Over-Production

[Fox Mulder]

One example of overproduction: Snares that sound like gunshots. Enough said.

 

[Whammywon]

Petrovsk, I agree. The whole purity thing is bullshit because nobody wants to pay money for a record that sounds like shit. As a matter of fact there is a band that is local to my area and they went to Tim Kimsey of Skyline Studios in Dallas to record. They recorded everything at once, and it sounds like shit. They paid a good amount of money that would've gotten them 2 amazing songs here in town, but went with a 'purer' method, I guess you could say.

When I listen to the recording I feel embarassed for them. :-(

But back to the whole subject of over-production, I was just asking everyone what in their mind was worthy of being labeled so. I've heard production that was amazing, but I haven't heard anything that I would consider 'over the top.'

 

[John_C]

I should say people says everything Andy Sneap and Colin Richardson mixes is overproduced, to abbreviate. Fuck that, they're simply awesome, there's no argument.

it's not overproduced, it's just done well so there aren't any glaring mistakes in the playing or the mix.
If you like your music to have glaring mistakes then.........hmmm

 

[John_C]

One example of overproduction: Snares that sound like gunshots. Enough said.

so that would be pantera: 101 live proof

totally overproduced album obviously

 

[Fox Mulder]

so that would be pantera: 101 live proof

totally overproduced album obviously

One of the very few

If you've noticed there are slap echos of the snare on the left channel which gets extremely fatiguing. I wonder what they were thinking.

Edit: I would just complain about the snare, obviously. It's a live album, dimefag's at the centre. Bleh!

To me a kick-ass production would be the "Toxicity" album. Not much of a fan of the guitars, but it's good the way it is. The rest, hell yeh.

 

[Melodeath]

"Overproduction" is also when something is "supposed" to sound really filthy, but it sounds clean. Like some death metal. Some of it would lose its power if it had been produced with a more "hi-fi" sound. You want stuff to sound raunchy sometimes. Hence, Boss HM-2.

 

[vespiz]

As said before, Blind Guardian's last few albums are a great example of over-production for me. Too busy arrangements, so many layers and there's something going on all the time. Get's fatiguing after awhile..

But heck, sometimes it's just pure fun! "Let's cram every idea we have into this song!"

I don't necessarily equate a "clean" "hi-fi" "polished" production as over-produced. Unless that's what the band isn't about. However... live is a bit different IMO than an album. Albums "have" to be larger than life for me. In a live setting, you have the whole volume and energy of the situation to "make up".

edit: wow, how many "" 's do you need?

 

[The-Zeronaut]

Rhapsody of fire. blind guardian, dimmu borgir , nightwish have a FUCKING LOT of stuff in the cds ...harmonies , orchestras , choirs , etc etc
but i dont think that is overproduced

for over produced , as i said before , i understand "a recording of a band that has nothing to do with the band playing live"
so basically is a band that in the cd sound very polished and awesome and then in live they SUCK (dragonforce...)

 

[Trevoire520]

To me and my friends overproduction is more to do with when the mix is too clean/polished and has no edge. Not metal but our prime examples are Blink 182's - Enema Of The State and to a lesser extent The Offspring's - Americana. Both albums have this super polished sound that you'd expect from a pop record rather than a punk band (yes I know these bands toe the line between pop and punk, lol)

 

[GarethSE]

People think Nile - Ithyphallic sounds overproduced.
I think the first time I saw someone claim that album is overproduced, I died a little inside and decided I didn't give a fuck if some pretentious death metal cunt thought a mix of mine is overproduced sounding.
That's probably because they ARE overproduced sounding though, or at least that's the sound I aim for.

However, I do try and take it just a step or two over the line so it's borderline self parody. Sub-drops, tape stops, too many layers of shit going on, insanely tightly edited guitars, machine tight drums.. I love it. I can't take that bow down mix I did seriously purely because it's so hilariously overproduced sounding, and that's the effect I want to induce.

Anyway, natural and raw recordings are the new over produced recordings, so I'm doing the exact opposite.
Call my philosophy batshit insane, because it probably is.

But anyway, I can see myself moving towards more natural recordings again soon-ish. I miss doing really vibey mixes.

 

[Full_Tilt]

I'm not a fan of this term "over produced" either , Its either been produced properly or wrongly .
I agree with what someone was saying about editing the performance to the point where it loses its intensity or spontaneity . If you like clinical or mechanical punctuality then I think over production is actually the ambition in some music.

 

[Fox Mulder]

So, what's the final definition of overproduction in terms on metal?

 

[Suicide_As_Alibi]

Over-production isn't a specific thing, it's simply when the production becomes the focus rather than the music - and what that takes entirely depends on the source.

Probably the best parallel is the film industry; every summer there's a bunch of terrible action films released that are literally nothing but a chance to show off the latest CGI. The obvious example this summer was Transformers 2 - the plot was completely secondary to the action sequences. They could have just released 2 hours of giant robot fighting (well, they virtually did) and people still would have gone to see it. The payoff for cheap thrills is that they're really short-lived experiences; the moment you leave the cinema you forget everything but the hottest chick and the biggest explosion.

Over-production in music is the same thing: you hear a song on the radio and it sounds big and punchy and gets you nodding your head, but when you listen to it through headphones in the dark you suddenly realise there's nothing to it; no depth, no soul, etc. Most people assume it's a bad thing, but that's just not true. The pop industry thrives on over-production, because people just want a quick fix to shake their asses to. You don't go to a club to sit down and think about the hidden depths of the lyrics to Kylie's latest hit. Modern R'n'B is nothing BUT production techniques - Snoop Dogg's "Drop It Like It's Hot" is a dozen samples of a guy clucking and a terrible sounding 80's synth lick with a guy talking over it. It's a "song" that has no melody and little more than 3 seconds of actual music - it's virtually beat poetry - but it's still a great track. The best pop songs are catchy AND produced to within an inch of their life - Britney Spears "Toxic" is a great example; it's bouncy and gets stuck in your head, but it's basically impossible to recreate live because of all the vocal effects and random layers of instrumentation.

I honestly don't think it's something that is that common in metal - metal largely relies on riffs and hooks to get your attention, and you can't really produce your way out of not having a good riff. There are still bands that are guilty of it though - early Linkin Park springs to mind, with all the vocal glitches (in fact the whole Nu-Metal scene was pretty guilty of hiding crap songs with clever production). Killswitch Engage rely on gimmicks quite a lot too (the telephone-stylee drum/guitar thing does my nut), but they tend to be structural rather than production-based.

The important thing is that metal bands rely on getting a dedicated fan base, and sugary instant-hit songs don't get you that. The metal albums that people tend to love are either ones that are full of great songs (regardless of the sound) or ones that take a while to sink in, either because of their technicality or their complexity; Tool, Mastodon, Metallica's earlier albums, "Reign In Blood" etc. Smashing Pumpkins were right on the edge with "Melon Collie..." - it was ridiculously grandiose and studio-based, BUT at it's core were a bunch of great songs that still worked on a single acoustic guitar.

Steve

 

[Aaron Smith]

Over-production isn't a specific thing, it's simply when the production becomes the focus rather than the music - and what that takes entirely depends on the source.

Probably the best parallel is the film industry; every summer there's a bunch of terrible action films released that are literally nothing but a chance to show off the latest CGI. The obvious example this summer was Transformers 2 - the plot was completely secondary to the action sequences. They could have just released 2 hours of giant robot fighting (well, they virtually did) and people still would have gone to see it. The payoff for cheap thrills is that they're really short-lived experiences; the moment you leave the cinema you forget everything but the hottest chick and the biggest explosion.

Over-production in music is the same thing: you hear a song on the radio and it sounds big and punchy and gets you nodding your head, but when you listen to it through headphones in the dark you suddenly realise there's nothing to it; no depth, no soul, etc. Most people assume it's a bad thing, but that's just not true. The pop industry thrives on over-production, because people just want a quick fix to shake their asses to. You don't go to a club to sit down and think about the hidden depths of the lyrics to Kylie's latest hit. Modern R'n'B is nothing BUT production techniques - Snoop Dogg's "Drop It Like It's Hot" is a dozen samples of a guy clucking and a terrible sounding 80's synth lick with a guy talking over it. It's a "song" that has no melody and little more than 3 seconds of actual music - it's virtually beat poetry - but it's still a great track. The best pop songs are catchy AND produced to within an inch of their life - Britney Spears "Toxic" is a great example; it's bouncy and gets stuck in your head, but it's basically impossible to recreate live because of all the vocal effects and random layers of instrumentation.

I honestly don't think it's something that is that common in metal - metal largely relies on riffs and hooks to get your attention, and you can't really produce your way out of not having a good riff. There are still bands that are guilty of it though - early Linkin Park springs to mind, with all the vocal glitches (in fact the whole Nu-Metal scene was pretty guilty of hiding crap songs with clever production). Killswitch Engage rely on gimmicks quite a lot too (the telephone-stylee drum/guitar thing does my nut), but they tend to be structural rather than production-based.

The important thing is that metal bands rely on getting a dedicated fan base, and sugary instant-hit songs don't get you that. The metal albums that people tend to love are either ones that are full of great songs (regardless of the sound) or ones that take a while to sink in, either because of their technicality or their complexity; Tool, Mastodon, Metallica's earlier albums, "Reign In Blood" etc. Smashing Pumpkins were right on the edge with "Melon Collie..." - it was ridiculously grandiose and studio-based, BUT at it's core were a bunch of great songs that still worked on a single acoustic guitar.

Steve

Great post

 

[greyskull]

its rare i hear it.... i hear polished recordings,
but linkin park is where i draw the line.

 

[jrt12]

over production to me is when a song/album where the editing/polish/fx are used to the point where the life is taken out of the performance/song.

of course this is all subjective, but there are times when they throw every plug-in and production trick in the book at the song. usually to make up for lack of actual substance in the song. this happens alot IMO when bands try to do pop-crossovers from whatever genre they originally are. chris cornell's last solo album comes to mind.

+1 to suicides post, just saw that. i was gonna do the movie comparison as well (using the matrix 2 and 3) but i was too lazy to write it all

 

[Metaltastic]

I honestly can't think of anything I'd consider over-produced, because those things that people whine about (lots of layering, inability to duplicate it live) usually just make everything sound bigger and more epic to me on the album, so like I fucking care if it'd be absent in a live environment! (where it hardly matters, because everything is so fucking loud and unclear anyway as long as the active ingredients are there that's all that matters IMO)

 

[GarethSE]

I think it's really important to make a distinction between live shows and albums when it actually comes to the music.
I can hear a fucking drum n bass dj live and think it's fucking incredible because it's a far more primal experience. It's pure caveman shit. UG LIKE BASS, UG LIKE LOUD *BEATS CHEST*
but you put on a record and i like to hear ridiculous amounts of layering going on. even the best speakers won't recreate the feel and atmosphere of a show. cant take the blood sweat and tears of a show and put it on a disk, so you need to create excitement in a different way.
I mean I just find the whole nile = overproduced point i made earlier so hilarious.
Yes, live, I'd want to see the band playing their music and playing it well, and playing it with as much passion and intensity as possible. If that means a few less layers of downtuned horns live, so be it. But what keeps me coming back to Annihilation of the Wicked (aside from the fantastic music) is that I keep noticing new things. I'll smoke a bowl and notice the HUUUUGE fucking cavernous reverb on the kicks during parts of user maat re, I'll notice the perfectly sculpted top end of the guitars, I'll notice the quad tracked guitars just adding an EXTRA layer of sludginess, just all the silly subtleties, and I keep discovering new little bits of stuff. If that album was any more straight up and raw I'd probably be a bit turned off by it, but it's a great example of production used tastefully. Keeping everything totally natural on a record just doesn't make sense to me. I see the use of production just as much as an artistic process, keeping people coming back through either subtle touches or total fucking gimmicks. I can't get bored of a well placed subdrop, a ridiculously OTT vocal harmony that you could never reproduce live, THOSE bars of KSE-esque radio effect before the big emotional chorus kicks in, tape stops, glitches, etc. Either subtle or overdone to the point of near parody will keep me coming back to an album for years.

I wouldn't personally want to hear that shit live. I want to know the band can play the MUSIC, I don't care if they can re-produce the production, I want to know if they can play the damn music. I think the two arenas should definately be kept seperate.

 

[Nebulous]

I guess that further adds to my opinion of it and that I can only think of a handfull of albums that I would consider over produced. If it adds to the music, then it's fine, but if it takes away from it and blurs the melody/ music/ atmosphere, then it has gone too far.

You won't find me complaining about guitars being too perfect, or that orgasmic drum verb.

 

[Metaltastic]

Amen to all your points Gareth, especially about noticing new stuff after a nice burn - aided senses for the win! :Smokin: