Cyrosis
Member
- Aug 21, 2006
- 223
- 0
- 16
I believe they mention rehearsing for the first time on the Watershed DVD, I would bet it stays in their routine in future sessions.
Does Opeth use auto-tune in recordings?
- Thread starter nat0
- Start date
The Emptier
t3h b3aSt0rZ
Hmm, i can only answer as a non-drumer, non-engineer. In honesty i knew about the practice of using drum samples in big-budget pop productions, but until you asked me i didnt know or bother to learn about "drum triggering" in metal. I had no idea it is used as much as it seems to be. Perhaps it is too early to tell and my opinion maybe needs to kind of ripen in regards to these matters but i feel that even if triggered drums arent cheating (some claim it is, some say you still have to play the drums just as hard and precise as usual), i think it is as artificial and pointless as the rest of the things fake and untrue. Unless youre going for a certain machine-like effect (and even then i suppose there are better ways to achieve that), or seeking for some rather aimless technical preciseness as in extreme technical metal, i would say triggering drums would be a sign of poor, mechanized taste.
I tried to google up some info about drums on Deliverance and Ghost reveries, and heres what i found. It is a post by Andy Sneap in some audio engineering forum, about his recording techniques for drums.
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/112885-post25.html
I will quote:
Now, hes been involved in mixing of Deliverance. Nicholas claims (without source or any details though) that hes been toying around with Lopez's drums after he "got his hands on Deliverance". What does that mean? Hes credited only as a mixing engineer, not the recording engineer or a producer, right? Its still somehow floating around, nothing specific, just insinuations. What does it mean? Mike would let him "get his hands on" Opeth record after everything has been recorded and produced, and then sound replace/blend some of the best drumming ever (imo) with samples? Is that your claim Nicholas? And Mike was ok with it? Lopez too? You claim that if Sneap got his hands on it and wanted it that way Mike was as powerless as say Killswitch engage lads when producers are tempering with their recordings?
What i know is that Andy Sneap wasnt involved with GR (or am i wrong?), but GR drums ALWAYS sounded very digital to me, especially the snare. I thought it was well produced effect, i liked that sound for a change, BUT if i am to realize that it is not Lopez that im hearing but actually 50-50, or maybe even completely inserted samples (and then, since its "modern recording", all that quantized and beat corrected and what not), i utterly, but utterly dislike the idea. I think it is sick. Again, maybe im stupid or something but if its not actually Lopez's acoustic drums but samples all over it, pffft. I just dont know.
I definitely feel antipathy for guys like Sneap, i mean that kind of approach, i think its degrading music, how he'll unscrupulously use artificialized sounds and wont feel guilty about it, youll notice if you read the whole thread that the guy who replied next to him said "hey thats cheating", and he didnt even bother to reply. Maybe im wrong, but i dont like those people no matter how successful or renown they are. They better go fuck up with Killswitch and Arch enemy and whoever, maybe these bands are cool too, i dont know, but its miles away from Opeth and it should stay that way. I would really like to know Mike's stance on this more than anything. Was it his choice, his will? Perhaps hes not aware of all kinds of tricks that can be used, so he just says an engineer that he would like the drums to have certain sound to them, and then doesnt know or care how theyre gonna use it and if its fair at all. And it maters!, i think, it brings completely different connotations when you shed different light on it, thats what people dont realize - what may seem as "fuller sound" or "that special click" to ignorant people, it will be just fake processed triggered/sound replaced shit to people in know. ...Anyhow, what is the particular claim we are trying to make? Mike wanted it, Lopez wanted it, RR wanted it sampled, by Sneap, by Bogren or whoever? What do you guys think of all this, please dare to have some opinion, nonconforming preferably, i feel most of us still sense something's smelly about it, just keep eluding it cause its unpleasant.
I guess there is one last sane (or maybe even silly) thing i can do. It is to say that i still wish to believe that Mikael, as by far the most accomplished and talented musician there ever was in metal music (imo), as someone whose musicianship seems to be so natural and organic, and whose taste in everything musical i still deem to be immaculate, just knew where the fine line was and never did and never would cross it, so whatever manipulations there were, right and wrong, classy and unseemly, his sense of judgment would not fail him, and Opeth records sound good cause its great songwriting and genuine musicianship of the performers that make them so, and not fucked up engineering and computerizing which i would most rather see forever cast-off from music...
x_OPETH_x
Member
just...wow.
Nicholas D Wolfwood is right. (i love Trigun btw)
The rest of you are either misinformed, or lack firsthand experience in a studio that does things the "typical" way.
YES most well-versed engineers will insist on pitch correcting vocals. Most SINGERS will want to fix at least a few minor errors or strange sounding parts. The fact is, you're limited on studio time no matter what. Vocals are usually the last thing i record, and sometimes we don't have the time nor motivation to sing the same part again and again, especially when the singer is having a tough time. Besides, there's something much easier.
If you haven't heard of Melodyne, look it up right now. It's not "autotune". Autotune is for hip hop/R&B, and country music. Melodyne is probably the most cutting edge frequency analysis tool out there today, and its main benefit (and subsequent popularity) is the extreme EASE for the engineer to yield a near-perfect vocal take with minimal effort, and still have have the pitch correction be virtually undetectable. Of course it depends on the engineer's ear, and his experience level in addition to the audience's ability to perceive any apparent pitch-correction.
I have no doubt that Opeth use Melodyne (possibly Antares, but i don't see why, it takes longer to get the same results). It's just part of creating a polished and well-constructed work of modern music. Don't take this the wrong way - If you want an album to do well these days, it needs to have something substantial and unique (Top 40 drivel excluded), and ideally pave new ground in fusing genres, creating new textures or rhythms, and showcasing memorable melodies and progressions yet still seem familiar without being a copy of something else. Production is one of the ways an album can REALLY stand out, or be crippled. I can't say for anyone else, but my ears continue to become more and more discerning to mistakes and flaws. It's nothing i can help, it's simply a by-product of exposing myself to a constant flow of music. I can only assume that the everyday listener's standards are being raised even if very slightly. HOWEVER...being disappointed by a mix, or hearing fuckups in a recording doesn't hinder my enjoyment of the music, and what the artist desires to convey.
It's nothing new for a band to want their record to be as perfect as possible. If you guys were involved in any recording situations, you should be able to identify with that feeling. As for myself, I don't want my name on something that I believe to be sub-par, or has less than 100% of my efforts contained inside. Pitch correction is a relatively minor aspect in making a record, so it's foolish to get hung up on this, especially considering that Watershed is easily Mike's best vocal performance to date. If Jens deemed it necessary to fix a few areas, then there must have been something there to fix. Hell, depending on Mike's level of involvement during the editing/mixing process, Jens may have fixed certain areas without Mike's knowledge or direct input, and Mike wouldn't even know otherwise. It's not like he remembers EXACTLY how he sung the 4th take of one verse of one song, and i seriously doubt that he's sitting at home comparing the rough unedited tracks to the final retail versions thinking "Wow, here's another part that i sung kinda shitty on, but on the CD it sounds perfect... I wonder why Jens did that."
Also, to clarify - most engineers also use sound-replacers like Drumagog to layer sampled drums sounds on top of raw live tracks. (The samples are usually clean, ideal hits of the same drums present in the live tracks). In most rock/metal recording sessions, the engineer will trigger the kick and maybe the snare in addition to having them mic'd - Not to use the triggered sounds, but as marker points to fix any volume or tone discrepancies by layering the ideal sounds of the same instrument on top of parts that might require a little cleaning up.
Nicholas D Wolfwood is right. (i love Trigun btw)
The rest of you are either misinformed, or lack firsthand experience in a studio that does things the "typical" way.
YES most well-versed engineers will insist on pitch correcting vocals. Most SINGERS will want to fix at least a few minor errors or strange sounding parts. The fact is, you're limited on studio time no matter what. Vocals are usually the last thing i record, and sometimes we don't have the time nor motivation to sing the same part again and again, especially when the singer is having a tough time. Besides, there's something much easier.
If you haven't heard of Melodyne, look it up right now. It's not "autotune". Autotune is for hip hop/R&B, and country music. Melodyne is probably the most cutting edge frequency analysis tool out there today, and its main benefit (and subsequent popularity) is the extreme EASE for the engineer to yield a near-perfect vocal take with minimal effort, and still have have the pitch correction be virtually undetectable. Of course it depends on the engineer's ear, and his experience level in addition to the audience's ability to perceive any apparent pitch-correction.
I have no doubt that Opeth use Melodyne (possibly Antares, but i don't see why, it takes longer to get the same results). It's just part of creating a polished and well-constructed work of modern music. Don't take this the wrong way - If you want an album to do well these days, it needs to have something substantial and unique (Top 40 drivel excluded), and ideally pave new ground in fusing genres, creating new textures or rhythms, and showcasing memorable melodies and progressions yet still seem familiar without being a copy of something else. Production is one of the ways an album can REALLY stand out, or be crippled. I can't say for anyone else, but my ears continue to become more and more discerning to mistakes and flaws. It's nothing i can help, it's simply a by-product of exposing myself to a constant flow of music. I can only assume that the everyday listener's standards are being raised even if very slightly. HOWEVER...being disappointed by a mix, or hearing fuckups in a recording doesn't hinder my enjoyment of the music, and what the artist desires to convey.
It's nothing new for a band to want their record to be as perfect as possible. If you guys were involved in any recording situations, you should be able to identify with that feeling. As for myself, I don't want my name on something that I believe to be sub-par, or has less than 100% of my efforts contained inside. Pitch correction is a relatively minor aspect in making a record, so it's foolish to get hung up on this, especially considering that Watershed is easily Mike's best vocal performance to date. If Jens deemed it necessary to fix a few areas, then there must have been something there to fix. Hell, depending on Mike's level of involvement during the editing/mixing process, Jens may have fixed certain areas without Mike's knowledge or direct input, and Mike wouldn't even know otherwise. It's not like he remembers EXACTLY how he sung the 4th take of one verse of one song, and i seriously doubt that he's sitting at home comparing the rough unedited tracks to the final retail versions thinking "Wow, here's another part that i sung kinda shitty on, but on the CD it sounds perfect... I wonder why Jens did that."
Also, to clarify - most engineers also use sound-replacers like Drumagog to layer sampled drums sounds on top of raw live tracks. (The samples are usually clean, ideal hits of the same drums present in the live tracks). In most rock/metal recording sessions, the engineer will trigger the kick and maybe the snare in addition to having them mic'd - Not to use the triggered sounds, but as marker points to fix any volume or tone discrepancies by layering the ideal sounds of the same instrument on top of parts that might require a little cleaning up.
Cyrosis
Member
- Aug 21, 2006
- 223
- 0
- 16
Well, considering I already mentioned Melodyne in this thread, I don't see myself in that latter category either. As far as auto tune goes, I don't think everyone in this thread, including myself, are using it to refer the actual Autotune branded application, but rather as an umbrella term for all of the choices available, including things like Melodyne, as there are plenty of alternatives now, and the term is pretty much universal.
True in some cases, but many other engineers use it to quite an extreme in metal, making the drums sound nearly like a Roland E-Kit. just another fad, like over compression and extreme limiting, in my opinion
All triggering does is...trigger a sample. Generally in extreme metal, only the kicks are triggered. At tempos of 240bpm+, 16th note double bass turns into a wall of mud - hence why the kicks get triggered, to be crystal clear. That is all they do. Any mistakes made (off-time hits, flams, etc) will be crystal clear and apparent. It is not cheating to make something sound better than a wall of mud. Clearly you are uninformed.
From what I remember, Sneap had posted about it on his own forum, or perhaps someone on here had posted about it around the time of the release of Deliverance. If you listen to any of the double bass on the record, the hits sound the same (or perhaps slightly varied so it doesn't sound too triggered.) Pay attention to the snare hits as well, from what I remember they don't lose power like a "real" hit would.
It means exactly how I stated it, Sneap got the tracks for mixing and replaced the kick and snare (at least a blend in the snare, at least.)
This can all be done during the final mix-down, when Sneap has the multi-tracks of the recording.
Refer to my second point of this post plzkthx.
You clearly don't have any idea what sampling actually does. It...samples something. Do you understand that when a record is sent for mix-down, in the case of Deliverance, the person doing the mix will have a track for everything? Clean DI guitar tracks, the amped guitar tracks, all overdubs. Drums will be split, often times it'll be a track for snare top, track for snare bottom, room, overheads, hi-hat, each tom seperated, etc. When I say "replaced," I do not mean that they replaced all the drums with a drum machine. A program like Drumagog will be placed on the snare track (probably a group track with the snare top and snare bottom being sent to it), and they will take a sample of say, a Pearl Signature Mike Mangini snare - and it will now "replace" the original sound of the snare.
In the case of an album like Deliverance, this is a god-send. As stated in Mike's studio diary as well as the documentary, they were recording that album in less-than-ideal conditions. Mics were being changed during the night, songs were unfinished and unrehearsed, they moved studios during the recording process, if I remember right some parts recorded were lost. Clearly they didn't have the luxury of spending a week and a half dialing in the perfect drum tones. This is why the snare was at least blended with the real drum tone.
Yes, this is my claim, because Sneap was the person who did the mixing of Deliverance. More than likely the band had the choice of who they wanted to mix the record and as such they probably were okay with it, or at least aware of it.
I didn't claim that at all, get a grasp of the English language before you make insinutations.
He wasn't, but Jens Bogren was.
email from Jens Bogren said:
Jens Bogren said:
Now as for what he said about the drums, I'm not too certain what it means. The drums certainly sound like at least a blending to me, but he hasn't made a specific post about it (and it's hard to ask him because he very seldomly posts there anymore.)
you really don't have a clue what you're talking about, do you?
Probably because most people on gearslutz are a bunch of nerds who haven't produced a single record, much less have such an expansive resume as Sneap does. Why would Sneap even need to explain himself, much less defend himself? His resume says it all, really.
What are you even talking about here?
Bogren says clearly in the above passage, refering to Ghost Reveries, that "it was a compromise, my will versus what the band thought they wanted." So yes, Mikael does have an option.
Get real, Mikael's been doing this as a pro for 15 years now, do you really think that he's naive to the recording process?
And clearly you're not in the know, because you don't have any clue what you're on about.
Wait, so Mikael is better than Tony Iommi or Steve Harris? Mikael is a great and talented musician, and did pretty well for just some kid who started jamming metal in his neighbor's basement - but let's not get ahead of ourselves here, shall we? I'm sure even he'd say the same thing - perhaps not referencing those two specific musicians but along the same lines.
Again, you're just missing the point and making yourself look even more uninformed than you did previously. Please stop.
tl;dr = I refuted every single point you just made. stop making yourself look dumber.
Cyrosis
Member
- Aug 21, 2006
- 223
- 0
- 16
Not the whole truth however; the only reason it turns into a wall of mud is because many of the drummers attempting such tempos simply aren't fast enough to play them properly. They may have the dexterity to barely tap the drum head enough to trigger the midi, but not enough for a proper acoustic strike, so then of course it will turn into mud. There is a fine line between proper use of triggers, and abusing them to play things out of ones league IMO.
You refuted some of it, but much of it is up to opinion, and you can't disprove that.
I'm pretty sure George Kollias and Derek Roddy are pretty good at drumming and they've both said the same things, about high speed bass turning into a wall of mud without the use of triggers.
etc etc etc
What, exactly, is left to opinion from either of our posts? For example, he stated that Sneap didn't play a part in the recording of Deliverance - yes, but you can replace drum tones during the mixing stage too. Or he posted about Sneap not refuting the "but it's cheating whine cry" post on gearslutz - well, I hate to break it to you, but I'm pretty sure Sneap's resume is quite more expansive than 99% of the people on that forum. Why would he want to explain himself to a forum that more than likely will just keep repeating "but its cheating!" over and over?
etc etc etc
Cyrosis
Member
- Aug 21, 2006
- 223
- 0
- 16
In acoustic situations it sure will, but played, mic'd and mixed properly it won't IMO.
The entire subject is still quite obviously left to opinion; for, or against triggers.
x_OPETH_x... Thanks a lot man, thats exactly the kind of proper (and polite
) explanation i needed. Thanks a million! Especially thanks for the drums explanation. Could you however refer to the point by Nicholas that there might have been "Pearl Signature Mike Mangini snare" samples used on top or in place of what Lopez played. imo its not the same thing, using samples of ideal Lopez hits to fix imperfect parts or putting artificial/processed samples over it.
Can i please ask you this too, cause im just trying to get a whole picture: do you think Thom Yorke or PJ Harvey (especially her) would allow pitch-correction on their voice? I do realize though that, as youve said "Pitch correction is a relatively minor aspect in making a record, so it's foolish to get hung up on this", so i wont quibble about that any more.
I think drums issue though is left to quite some consideration.
Nicholas, theres some very useful info in your post and thanks for such a detailed reply for sure, i appreciate your effort. I wish you were more kind though, i think there are better ways to put one's point across, especially since i still do think this is very much an open field situation where different opinions and diametrically opposite approaches and conclusions are possible and up to person's own feelings and beliefs as to what is proper and aesthetically relevant. I for one definitely dont think its ok if authentic Lopez hits were replaced with "Pearl Signature Mike Mangini" snare samples (especially in percentage of 50+, as is Sneap's practice according to that post) from some program, im totally against that.
I would like to apologize for what i said about Sneap, i felt bad about it later on cause it sounded like a personal attack, i didnt mean it, im sorry, it was too late to edit my post, i realized it too late. However his resume cannot be a sufficient argument for anything. After all, there are engineers with equally impressive resumes (maybe not in metal but still), who did not and would not do such a thing. I do not like the kind of approach, no matter how much success it brings to the most skillful and uncompromising ones, that replaces genuine acoustic drumming from one of the best drummers out there with samples from a program, if thats what Sneap definitely and undeniably did on Deliverance, which i dont still see proven. I would sooner believe XOpethX's guess that they used ideal Lopez hits to fix things in which case im ok with it. Could you also tell me if youre an engineer or musician yourself? No offense, you seem to be talking with way too much confidence and arrogance for someone who stated the most inaccurate statement of all in this thread which is:
As for triggering, Cyrosis said it nicely why some may consider it cheating:
) explanation i needed. Thanks a million! Especially thanks for the drums explanation. Could you however refer to the point by Nicholas that there might have been "Pearl Signature Mike Mangini snare" samples used on top or in place of what Lopez played. imo its not the same thing, using samples of ideal Lopez hits to fix imperfect parts or putting artificial/processed samples over it.Can i please ask you this too, cause im just trying to get a whole picture: do you think Thom Yorke or PJ Harvey (especially her) would allow pitch-correction on their voice? I do realize though that, as youve said "Pitch correction is a relatively minor aspect in making a record, so it's foolish to get hung up on this", so i wont quibble about that any more.
I think drums issue though is left to quite some consideration.
Nicholas, theres some very useful info in your post and thanks for such a detailed reply for sure, i appreciate your effort. I wish you were more kind though, i think there are better ways to put one's point across, especially since i still do think this is very much an open field situation where different opinions and diametrically opposite approaches and conclusions are possible and up to person's own feelings and beliefs as to what is proper and aesthetically relevant. I for one definitely dont think its ok if authentic Lopez hits were replaced with "Pearl Signature Mike Mangini" snare samples (especially in percentage of 50+, as is Sneap's practice according to that post) from some program, im totally against that.
I would like to apologize for what i said about Sneap, i felt bad about it later on cause it sounded like a personal attack, i didnt mean it, im sorry, it was too late to edit my post, i realized it too late. However his resume cannot be a sufficient argument for anything. After all, there are engineers with equally impressive resumes (maybe not in metal but still), who did not and would not do such a thing. I do not like the kind of approach, no matter how much success it brings to the most skillful and uncompromising ones, that replaces genuine acoustic drumming from one of the best drummers out there with samples from a program, if thats what Sneap definitely and undeniably did on Deliverance, which i dont still see proven. I would sooner believe XOpethX's guess that they used ideal Lopez hits to fix things in which case im ok with it. Could you also tell me if youre an engineer or musician yourself? No offense, you seem to be talking with way too much confidence and arrogance for someone who stated the most inaccurate statement of all in this thread which is:
For someone who claimed such a thing i dont think you are necessarily competent to judge if every double bass hit on Deliverance sounds the same and if the snare loses power and so and so... In other words, you might be just a "nerd", as any average "gearslut" or myself.
As for triggering, Cyrosis said it nicely why some may consider it cheating:
Besides i didnt really claim it is cheating i said some say it is some say it isnt i just stated my opinion that no dynamics/every hit the same sounds like a bad idea to me and a sign of a poor mechanized taste.
I don't know for sure what snare they used as a sample, that was just an example of what they could do. It could have been any old snare that Sneap had laying around in his collection of samples.x_OPETH_x... Thanks a lot man, thats exactly the kind of proper (and polite
It's not so much using samples of "ideal" Lopez hits, in the case of Deliverance. All the tracks are exactly how he played them (although I'm sure they did some fixing, tightening, quantizing, etc for any mistakes that he may have made during the recording.) But as was the case of the recording for those specific albums, time wasn't on Opeth's side to spend a week and a half searching for perfect drum tones.
I don't remember off-hand whether they changed studios in the middle of the drum recording, but I know that Mike commented that parts were lost when they changed studios - as well as Lopez commenting that in the middle of the night, one of the guys at the (original) studio changed some mics on the drums. This would have a huge impact on the consistency of the sound of the recording, because one slight change in the mic position (even if they changed it back) will change the tone. It's the same reason why guitar players will generally tape all the knobs up on their guitar during recording - one slight change and the consistency will be altered from one take to the next.
I originally had an even longer post but it got lost due to Firefox being retarded. It's definitely an "open field situation" but at the same time, there's plenty of things that a lot of people don't know about the recording process of a record and as such, they start to make uninformed/improper/wrong statements.
As was said before, this isn't anything against Lopez (or any other drummer, for that matter.) The decision was made, more than likely, for consistency reasons. It's not as if Lopez's drumming was automatically erased - think about it like this.
Many guitar players do not record their parts all in one take. They do many takes, and then those takes are edited together. It's the same thing with vocals, bass, drums, keys, whatever. Now in the case of Lopez, would you feel the same way about him not recording everything in one take? Because really, they're one and the same - semantics-based arguments about a means to an end. I'm willing to bet that those drum tracks were edited all over the place, taken from different takes.
Again, I wasn't saying that he actually used that specific sample - I'm sure Sneap has an extensive collection of samples from his own drum kits as well as the kits people would bring into his studio etc.
I didn't take it as a personal attack, I just bluntly said what I felt - gearslutz is full of people who, although they may mean well, are just the peanut gallery. A lot of them don't have much, if any, experience in producing - much less having the reputation that someone like a Sneap or a Bogren or a Richardson has. For them to question Sneap would be like an armchair psychologist questioning someone who's among the top men of his field.
Perhaps not from the 50s-80s (even going into the 90s), but pretty much all productions post-2000 (especially in the advent of things like Beat Detective and Melodyne) will use some form of "studio trickery." Whether it's replacing the drums, tuning the vocals. Whether it's Pro-Tools-ing everything etc. All of these studio tricks are used all over the place, it's just that most people don't know how to tell or what to even look for, or they haven't even heard of Melodyne/Antares or sample replacement.
http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/sneap-produced-albums/262410-opeth.html#post6080825
I also just posted in that thread asking for undeniable proof from the man himself.
To be perfectly honest, I'm not sure what different it would make whether it was Lopez hitting the drum or one of Andy's random studio engineers. At the end of the day it's still Lopez's playing and it was still 50% of the recorded tone from his drum.
I'm a musician and I'm self-producing my band's demo after having studied various metal productions for years, plus snooping around on various forums in various threads dealing with production. Not to mention the countless interviews I've read with people such as Sneap or Richardson.
Because a lot of people on this specific forum like to talk when they have not one iota of what they're talking about. Every single point I've made, I've backed up.
It (the kick) sounds the same because it is, pretty much every record Sneap works on is a triggered/replaced kick. As far as I know, Deliverance did not break this mold.
As with a drum machine, replacements can be edited to sound human via velocity adjustments.
Also remember that generally Sneap does 50% blending on the snare, so the hit will sound human because 50% of the sound is from a human hitting the drum.
The problem with the trigger argument is this: 240+bpm double bass is going to sound like a wall of mud over a PA system no matter how great the sound guy is or how great the drummer is. Especially in venues that metal bands play (1000-3000 person venues, most of which that have poor acoustics for a metal show,) an acoustic bass drum will not sound good at all at these tempos.
As for the specific argument of cheating - the drummers in extreme metal, don't do it for cheating. Guys like Kollias, Hellhammer, Roddy, Inferno - they can all really play at those tempos, and have been for years and years. The triggers are used to bring clarity into the picture, and to make the sound guy's job a whole shitload easier. If someone's not really playing the parts correctly, the crowd is going to feel it. But the clarity is why they are used. That clarity can actually turn a crowd against a drummer, because any mishit, any flam, any fuck-up whatsoever will now be clearly audible. So really, you have to be a better drummer to play with triggers at those tempos - because not having triggers will hide your inaccuracies as a drummer.
Hope I've explained this well enough for everyone here.
Klämrisk
A fucking swede
I'd choose the latter, mainly because I like "natural" recordings and albums recorded on tape and such, where all instruments are just recorded and not tampered with afterwards.
However, in a modern production with digital guitar effects, triggered drums, etc. "auto-tuned" vocals fit in quite well with the other tools, as long as it's not heard. The worst thing that could happened in a modern production is to get the so called "Hanna Montana"-effect on the vocals
, where it's all a fucking computer singing! Well, I oppose the 'perfect' production! LET IT BE GONE! RECORD LIVE ON TAPE!
....I have to admit that I myself use electronic drumkits and computers and digital effects while recording, but hell, such things are so much easier and cheaper to get my hands on nowadays. If I ever earn money from making music (like that's gonna happen...) I will buy huge amplifiers, old analog synthesizers and effects, a real drumkit and record an album that is shitty and awesome! That would be my perfect production, totally imperfect to modern standards.
still pending on the snare but since the kick was replaced, I'm sure that like most other Andy Sneap productions, the snare was a 50/50 blend.
there you have it folks.
Above all thanks a lot Nicholas for digging that info out, now we know for sure. Help me understand this please: "there was no original kick"; there must have been original track, right?, but there IS none of it on the final product. That's what Sneap meant to say? Reasons for this could be either poor sounding original track, due to fucked up mics, studio change and so; or, more likely, engineer's choice (insofar we cannot know Mike's stance on it but we can assume he complied nevertheless) to go with his standard method of sampling the kicks. Its probably the latter, cause snares were probably blended too. Well, i shall wait before i go to give my "final" thoughts; at least im glad that i know for sure, cause i hated uncertainty... I suppose it is important to say that no matter what the final audio still (somehow!) showcases excellent performance from Lopez and the rest is up to individual listener's preferences... Do your thoughts go along that line too?
Oh, yeah, about GR... After all it seems there was no much sampling/triggering on that record, "a little support triggering on kick and snare (not much on that album though)", according to Bogren. Again i wonder if its his own samples or Lopez ideal hits that were triggered. It seems he only used it to fix erroneous parts and not to even everything out which i think makes it more likely Lopez' hits were used as "support triggers" (which i like much better).
Did Bogren use triggers for Watershed as well?
Oh, yeah, about GR... After all it seems there was no much sampling/triggering on that record, "a little support triggering on kick and snare (not much on that album though)", according to Bogren. Again i wonder if its his own samples or Lopez ideal hits that were triggered. It seems he only used it to fix erroneous parts and not to even everything out which i think makes it more likely Lopez' hits were used as "support triggers" (which i like much better).
Did Bogren use triggers for Watershed as well?
I almost always use many samples and a lot from the original snare (if it doesn't sound too shite), and create a blend that i happen to like together with the rest in a certain mix.
Sometimes i wish i just wouldn't care about the natural feel and dynamic of drums, and make my life easy as many other metal producers do.
He replied this in the Andy Sneap forums, awesome thread, he answers many questions, check it out.
http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/andy-sneap/429348-jens-bogren-my-new-hero.html
Yes, the original track is what Sneap used to trigger the sample of the kick.
In theory, that's incorrect. "There was no original kick" just means that the sound that Lopez used for his bass drum was not the one you hear on the record. Everything Lopez played, kick-wise, is still there - it just got changed to a different sound later on in the process.
In the case of the snare, it's a long, long process in the case of a Lopez - all the ghost notes. Whenever he played a ghost note, the trigger would have to be changed to a snare sample that was of lesser strength. An entire record filled with ghost notes (which is one of Lopez's "trademarks") would take a long period of time to go through and setup each individual trigger.
Also remember that this has a lot to do with velocity settings too. When an entire record has the kick triggered, it'd be very plausible for the engineer (in this case, Sneap) to go through each song and change the velocity of every note a tiny bit so that it doesn't sound as mechanical - this would help especially on the "prog" or "soft" parts as they require a different strength than the "metal" parts do.
In this specific case, it's pretty realistic that it could be both reasons. Yes, Sneap's standard policy is to trigger the kicks and use a 50/50 blend for the snare of a sample and the actual recorded snare.
But also take into account the shitty conditions of Deliverance's recording and that could be a big reason why too.
Deliverance is my favorite record from cover to cover. A lot of people seem to dislike "By the Pain I See In Others" but I love that track, it's got some great riffs and some excellent drumming by Lopez.
As far as the production, it's excellent too. The only thing that bothers me is that sometimes the bass gets lost in the mix if you're not paying attention - which sucks because Mendez has some brilliant lines in there. There's a bass part in "Wreath" @ around 3:55 that I'd never heard before I put on some great sound isolating headphones with a huge bass response, because the bass gets lost in that mix so easily.
Actually, he was referring to Watershed with that specific quote. The drums definitely sound more natural on there, as opposed to Ghost Reveries where they do indeed sound a bit more like they were triggered. (But GR, he said that it was a compromise of "his will versus what the band thought they wanted")
Possibly both. It's hard to know because he doesn't post here much anymore, he's probably so busy with all these productions he's doing that he never has time to do anything. (From what I understand, he's been doing a whole lot of work lately - ranging from Opeth to Daylight Dies to even Swallow the Sun to Draconian etc).
Again, it's hard to know exactly what he used triggers for on GR as he doesn't post here anymore. All he said was that he made a compromise, "his will versus the bands." So perhaps he only used the triggers on the "metal" parts to make it stronger, and left all of Lopez's fancy kick/snare work on the "prog" parts alone (which is actually easier than going through and triggering, because GR especially is ghost-note-heaven which would be a gigantic pain in the ass and time consuming process to trigger a snare for.)
I'd guess so, since he does state that he uses triggers on album, "but not so much"...that would mean, I'd guess, that he only used it to give the "metal" parts more strength, rather than having the entire record triggered.
Cyrosis
Member
- Aug 21, 2006
- 223
- 0
- 16
Extremely simple if you just set up a few sample layers, hard hits down to light hits, and allow them to be triggered by a threshold conforming to the input media.
Wouldn't surprise me if Bogren actually would have done that but judging by the extensive editing that some engineers go through, it also wouldn't surprise me if every hit was changed.
For the sake of futility id like to say a few words more...
I let some time pass to see if something will change and, nope, im not happy with either autotune or how the drums were produced on recent O records. I might lack some insight or grasp, but for all the competence and knowledge guys like Nicholas, Cyrosis, Davo or XOPETHX showed, i havent heard any argument which would help me understand why sampling drums (especiallly Sneap's way) would be the right solution for the band artistically, so i have to trust my own judgment. I personally see Opeth's music as fine art and as such i think it would be much better if they stayed true to some more traditional recording methods. Heck it couldnt have gone worse than BWP or SL or MAYH... Ive been trying to listen to some Deliverance songs over and over again, and its weird, i kind of block, all those drum parts in Wreath or MA that i liked so much... i just dont know what to think any more. Its like when you see fake nails or fake teeth - looks kinda nice but its still fake, and once you know it isnt real it doesnt affect you in the same way. Perhaps it would give richer and fuller sound to some other band, but with Opeth its like using pesticides in organic farming, or like adding some fresh paint to "fix" a Rembrandt painting or whatever... Just not what i feel is right at all.
I just wish i didnt know about this, i dont care if its weak that i say that, id be better off if i enjoyed their music for couple of years more and then found out, this is way too early to lose zest like this. Worst of all, all the other music sounds weak to me now. I so wish someone would ask Mike about this in an interview, i guess he could explain it the best, i still feel right words must exist to put the point across to someone who doesnt know anything about making music first hand, but cares enough to think about methods being used in its production; if anything, im glad that the rest of the people here find it ok and that it doesnt affect their pleasure in Opeth's music.
I let some time pass to see if something will change and, nope, im not happy with either autotune or how the drums were produced on recent O records. I might lack some insight or grasp, but for all the competence and knowledge guys like Nicholas, Cyrosis, Davo or XOPETHX showed, i havent heard any argument which would help me understand why sampling drums (especiallly Sneap's way) would be the right solution for the band artistically, so i have to trust my own judgment. I personally see Opeth's music as fine art and as such i think it would be much better if they stayed true to some more traditional recording methods. Heck it couldnt have gone worse than BWP or SL or MAYH... Ive been trying to listen to some Deliverance songs over and over again, and its weird, i kind of block, all those drum parts in Wreath or MA that i liked so much... i just dont know what to think any more. Its like when you see fake nails or fake teeth - looks kinda nice but its still fake, and once you know it isnt real it doesnt affect you in the same way. Perhaps it would give richer and fuller sound to some other band, but with Opeth its like using pesticides in organic farming, or like adding some fresh paint to "fix" a Rembrandt painting or whatever... Just not what i feel is right at all.
I just wish i didnt know about this, i dont care if its weak that i say that, id be better off if i enjoyed their music for couple of years more and then found out, this is way too early to lose zest like this. Worst of all, all the other music sounds weak to me now. I so wish someone would ask Mike about this in an interview, i guess he could explain it the best, i still feel right words must exist to put the point across to someone who doesnt know anything about making music first hand, but cares enough to think about methods being used in its production; if anything, im glad that the rest of the people here find it ok and that it doesnt affect their pleasure in Opeth's music.
