's no downside. If you guys don't like any of the producers, do it yourselves.

Enjoy,

Mixerman

Starfucker
August 10th, 2011, 01:29 AM
I'm making arguments for you, MM, because I agree with almost everything you say.

I am not a great experienced producer. If I was, I wouldn't have started this thread. I probably shouldn't even have called it "Producing the next Homer album" but I did have questions about the production side of recording the next album. Because even though this is actually a self produced co-production, if I may call it that, I wanted to know how outside producers would handle this, so I can learn. And I must say that I have learned a thing or 2.

I do however have to disagree with you on what you say about me trying to make it more commercial. I am trying to make it more musical. We discussed the sound and mood, we agreed that we want high energy, some aggression and melody, and I am trying to work on the songs and performance so that they have that energy.

I agree that there's more of a writing issue than a singing issue. He usually nails the long notes. But he writes parts that are too fast and too high for himself. I would like a vocal coach because there are some technical things like putting too much energy in the attack of the notes or always sliding down at the end of a line.

Also, you're not going to believe this and tell me I'm delusional, but I am trying to make this album sound like us. The new us, who have put more work, thought and passion into their songs and performance. I am trying to keep it as close as I can to what we are live.

I understand your advice is to stop everything and look for an outside producer. But as it is now, the band is very happy and excited with the way things are going. If they don't like what I do, we can just decide that I move aside and find someone else. I will look around for someone who could be a great producer for us. All the "punk" guys I know from the top of my head are into the more commercial polished sounds though. I know one guy here in Belgium that we'd really like to work with but he's very busy touring. We contacted him last year for the 7" and he didn't have the time, even though he said that he wanted to do it.



Weedy, what you said is exactly how it is.

Eagan, I didn't miss what you wrote, but I really need to go to sleep now.

Starfucker
August 12th, 2011, 12:00 AM
The flip side of this is that reading the narrative from the position of neutral outside observers, I suspect several of us think more or less the same thing, which is, it's actually more fucked up than you want to let yourself believe.

The funny thing about dysfunctional families... they never believe they're dysfunctional (and the occasional case of one of the family actually recognizing it, and either trying to shine a light on it and deal with it, or just saying "fuck all this" and breaking away, probably just has the rest of the bunch viewing them as some form of "troublemaker"). That's why they're dysfunctional.

The funny thing is that we got to a certain level with this band where we play some really cool shows, where kids learn how to play our songs on guitar, where they are violently dancing and screaming along with us, where people are already looking forward to our next album, where someone offers us to release vinyls of our records on his label, where they make live DVD's with us, where they play our song a couple times on the national "alternative" radio and interview us,...

And all of it with our small record label, no managers, no bookers, no marketing plans, no endorsements..

I think the fucked up-ness is in the fact that our organisation never evolved along with the growing success. And now we find ourselves with our faces pressed against a glass ceiling and slowly realizing that we're going to need help if we want to grow more. And on the other hand, we're not the young band that's going for the international commercial breakthrough hype. I have lots of musical plans, but some of our guys have houses and children and... real jobs...

We have plans, but Mtv is not one of them... or one of the channels that still does actual music.


There you are.

Like I said.... "make it better...... just DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING".

yeah... I'm slowly introducing new things to earn their trust and it's working. It reminds me of something I heard about the first time Metallica worked with Bob Rock where they gave him a really hard time until they trusted him. Actually, they're not giving me such a hard time, but sometimes there is a bit of a power thing going on between me talking to the band with my producer hat on, and the guitarist talking to me with my bassist fez on.


That's definitely one of the biggest problems, right there in a nutshell. The "as we go" part.

None of this is going to work itself out if it just sort of wanders along running (or idling) in some weird hybrid mix of random chaos, habit, whim, and inertia.

I think I might have said this, but in case I didn't... it's bone dead obvious that one thing that MUST occur, if you actually are going to produce this and not be an exercise in chaos and frustration.

This is to call "all stop", bring the entire band together for an actual serious meeting, where you get everybody to shut the fuck up, lay this all out, and say: this is what we need to do, this is what we're going to do, this is how we're going to do it, and why we're going to do it that way. If I'm producing, then this is what we're doing and how this works.

I can tell you this right now; unless you get ahold of all this shit the way people are telling you, what you will actually have is this. The band, for all intents and purposes, still won't be working under the direction of a producer, BUT, from this stage onward, if the band gets something done, and anybody is unhappy with it, in their head, it's YOUR FAULT, because, hey, man, YOU WERE THE PRODUCER!

In their head, it was going to be my fault because I was the recording engineer. That's why I told them I was going to take control over the process, to which they agreed. And apparently, as they see it, this album is being produced by Me & Homer. The origin of this situation lies in the fact that we weren't looking for a "producer" but we agreed that I was going to take charge of the preparation and the recording and I made clear to them that that is actually producing.

I have told the guys 2 months ago that I want a meeting to further discuss everything we mailed about. We never have those, and we never have serious group discussions. I discuss things with each member individually in the car. Singer suggested to have a band BBQ at his place but the weather is shit. Maybe we should aim for a Kebab meeting.


This is the part I'm really kind of astounded by. You're PART of the band, yet, apparently, anyway, there's some weird fucking neurotic fixation that letting somebody take the controls and guide things through is going to somehow break their precious toy, even though YOU'RE ONE OF THEM.

[Just to be clear, I understand that, there, you're talking about whatever resistance the band has had about bringing in an actual outside producer, but it looks to me like there's just as much of a problem when somebody being an "outsider" is NOT a factor.]

The dynamic in the band has always been that the guitarist is the artistic leader. He comes up with the riffs and tells the drummer more or less what to do and looks funny at me when I try notes that he didn't expect, he likes to be in control of the songs. And I was the last one to join the band after they lost a bass player so I kept quiet for a while. Our singer leads the rehearsals, calls the songs and acts as manager, booker and label... and writes the lyrics. Guitar and vocals are brothers, which brings another weird dynamic in the equation. And we have a drummer who hits things with sticks, does his own thing unless the guitarist tells him what to do.

Since I joined and kept quiet, I had some "commercial" "success" with my other band Starfucker. We had managers, a booker, producers, record label, publisher, music videos and radio,... and along the way I learned a few things that the other Homers haven't. So I start to speak up.


I'll leave that for you to think about on your own without comment.

mhm, no comment...



(I think i know where you're going with this and if I may just say that I recorded that one song last year that I didn't edit, replace or tune and it sounded just fine to me. Actually, you can judge for yourself if you go to soundcloud.com/homer666 and find Vamos. Not promotional, just reference, not your style of music anyway. The other songs on the page were done by the regular guy)

weedywet
August 12th, 2011, 12:13 AM
honestly?

sounds to me like the guitarist should produce, and you engineer


you think that because it didn't say "Produced by George Martin AND The Beatles" that means he made all the decisions or steamrolled them?

really?

all it says is that they were secure in THEIR jobs.

eagan
August 12th, 2011, 02:09 AM
mhm, no comment...



(I think i know where you're going with this and if I may just say that I recorded that one song last year that I didn't edit, replace or tune and it sounded just fine to me.

OK, I think I'd better follow up on this, because, no, I don't think you know where I was going with that. I think you missed the hint, so I'll clarify.


What I was leading toward was thinking about what that engineer was doing.

for review:

That is why we always recorded with the guy who just recordedwhat we did (and then edited and replaced and tuned it).What I was hoping would occur was that you would get the hint about what was happening there.

The engineer was not "just recording what you did".

The engineer was doing very substantial bits of work there, that were well beyond capturing what a band was doing in the room.

These involved production decisions.

Who made the decisions to do those things?

Who, next, then directed those pretty major surgical operations?

That person; THEY were producing.


JLE

weedywet
August 12th, 2011, 02:32 AM
That person; THEY were producing.



HE was. (unless there were several of them)

eagan
August 12th, 2011, 03:05 AM
Avoiding commitment to gender there.

Sorry. Try again.

Them am the producer.


Well, OK, grammatical point aside..

What was the case?

Was it "just recording what we did" engineer?

Was it Mr. Engineer collaborating in partnership with Mr. Starfucker?

Was it Mr. Starfucker directing Mr. Engineer doing the surgery?

This bit of questioning leads to the identity of the producer of the thing.

This is where I'm trying to nudge him.


JLE

weedywet
August 12th, 2011, 03:57 AM
I know, and, grammar aside, I'm with you

but I keep reading this:

"The dynamic in the band has always been that the guitarist is the artistic leader. He comes up with the riffs and tells the drummer more or less what to do and looks funny at me when I try notes that he didn't expect, he likes to be in control of the songs."

although I could use that to make the case that this (in addition to the dynamic of brothers in the band) might be an argument for an outside producer, if it's to be an 'inside' the band producer, it reads to me like this guy (the guitar player, bossy, in control one) is it anyway.

plus, I might also say that engineering and producing are best done as separate jobs - especially by the lesser experienced in either.

otek
August 12th, 2011, 05:30 AM
especially by the lesser experienced in either.

Back to grammar for a second, shouldn't that be the less experienced? :D :Razz:

(Actually, you may regard that an honest question. I myself am uncertain.)

otek

weedywet
August 12th, 2011, 05:40 AM
could go either way

I actually meant 'lesser', as in of lower quality, but simply 'less' could also have applied.

eagan
August 12th, 2011, 06:31 AM
I think all that does add to making the case for an outside producer.

It looks like a cat herding exercise, and I think I definitely agree with the idea that what's needed there, really, is an outside producer, that these guys will accept as somebody with authority. Somebody they don't regard as a peer.

Especially if, besides the whole brothers thing and everything about the guitar player, there's some lingering odd vibe of regarding him as the new guy.

From what I can guess reading (I mean, none of us knows this band) it does look like the guitar player kind of ends up dominating things anyway even if it's some sort of passive thing (i.e., I'll just keep refusing and rejecting things until we're doing what I want to do).

I'm not sure having him ending up as producer is the best thing there. That seems, again, just guessing from what I read, that things will just be however these guys have always done it before.

It's back to "sure, OK, we'll have you produce this..... we just won't actually LET you produce it".


JLE

Starfucker
August 13th, 2011, 02:11 AM
I think letting the guitarist produce would be more of the usual. Actually you could say that he produced all the records up until this one.

Unless you count the engineer who replaced everything. But he always does that. He does it because that's how he works, not because some bands need it and others don't. I worked for him and I did that shit for him constantly. Then I wouldn't call it production, I'd call it a bad habit.

I should also say that the guitarist is not downright rejecting and refusing everything, but rather stepping on the brakes when things don't go as he expected. Maybe he needs time to process new things or he needs someone like his older brother to tell him it's ok.

Don't worry, Weedy. I don't think George Martin made all the decisions etc. I've been in situations myself where I worked with an outside producer and worked together with him. I've also been an assistant in sessions where producers and artists were secure in their jobs.


Now, I agree that an outside producer is the best thing to do, and I hope that we will get there. However I am now going to tell you guys that I decided that I will continue to produce this record for the following reasons:
- The guys are happy with the direction things are moving.
- I believe that I can make this record sound more like us than the old ones.
- I believe that I am breaking down some barriers and opening the door for an outside producer in the future.
- There are deadlines and budgets and certain arrangements have been made which makes it harder for a new producer to do his work properly.
- I want to do it, I like to do it, I am learning a lot and I hope I can become the outside producer for other bands in the future.

So next I will tell the band we need to have that meeting soon, and based on that, I will tell them what we're going to do.

If you guys want to continue helping me out, I would be very thankful. If you want me to stop posting this shit, let me know.


PS on a positive note, we played a show today with LA punkband Strung Out, and apparently the singer told our singer that he wished he had his voice... confidence rising...

Starfucker
February 10th, 2012, 10:53 PM
Just bringing this thread back to life for those who might be interested to hear the end result.

We started leaking some songs as teasers for the release next month on our bandcamp page (http://homer.bandcamp.com/). Have a listen if you want, and maybe compare it to our previous records which are also on bandcamp.

I hope it's clear that I'm not trying to sell our record here. We haven't sold a single song through bandcamp and I don't expect it to change. I guess I just want to hear that it didn't turn out as terrible as we all feared it would be :lol: Reactions so far have been really positive.

And I might coax MM into leaking some parts of his new book "Yoga and the law of Oooohmmmmmm"

Info: I produced it and recorded it in 9 days. It was mixed by Huub Monstermixer Reijnders in 3 days. Studio was Motormusic here in Belgium and it was mastered by Alan Douches and his team at Westwestside.

and I'll leave you with a short "making of"
I'm the skinny guy behind the faders, if you're wondering...
5mmcigvk_ok

T.Bay
February 11th, 2012, 12:53 AM
We haven't sold a single song through bandcamp and I don't expect it to change.

Glad to hear it's going well, then... :Confused:

Starfucker
February 11th, 2012, 02:25 PM
We still sell real records in stores and at shows though...

T.Bay
February 12th, 2012, 01:58 AM
Cool, how many?

Starfucker
February 12th, 2012, 02:33 PM
We print 1000 cd's of each release and we sell most of them.

Which I know is peanuts compared to a US punk band, but for a Belgian underground DIY record it's pretty fucking good. I bet we sell more than some alternative national radio bands here.

This record will have a 1000 copies for the euro market and another 1000, I think, for the Americas on a canadian label. And 250 on vinyl.

T.Bay
February 12th, 2012, 05:45 PM
Good to hear, liked the video btw. looked like fun.

Eddie G
February 17th, 2012, 02:27 AM
nice work, Starfucker.

looks like you guys had a blast; though this kind of freako music isn't my personal cup of tea I'd say you did a good job.

Here's one old man's advice: always follow your gut. I just re-read some of this thread and there was alot of bullshit thrown your way, but you persevered.

well done.

eddie

T.Bay
February 18th, 2012, 11:58 PM
I just re-read some of this thread and there was alot of bullshit thrown your way

eddie

Can you just quote the bullshit, so we don't have to guess? Please?

Knastratt
February 19th, 2012, 12:21 AM
I guess he meant from the band/situation.

T.Bay
February 19th, 2012, 02:08 AM
I guess he meant from the band/situation.

Oh... just the usual warped, egotistical, sense of entitlement kind of bullshit then.

Le chef
February 19th, 2012, 05:19 AM
Oh... just the usual warped, egotistical, sense of entitlement kind of bullshit then.

:-)

Starfucker
February 19th, 2012, 03:21 PM
nice work, Starfucker.

looks like you guys had a blast; though this kind of freako music isn't my personal cup of tea I'd say you did a good job.

Here's one old man's advice: always follow your gut. I just re-read some of this thread and there was alot of bullshit thrown your way, but you persevered.

well done.

eddie

Hey thanks Eddie :)

I think by "bullshit", you also meant that the guys here weren't going easy on me, which is true, but I have to say that I couldn't have done it without this forum.

It's their job to write how it should be done, and then it's up to me as a hardheaded punk to take what I need and do it my way.

We had a great time, and we didn't fuck up. Now let's hope the audience will like it as much as we do.