Chris Lord-Alge interview

[Aaron Smith]

I'm sure some of you have read this already, but I just dug it up on Google and it's a really cool, really interesting read:

http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_chris_lordalge/index.html

Some of the stuff is just, insane sounding. Like this:

What's this rumor that you don't like to change settings on your outboard gear?

It's true. On the limiters, that is. Rather than change a setting, I'll just buy another one and set it differently.

You're putting me on.

No, that's what I do. That's why I have so many. I have that one set for a certain sound, this one set for a different sound. I just power them up, plug them in and they're on the best setting. I change the EQs, but that's it. The limiters stay set to the optimum setting for that limiter. It's part of the gig; it helps the repeatability.

Okay, what's that 1176 set for?

It's a gain structure thing, really. Each 1176 that I have here has a different sound. This is fatty, this is skinny, and that one is for vocals that are too boomy. I can listen to the vocal for three words and say, “Okay, put number three on him.” Or number one, usually number one, my old blue, magical-sounding 1176 — the first ones they made. Basically, I could put covers on my gear for weeks, and not have to worry about it. I'd just say, “That one's not right, plug in the next one. Okay, that's better.”

There are certain limiters that just stay patched into certain spots of the console — been there for a long time. And they work great because I always put my tracks in the same place.

On my way over I was listening to songs you'd mixed for three different artists, and they all sounded completely different. I wouldn't have guessed that they were all mixed by the same person.

You would think, from how I have it set up here, that every mix is going to sound the same, like cookie-cutter mixing. No. It's just convenience. Just because tracks are parked in the same place on the console, and a lot of times are going through the same gear, doesn't mean the music will sound the same. You have to give everything its own identity for the artist. You can't put your imprint on it.

 

[kaomao]

I'm not agree on this topic:

Because you're so into speed and efficiency, I'm surprised you haven't converted to hard drive random access.

It's not recognized as a professional medium that can be archived. What are you going to do? [What if you] put the hard drive away in some vault, and in 10 years, when they want to resurrect that album, that software is not to be found, or it doesn't work, or those files are corrupted? Yeah, that's really helpful. The format is not nailed down as a stand-alone medium that will sit in storage, and right now the 48-track is.

I think that this man "smoked" something not good.
In the long run will his tapes last the test of time?
Chris you better think twice about medium!
A wave file will last longer than a tape.
anyway he also doesn't use compressors:

What compressors do you like on drums?

When drums are recorded, my preference is to try not to use any compression. Use the old Neve mic pre's, use the good mics, try not to over-EQ and add as much bottom as you can, because the bottom is the thing that's tough to get right. Try to make it so the mic pre's aren't clipping on the kick drum. Which happens all the time — can ya just listen to it, please? There's nothing wrong with the drums being a little plain Jane. If you want to mangle a couple of tracks with these cool compressors at the studio you're recording in, put them on a couple of extra tracks.

I wonder if he's doing metal what would he be using? no comp on snares/kick?
goddamn I don't get it!

 

[sparkyness]

I'm not agree on this topic:


What compressors do you like on drums?

When drums are recorded, my preference is to try not to use any compression. Use the old Neve mic pre's, use the good mics, try not to over-EQ and add as much bottom as you can, because the bottom is the thing that's tough to get right. Try to make it so the mic pre's aren't clipping on the kick drum. Which happens all the time — can ya just listen to it, please? There's nothing wrong with the drums being a little plain Jane. If you want to mangle a couple of tracks with these cool compressors at the studio you're recording in, put them on a couple of extra tracks.

I wonder if he's doing metal what would he be using? no comp on snares/kick?
goddamn I don't get it!

I think he's referring to not using compression during tracking, as opposed to mixing. According to the Sound on Sound interview he did recently, he's compresses drums like everyone else - 1176's, etc.

BTW Aaron....your avatar/facial hair gets freakier every time you post a new one

 

[CJWall]

hey, i don't question his methods at all. they work for him, and his work certainly speaks for itself.

he produces some of the most amazing sound mixes i've ever heard...

listen to the Blindside CD, "Silence".

Whoa.

 

[Seizure.]

Vocals on that album sound insaaannneely big.

 

[CJWall]

haha, weird dude, that's what I love about it as well. I've never hears BG Vox as wide as on this record. They fucking pop RIGHT out of the speakers, it's insane.

The whole record is actually really good.

 

[Seizure.]

Great minds think a like hahaha
Atleast... lets hope so!

 

[CJWall]

Great minds think a like hahaha
Atleast... lets hope so!

LMAO.

 

[kaomao]

ok about compression it works for him, but he's totally wrong about the medium stuff he's talking about.

 

[smy1]

ok about compression it works for him, but he's totally wrong about the medium stuff he's talking about.

Haha, that's like me telling Michael Jordan that he is wrong about the way he does his slam dunks ...

 

[greyskull]

oh yeah...
he also only pans things centre, hard left and hard right....
mental
i love chris lord alge

 

[kaomao]

Well it's a fact that tapes are not reliable.
I don't give a damn if it's Chris lord or Jesus, tape are not reliable he can't tell me that a harddrive can be fucked up more than a tape come on!

 

[kaomao]

....strange that most of the people on this earth use hard disk's instead of tapes.

 

[CJWall]

....strange that most of the people on this earth use hard disk's instead of tapes.

Well, there is this little thing called.. hmmm.. price difference?

His theory has it's merits, I wouldn't say he's totally wrong.

 

[C_F_H_13]

Well it's a fact that tapes are not reliable.
I don't give a damn if it's Chris lord or Jesus, tape are not reliable he can't tell me that a harddrive can be fucked up more than a tape come on!

I do somewhat agree with him. There are tapes still around from 30-50 years (beach boys, beatles etc etc) ago that with a little baking can actually play back. I have harddrives (scsi) that are about 8 years old that won't boot up. Hard drives are prone to mechnical failure if they aren't booted up regularily. The constant changing of formats for digital audio is also a problem (not that finding a sony digital 48 track tape machine won't be hard in 30 years)......

HOWEVER, once companies move away from current hardrives and move to flashdrives (which they will), I think things will get far more stable....why?.....no moving parts.

 

[SickBoy]

Well, I'd like to see a pro backing up to the HDD, that's just insane! As CFH13 said, HDDs are very prone to errors and there isn't a single manufacturer that can guarantee you such longevity... Even if you back up to say HP 72GB DATs - who can guarantee the dat drives themselves will be in working order in a few decades if the tapes themselves survive? And backing up to DVDs isn't very convenient and they're even more sensitive than CDs.
The analog tapes may gain some hiss and pop/crackle here and there as the time passes, but when properly stored and maintained and then played back on machines equally cared for I see no reason for worry. Not only that, in the digital world there may be a few bad tracks on HDD that can ruin the whole content, whereas a minor tape fault shouldn't be as troublemaking.

I'll second Lord Alge on this one and I'm really curious on Andy's opinion about this digital recording archiving issues and how does he perform his archives.

 

[kaomao]

it seems you're all agree with Chris lord, but I bet you're all using hd's instead of tapes? am I wrong?
Why don't you all use an old alesis dat? it's not that hard to find dat tapes I think, alesis dat is not that expensive.
Andy said on this forum that tapes caused him problems, for istance: oxide on the machine destroys the hi frequencies on the tape.
Anyway new hard drives with the ntfs file system got very few errors compared to the old file system fat16 and fat32, it was easier to get errors with fat16 and fat32.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS <-interesting reading
I'm agree with C_F_H_13 about flash disks, they are the future, no more mechanical problems.

 

[PhilR]

it seems you're all agree with Chris lord, but I bet you're all using hd's instead of tapes? am I wrong?

Of course not. Have you seen how much tape COSTS? Let alone the machines themselves. Not to mention the constant calibration and maintenance that tape machines require.

Why don't you all use an old alesis dat? it's not that hard to find dat tapes I think, alesis dat is not that expensive.

Yeah but the problem of digital corruption remains. Degradation of digital tape leads to horrible audio artifacts if it doesn't render the DAT completly unplayable. Of course, proper storage is required for ANY format.

 

[Matt Smith]

Keep in mind, that interview is 6 years old. He may have changed his archiving practices for all we know.

 

[SickBoy]

it seems you're all agree with Chris lord, but I bet you're all using hd's instead of tapes? am I wrong?

As Phil pointed out - it's cheaper!
"It's not recognized as a professional medium that can be archived."
His main concern is backing up the work done from HDD. The drives themselves are a poor backup media... I think if you really want to properly save the tracks for decades to come - tape is the way to go!

Anyway new hard drives with the ntfs file system got very few errors compared to the old file system fat16 and fat32, it was easier to get errors with fat16 and fat32.

That's true as far as working/tracking on HDDs is concerned.
But again - CLA's complaint was directed more at the archiving prospects...

I'm agree with C_F_H_13 about flash disks, they are the future, no more mechanical problems.

Errr... So you've never had a corrupted USB flash drive or a RAM module, eh? I've seen my fair share being a computer technician...
The fact that SSID drives don't have moving parts doesn't make them perfect and incorruptible, bear that in mind!

Keep in mind, that interview is 6 years old. He may have changed his archiving practices for all we know.

I deeply doubt that. HDDs are a bit more reliable now than in those days, but the amount of data at stake is 100 times higher! I doubt anyone sane would archive the tracks on HDD for decades to follow - that's my point!
My bedroom recordings are nowhere nearly important as the stuff CLA mixes and the money invested in my recordings is almost nonexistant compared to the budgets of the big ones. I understand their need to make sure their expensive recordings survive the following decades for whatever future need that may arise.

To summarize my point:
HDDs for recording - okay
HDDs for archiving - unreliable
analog tape for archiving - the ultimate