: How long have you been in this business ?
01: 48 ) I've been in the recording business now for... about 26 or 27
years, I started as an electrical land engineer kind of like teen electrical
engineer and moved on to...other things, but really regard myself as an
engineer and a musician, was a trumbone player and a bass player later
in an r&b band. Enjoyed that very much but I wasn't very good. I enjoy
very much building equipment and making records er... using that equipment
to... attempt to improve equipment, I find that it's a fertile ground for
development for recording studio, there's always something wrong and always
an environment that makes equipment look bad, you can... pretty much break
anything in a recording studio. To that end I engineer records and I also
produce records, I have people that I work with for a very long time: noto(?),
little feat and linda rondstadt. and er...occasionally people that I work
with are...new, for the first time. I work as a producer some of the time,
as a ..?.., as an engineer some of the time, I prefer to do three different
things, I prefer to work as an electrical engineer building equipment,
as a recording engineer with plenty of time to play with the equipment,
in other words a producer doing the choice and about the third of the time
as a producer with the responsability for deciding how a record should
sound. That's what I do.
: (00: 04: 03 ) So what was the equipment in the sixties?
: (00: 04: 07 ) The very first equipment that I was exposed to in the sixties
used of course tubes, valves. Our tape recorders, our mixers and of course
our microphones were all tube based. this presented some interesting challenges,
er...and some advantages that we didn't even know about at the time. But
(00: 04: 30
) The thing that I remember most about the sixties was working in the two
track format and having to learn how to fit everything onto two tracks.
My...my experience was both in jingles for advertisements and records,
the jingles were harder because we had to do the music very quickly, you
always are pushed to finish jingles very quickly but the records weren't
easy either. (00: 05: 07 ) Both of them were characterised...i remember
doing both things and I remember having to work very hard to fit the sound
in a final form as I heard it. It was a very quick take, you would get
a fast balance, your very first impression of the sound, do a minimum of
E.Q. because we really only had a few equalisers. And i...i seem to remember
the only equalisers we had were proto equalisers and it pretty much had
to go down the tape correctly.
(00: 05: 35)
This presented some interesting challenges for musicians and arrangers
and that the arrangment really had to allow for everything that was going
to happen, everything had to be known when you went into the recording
studio, to really make something sound... crisp and thoughtful and er...present.
(00: 06: 06
) Usually this meant that all the parts had to be written, but at least
when you...when I listen to old records from the sixties, from the fifties
and sixties, old Frank Sinatra, old Ella Fitzgerald, old jazz records or
old Coltrane or any of the guibert(?) records, the thing that i'm struck
with the most is how...How artful the presentation was, it was...It would
start off as a complete presentation: the arrangment and the setting in
the studio and where everybody...How everybody was set up. and the other
thing that I remember from all these sessions is the energy from doing
those sessions, the two tracks sessions that when...
(00: 06: 4
6 )When people walked into the studio to work, they were on, they had to
perform well, they had to perform well not only for themselves but they
had to perform well to help their fellow musicians, so that their fellow
musicians wouldn't have to stay endless hours and take after take. And
it was a different attitude.
(00: 07: 14
) That changed in the seventies, the seventies was a time of experiment,
of er...Evolving technique, at the fore front of rock & roll, one always
noses innovation, innovate of sounds or innovate of techniques. The bigger
innovation of the seventies was probably multi-track, it was probably going
into the studio with something less than a complete idea and forming the
idea as one proceded in the recording. In retrospect I have to say that
this was less successful than the arrangment method of going into a recording
studio. I think because there wasn't ...the, the dream, one person didn't
sit down and have a dream, you know the dream of a song and the dream of
a sound. One person didn't organize the effort, that it was usually done
by different people: the guitar player would play with who he wanted to
play, the bass player would play with who he wanted to play and one thought
of being able to work it out in the mix which of course was impossible,
completely impossible and a lot of time was wasted.
(00: 08: 41
) As people understood what the limits of the technology were and pressed
against those limits - i'm going to go way out on the limp here and say
that musical innovation happens when people meet, when musicians and artists
meet a barrier, meet an obstacle and have to innovate a way around it.
A lot of time a musician would dream of a sound or dream of an effect and
it was impossible to make with that technology in the sixties, they were,
they would simply have to dream a way around it whether it's a tape recorder,
or a reverberation effect or a musical effect and I can't think of a good
example, maybe I can think of a good example. Stop for a second (00: 09:
34 ) And I think the sound that evolve the most, at least for me in these
thirty years were drums, percussion, the modern rock & roll drum sound.
In the sixties it was extremely hard to get a drum sound, you had to count
on what you could do to the snare drum, to make the snare drum bigger,
to make it broader. You'd literally change the snare drum, you'd tune it
very carefully or you'd double up on the snares on the bottom or you'd
very carefully damp the, the head of the drum er...rather than rely on
equalization or any of the exotic reverberation effects that became er...well-known
in the eighties. There was a big difference but i'm going to return to
that point of meeting a technological barrier, time and time again because.
(00: 10: 35
)What happened in the eighties is the barriers seem to fall. There was
very little that you couldn't do, there was very little to resist your
impulse, all that it would take was time, you'd have to spend time to do
these effects but you could do it, effects or, or musical sounds, or er...Synthetizers
became very highly programmable in the eighties. No longer did every patch
corner had to be placed very carefully, they were highly programmable by
many computers and at a touch of a button you could get thousands of...tens
of thousands of different kinds of sounds. The challenge of the eighties,
the challenge of the eighties became how to find out, how to... for me
how to find a culture in the music, how to refine, where to go with the
music, how to find the barrier, what was the technological barrier.
) The first technological barrier was having enough hands to mix multi-tracks
and we sort of solve that by er...designing a...the use of friendly automation
system that's still evolving as we find things that are to do. Er... synthesizers
were addressed by improving the programability but I say in the eighties
that few musical barriers existed. We all look at technological barriers
and we're fixing technological barriers and I think music has suffered
in the eighties as a result. Think there was very little challenge in the
(00: 13: 15
) What happens to musicians in the eighties is that everything that could
be fixed was fixed, that er...the performances became synthetized, that
whenever you heard a note that maybe seemed to clash your very first impulse
was to replace it, the very first impulse was to get the guitar player
to play the part again and to re-record it until it was seemingly perfect,
in tune and in time, in the correct perspective and the correct texture
until music had, was featureless and emotionless and many records in the
eighties artists proceded in that direction, proceded in emotionless directions.
(00: 14: 05 ) Though I just have made very good records like this, steely
dan made superb records I think we still like to listen to them. But i've
never met two more tortured individuals than fagan and becker, absolutely
suffered for what they had to put on tape. The barriers that they constructed
in their mind was sufficient to stimulate them to creativity. they were
not limited gy technological barriers but their creative juices flooded
and they made great records, a lot of people didn't.What I want to hear
in a record, in the nineties I want to hear a life and a culture and a
texture that's as close to real as I can possibly imagine. Anything that's
in the way of that, to me is a barrier er...which presents a lot of opportunities
because every piece of electronic equipment you suspect...the all digital
pro...the all digital process is suspect because it has limited resolution.
(00: 15: 20
) We're looking for ways to improve the resolution of digital, because
we'd like to seek culture in music we're more likely to record where er...There
is an inherent musical culture. the ...?... records was started in new
orleans which is a music city and the challenge was to work with musicians
that didn't necessarely know how to play in a studio, didn't necessarely
know how to synthetize their performance and didn't...didn't clean up what
they did. they were responding to the moment and it was up to us to make
it presentable for a record which we'd try to do without over synthetizing
the performance, so that's the challenge now.....is taking the technology
to where real culture exists.
: (00: 16: 11 ) Do you think that we are coming back to emotion and playing
: I think that we have something to compare emotional playing to.
(00: 16: 21
) We have a..I think a new respect for records of the fifties and sixties,
because I think some recordings that were made then are to this day unsurpassed.
some absolutely superb recordings that we have not improved on, whose methods
we have not improved on. And I think the musical performances are standards
as well, on the other end of the spectrum we have the synthetized dailies
which are er...an example of ...corruption of musical values and banalities
(00: 17: 03
) Comparing these two it's very clear what the choice should be,what the
choice should be is a live, emotional performance were possible....If a
band can deliver a live performance, great, if the producers can focus
on what a live performance should sound like, what in their heart is the
effect of live performance then I think multi-track will survive. cause...It
does help in some ways.
(00: 17: 33
) And I think there's, there's some new methods with digital editing that
are very interesting. I work with a jazz group and we take complete performances
of a song and when we're finished we edit together our favorite sections.
Now we happen to do this on 48 track rather than 2 track, in the sixties
we did it on 2 track, we did any number of blue grass records that way,
2 track, straight on, play it five or six times and "hey I like that and
let's put it on the finished take". Now we're doing that 48 track so that
we have the ability to improve on the mix.
(00: 18: 22
) But the combination of the mixing tools we have in the eighties...I think
we actually can make a snare drum sound bigger than ever, tremendous, I
mean we really can make drum sound fabulous but we can't guarantee a performance
out of a drummer. the tools that we have to make things sound good if coupled
with a method to allow a heart and musical values to come through a performance,
I think it's the record of the nineties. It's not perfection but it's improving
the accessibility of the musical performance.
: (00: 19: 00 ) What do you think about rhythm machines? Do you think they
represent an evolution or a regression?
: (00: 19: 20 ) Well, I'm sorry to tell you that the evolution of rhythm
machines or drum machines has led us to a point where we very often when
we're cutting a rhythm track have available a click or a rhythm part for
musicians to listen to, should they prefer to do that. It's not always
the case but i'd say it happens in eight out of ten sessions. What we find
has happened between the rigorist formalisation of tempo and the rigorist
formalisation of pitch has on one hand increased the sensitivity of drummers
and players to at least be exposed to how to play, in time and in tune
which are two primary classical values.
You know rock
& roll players never really had to learn how to play in time and in
tune. and with rhythm machines and tuning machines now they're obliged
to be sensitive to this. I think that's good. I think that's good. (00:
20: 36 ) On the other hand, I fear that it's been overdone, I enjoy the
classic r & b from the sixties where everyone had a sense of time but
could play in a liquid fashion within a beat. That a drummer could lay
back from the beat, a guitar player could be pushing it, a piano player
could be playing anywhere, a bass player maybe ruling(?) solidly in the
beat and there was a...there was a live feel to this music and it interchange
because time has another dimension in music, everything doesn't have to
be exactly on 4/4. And I think unfortunately drum machines have made things
this happens in the eighties we're responding to it in the nineties with
saying that we'll follow a click but it's ok if something's slightly behind
then, you know maybe when we listen to a drum machine we'll move the part
around and see where it feels best. Maybe instead of programming and quantising
drums we'll take a complete loop of two mesures with a fairly er... liberal
sense of time within those two mesures and loop it. It's a volt(?) but
I think having the drum machine has been a good lesson.
: (00: 22: 01 ) When you work with Little Feat, how do you procede?
: (00: 22: 12 ) What we try to do is to procede as it is appropriate for
the song. A song will generally tell us what it needs, if you listen very
carefully to a song it will give you a direction...you know it said that
to a novice there are many choices, to the boudhist, to the evolved boudhist
mind there is but one path. I think if you're very... if you listen very
carefully to what you're trying to do, it's very clear how to procede.
(00: 22: 32
) It could be that you use a drum machine, it could be that the drummer
follows a click, it could be that the band plays completely live, completely
live, and you record... many times the same track until it's perfected.
we still do that from time to time. It could be that you tweaser(?) a track
together that you have live players but you take the parts and you move
them as it suits you, you take, you love the second verse on guitar so...Let's
move the second verse to the first verse, let's move the second verse to
the third verse, let's have that same guitar part every place in the song.
: (00: 23: 30 ) Do you do it technically or do you ask the player to do
23: 34 ) We do that technically... With a digital machine. And in our case,
we use a sony 48 tracks cause they're really very easy to do this, they
have an internal sound memory so that you can move, you know within the
machine and it just requires one machine, more often we have two machines
locked up and we build a song by offsetting and dededing(????) things across.
It's, it's an option, it's not something you want to do all the time, it's
not even something you want to do very much but occasionally it works.
) We have a song on the new aaron neville record that's just new orleans's
rhythm section playing without a drum machine, doctor john, mac rabonite(?)
the piano player and er...a new orleans' player, willy green and darryl
johnson playing bass and, and it's just four piece on aaron neville and
it's beautiful, it's completely unchanged. This song rejected all attempts
at changing it. We tried to overdub horns, we tried to overdub singing,
we tried to overdub everything, nothing worked. The song only existed as
a four piece song of aaron singing. and finally after spending a great
deal of money trying a number of different things, we mixed four musicians
(00: 25: 03
) And i'd like to, i'd like to point at this as an example of the proper
path to the truth in mixing, that if, if you can just be objective about
what the song needs and even though you've spent ten thousand dollars or
a hundred thousand francs to do what's right for the song, you tear off
the money at the end, you throw it away, it's what's right for the song,
it's what's important for the song and it's always clear if you listen
patiently and carefully. I'm pretty far out on the limp on this one, because
record companies I think of are gonna get very unsure about my next project.
(00: 25: 53
) But innovation takes experiment, real innovation, really, really trying
to hear something new and real and something viceral and tangible and something
you can touch, you know, something when you put the earphones on or you
turn the radio on, it goes right to your heart, it goes right to your heart.
I mean you can, you can hear the times that's happened, you can remember
the times that's happened when you've listened to music, where you turn
on the radio and the song has immediatly grabbed your heart and said I
want your full attention. That's the hardest thing to do in a studio, you
(00: 26: 22
) What do you....let's talk about Linda Rondstadt. How do you work with
her? As far as recording her voice and getting the voice..?
(00: 26: 36
) Linda Rondsadt's sessions go back really a long way. when linda finds
a song, she'll make a cassette of it and listen to it...for months, day
and night, for months, listen to it in the bath tub, listen to it in bed,
listen to it in the car until she starts getting ideas about what that
song says to her, how she's responding to that song, what the voice should
be, what, what perspective the, the band should take, the direction of
the band should take, who should play on it, er...what musicians might
contribute to it. By the time it gets to recording the voice, we usually
have a scratch track, a rough track and it's, we're pretty clear on what
direction we're going by then.
(00: 27: 34
) When we finally get to recording voice we do so by recording many many
tracks. by linda trying the song over and over again until she can find
that small voice within herself. She has to be very patient to hear it,
but it's a little voice that says: "try this, try that". Out of many performances
we sit down and we listen to these complete performances and we select
sections, we take the first verse here and the second verse there and whatever,
it's common technique now I think. We take it to an extreme and if there's
something, if there's something out of tune and it doesn't fit, if there's
something out of tune and it's intrusive, if there's something out of tune
and your ear skids on and comes to aand we'll replace it. We'll go so far
as to harmonising it. if we don't have a song in tune, we'll take a...we'll
use an h3000 with a custom set up and we'll harmonise a performance until
it's in relative proceed pitch.
(00: 28: 43
) But that's not to say that her performance is always in perfect tune,
if it's, if there's an emotional value to a selection of pitch, if it comes
from inside, we'll leave it alone, we'll leave it alone.
Q7 : (00:
28: 59 ) And how do you record drums? In Paris there is a generation of
engineers who don't know how to take drums.
29: 19 ) They have many, many stories about in the united states, many
stories about er...young engineers coming into a studio, being paid a lot
of money, coming into a studio and cases of drums being moved into the
studio and they say, they turn to their second engineer and they say: "what
are these things?, what do I do with this?, what is this? I think they're
having to learn, I think some of the, some of the best engineers of the
eighties, engineers like bob clearmountain had become extremely competent
live engineers. He really has learned how to record drums beautifully and
I think that's true for many of the, of the new engineers that have only
learned with machines, they had to learn to deal with live drummer. (00:
30: 14 ) how do I record drums? I record drums differently almost every
time I do a song, but I always start at the same place, I have certain
sets of microphones I use, I always start with b&k 40,11 on the overheads,
I always start with gml eqs, I always start with gml mic preeze(?), I always
start with a sennheiser 431 on the snare, always always always. that's
my reference point but this could go anywhere. I could replace a 40,11
with dynamic mikes, or I could replace them with mikes off in the room(?)
I could replace a snare drum mike with a 56, I could replace them with
a bmk(?), I could replace them with a c12. it moves along with the song,
what elements in the song need to be exposed, how, what role the snare
drum plays in the song whether it should be large and warm, whether it
should be roomy, whether it should be ambiant, whether that ambiance should
be rectangular, rectangular ambiance by which I mean anonally(?) type of
sound, an M&S anonally type of sound or what we do very often to simulate...
if it was a phil collins sound where we compress the room, squash the room,
maybe distort the mike...?..Completely squash everything, two or three
different compressors and then very sharply trigg the room off in response
to each tom-tom and the snare is solid(?) you play the cymbals it's kind
of a nice sound but touch the tom-tom and the room exploses. (00: 31: 54
) we can go that way with the sound. Er...it evolves, the kick sound evolves
through one of five or six different kinds of microphones but I always
start with a d12, I very often go to a 47 fit(?), i've gone to 44 bx, er...sky
is the limit. I just have a reference point for where, for where I start.
and, and I should add that if there is a range missing in the snare drum
i'll take a sample and dial that into the snare drum, just that range,
if it's a...on little feat for instance, often we need a crunch on, Richard(?)
plays two snare drums and to differentiate them i'll give one snare drum
a little different crunch, 95% of the sound you hear on little feat records
is the drum, is a live drum but there's this small element that's enough
to tell the ear that it's a different drum or to help the ear along, I
use a 4 out(?) for that and I use my own samplers of drummers i've worked
with but I use a drum machine just to add a little extra.
: (00: 33: 13 ) How long does it take you to make drum sound?
33: 31 ) I make my first drum sound in about five minutes. I...I what I
want to do is to let the musician hear what the drum sound like as fast
as possible, and the artist hear what the drum sounds like so that everybody
can work together. Er...what i'll do is to make sure that everything is
in tune and i'll work with drum technicians to make sure that the heads
are good and that the essentials are taking care of. But once i've started
turning mikes up, I have a drum sound in about five minutes and it's very
good, if I do say so myself, it's pretty good sound. Sometimes this is
the only sound that sort of...survives! Occasionally you know, we have
to use the first take and that's the sound. more often what happens is
that you make a tape as fast as possible, musicians are doing the song
as fast as possible, and you get the first reading on the tape as a group:
musicians playing, singer singing...and you listen to it and you decide
what a good approach would be. (00: 34: 34 ) Maybe it would be that the
song will be broken down with just a rhythm section playing the part, piano
and bass drum playing the track. Maybe it will probably be broken down
into further than that, maybe to just a drum machine, get a drum part together
and very often you proceed, you fix one thing and you proceed. So there's
different ways of starting songs. what I try to do is to listen to the
song as much as possible and to get ideas about it, to have some thoughts
about what I hear in the song, what touches me in the song, how I can make
what touches me more accessible, more clear: if it's a drum part(?) if
it's a tiny drum part maybe in the demo it's badly recorded, maybe, usually,
you know...the important elements you have to pay careful attention to.
(00: 35: 35 ) So that when it comes down to working with the track maybe
i'll have, after the musicians have tried some things, maybe i'll have
a suggestion for a musician, maybe i'll say...."boy, wouldn't it be great
if we went to a cross take here, you know I..I.. what's that?
(00: 36: 00
) We're talking about how I might help as a producer, help a song along
in the studio. what I was talking about I think, we hire very good musicians,
we love our musicians, they're really very good friends of ours....
(00: 36: 20
) What we're hiring good musicians to do is to give us very often...give
us their idea of the song. so maybe the very first thing we'll listen to
is what the musicians idea of the song is. If that doesn't seem to be getting
anywhere and often it doesn't, I'll have an idea of a good jumping off
point for musicians either a sound or what I like in the demo, the song
demo or what I like about the song or what I like about the way they were
playing in this one spot and maybe they could expend on that.
(00: 37 :
01 ) As a producer it's my responsability to be very careful that my ideas
are transparent, that it's not just my taste, that we're asking people
to aline(?) themselves with. What we'd like to do is to be true to a song
and to be...to allow the ideas to be more accessible, it's very easy for
someone to come into a studio and want to try all of his or her ideas,
to play guitar all through, to play piano all through it but it's much
more difficult and it takes a much more complete musician and a much more
mature musician to not play so much, to listen to the heart of the song
and to expend on the very heart of the song.
And our favorite
player, our best example is dan verony(?) who is er...just a great player,
he's a great person and a great player and makes the very simpliest idea
-which in fact may be extremily difficult to perform- makes the very simpliest
idea come to life, sound alive and real and visceral and he plays with
great heart but very simple and very careful to listen to, at any time,
the entire performance, always listening to the performance as a whole,
listening to the dums and the guitar and the bass.
(00: 38: 55
) This is very self-serving but the first sign of a musician who maybe
is not so mature is a musician who needs to hear a great deal of (?) himself
in the earphones. It's a clue, we watch for this. I'm sorry to make this
sounds like preaching.
: There is this controversial thing between analogue & digital...
39: 42 ) Frankly, I think that the things that I like the most about analogue
recordings are out of reach in the d(?) domain, digital domain right now.
These things are: resolution in the low levels and a...a friendliness toward
ambiguity, a friendless toward ambiguity. Digital is not very ambiguous,
digital world is absolutely precise at any given instant but the price
that you pay for this lack of respect for ambiguity, the price that you
pay is that the ear has learned how to derive to tell from a lot of clues
and the analogue medium supplied those clues. The problems that we have
in digital, the palette that we were given in digital are completely different
and the techniques had to evolve. I considered it a challenge to try to
make good recordings in digital because frankly, very few people were when
I started making multi-track digital recordings. (00: 41: 31 ) I can't
even tell you that i'm now making good multi-track digital recordings but
I can tell you that i'm trying very hard, I can also tell you that. I find
that some of the tools available in digital stimulate me, I really love
the ability to edit performances and retain the initial aspect: the first
take that I had, the first mix that I had doesn't deteriorate as I copy
digital, I'm sure of that now. I'm gonna go so far as to say that I believe
that it doesn't deteriorate. I'm maybe going out of limb but I think that
number for number transfer to digital is true, taken that as a fact I like
a lot of things that we can do. I like shifting pitch i've already told
you, I like moving things around sometimes if one drum is beating the song
it stops my enjoyment of a song, i'll move it, i'll fix one back beat just
to make it work a little bit better.
(00: 42: 38
) I think a lot of people are doing a lot of wonderful recording in analogue
and now they're expending on that with sr(?) but for me I appreciate working
digitally and it's getting better. And again there's this tremendous technological
barrier that I mentionned earlier with these limited resolutions of 16
beats, what fits to this window, all recordings I see as a window,
we have to make things that work in this rather small window, it's not
the real world, it doesn't have infinite detail and great depth, it's this
We have to...we
have to present things in this little window that make people, the fool
people into thinking that this is real life, we have to make things presentable.
things that work in real life don't work in this little window.
(00: 43: 37
) I'm going on a little bit too much about this but the digital resolution,
the low level resolution changes what we can present. It changes the instruments
that work in analogue don't work so much in digital, that changes...the
reverb changes, these beautiful reverbs that we use to be able to capture
in analogue are less effective in digital for some reason, we don't get
as much of the spaciousness, this is changing. I won't be able to give
you a copy of this but i'd like you to hear one of my early aaron neville
records that we've just finished. it's a good example of working in a cathedral
and maybe compressing the ambiance a bit so that we...So that we hear the
ambiance a little bit better. as digital evolves it will undoubtoudly offer
more resolution, i've been told by people that I trust that we could consider
that the resolution of the ear is as much as 23 binary beats, right now
this is beyond our physics, current physics doesn't allow this, there's
a physical technology barrier somewhere around 18, 19 or 20 beats. I'm
using a 20 beats converter to mix now, when we're getting into the mastering
room, in our digital prep-room we convert to analogue into all our work
analogue, our limiting and our eq is all analogue. We reconvert to 16 beats
for cds but we have mixes that have 16 times, that's probably not fair,
some substantial increase of resolution compared to the released product
and the effect is stunning. We make very good mixes now. in the future
the technology will undoubtoudly offer more beats of resolution.
: What is your most insane session?
: OK the recording that comes to mind, the recording that was mentionned
to Mr. Bonzai was a recording I made.
(00: 46: 30
) With David Franks in 1967, 66/67. We went to a pig slaughter house and
recorded on a nagra sounds of pigs being slaughtered. You know there's
the squils that come out of them are rather earthly and we...and there
was a drum pattern in the sixties known as the fat-pack(?) it was doo doo....tch
tch.....the fat-pack it maybe came from memphis or from the south, r&b
drum pattern and we made out of five or six different squils and moans
of pigs dying a drum track. Long before digital samples by splicing these
sorts of things together and putting a little loop in and you've seen this
on hanging them on a tape recorder and building a song around it.
I remember when we were actually working on the song david bought ten pounds
or five pounds or some...a tremendous ammount of hamburger meat and we
were throwing raw meat all over the studio for the ambiance and the effect
is absolutely over-worldly...it was two track section and musicians played
to this fat-pack little pen(?) I don't even have a copy of it but I remember
it as being bizarre and abstract and very very weird. That was my weirdest
time in a studio and there were some pretty weird times.
: (00: 48: 10 ) I'm going to ask you one last question...What do you think
of actual music and actual recording?
48: 27 ) What...what is taught me is a respect for, a new respect for how
instruments really sound that...our best work, our best efforts may be
and quite properly could be just getting an instrument to sound right,
not inventing something from scratch, just making it sound right. Er....
I love Bruce's approach to recording because he really has great respect
for sounds, he gets sounds right. I've learned a lot from bruce but i'll
only give you one parade(?) of you, you'll have to ask me again. I've got
a million of them.