The Role Of A Producer >>
BA (Hon’s) Music Industry Management – Level 1
Studio Familiarisation (MI109) – Assignment 2

Consider both the creative and music management implications for the following elements of the music production process:
· The recording studio technology
· The recording environment
· The role of the producer

All of us hear music every day, usually without considering the complexities of how it was made or why it was produced in such a way, taking the version we hear on an album to be the ‘true’ or definitive version of a song. In doing this we are overlooking the crucial elements along the production process which are there not just to capture a ‘performance’ in the studio using recording technologies (which is complex itself), but are also involved in everything from creativity to administration (e.g. budgetary constraints). It is therefore important for those working in the music industry to have some awareness of procedures that take place in the recording studio. For instance, a band may have almost unlimited wants of equipment, time or certain collaborators etc., but the record company can only allow them limited resources (i.e. budget) to complete a certain recording. Also, the band may consider the recording to be primarily their ‘art’, whilst the record company are looking for a commercial profit making product. The producer often has the near impossible task of trying to create a record that is an accepted (by all) balance of creativity (for the artist), and marketability (for the record company), whilst abiding by the financial and time constraints set by the record company. Therefore, the different aspects investigated in this essay will be inextricably interlinked.

Recording studio technology
Amongst the considerations will be the decision of which technologies to use. There are different approaches to the recording process and it goes far beyond just the sound capture, and its conversion into ‘electrical energy’ or ‘digital signals’. Even this contains choices; the producer must decide for each ‘track’ whether microphones will be used (then he has a choice of microphones…) or direct input (DI) line signals from certain instruments. Nowadays, every professional studio will have multi-track facilities (See Appendix 1) (there are also two-track methods, but multi-tracking is invariably featured in modern studios – and then ‘mixed down’ to two tracks for manufacture, sometimes even then there are multiple tracks, for use on surround sound set-ups). This basically means that a number of sound sources can be recorded individually in isolation but played back simultaneously. This means not only that one person may play a number of instruments on a recording, but that volume levels, effects and equalisation (EQ) etc. can be applied more specifically, resulting in a ‘performance’ that may effectively be impossible in ‘real’ terms. Also, using stereo techniques, sounds can be ‘positioned’ in a certain space, traditionally left or right - but with ‘surround sound’ systems, toying with sonic space has an increasing amount of options.

Another consideration is the ongoing issue of ‘analogue vs. digital’ recording. Analogue has been the accepted method for many years (until recently, due to the lack of other methods) and it is argued that it still produces the ‘best’ sound (although it is increasingly difficult to distinguish from digital replications). Dan The Automator (producer of Gorillaz) is a firm believer that “analogue (mixing) desks sound better” (cited by Collins, 2002b). However, digital recording is undoubtedly easier to manipulate audio detail and its editing and automation possibilities can potentially save a lot of time. In this computer age, digital techniques are often preferred due to the standardisation of equipment and its affordability.

More and more people are setting up home studios, often using Hard Disc Recording (HDR) set-ups such as ProTools or Cubase – programmes which allow the combination of MIDI and analogue inputs. These formats mean a piece of music can be composed or edited on a laptop computer anywhere, and simply put onto disc that can be used on any similar system. This can save a lot of time and cut back studio costs, but its seemingly unlimited possibilities mean that artists may never be fully satisfied, and end up spending a lot more time than planned ‘tweeking’ the master. The Beta Band’s Steve Mason is very much pro-HDR, saying that “ProTools saves time and money, but it also helps creativity” (cited by Collins, 2002a). Conversely, John Leckie (Radiohead, Stone Roses, Ride, Muse, Pink Floyd), who has a background of producing guitar-based acts since the seventies, still prefers analogue recording. He realises the endless possibilities associated with HDR editing; “As soon as ProTools appears on one of my sessions, I book another month or two” (cited in Massey, 2000).

The recording environment
Many things must be taken into consideration concerning the studio environment, for example, would an inner city or a rural studio location be preferable? Some artists will need a city studio for ease of access, whilst some prefer to spend time away from everything, in a residential studio in the middle of nowhere. Sometimes this may not be an option, for example if they need a studio with particular acoustics, or if an engineer they wish to work with only works in certain studios. It is not uncommon for bands use their own studios, ranging from the Charlatans, who built their own ‘Big Mushroom’ studio to record “Us and Us Only” (Universal, 1999), to The Streets who recorded most of his debut album, “Original Pirate Material” (Locked On 679, 2002), in his mothers house.
Another related question to be answered is, “What area/ country should the recording take place, and is this practical in terms of other commitments or financial constraints?”. Most of Oasis’ “Standing on the Shoulder of Giants” (Big Brother, 2000), was recorded in a secluded area in Southern France. This was only possible because they were ‘taking time out’ from other duties, only feasible due to their reputation – it is unlikely that a record company would allow a new act to do the same. For example, an artist may wish to record in a Los Angeles studio, but have touring commitments in Europe, meaning the costs and effort of travelling back and forth would be impractical.
Also, in terms of the studio environment, a decision must be made on who is there; does the band just want one all-round producer or should there be separate engineers, tape operators, executive producers, tea boys, programmers etc.? Then the arrangements must be considered; will the artist require any session musicians? Once that is decided, they still need to choose specific people, based on who they will have a good working relationship with, as well as who has the skills required to attain the sound the artist is seeking.

These factors must be considered by all, from the artist to the producer to the record label’s A&R man. Again, many compromises must be reached for the most effective and satisfying solution all-round. The actual recording process itself will be very different depending on what kind of record is to be made, who the artist is and what type of producer is to be used.

The role of the producer
The term ‘producer’ is used as an umbrella for many different (but related) job descriptions, and shouldn’t be taken to always mean the same thing. The International Managers Forum handbook (IMF, 2000) describes the producer’s role as, “ the translator of the artists ideas”, explaining that an artist is often too close to their art to be objective. Commenting on the conflict of interest between art and commerce it also states that the producer is “often made a convenient scapegoat” – by both sides (IMF, 2000). The producer will usually be involved with a project much further than just in terms of studio recording time, and will be a part of the process from rehearsals and preparation to record, to the ‘mix-down’ and re-mixing of the master recording, ready for manufacture.

The pre-production stage will include either writing or selecting which songs are to be recorded, changing the arrangements or structures, completing any programming that will be needed in the studio and making a ‘demo’ (a rough recording) as well as outlining the budget and studio requirements.
Richard Burgess (2001) describes four kinds of producer (See Appendix 2). The ‘all-singing-all-dancing’ producer itself falls into two categories. There are those such as Pete Waterman (Kylie Minogue/ S-Club), who create the tracks to be sung by somebody else; usually an all-time ‘great’ singer who doesn’t write their own material, e.g. Aretha Franklin/ Mariah Carey or the ‘puppets’ that act as cash cows for labels –i.e. ex-soapstars or Pop Idol style artists. Then there are those who act as artists in their own right or as a ‘leader’ of a band (these are more commonly found in dance or hip-hop genres, e.g. Fatboy Slim, The Streets or Dr. Dre but also include people like the Beach Boys’ Brian Wilson). This kind of one-man-band is only possible thanks to the overdubbing and multi-tracking technologies outlined earlier.

The second, ‘faithful sidekick’ type would be best suited to artists who write their own material, and have a clear vision of the sound they are seeking, but lack the technical know-how of the studio or the experience of organising a recording session. Burgess states that humility is vital, whilst Steve Albini comments, “remember it is the artist that will be the star – who is laying their soul on the line” (cited in Burgess, 2000).

Similarly, but more creatively involved is the ‘collaborator’ type. This may be better suited to artists who have an understanding of where they want to go, but might wish to experiment with different styles, or maybe are new to the recording process and unaware of many of the creative possibilities in making a record. The experienced producer may be able to offer new, different or opposing ideas to the band’s base. Steve Mason of the Beta Band says of their producer (Colin Emmanuel – “The Three EP’s” (Regal, 1998)); “he had the experience and know-how to take some of the basic patterns and make them kick and swing much more” (cited by Collins, 2002a).

The ‘Merlin’ type of producer is obviously sought after as it brings enormous weight to a project. Often, philosophical or off-the-wall ideas will be introduced, sometimes more conceptual than technical. Brian Eno devised ‘Oblique Strategy Cards’, that would be chosen when a creative block occurred, each with a different random direction written on them (Massey, 2000)
Producer Flood (PJ Harvey/ Depeche Mode) - who worked alongside Brian Eno in the making of U2’s “The Joshua Tree” (Island, 1987) - says, “his psychological approach is something that very much influenced me”, whilst U2 singer, Bono enthuses, “with him (Eno), we discovered the spirit of our music and a new confidence in ourselves”. It is rare that such well-respected names are so quick to heap praise on a producer, and it’s unlikely that producers with the charisma and insight to inspire these comments would fall into anything other than the ‘Merlin’ category.

Some characteristics will be evident in any good producer that works with other people (artists or session musicians etc.) Like any leader, they must be able to command respect and authority when necessary, whilst supporting the artists and not being overbearing. Daniel Lanois, who also worked with Eno and co. on U2’s “The Joshua Tree” (Island, 1987), states that, “encouragement goes a long way in the studio – if a musician gets the sense that people around him really believe, he’ll play better” (ISIS Productions, 1999).

Conclusion
With the increasing quality and ease of use of home recording set-ups, it is likely that an increasing amount of artists will choose to complete more recording away from the traditional studio, especially new artists or at the ‘pre-production’ stage. This can only be a good thing as it means more people have a deeper awareness of what a producer does, and understand the concept of being able to create the ‘perfect’ performance by manipulating the sounds and ideas that would otherwise have sounded blander and more traditional. At present, the industry is almost saturated with ‘producers’, especially in certain genres such as dance and hip-hop, in which producers such as The Chemical Brothers, Missy Elliot and Dr. Dre keep pushing the boundaries of what can be done. But rock bands will always work better with a good producer to bounce ideas off, and there will always be ‘manufactured’ pop acts that need backing tracks – meaning the extinction of the professional producer will not be in the foreseeable future, although their duties and studio procedures and technology are constantly evolving.

Appendix
Appendix 1: A brief history of the use of multi-tracking

Much of today’s recording relies heavily on multi-tracking and overdubbing techniques pioneered by Les Paul in the late 40’s (Massey, 2000). At first it was deemed impractical due to the time-consuming nature of the procedures, but after recording crossed the line from ‘real’ to ‘artificial’, and as technology swiftly advanced, similar techniques grew in popularity.

The techniques were largely brought into the mainstream in the 60’s. The most notable examples are Brian Wilson’s production of the exquisite vocal layers on the Beach Boys “Pet Sounds” (Capitol, 1966) and The Beatles’ George Martin-produced album “Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band” (Apple, 1967), which took 700 hours of studio time (Rees & Crampton, 1999). In the early 70’s the technique was taken one step further, when artists started to use the technologies to create entire albums alone, for the first time being able to record each instrument themselves without the constraints of ‘real time’.

The most commercially successful early example of this is probably Mike Oldfield’s “Tubular Bells” (Virgin, 1973), on which he played the majority of the parts and co-produced with Simon Heyworth and Tom Newman. Technologies are ever advancing, and with reduced cost and easier use (e.g. with ProTools/ Cubase etc.) are becoming more and more widespread. These are particularly popular with aspiring ‘bedroom’ artists who cannot afford studio time or session musicians as well as established acts and producers who bring their ideas to life with layers of sound.

Appendix 2: Different types of producer, according to Burgess (2001)
· Firstly, what he describes as an ‘all-singing-all-dancing-king-of-the-heap” producer, by which he refers to a kind of svengali who will undertake most of the creative, performance as well as technical duties himself.
· Secondly is the ‘faithful sidekick’ type of producer, who often starts as an engineer or musician, maybe earning the title of ‘co-producer’ and gradually building up relationships and respect from artists they work with, working their way up the ladder until they build a reputation as an individual producer.
· The third type is described as a ‘collaborator’. This is somebody that doesn’t wish to be a one-man-band, often fitting in like an extra member of the band. Rather than take full control, they prefer to lead the band to a unanimous decision, perhaps throwing their ideas into the melting pot, but not pressuring the artist. They will usually have a musical background in a band, or just greater studio experience, so that they are somebody to bounce ideas off, and that can also steer the band away from time-wasting situations.
· Lastly is the ‘mysterious’ ‘Merlin the Magician. This is the kind of producer who has such a reputation, they can boost sales, launch new artists and please the record company just on the strength of their name. Sometimes they will spend limited, if any, time in the studio, but just by lending their name to a project everybody is happy; the record company gain all-important sales and put less pressure on the band to produce a hit (‘if ‘Merlin’ spotted it, who are we to disagree?’). The band gain increased coverage, sales and credibility and ‘Merlin’ takes his payment.

Reference List/ Bibliography

Burgess, R. (1997) The art of music production. London: Omnibus.

Collins, R. (2002a) Getting Beta. NME. 16 February, p.60.

Collins, R. (2002b) Automatic for the people. NME. 4 May, p.60.

Cunningham, M. (1996) Good Vibrations: A history of record production. London: Castle.

IMF (2000) The IMF handbook 2000. London: Sanctuary

U2: The Joshua Tree (1999) Directed by Philip King and Nuala O’Connor. 60 mins. ISIS Productions. DVD Video.

Johnstone, D. (2002) Reef madness. NME. 18 May, p.60.

Massey, H. (2000) Behind the glass. London: Miller Freeman.

Negus, K. (1996) Popular music in theory: An introduction. Cambridge: Polity.

Negus, K. (1999) Music genres and corporate cultures. London: Routledge.

Rees, D. & Crampton, L. (1999) Q: Rock stars encyclopedia. London: Dorling Kindersley.

White, P. (1996) Basic Mixers. London: Sanctuary.

White, P. (1997) MIDI for the technophobe. London: Sanctuary.

White, P. (2000) Basic effects and processors. London: Sanctuary.

White, P. (2001) Basic mixing techniques. London: Sanctuary.

Discography

The Beach Boys (1966) Pet Sounds. Capitol.

The Beatles (1967) Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band. Apple.

The Beta Band (1998) The Three EP’s. Regal.

Carey, Mariah (1993) Music Box. Columbia.

The Charlatans (1999) Us and Us Only. Universal.

Muse (2001) Origin of Symmetry. Taste Media

Oasis (2000) Standing on the Shoulder of Giants. Big Brother.

Oldfield, Mike (1973) Tubular Bells. Virgin.

Radiohead (1995) The Bends. Parlophone.

Ride (1994) Carnival of Light. Creation

The Stone Roses (1989) The Stone Roses. Silvertone.

The Streets (2002) Original Pirate Material. Locked On 679.

U2 (1987) The Joshua Tree. Island.

ALL ESSAYS ©JOE MORRISH 2003
----------------------------------------
<<Back