By Bob Olhsson (68.32.101.228 - 68.32.101.228) on Saturday, July 20, 2002 - 02:14 pm: |
I'd like to all everybody's attention to this interview I gave Tape Op magazine last year which just came out July 15th. The wonderful pictures were supplied by Don Gooch although he isn't certain who took them. They are the best I've ever seen of what our studio was like around 1966.
Now that I can see the detail better, I made a number of mistakes identifying equipment so I'd really appreciate some help so I can send in an accurate correction.
Oddly a friend in London was the first to report seeing this so our friends in England should be able to find it.
By HW (68.37.217.106 - 68.37.217.106) on Saturday, July 20, 2002 - 02:29 pm: |
where can one find this magazine...?!?
By Ritchie (62.254.0.6 - 62.254.0.6) on Saturday, July 20, 2002 - 03:12 pm: |
Here's the mag's website, but it looks like it needs a slight update...
http://www.tapeop.com/magazine/currentissue.html
By Bob Olhsson (68.32.101.228 - 68.32.101.228) on Saturday, July 20, 2002 - 04:13 pm: |
They send it free to any studio or engineer requesting it and I think Tower and maybe Borders sell it.
By Bob Olhsson (68.32.101.228 - 68.32.101.228) on Wednesday, July 31, 2002 - 05:44 pm: |
The text of the complete interview just got posted on the net by the author. We're working on the pictures.
http://www.madmooserecording.com/Nowhere_to_Run.htm
By Steve Litos (209.100.86.4 - 209.100.86.4) on Wednesday, July 31, 2002 - 06:31 pm: |
Wow! Pretty good interview, Bob! I liked the "Riding the gain with Levi Stubbs" section.
Must have been a thrill...
I also liked your take on the current state of all things music and the quote about the Sunset Sound guy & transistor equipment.
Just one question...when you employed at Motown, was it just a job or was it a good feeling when you went into work?
By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Wednesday, July 31, 2002 - 07:34 pm: |
Great interview Bob. I wish the web-site would get rid of that bright red color though. I found it difficult to read.
By Ed Wolfrum (165.247.230.15 - 165.247.230.15) on Wednesday, July 31, 2002 - 07:44 pm: |
Great article Bob...I found a few minor errors but nothing too glaring.
I have a few pictures of Golden World after the move out. I never took any good shots in the two years I worked there. I have a few shots of Russ at Motown but none at Golden World.
I just finished Dennis's book. A very good read and lots of memories.
Pax,
Ed
By Ritchie (62.254.0.6 - 62.254.0.6) on Wednesday, July 31, 2002 - 07:59 pm: |
Bob
Ditto to all the preceding positive comments. I really enjoyed it, and I've saved the page for study at my leisure. (Leisure...! What's that?)
By Bob Olhsson (68.32.101.228 - 68.32.101.228) on Wednesday, July 31, 2002 - 11:52 pm: |
Working at Motown was absolutely exhilarating although it was always exhausting. Sometimes I think it was more a lifestyle than a job. I've learned that this is pretty typical of working in a high-profile show business environment.
Moments after Cal Harris told me he'd just resigned I walked into Ralph's office and quit. I was absolutely wiped out and felt like I wanted to learn to have a life. I wouldn't change a moment for anything!
By mhc (172.170.205.232 - 172.170.205.232) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 03:04 pm: |
That's a great article containing lots of wisdom. Pro Tools is just more BULLSH#T in the world; it's good that you said so publicly. I read the article online; I can't wait to see the photos.
By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 03:44 pm: |
Marshall,
Regarding your comments on Pro Tools. DITTO!!
By Livonia Ken (136.2.1.101 - 136.2.1.101) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 08:04 pm: |
I remember reading an article about "The CD of JB" James Brown release in the mid to late 80s. It was probably an interview with Dennis Drake and/or Cliff White. It talked about how they were able to use digital tools to fix sections of a tape with blisters or deformities on it. I thought that was a great use of the technology and wondered what kind of wonderful restoration work they would be able to do in the future.
If I had known that it would lead to today's severe "digititis" that sucks the life out of so much new music as well as reissues, I probably would have rather they just leave the drop-outs on the disc.
Regards,
By Bob Olhsson (68.32.101.228 - 68.32.101.228) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 08:21 pm: |
I've got to read what I said again! :-)
I hoped to make the point that the pro tools mentality is the problem. It's as if video games have replaced going to an NFL game. There's nothing wrong with video games, just something wrong with telling people that they are just as good or better than the real thing.
The same is true of PA systems. The standard today is to make it as loud as you can no matter how bad it sounds or how poorly it serves BOTH the performers and the audience. The technology tail is wagging the dog.
By Livonia Ken (136.2.1.101 - 136.2.1.101) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 09:02 pm: |
Bob,
Your video game/ NFL game analogy would explain things perfectly except that I am a Detroit Lions fan and sometimes my daughter's Barbie Beach Party CD-ROM looks more like the real thing to me. ;o)
Regards,
By Carl Dixon London (62.31.32.130 - 62.31.32.130) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 09:09 pm: |
Bob - agreed 100%. I feel technology is helping abuse things a little here and there. But I still love my sequencer package, even though Mac have just bought Logic out and are ceasing the PC/Windows platform! I have spent over £1000 on this software and have remained loyal for years. A very interesting article. I also agree with video's selling the song point. I suggest a good song would sell itself, without a video, although historically, it is good to see them in years to come when they are an oldie.
By HW (12.110.192.128 - 12.110.192.128) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 09:12 pm: |
As a catalog guy I work in analog as much as possible and use the digital domain for assembly and any final mastering tweaks we need. I have always shied away from Pro Tools or, as we used to call it, 'Slo Tools.' But while we do not use Pro Tools in our current set up and certainly do not use it for final mastering, I am planning to for various projects where its application is apropriate, as in recent months the system has been elevated to a more usable and real tool for the world we live in now. The sound they get now is wonderful, surprise.
I do agree with Bob & Ralph - digititis is a nasty problem and Pro Tools is often blamed. It's hard to get someone who is used to that system to listen to the common sense adage that 'just because you can do that doesn't mean you should'! Why try to sing it right if ya can fix it later... etc. etc. All too true. The Temptations just off a tour with no rehearsal could sing better harmony than any group now, period.
That said, the world of digital audio has taken many great strides, well beyond the anecdotes that relate to The CD Of JB. We have 'fixed' many bad or damaged tapes through proper and intelligent application of the Sonic Solutions software et al. Ya wouldn't believe it!
And also, that said, tape sounds best. Our best new mixes for older Motown recordings are the ones transferred back to half-inch analog with - and Bob will love this - NO COMPRESSION.
By Ritchie (62.254.0.6 - 62.254.0.6) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 09:21 pm: |
For what it's worth - my two penn'oth:
While I am in total agreement that the copy-and-paste mentality of much of today's digitally-created music - or should I say "artificial music substitute" I personally could not attempt most of the work I do today without the benefit of digital technology. Going back to Ken's point about the James Brown CD, that is exactly the type of project I'm involved in. The level of restoration that I am able to achieve on severely-damaged records is simply impossible using analogue means.
I learned to edit using an emmy block, a single-edged razor blade, a chinagraph pencil and a roll of splicing tape. I became very proficient, but no way could I edit down to an accuracy of thousandths of a second. There's no way in hell with razor-blade editing that I could have repaired the fleeting clicks and cracks in old vinyl that I can now (albeit painstakingly) eliminate digitally.
I am just about to embark upon a programme of restoration for a certain British record label, and I am thankful for the possibilities that digital audio offer me, in pursuit of "rescuing" old recordings for posterity. While I despair at some of the mindless plastic trash that masquerades as music today, I am employing the new technology, purely to - hopefully - better people's enjoyment of the music of the past.
PS - I can make no comment regarding ProTools - it's way beyond my limited budget!
By Carl Dixon London (62.31.32.130 - 62.31.32.130) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 09:31 pm: |
Razor blades - imagine trying to edit a 2" video tape from 30 years ago! You would have to find the edit point AND make sure you spliced at the appropriate 4 or 8 field edit sequence - all without being able to see the picture.And we are thinking of a state of the art 'domestic' PC tv card and editing package at home. Here, in the UK, digital TV has helped with interactive pragramming, where the viewer can select whatever camera angle at a football match he desires. Sky News has no less than 8 different stories/pictures going on at the same time. To me, digital and bandwidth in television terms, are ugly words and that's another technology tail wagging the dog.
By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 09:34 pm: |
I used to make jokes that my brother Russ could edit out a vowel. He was rather profecient with a razor blade. Surgeons could have learned things from him.
By Ritchie (62.254.0.6 - 62.254.0.6) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 09:38 pm: |
Ralph
Been there - done it! Part of my job way-back-when was to edit voice-overs for radio commercials.
By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 09:42 pm: |
It's become a lost art Ritchie. I was always fascinated watching a good editor.
By Ritchie (62.254.0.6 - 62.254.0.6) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 09:51 pm: |
Somewhere, I've still got a quarter-inch editing block, would you believe....? Don't know where in hell I'd get hold of those single-edged razor blades any more, though!
By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 10:18 pm: |
I also have a 1/4 inch block Ritchie. You can usually get single edged blades at a hardware store. they come in packets of 50 or so.
By Ritchie (62.254.0.6 - 62.254.0.6) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 10:28 pm: |
OK, Ralph -
Next time I'm passing through California I'll pick some up. Over here they seem to have become extinct... rather like guys who can edit analogue tape, in fact!
By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 10:33 pm: |
Just to set the record straight. I'm not totally against all things digital. I record digital ( ADAT ) and mix to a DAT recorder. At one time I mixed to an analog 2 track. That was my compromise. The general consensus was that anolog was warmer, so I thought I would take my digital studio tracks and mix down to analog to warm things up. I was having a lot of trouble with my 2 track at one time and out of disgust, got rid of it and bought a DAT machine. I have never regretted it. I hold the theory that if you want a warm mix then, mix warm. Simple. As far as all the other things available, as my brother always said, they are tools and should be used as such. Many of today's younger producers and engineers see the " tools ' as a be all and end all of the production, forfieting personal creativity in the process. I'm sure Bob Olhsson and other veteran engineers can tell you many stories on what they needed to do to get a finished product when they didn't have the luxury of some digital gizmo to do the job for them.
By HW (68.37.217.106 - 68.37.217.106) on Friday, August 02, 2002 - 01:54 am: |
For the record (hee hee)... I learned my trade using a quarter-inch edit block and crates of single-edge razors. I absolutely bring that experience into the digital process working with our mixing and mastering engineers.
And of course it comes in handy when old Motown splices break on the analog reels and you wanna pitch in old-school style.
By Carl Dixon London (62.31.32.130 - 62.31.32.130) on Friday, August 02, 2002 - 08:00 am: |
I suggest using a Gillette Mach 3 razor blade. This way, you can do 3 edits at once, in one stroke. Once the blade is useless, simply toss in the bin and replace with a new one. Sainsbury's are doing 'buy one get one free' over here, so you can save money too. I only ever tried splicing once. Can you believe I was helping a blind friend of mine to do it on his quarter inch, at home. I held his hands and guided his fingers to the equipment. He did it eventually, but it was rough, but good fun for us both. Strange as though it may seem, with practice, he would have probably got better, but with Cool Edit or Pro Tools, how could he do it, unless the PC spoke back!
By Livonia Ken (136.2.1.101 - 136.2.1.101) on Friday, August 02, 2002 - 02:39 pm: |
HW said: "And also, that said, tape sounds best. Our best new mixes for older Motown recordings are the ones transferred back to half-inch analog with - and Bob will love this - NO COMPRESSION."
I say: Hallelujah!
My only knock on some of the Motown issues of the past few years was that they occasionally sounded overly maximized. Now if they were compressed using analog tools to the dynamic range of, say, a 45 RPM single, I could understand that. That's how they were approved for release even though modern playback media are capable of much more. When they start approching the range of some modern releases (especially but not exclusively club hits) with less than 3 dBs of dynamic range, though, ugh.
In the age old mastering engineer quest to make one's recording sound louder on the radio or the store speakers than the next guy's, some engineers (and probably the clients who are telling them what to do) have lost their aversion to distortion when it comes to digital compression.
Regards,
Ken
By Lynn Bruce (64.233.239.172 - 64.233.239.172) on Sunday, August 04, 2002 - 07:29 pm: |
Single edged blades are sold at every beauty supply store and they are longer then the kind men shave with(think straight razor),also good for triming beards.Hair-stylist one of my many attempts at a day-job.
Lynn
By Bob Olhsson (68.32.101.228 - 68.32.101.228) on Sunday, August 18, 2002 - 03:42 pm: |
This was just put up and it includes pictures.
http://www.prosoundweb.com/recording/tapeop/olmo/olmo.php
By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Sunday, August 18, 2002 - 04:22 pm: |
Thanks Bob,
Once again, great piece.
By acooolcat (211.78.28.80 - 211.78.28.80) on Monday, August 19, 2002 - 10:09 am: |
Bob - thanks for posting that. One thing that I think is slightly adrift is the date of 1964; "Testify" was a hit in the summer of 1967, so I guess you are a few years premature on the Motown period.
Best wishes,
Graham
By Bob Olhsson (68.32.101.228 - 68.32.101.228) on Monday, August 19, 2002 - 10:32 pm: |
You've got to be right because the engineer for "Testify" was Danny Dallas and when I was first hanging around United in high school the engineer I used to see was Bill Beltz.