Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] new song on-line
From: Dave Phillips (dlphilp_AT_bright.net)
Date: Sun Nov 14 2004 - 17:18:24 EET
R Parker wrote:
>I really like Luke's suggestions. Very sensible pop
>arrangement ideas. A month or so back, my studio
>partner Bill Bailey, mentioned Peter Gabriel and his
>drum production. I heard Sledge Hammer at a sound
>check and didn't listen closely but I think if you
>studied Gabriel's drum production you would find that
>there isn't one cymbal hit in that song--I'm not
>absolutely certain about that. So, what was he
>thinking:
>
>Part of Gabriel's success is his production and sound.
>He has a loud in your face style. Cymbals are loud
>announcements and Gabriel has vocals in all the spots
>where cymbals belong but the vocals are more
>important. Solution; no cymbals. You think?
>
PG's decision re: the cymbals was a very commented-upon move at that
time. It's also worth noting that:
Cymbals are rich in high frequencies, they cover a lot of sonic area
that is exposed without them. When these areas are open new
possibilities arise, including simply leaving the space open. African
percussion is glorious in its resources, but I don't think cymbals
figure very prominently. Cymbals are actually an interesting technology,
and I don't think the metallurgy was available to African instrument
designers.
So perhaps PG simply wanted to redesign the sonic space in a more
African style ? Leaving out the cymbals is guaranteed to open up areas
that could be filled with something else or just left open too.
I love his songs and his arranging skills, not to mention the fact
that he gets some great players on his sessions...
>In contrast, Dave's song is an entirely different
>style of music but it has the same considerations of
>every song including Sledge Hammer. So we make
>decisions when arranging music; what instrument best
>dictates the fell for any given part and if drums,
>then everyone supports the drummer. If vocals then
>everyone supports the vocal part.
>
Yep, it's the song for me (if that's what I'm focused on). I'm typically
telling guitarists that I don't give a damn how well they play their
!@#%ing instrument, I want them to play the *song*.
When Fuzzy Samuels (bassist for CSN&Y, Manassas, Taj Mahal, etc.) worked
with me I noticed that he knew the words to every song I sang. I remind
players of that, because it indicates that for Fuzz the song came first.
Exactly how is an instrumentalist supposed to know what sort of drama to
add to the song if they don't even know what it's about ?!
Obviously for other kinds of music I have different criteria.
>In my own ignorant tractor repairman way, I like to
>consider full orchestral arrangements. How many string
>players and how many parts; 12 players and one part?
>The most talented audio engineers in the world can't
>make 12 selfish fools sound good. To book, imagine
>some poor construction worker trying to hum the
>melodies of 12 fools.
>
I'm not completely sure I understand this illustration, but it *is*
colorful... ;-)
Thanks for the comments, Ron. Phase 2 of the song is already under
construction...
Best,
dp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Nov 14 2004 - 17:14:25 EET