By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Sunday, April 28, 2002 - 07:23 pm:

Let's continue anything on Mike at this thread. The original is getting a little out of hand. Mike...you're a hit here. So good to have you around.

By Ritchie (62.254.0.6 - 62.254.0.6) on Sunday, April 28, 2002 - 07:53 pm:

Good idea, Ralph.. the guy is almost as popular as you are!

Mike

I think your comments on the subject of nostalgia are extremely apt - often it's a rose-tinted view of a time which had its pitfalls as well as its peaks. I would suggest that our particular fascination for the "golden years" stems not from any wistful longing to return, but from a burning desire to discover the background stories and technical details which add to our understanding, and enjoyment of the music. I suppose it is no different to reading a biography of Beethoven to better understand the man who created the nine symphonies... except that such an endeavour is academically accepted, whereas researching into Motown records may be viewed by some as a low-brow pursuit!

I personally have no longing to return to 1960s Detroit, as it's an era of which I have no experience - so I can't go "back" to somewhere I never went. Don't worry - we may go dewey-eyed over the music, but we all equally accept that you guys were simply doing your job. The fact that magic was created in the process is a bonus, and a tribute to all the talent involved. Incidentally, my only use for a time machine would be to go "back" and stock up on the records which are now unobtainable... or perhaps catch some shows at the Twenty Grand.

As for humour (as we spell it over here) - the only people I feel sorry for are those without it. In my opinion, it's the little moments of insanity that help to keep us all sane.

(Lon Chaney Sr...? A gifted actor, but what a shame his son was such a ham!)

By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Sunday, April 28, 2002 - 08:09 pm:

Ritchie,
Thanks for making me laugh.

Nostalgia is a funny thing. I don't think there is any time I would really like to go back to. I'm grateful for the experiences, but the rose tinted glasses theory holds much water here. For example.� I loved Tera Shima, and always will, but the place took a lot out of me and I woudn't want to repeat that kind of pressure in my life.

Motown was great but also not without it's problems as Mike points out However for the most part it really did seem to be " normal " for those of us in the business at that time. In a recent discussion with Russ he pointed out how "normal " we thought it was to be going to the studio to turn out records. Hits or otherwise.

So it was all pretty normal for us but not without it's consequences, and I'm sure each of us as idividuals ,that were involved at that time, have some story of their own that relates to a less than favorable reality. However, in spite of all this I would not change a day of it all and I feel I have been blessed to have the experiences I have.

By M.McLeanTech (63.210.112.176 - 63.210.112.176) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 02:42 am:

To whom it may concern:

I have posted a couple of items in answer to a letter from Ed Wolfrum under the thread "Motown Bass Sounds" that you might find interesting.

Mike McLean

By acooolcat (61.222.95.58 - 61.222.95.58) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 04:02 am:

Good morning Mike,
For info' on Gorecki's 3rd Symphony, click on;
http://www.hnh.com/composer/gorecki.htm
There's a link that allows you to hear part of the recording.
Best wishes, Graham

By M.McLeanTech (64.236.243.243 - 64.236.243.243) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 04:30 am:

Graham,

Thanks for the tip. I have a library nearby that is full of CD's. There is a very good chance that they might have this recording. I will find out and take it home, if they have it.

I am down at work makeing a videocassette transfer at the moment. I used the DIGITAL BETACAM player.

Thanks,

Mike McLean

By M.McLeanTech (64.236.243.243 - 64.236.243.243) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 05:00 am:

To whom it may concern:

I just posted an interesting item on the "What was your first Motown record purchase" thread.

Mike McLean

By acooolcat (211.72.121.66 - 211.72.121.66) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 05:12 am:

Hello Mike,
It seems that Hitsvlle was running 24 - 7 but I wonder if you had a regular 9 to 5 routine?
Also, were you ever asked to work at other studios in Detroit? I know some of the Funk Brothers, such as Mike Terry and Jack Ashford, did outside production work, and eventually left Motown. There seems to have been a boom in the number of small recording studios in Detroit during the mid-60s.
Graham

By M.McLeanTech (63.210.126.239 - 63.210.126.239) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 06:11 pm:

Dear Soulboy,

Thank you for your interesting letter, which I found most stimulating. I noted the following comments that follow your letter:

John Lester: "Ouch!!!!"

Richie: "I think it's quite obvious what was "built in to" those classic tracks at Motown.... quality!"

Carl Dixon: "Ritchie - agreed!! All your comments earlier, I mean."

I would appreciate it if I may save time by responding to all those comments, as well as your letter, with one letter: this one.

Thank you for you kind words. I have not listened to any Motown at all in digital format such as a CD re-release. The one exception is a CD compilation of my favorites that I made myself from mint condition very early 45's. In that case, I felt that my sound card (Creative Sound Labs Sound Blaster Live Value) did not produce any noticeable quality loss, when compared to the original.

When digital recording first came into use in the late 70's (before the CD came on the scene in 83), the most critical and discriminating listeners bitterly complained about a "graininess" in the sound of the string section of an orchestra. This unhappiness continued for many years into the CD era. I have collected 2,300 CD's since 1983, and the improvement in quality, over the years, regarding this "grain" problem has been astounding.

Within the last year, I have conducted some careful experiments, using high quality analog recordings of an orchestra as source material. I have concluded that my sound card has less "grain" then a typical 1983 CD, but still has enough to be detectable when listening to a very high quality string recording. On the other hand, I have heard recent CD's that seem to have no problem at all with grain, and sound simply beautiful.

Note above that I said that I could hear no quality loss with my sound card with old Motown 45's. This does not surprise me at all.

Here is a primer on the facts of life about sound recording:

First, the sound leaves the musical instrument and reflects off the walls of the studio. The reflections mix in with the direct sound and can improve, or degrade the subjective quality of the sound.

Next the music is converted to an electrical analog of the sound pressure by the microphone. While there are special "ultra low coloration" microphones available, most "Pop" recording engineers react to such microphones as if they were drinking distilled water. The microphone of choice is a microphone with a coloration that seems to improve the sound of the musical instrument.

In order to get control over every possible subtle nuance, a microphone is placed on practically every instrument. There is sound leakage in the studio. Sound from the same source can be present at the output of more then one microphone. When these microphones are mixed together, timing differences related to the speed of sound can cause coloration due to "phasing."

Before you even roll the tape, you have a big mess of problems. I sometimes think that a little recognized reason for the popularity of multi-track to such an extreme degree has been the feeling of frustration that the recording engineer feels at this point. There is a feeling that if only he/she could spend more time fooling around (after the musicians have punched out on the time clock,) that some of these problems could be reduced.

An analog magnetic tape recorder has a distinctly audible cocktail of degradation. The level capability at high frequencies is much less then at lower frequencies. Further, the less then perfect linearity results in noticeable intermodulation distortion (IM) effects. The NAB equalization (used in professional tape recorders) has a boost at low frequencies, which tends to aggravate this problem. This IM is most degrading when all the sounds are mixed together. When all the sounds are separated, as they are on the 24 track original session tape, the IM is much less a problem. This is because one sound can't modulate another sound and degrade it.

A twenty four track session tape can sound quite clean when played on the monitor mixer, but when you rerecord it onto a stereo two track 1/4 inch tape, the IM causes a substantial drop in "cleanness."

A master disc must be cut from the two track master tape. Modern disc recording cutting heads, in combination with their special electronics (the combination is called a "cutting system") move the cutting stylus in a manner which is virtually flawless. However, a lot of distortion is added by the process of cutting the groove in the lacquer. There is a "spring back" effect, as the material is sheared away, that adds considerable distortion. Near the end of the vinyl era, a process called "Direct Metal Mastering" (DMM) was developed which cut the groove in copper metal, instead of lacquer. This process solved the spring back problem, and resulted in a noticeable improvement. I was long gone from the phonograph industry by then.

By the time the master lacquer is processed and used to press a vinyl disc, there is more quality loss. However, if great pains and expense are expended on premium processing techniques, this loss can be kept quite low. That is what is going on with very expensive "audiophile" records. In the case of pop tunes intended for teenagers, the cheap alternative was to simply make the recording level as high as possible without over-cutting into the adjacent grooves, to position the music as far above the "record scratch" as possible. This very high recording level aggravates the distortion problems tremendously.

Next comes a whole new horror show when you try to trace the groove with a playback stylus. A great deal of distortion is added at this stage.

When it is time to prepare a reissue of an old Motown song on CD, it is possible for the mastering engineer to go all the way back to the 24 track multi-track original session tape and start with that. It should be clear that a vast amount of loss is eliminated right off the bat.

In addition, vast strides have been made in the last twenty years in the area of digital processing of sound. Record companies have access to very expensive computer based equipment that can work wonders. The multi-track format allows these techniques to be applied individually to each musical instrument, for maximum effectiveness.

After the sound has been cleaned up, it is mixed, using the original version as a reference so as to maintain the same basic feel as the original. The result is an astounding improvement in the clarity of the sound. Of course, if the mastering engineer has bad taste, the process can result not in a Hollywood starlet who is delighted by the new look her plastic surgeon has rendered, but rather in a Frankenstein's monster.

This beautiful new mix can be recorded onto a CD with virtually no quality loss (the grain is almost gone, now), and even low cost CD players can play back the CD with virtually no quality loss.

Is it any wonder that these reissues sound better?

Recently, I purchased a couple of reissues of classical piano recordings made in the early 1950's. One was the complete piano works of Debussy, played by Walter Gieseking on EMI (7243 5 65855 2 2 [4 CD's]), and the other was the "William Kapell Edition" on BMG (9026-68442-2 [9 CD's]). I was astounded and delighted by the stunning quality of these reissues. There is no question in my mind that modern digital technology is making vast strides in quality.

I agree with your findings about these improvements, and I find your question about "�something being built in to these tracks�" most interesting. Yes!!! There was something built into those tracks: It was a TON OF DISTORTION that can be eliminated by going back to the multi-track and starting over with modern techniques.

I join with you in not minding offending the purists. Facts are facts. I am not musically necrophilous. If I can move away from decay toward the warm living, I will do so with pleasure.

Come to think of it, I don't seem to mind offending anybody.

I also agree with Richie ("I think it's quite obvious what was "built in to" those classic tracks at Motown.... quality!") After all: The motto on the Gordy Record label logo was "IT'S WHAT'S IN THE GROOVES THAT COUNT"

Sincerely,

Mike McLean

By M.McLeanTech (63.210.126.239 - 63.210.126.239) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 06:25 pm:

To whom it may concern:

It looks like I am about twelve letters behind in my answering.

I have devised a system where I answer all letters in the order received. If you check the position in the que (line) of a letter you hope to see an answer to, in relation to the letter that I have most currently answered, you can get a good idea of how soon your letter will be answered.

About one letter like the above one to Soulboy, per day, is about all I can afford time for.

Remember to look in the first thread "Technical talk with Mike McLean" to see the entire que.

Mike McLean

By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 06:37 pm:

Use any system you need to that will work for you Mike. No one here wants you to " TILT "

By Carl Dixon London (62.31.32.130 - 62.31.32.130) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 07:02 pm:

That was a close shave Ralph!!

By the count (65.59.35.114 - 65.59.35.114) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 07:11 pm:

Hey RICHIE,YOU SOUND PRETTY KOOL MAN,BUT IF YOU DID'NT LIVE IN THE 50'S OR 60'S,YOU MISSED THE best YEARS OF YOUR LIFE.I STILL LIVE THE 50'S&60'S,i still comb my hair in a D>A>(ducks ass)and wear my points ,and carry my CODY Hi school boxing glove(switchblade)I'AM ASKED ALL THE TIME,WHY DID I GO BACK TO THE 50'S?,I SMILE AND SAY,MAN LIKE I NEVER LEFT.STEVE THE COUNT

By Ritchie (62.254.0.6 - 62.254.0.6) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 07:23 pm:

Steve

Coming from you I take that as a compliment! In truth, I was around in in the fifties and sixties. I'm actually about the same age as The Drifters. The difference is... I have not been replaced with any new members!

By john lester (213.122.203.171 - 213.122.203.171) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 09:44 pm:

Mike......

I agree with your comment on distortion.....although I have never admitted it. Joe Meek (Telstar by the Tornadoes) specialised in distortion..to the point that if he could make the listener's brain was unable to hear what was going on, the ear would keep on trying...thereby keeping the attention span lasting longer.

Motown were ace at mixing in distortion. Even to the point of re-promoting a better distorted mix eg Marvin Gaye's "Take This Heart Of Mine".

It got my attention and it still has my attention

By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Monday, April 29, 2002 - 10:37 pm:

Count,
Did you spit shine your points?

By soulboy (213.105.232.36 - 213.105.232.36) on Tuesday, April 30, 2002 - 02:26 pm:

Mike

I am glad you agree with my sentiments on modern technology. What you say about the improvements in CD technology over the years is correct not just for Motown records, but i've found it re-vitalises recordings from other bands of that era.
(which i will not name on this forum).
I use the Creative Sound Labs Sound Blaster Live Value, and find this better than many others. In fact it is a lot better than my own mini CD system, with a really good bass and treble output it emphasises all what is good about Motown.

By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Tuesday, April 30, 2002 - 03:11 pm:

I talked with Mike on the phone this morning for the first time in 32 years. We had a great time and I'm sure our friendship will pick up where it left off in 1970. Mike, I can't tell you what it means to re-connect with you. Another thing to thank Soulful Detroit for.

By Carl Dixon London (62.31.32.130 - 62.31.32.130) on Tuesday, April 30, 2002 - 03:49 pm:

So you two have aligned your heads together at last!

By Eli (170.115.179.106 - 170.115.179.106) on Tuesday, April 30, 2002 - 05:13 pm:

Mike,,
Was any form of noise reduction used at Motown??
Also, what was the basic design of the live chambers and the maximum decay of the EMT??
It seems to me that the decay time usually was at about betwen 2-2.5 seconds for most with maybe a 100ms. pre-delay.

By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Tuesday, April 30, 2002 - 05:40 pm:

It's a funny thing Carl. Our heads aligned which caused us to laugh our asses off. Very strange.

By M.McLeanTech (64.156.152.18 - 64.156.152.18) on Tuesday, April 30, 2002 - 08:01 pm:

Dear Carl,

Thank you for you nice long juicy letter. You say you are speechless. How I long for that condition with this motor mouth of mine!

Regarding the love of Motown music, I have a number of favorites that I compiled onto a home burned CD. Here is the jewel case rear page, which lists the tunes:

THE MOTOWN THAT TIME FORGOT Total time: 77:08
1. Same Thing Gino Parks Tamla H-711 2:30
2. What is a Man (Without a Woman) Henry Lumpkin Motown 1013 2:49
3. Faded Letter Satintones Motown 1020 2:46
4. Take Me Mabel John Tamla 54050 2:49
5. Don't Take It Away Sammy Ward Tamla 54049 2:47
6. Buttered Popcorn Supremes Tamla 54045 2:32
7. Money (That's What I Want) Popcorn Wylie Motown 1009 2:23
8. Just For You Freddie Gorman Miracle MIR11 2:09
9. I've Got That Feeling Cornell Blakely Rich R 1801 2:50
10. Two Wrongs Don't Make a Right Barrett Strong Tamla H-687 2:38
11. Check Yourself Temptations Miracle M12 2:44
12. I Am Your Man Bobby Taylor Gordy G-7073 3:14
13. Whole Lotta Woman The Contours Motown 1008 2:48
14. I'm Gonna Stay Mary Wells Motown 1024 2:43
15. Jamie Eddie Holland Motown 1021 2:21
16. Don't Let Him Shop Around Debbie Dean Motown 1007 2:43
17. Real Good Lovin Popcorn & Mohawks Motown 1019 2:25
18. Devil With the Blue Dress Shorty Long Soul 35001 3:09
19. I Know How It Feels Satintones Motown 1010 2:35
20. The Further You Look The Less You See Temptations Gordy G 7015 2:18
21. Yesterday's Dreams Four Tops Motown 1127 2:55
22. I Don't Want to Take a Chance Mary Wells Motown 1011 2:48
23. Contract On Love Little Stevie Wonder Tamla 54074 2:57
24. Please Mr. Kennedy Mickey Wood Tamla 54052 2:32
25. Everybody's Gotta Pay Some Dues The Miracles Tamla 54048 2:56
26. That's Why I Love You So Much S. Taylor & S. Ward Motown 1004 2:06
27. Strange Love Mary Wells Motown 1016 2:40
28. Dream Come True Temptations Gordy 7001 2:54
29. Sad Lover Vandors Never released 2:50

I am familiar with both the "Danse Macabre," and "The Wasps," which was indeed written by Ralph Vaughan Williams. One of the great thrills of my life was to shake hands with this great English composer in 1954. The occasion was in Ann Arbor, Michigan at the "Michigan Union," which was sort of like a YMCA (a hotel combined with an athletic club.) My father and I went up to his room. His wife, half his age, was there. My father did most of the talking. What made it especially thrilling was the fact that at that point in my life, I was totally obsessed with his "London" Symphony.

"The Wasps" is a wonderful piece. I first became familiar with it at about the time I met the composer. It starts out with all this buzzing, as the wasps prepare to go on a "bombing run." Then, as they soar out over the beautiful English countryside, the most exquisitely beautiful melody describes the majesty of the land. "The Wasps" is a real winner!

The greatest recording ever made of the "Danse Macabre" was released in 1946, on an English Decca/London "FFRR" (Full Frequency Range Recording) 12 inch 78 RPM record. Charles Munch conducted the Paris Conservatory Orchestra. My father had that record, but somehow it has disappeared. Perhaps someday I will be able to find a copy. The performance was utterly inspired, and the recorded sound was way ahead of its time.

If you like Saint-Saens, then you would love his Symphony No.3 in C minor, Op.78 "Organ." This is a very popular piece, and there are dozens of recordings. The best performance that I have found (Munch recorded it in 1947 on Columbia 78 RPM discs, with the New York Philharmonic, and it was sensational) is a CD on 1990 vintage BMG/Eurodisc (69224-2-RG) (UPC code 0 9478-69224-2 7) with Edgar Krapp, Organ, and the Bamberger Symphoniker conducted by Christoph Eschenbach.

Thank you for your kind words regarding your excitement over the technical insights that I have offered in the area of level standards, and VU meters. I am going to reward you below with a lecture on this subject, written just for you (Sung by Freddie Gorman. See jewel case notes above.)

You say that you are not an engineer. Well that makes two of us. I never got beyond the 9th grade in high school. I am entirely self-taught.

I have never worked with a PPM (for the other members of the forum: this stands for "Peak Program Meter," a type of sound volume meter developed in England by, I believe, the BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation].) However, I have read about the characteristics of this instrument: The PPM is a more expensive and complex device then a VU meter, and is based on very elegant design concepts.

In order to cope with line up tones, one first must understand the fundamentals. It is then possible to place things in perspective such that the significance of the tone level can be appreciated. Here are some fundamentals:

1. TRANSMISSION CHANNEL. A transmission channel (let us call it a "TC", although this is a non-standard term) is a "conduit" through which the sound, or sound analog, flows. A TC has an input, and an output, just like a pipe. If you set off a firecracker in a studio, and pick up the impulse with a microphone, the air between the two is a TC. A power amplifier is a TC. A loudspeaker is a TC. A microphone cable is a TC. A magnetic tape recorder is a string of TCs (recording amplifier, record head, tape oxide, playback head, playback amplifier.) A similar complex TC exists between the input of a phonograph disc cutting system, and the output of the phono pickup playback preamp.

It is vital to keep in mind this concept, if one is going to stay mentally organized during the process of understanding the picture.

2. DYNAMIC RANGE. All TCs have a range of level (loudness capability) that extends from the noise level at the low volume end to the overload point at the high volume end. Even a loudspeaker has a self noise level: If you short out the terminals, the thermal noise in the voice coil resistance will generate a tiny white noise current in the coil that will vibrate the diaphragm slightly, but at a level that is far below the threshold of audibility. Of course, we all are familiar with the fact that when the volume is turned up too loud, overload distortion in the TC becomes audible.

It is important to appreciate that some TCs have such a wide dynamic range that the volume level can be ignored because they don't cause any problems. An example of this is a good quality microphone cable. The noise level is so low that it can transmit very weak microphone level modulation, and yet the overload point (when the wire gets red hot and melts) is so high that you can use it as a speaker cable with good results.

Other TCs have nasty dynamic range limitations. A good example is an analog magnetic tape recorder. At the low end is a lot of tape hiss, and at the top end is a complex package of overload distortions. The total separation ratio (expressed in dB) between these two nasty limitations is not sufficient to allow them to be ignored. This is where the need for a volume meter comes into the picture.

To illuminate the point, consider the fact that tape recorders almost always have a volume meter, but microphone cables never do. The reason that we don't need a volume meter on a microphone cable is that it doesn't make a damn bit of difference what level you transmit through it: The fidelity is always excellent. Not so with the tape recorder. The recording level must be set carefully, if an optimum audible result is to be obtained. Thus the need for an instrument, the volume meter, to facilitate level adjustment.

3. THE WEAK LINK. As the sound works it's way from the musical instrument, through the recording and reproduction process, and finally to the music listener's eardrum, it passes through dozens of TCs. Each and every one of these TCs is associated with a scientific method of measurement. Among the many intimidating terms are those used to express sound pressure, electrical amplitude, force (Example: a voice coil exerts a force on the cone, in order to move it,) distance (the length of the stroke of a cone) and magnetic flux density. If a person is to maintain a detailed understanding of every single TC in the system, complete with all scientific measurement units, it would be a semi-overwhelming task.

It is very important, if one is going to focus on what actually matters, to keep in mind that it is only the weak link (the TC in the chain that has the least dynamic range) that requires all this special attention, and metering. Traditionally, this has been the sound recording machine. Of course, there are other little spots where clipping can occur, as in a mixing console, and these are dealt with little clipping indicator lights (LED's.)

4. CHEATING. If a great lust to avoid noise exists, then the exploration of those levels where a certain amount of distortion is tolerated becomes part of the process. The subjective degradation of the sound by the distortion must be evaluated, and a compromise selected between noise and distortion.

5. LOUDNESS. Another aspect to the function of a volume meter is to measure the apparent loudness of the modulation. This is a vital matter when assembling an album of tunes. When the album is played back, the volume of each selection should be such that the overall impression of loudness to the listener is proper and consistent from selection to selection.

With the above in mind, let us take a look at the steps involved in the deployment of a volume meter:

A. NEED. A volume meter is deployed as AID, when there is a need to set the level in the case of a TC that is a weak link due to limited dynamic range, or in the case where apparent loudness must be maintain consistent among different recordings.

B. IMPERFECTION. There are many volume meter designs, and standards. The most expensive, and exotic, one I ever saw was made by Hewlett-Packard around 1965, and sold for $6,500. At that time, that was more money then the cost of a new loaded Cadillac automobile. It was called a Zwicker Loudness Analyzer, named after a Dr. Zwicker, who developed the method of measurement. The instrument was about the same size as a SONY DIGITAL BETACAM recorder. When I saw that analyzer, I remember how I lusted to have one for Motown to use in the disc mastering room. I never got up the nerve to propose such a purchase.

Even the Zwicker analyzer would require a computer to record, over time, and analyze, the instantaneous electrical analogs of the "apparent loudness" of the modulation under analysis. The point is that, in the real world: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT VOLUME METER.

It should be kept in mind that all volume meters are like radar: They can tell you part of the story (an aircraft is coming), but not the entire picture (Is it a strategic bomber or a passenger airliner?) A volume meter is an AID that must be used in combination with discerning judgement.

C. INTERFACE. The volume meter must be calibrated in relation to the IMPORTANT PARAMETER. Everything else is of little importance. In the case of an analog magnetic tape recorder, the key parameter is the intensity of the magnetic flux recorded on the oxide coating of the tape. This is where the overload distortion occurs. All the other items, like voltages in the electronics, are beside the point.

In the case of determining the apparent loudness of program material, the key parameter is the intensity of the sound emitted by the monitor loudspeaker. This is what creates the impression of loudness in the listener. Again, all other items are beside the point.

In the dubbing of theatrical motion pictures, it is absolutely vital that a very tightly controlled relationship be strictly maintained between the volume meter, the recorded magnetic flux intensity, and the monitor speaker volume. Further, because of the imperfect nature of all volume meters, which necessitates the development of a subjective interpretation by the mixing engineer of the meter indications, it is difficult to upgrade from one volume meter to another. For this reason, the practice in motion picture dubbing (in Hollywood) is to use a "VI" meter, which is a standard which predates the development of the VU meter in 1939, for the primary volume meter function. The point is that the VU meter was not a sufficient improvement over the VI meter to justify the elite mixing engineer throwing his hard earned expertise at working with the VI meter in the trash and starting over to learn the VU meter.

By the way: VU stands for "Volume Unit," and "VI" stands for "Volume Indicator." The VI meters using on a motion picture dub stage are about the size of a 35 inch TV set, cost about $2,500. each, and are located directly below the picture screen so that no eye refocusing is required.

D. DOCUMENTATION. After the recording engineer has applied his judgement to what he hears, and what he sees when he looks at the meter, a final specific recording level, and associated speaker volume, is the result. This information is a valuable parameter which must be documented so that future users of the modulation may set volume levels. This is accomplished by the use of a head tone, which is usually a sine wave with a frequency of 1 KHz.

Now we can paint a picture of the nitty-gritty:

1. A particular type of VOLUME METER is selected and standardized.

2. For a defined meter indication, the MONITOR SPEAKER LOUDNESS is selected and standardized. This is done with pink noise, and a sound level meter.

3. For a defined meter indication, the overload point of the WEAKEST LINK is selected and standardized.

4. The mixing engineer EVALUATES the modulation level, and ADJUSTS IT TO BE OPTIMUM, using the above system. The recording is then made onto the tape.

5. The mixing engineer DOCUMENTS his work by turning on a 1 KHz tone and adjusting it to a DEFINED AND STANDARDIZED READING on his volume meter, and then recording the tone at the head of the tape.

6. In the future, all that is needed to use the tone to facilitate dubbing is an identical meter/loudspeaker/recorder setup, or else a CORRECTION FACTOR to relate the tone to a DIFFERENT meter/loudspeaker/recorder setup.

Since this entire process is very subjective, a PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP must be developed between the operator, and the meter/loudspeaker/recorder setup.

It should now be obvious that it is easy to set up your own system.

1. Choose your favorite volume meter.

2. Use a step type volume control that can be returned to a reference position, and standardize the playback level, using a sound level meter.

3. Standardize the recording level in the magnetic recorder.

4. Choose the reading on your meter that you consider most proper for the tone, and standardize it.

5. Play tapes from various sources and adjust the level to be proper, in your judgement.

6. Note the reading, on your volume meter, of the head tone each time.

7. You will find that the tone level readings for tapes from a given source (such as the German tapes that you mentioned) will fall into a consistent small range. The difference between the tone meter reading that you have standardized, and the center of this small range, is the correction factor.

8. Once you have established the proper correction factors for the various tape sources, you can set the tone level on you volume meter and get on with recording.

Keep in mind the fact that few, if any, standards for these relationships exist. Further, occasionally a tape will show up that had the tone level set by an idiot. Still, the above approach, which is actually not very hard to implement, will result in reliable correction factors that will solve your problem.

Regarding the U-Matic tape formats: I am such a neophyte that I am not familiar with what this means. I know that the last generation of U-Matic machines, like the Sony VO-9800, had a special higher resolution format, that required special cassettes, but we never used it. Is it this to which you are referring?

We have several insert/edit U-Matic machines: Sony BVU-800, a BVU-850, and several VO-9850's. I never heard of "high band" in connection with insert edit, even though I have operated these machines many times.

"Colour under" means nothing to me.

I have never worked with a Marconi machine.

At Motown, the recording engineer would "lace up" the machine. Funny: We called it "threading up a tape." In the movie industry it is called "hanging a roll." The machines at Motown were quite simple, and no problems were encountered with reels flying around the room. In the film industry, something like this happens once in a while, but almost always to a novice.

Regarding Betamax: I have almost no experience with this format, other then having found old cassettes in storage, and noticed that the physical cassette package is almost identical to Betacam SP and Digital Betacam.

There is no question that Digital Betacam is a better format then Betacam SP, and we use it for all our "on line" work. However, SP seems to have a very low quality loss over any one generation, and we find that for our everyday work: One is about as good as the other, and the SP machine is much less expensive to maintain.

I am afraid that you are way over my head: I never heard of an Ashvale slo-mo controller. My video experience is quite limited, compared to yours. I follow your drift, however.

Between the two of us, that server is a goner. The two motor-mouths! That's us.

Best wishes,

Mike McLean

By M.McLeanTech (63.212.135.154 - 63.212.135.154) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 04:53 am:

Dear Ritchie,

Thank you for you compliment regarding the advanced equipment at Motown, as reflected by our deployment of a 1 inch eight track multi-track recorder in 1965.

As far as I know, the very first such machine was an Ampex 300 custom built for guitarist Les Paul sometime in the late 50's. Not long after that, Atlantic Records in New York City installed a similar machine. The team at Atlantic was Tommy Dowd, mixer, and Phil Ihile, technical. I consider these three people to be the ones that were truly advanced.

The one small claim to fame I would suggest for myself is the fact that they did their pioneering with money, and we did ours with a soldering iron.

Here is an interesting fact about the first Motown home brew eight-track machine:

Berry's brother Robert Gordy (see thread: "What was the first Motown record you ever bought," regarding Bob Kayli) had a family, and a secure job at the U.S. Post Office. He would come by Hitsville in the early sixties and often we would have long conversations. There was a considerable period where he was debating the decision to give up the security of his postal job and join Motown, and we discussed the matter several times. Finally he decided to make the move, and he joined the staff.

At about this time, I had just about finished designing the electronic assembly that would be used in the new eight-track machine. I had hand built a prototype, tested it, and everything looked good. Now we had the problem of building the other seven assemblies.

Berry assigned Robert to help me in the shop. We started out with seven more blank Bud chassis. I would take one chassis and show Bob exactly what to do to the remaining six, using the number two as a "demonstration model." We took it just a few holes (operations) at a time. Bob was very interested in doing a good job, and I was very careful to make sure that he understood exactly how to execute each little step properly. This process went on, step by step, through chassis drilling, painting, mounting all the components, and then installing all the wiring inside the chassis to interconnect all the components. Robert did every last bit of work needed to build six of the assemblies, while I built two.

When we had finished all eight, you couldn't tell one from another. They all had superb craftsmanship, with beautiful soldered connections, Etc., and they all worked beautifully, with equal reliability. Robert Gordy was, and is, a very fine person with an exceptionally good attitude toward applying himself to a task in a very attentive and cooperative manner. Working with him on this little project was one of the most personally rewarding experiences that I ever had at Motown.

Cheers,

Mike McLean

By Carl Dixon London (62.31.32.130 - 62.31.32.130) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 08:18 am:

Thank you Mike for this morning�s top lecture. You now realise of course, you have managed to explain things to me others could not, regarding technical issues applicable to the industry I work in! With your permission, I would like to print off what you have just said and offer it to our young work experience visitors who come into our department from colleges and schools to learn about how a TV station works. If they wish to pursue a career in technical broadcasting, they should find your explanation invaluable. I certainly have and will even more once I have read it a few times. I could even mention who you are and get them to ask their parents to play them some Motown records when they get home, which would be a nice little exercise for them to complete.

U- Matic - I have no idea why the UK (Europe?) have high and low band machines. Our low bands tend to have a colour sub carrier switch to toggle between ntsc and pal. Also we used to receive tapes with 30frames/525 but with a pal sub carrier of 4.43361875 mghtz! Talking of sub carriers - Because Umatic/vhs/video 8 and the like are not full broadcast specification, they have compromised the picture quality by reducing the frequency of the colour sub carrier, but only on tape! When the video is recorded, it goes through a process, which probably knocks it down by a meg or so and on play back takes the frequency back up to its correct pal/ntsc level. The bandwidth of television in the UK (analogue terms) is 5.5mghtz, which allows for full colour moving pictures. A sub carrier of 4.43361875 mghzs provides the colour reference needed by the television to decode the information. By reducing the bandwidth of the picture (U Matic) lower than the 5.5 mghtz, the sub carrier must then be placed at an appropriate frequency within that new bandwidth. The problem with sub carriers, they interfere with the picture. The next time you see a man with a black and white herring bone suite on and it starts to look fuzzy and 'colourful', that is the interference inherent with analogue television systems. A good director would ask the cameraman to pull out or zoom in a little to solve that problem, as view finders are black and white and small, so the problem would not be seen.

Mike � I need to read your response again! Who said I am never too old to learn?

Cheers

Carl

By Carl Dixon London (62.31.32.130 - 62.31.32.130) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 08:54 am:

Mike - as for your cd compilation, when is it in the shops??

By Ritchie (62.254.0.6 - 62.254.0.6) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 12:28 pm:

Mike

Thank you for your comments on the eight-track question. I was aware of the earlier Ampex machines, particularly with regard to Atlantic in New York, but I would still view Motown's use of the technology as "pioneering" - at a time when four track was considered quite advanced.

I understand that Les Paul's original multitrack in the early fifties was something of a home-made affair. Subsequently, he used a custom-built Ampex, having proved the point that synchronous multi-tracking was a viable proposition, with his memorable records with his wife - Mary Ford. I wonder if he also pioneered bouncing down (aka "ping-pong"ing)...?

I remember reading an interview with Jerry Wexler, in which he described how Tom Dowd was eager for Atlantic upgrade to eight-track (for exactly the same reasons that you did at Motown.) They had already experimented with binaural Jazz albums, so they weren't averse to trying out different technology. "Wex" also recalled paying a visit to Les Paul, to inspect the machine that Ampex had custom-built for him, and seemed quite taken with the possibilities, though he was not technically-inclined himself. Apparently, there was a second eight-track machine ordered by Mitch Miller, but Atlantic were certainly the frst record company to own a machine and use it for "pop" recording.

PS - your personal CD compilation is fascinating. I was delighted to note that I have at least a few of the more esoteric titles!

By M.McLeanTech (65.59.26.132 - 65.59.26.132) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 02:39 pm:

Dear Ralph,

Thank you for your letter of April 27, 2002 - 10:11 PM. Gee whiz! Every time I get my powdered wig on, and my nose stuck up in the air at just the right angle, I look down and find your fingers dug into my ribs and wiggling violently. ("�I must admit I liked the nutty professor comparison.") Oh well: I suppose that if you didn't pull me off my perch, I would do it myself anyway. When you bate me, we become mutual baters, whereas if I did it myself, I would be a masterbater. Somehow, there is more dignity in doing it with a partner.

Actually, I am glad that you brought up the subject of humor. Over the years, I have become more and more addicted to humor. Upon reflection, I feel that the basic reason for this is that I am cheap. I take after my Dad Archie, who was a notorious tightwad. He was a wonderful man, and he influenced me profoundly with his love of fine music, but he was an obsessive penny pincher. One of his most noticeable pet peeves was summed up by the sight of him pacing back and forth (after having discovered my mother wiping up a spill in the kitchen with a piece of paper toweling) bellowing (in the manner of Teddy Roosevelt making a speech at the rear of a railroad train on a whistle stop tour during a political campaign) "I will not support the paper companies!" Believe it or not, when I was four, he took me into the bathroom and conducted a real demonstration (not simulated), in full color, with himself as the subject, of how to use two squares of tissue to make a pass, and fold it over so that a second "pass" could be effected with the same paper.

Just to show what a notorious reputation he had for thrift: At Christmas in 1951, we set up the Christmas tree, which by chance came to be located directly in front of the 120 Volt AC outlet on the wall. By the time we got done trimming the tree, we discovered that it was quite a chore to crawl on your hands and knees to get behind the tree to plug in, or out, the Christmas tree lights to turn them on or off.

After a few days, Art and Elizabeth came by to drop off gifts. Art had a wicked, razor sharp sense of humor. As they were about to leave, Elizabeth said "Oh Archie! We didn't get to see your beautiful tree with the lights on.

Dad got a slightly pained look on his face as he contemplated yet another effort on his hands and knees to plug in the lights. Seeing this, Art at once quipped: "Oh that's all right Archie: Just flash em!" Everybody was in stitches for about five minutes.

At any rate, humor packs more pleasure per buck then any hobby I know. I love dirty jokes. It's a shame that our forum has mixed company, or I might feel free to tell some ghastly beauties. Here is a little limerick that is quite mild, and which I have always adored:

Of course you have heard of Franz Liszt, the great classical composer-pianist who wrote romantic orchestral and piano music. His daughter married Richard Wagner, who composed "The Ride of the Valkyries." At any rate:

The sister of Franz Joseph Liszt
had a double fallopian cyst.
But the cyst of her sister
was such a big blister
it whistled G flat when she pissed!

Regarding the restaurant: It seems to me that the place was on the Southwest corner of Woodward and 14 Mile Road or maybe 10 Mile Road, or in between.

Thank you for your kind words regarding my "�great story�" about my plans to impress the salesmen with my super home sound system. You know, a person who is great at telling entertaining stories is called a raconteur. My father's father John McLean, who died in 1908, was well known in Detroit social circles. I have a book full of old newspaper clippings about him. He had a reputation as a great raconteur. I have old pictures of him when he was about 40, and at that same age we looked very much alike.

That Rolling Stones album was the "Let It Bleed" album. I still have the same LP, in mint condition, and I still love to play it once in a while. It says right on the album jacket: "This record should be PLAYED LOUD." My three all time favorite pop albums are: "The Dark Side of the Moon," and "Wish You Were Here" (Pink Floyd), and "Let It Bleed" (The Rolling Stones).

One factor in Mrs. Edwards dedication to Detroit may have been that she had built up excellent political and civic connections over a lifetime, and to relocate in California would have meant that she would have to start all over. Mr. Husband, the late George H. Edwards, was a Michigan State Senator.

Regarding your delight at my "�pinning the meter�": Please see my lecture on volume meters in my letter to Carl above. Thanks for the encouragement.

I called up Harry Balk yesterday morning, and we had a great talk for about twenty minutes. He was quite aggressive regarding his suggestion that next time you come down to Los Angeles, we should get together for lunch and have a great time talking about the good old days. It sure was great to hear his voice again.

Have a good day,

Mike McLean

By M.McLeanTech (63.208.246.88 - 63.208.246.88) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 04:08 pm:

Dear Gags,

Thank you for your letter of April 28, 2002 - 12:22 AM. I would like to help you if I can, but first I need to try to clear up the picture in my mind so that things "add up."

If I took you literally, I would suggest that to reproduce Kim Weston's "Helpless," you should play that record on a phonograph. Surely that was not your meaning.

I must assume that by "re-produce" you mean that you are going to:

1. Transcribe to sheet music the original parts played by the Funk Brothers, along with the lyrics, of Kim Weston's original record.

2. Find and hire some musicians that can play this music.

3. Find and hire a vocalist who can sing in a similar manner to Kim Weston. I suggest a female singer.

4. Select and book a sound recording studio and record the performance, under your direction.

5. Select and book a sound recording studio and mix down to the final master, and burn a CD for listening to the final product.

You indicate at the end of your letter that you are located in Scotland.

My first comment is that this "collage assignment" seems about as if a military academy assigned a student the project of winning World War 2.

That is one hell of a big, expensive project. Just doing step one above would be a big assignment. The other steps would be very expensive and difficult.

The factor that is going to have by far the most effect on the end product is the choice of performers. How you could find suitable performers, at an affordable price, in Scotland is way beyond my imagination.

Assuming that you solve those problems, and hire a studio, here are my suggestions:

A. Try to talk the studio into letting you come in for a few nights, with a minimum, or no charge, and play the Kim Weston record on their control room monitor speakers a number of times. You should also bring a number of your other favorite records, with which you are very familiar, and listen to them as well. This will help you to develop a feel (auditory perspective) for the idiosyncrasies of that particular speaker and control room acoustic. It is very important when you start recording to have a good idea of what you are hearing, without having to outguess a strange monitor setup.

B. Use high quality studio microphones for all the instruments. If you just simply do this, you will be in excellent shape. An excellent unit is the NEUMANN TLM 170. Of course, similar Mic's, such as the NEUMANN U 87, are also up to the task. NEUMANN currently offers an economy microphone, the TLM 103, which would do an excellent job.

With this approach, you would establish a baseline, which would be excellent. Assuming that the studio acoustics are good (this is VERY important) you should be able to get the sound onto multi-track in a more then satisfactory manner. If the mixing engineer at the studio suggests some other special microphone that is supposed to be superior for a particular instrument, you should listen (this is where knowing the monitor is very important) and decide for yourself if this departure from the base line is an improvement.

C. Try to establish a very civilized, constructive relationship with the mixing engineer. When session time arrives, you will need all the cooperation that you can get.

D. When you mix down to the master, experiment with limiting and compression, equalization, and reverberation (echo) and time delay. Your ears are the final judge. If you work hard to learn about what you are doing, and keep your head screwed on straight (as Ray Dolby once advised me,) you should be able to come up with a satisfactory end product, assuming that the studio that you have selected is competent.

F. Another good thing is to become friends with mixing engineers by taking them out to lunch. Do you like haggis? Perhaps a fine meal of haggis will buy you some good ideas from an engineer friend. I am not a mixer. I am an equipment provider and fixer, not an equipment user. Further, a lot more words can be spoken at lunch then I can type.

G. Remember that the recording studio business is full of hype! There is a sucker born every minute. Be careful to make sure that things make good sense to you before buy a line of bull!

Good luck, both to you and to whoever pays the expenses for your project.

Mike McLean

By Eli (170.115.179.118 - 170.115.179.118) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 06:32 pm:

Mike , any feedback on my echo enquiry?

By M.McLeanTech (63.210.121.125 - 63.210.121.125) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 06:45 pm:

Eli,

Your letter about noise reduction and echo chambers requires a long answer. I answer the letters in the order received. You will have to wait for your turn.

Rest assured that I will answer you at that time.

As you can see from the answer to Gags letter (directly above) of April 28, the turn around time at the moment seems to be about three days. Your letter was received yesterday. You still have about two days to wait.

Mike McLean

By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 07:10 pm:

Mike,
Right....Let It Bleed was the album. One of the songs...You Can't Always Get What You Want.....you were applying this to my situation at the time of being separrated from my wife. I must say, you gave me something to think about.

The detail of your memory astounds me. OK so you don't have the exact location of the restaurant...but the Southwest corner????

Your father....I remember you telling me that he had fashioned the first pseudo stereo system by rigging two phonographs in tandem and having dual sets of certain records he enjoyed.I see the apple didn't fall very far from the tree.

Glad you got the chance to talk to Harry. The three of us will have to get together for lunch sometime soon. That would be " The Hot Set Up " for sure.

Humor....it's always been a part of your personality as far as I can tell.

No need to answer any of this Mike...I'm just babbeling. Take care of Bobby Eli and the rest of the guys waiting to hear from you. I'll more than likely be calling you again sometime soon anyway.

Ralph

By M.McLeanTech (63.210.121.125 - 63.210.121.125) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 07:19 pm:

Ralph,

It was THREE turntables, and now that you have brought that up, there is NO WAY that I won't answer your letter.

Mike

By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 07:38 pm:

Well since I forced your hand so to speak...this ought to be good folks! THREE TURNTABLES!!! Put me in line Mike.

By Eli (170.115.179.118 - 170.115.179.118) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 07:42 pm:

I'm waiting in line!!! No pressure intended.Just one tecchie to another.

By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 07:46 pm:

Hey Bobby,
How ya doin'?

By Eli (170.115.179.118 - 170.115.179.118) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 07:54 pm:

Hookin' it up man. Lookin' good!!
In the compiling mode. Good things to come, and a few surprises.
I wish I can re design the "Scrotum" I probably will improve it!! I'll add a bogus vacuum tube and some l.e.d's.

By M.McLeanTech (63.210.121.125 - 63.210.121.125) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 07:54 pm:

Ralph,

Three ACOUSTIC "soundbox" (cartridge) - arm - horn units with different size horns to smooth out the peaks and dips. No electronic amplifiers. The record albums were purchased in sets of three.

Best of all: The three turntables were driven (via a "locomotive drive," like you see on the driver wheels of on old steam locomotive) by a "wind up" spring powered motor, so Dad could play his music during a power black out. Three candles were sufficent to see the pressing stamper numbers, which served as sync marks.

A great feature of this system was the fact that every time you changed a record (every four minutes with 78's) you got a different set of small sync errors. Thus, the sound quality of the system was always a little different. This prevented the boredom that results in the urge to buy a new stereo component from time to time.

Mike

By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Wednesday, May 01, 2002 - 08:55 pm:

Thanks for reminding me of this great story Mike.

By M.McLeanTech (63.208.240.87 - 63.208.240.87) on Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 07:34 am:

Dear Graham,

Thank you for your letter of April 28, 2002 - 04:43 AM. I appreciate your interest in serious music, and I did indeed get your detailed information about the NAXOS recording of this work, which you feel is so worthwhile. I believe I sent a little note indicating that I am going to try to find this item at the library. I will let you know just as soon as I can find it, and listen.

Regarding what Robert Bateman said (I was the reason he quit Motown): He told me the same thing, right to my face, under very favorable and cordial circumstances, in my living room, about a year ago.

I am sure that his statement is true. Frankly, the time came when it was time for me to quit Motown (April, 1972,) and when I did; I had EXACTLY THE SAME FEELING as Robert did when he quit. In Robert's case, it was Berry, Robert, and I. In my case, it was Berry, me, and the late Guy Costa (who took my place.)

A person who is spoiled, and has a big ego, like me, has a difficult time adjusting to the conflict between his own dream of how it should all be, and the requirements of growing business organization.

Berry was very charming (intensely so) and he always was almost like a doting mother in his positive encouragement. The kind of thing that can happen when such a boss interacts with an inexperienced young person, such as I was, is illustrated by the following "almost a quote" example:

Mike: "Berry, what do you think I should do to try to help the company?"

Berry: "Well, we are building a great company here, and we need a sound foundation. That foundation is only going to exist if our people have the knowledge that they need to do their job. You should take care of your engineering department duties, but also, you should look within yourself and learn what you need to know to do a better job for the company. You should go to New York, and learn about the recording industry, so you will know the things that you need to know to do your job in the very best way."

What Berry intended was that I might hang around studios like Columbia Records, RCA, Atlantic, Bell Sound, Etc. and learn how things are done, in the record industry, like he had done when he met Harry Balk, and allowed Harry to become his mentor.

What I took Berry's words to mean was that I should dive deep into the esoteric technical side of sound engineering. I joined the Audio Engineering Society (AES) and soon found myself sitting at a typical exotic technical paper presentation session: The then utterly unheard of subject of polarized polyester foils that promised to allow the design of a condenser microphone that would not require a polarizing voltage. (This eventually led to cheap condenser microphones using the "electrete" principal, which have replaced the carbon granule microphones [Edison's invention] that were the backbone of Western Electric domestic telephone instruments during the golden age of government regulated telephony, the 1940's.)

I still can picture in my mind that paper session. G. M. Sessler and J. E. West, both of whom worked at Bell Laboratories, wrote the paper. I felt that I was doing my job to be in attendance at that paper presentation.

In the mean time, studio microphones continue to use an external polarizing voltage, to this day, because they work better that way. I was wasting Berry's travel expense money on things that had no relationship to the actual activities of the company, and I didn't even know it.

My reaction was to say "Gee! I didn't know that a condenser microphone even needed a polarizing voltage! Wow!" Off I went to find out what all this was about.

Berry paid me good money to find out what equipment was used to make records, and I spent the freedom, for which he paid, learning how to make microphones.

Without in any way intending to insult anyone, least of all Berry, I find the following ANALOGY very on point:

A very high minded pimp is concerned about the health of his whores, and his johns, so he hires a young nerd, who he feels is a genius, to research and find the very best condom on the market. He sends the nerd off to solve the problem, and five years later the nurd comes back with a doctorate in organic chemistry, and presents his doctoral thesis to the pimp. The thesis is on the subject of molecular analysis of rubber molecules.

Why did the nerd react that way? Very simple: He had grown up in a home where even the mention of the subject of "illegitimate" human sexual activity was considered vulgar, and was proscribed. The very idea that Mike McLean, who had the following background�

He had been raised in a home full of fine art objects, with a father who spent his Sunday listening to Beethoven string quartets.

He had a mother who was obsessed with poetry and fine literature.

�would take seriously a situation where a group of people who seemed:

Like a bunch of wild, ill mannered, addicted to every bad habit, group of people who were mooching money off of this bunch of prudes who were building this record company by acting like they were teaching Sunday School to a bunch of kids.

Like they needed to be made aware of Mozart. I remember admiring Popcorn Wylie, and wondering how he learned to make all those wonderful, skillful, and vulgar (boogie-woogie) sounds.

Ditto for Robert Bateman, in spades! (no pun intended)

I went off to study audio at the "Atomic Energy Commission" (the AES,) and, at the same time, was utterly seduced by the musical scene that I first encountered when I arrived in January, 1961.

All these strange looking people were presenting me with very inspiring music that I didn't understand. I needed the job, and I wanted to make the best of it. Typically, when I was presented with a race, that I had knew nothing about, in the neighborhood where I grew up, the consensus was "They certainly don't seem to have a very good command of the English language. How can they claim to be part of America?" I tended to assume that they were "low class," and didn't merit my serious effort to understand them. Especially when all I wanted to do was study "higher audio engineering." After all, my own mother had only had the right to vote from the time that she was a toddler. Second class citizenship was not such a strange thing. It was the superior people, like my father, who could introduce me to Ralph Vaughan Williams, that were the custodians of all that was truly valuable.

My attitude was, "If Berry wants me to invest in the basics, I better start where the basics start for me!" That meant investigation into Detroit kinds of things: How many foot-pounds of torque is proper for a tightening a fastener, and why? How do you figure the current carrying capability, in Amperes, of a piece of wire? How do you calculate the proper values for shock absorber damping, and spring stiffness, to obtain optimum suspension characteristics in a hot rod car?

It finally boiled down to "How do you start from scratch and build a successful factory to manufacture common wood lead pencils?

I could never answer any of these questions, but I did learn what a volume meter is all about, because, for some reason, this was a pet interest.

And I learned a few other things.

When Robert Bateman and I spent time together, recently, it was like we were long lost brothers that worshiped each other, while at the same time it was as if we were two scorpions trapped in a Mason Jar.

I feel that the defensive poison stingers on us both were the same: the ego of a spoiled child.

Sincerely,

Mike McLean

By acooolcat (61.222.95.58 - 61.222.95.58) on Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 08:31 am:

Good morning Mike,
Thanks for such a wonderful and entertaining response.
The Lark Ascending is my favorite Vaugn Williams piece. I ought to advise you that when you get hold of Symphony of Sorrowful Songs you should have a box of tissues handy before you play it as the title is something of an understatement. The composer, being Polish, wrote it with the Holocaust in mind.
I already realised that you knew how Robert Bateman felt at the time he quit Motown, so please don't think I was being mischievous. He also told me that he couldn't understand why The Miracles were getting hits and (his group) The Satintones weren't - he attributed it to the two groups being on the same Tamla label and radio DJs randomly picking The Miracles 45 instead of The Satintones one. He's since realised that The Miracles had excellent songs. What Robert also said was that the Motown label was effectivly created for The Satintones.
What I'd like to know is whether you worked for any other recording company in Detroit during the 60s - or were ever asked to. It really was a hotbed of recording activity back then.
Best wishes, Graham

By M.McLeanTech (209.245.79.19 - 209.245.79.19) on Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 09:54 am:

Graham,

When I arrived at Hitsville, I was a pauper. When I left, I took a 50% cut in pay to work for a high technology company so I could learn electronics more properly. That was TEKTRONIX.

This name (TEKTRONIX) may mean little to you, but it was, and is, to me, what Motown is to you.

After I had my fill of education, I moved to first: Gotham Audio Corporation, in New York City, and then, in 1974, to North Hollywood, to work at QUAD-EIGHT. After four years I joined the motion picture sound industry.

Every thing that has bothered me about life has been resolved by the various jobs that I have had in motion pictures: "Mike! You dream of how you didn't try hard enough for Motown!" You work here now, on this big picture, and we are down because the high speed projector is down.

Can't you please try to fix it?

"Tell that fool to press the "Bus 1" button!"

Thus, I decay, compared to the days when I was alive.

To answer your question: I never worked for any other recording company DURING THE 60'S and I was never asked to.

When I quit Motown, in April, 1972, I went to work for Richard Becker at Pac-3 in Dearborn. That is a fantastic story. I feel that it would be better if he told it his way.

I was forced out of Pac-3, so I went on to TEKTRONIX.

To answer your question, Graham: I worked only for Motown, PAC-3 and Tektronix, before I moved to New Your City to work at Gotham Audio Corp.

Richard Becker, with his PAC-3 operation, is the only other Detroit operation that suffered the problems of employing me.

I gotta go. Love, MIke

By Bob Olhsson (68.53.120.100 - 68.53.120.100) on Thursday, May 02, 2002 - 06:06 pm:

Mike, I think you made one of the most significant contributions to music production of anybody in the past 100 years. This, perhaps unintended, contribution was to encourage everybody at Motown to think outside the box creatively. By the time you left Motown, the whole industry was moving towards doing things the way Motown did rather than the way Bell Sound or Atlantic had. I realize that you often seemed to be in your own world but the fact remains that you applied an outstanding level of creativity to your work and everybody benefitted a great deal from that even if you think you may have done it for the wrong reasons.

Those of us who worked with you at Motown are extremely proud of you and of what you accomplished.

By cl (204.38.7.43 - 204.38.7.43) on Friday, May 03, 2002 - 12:21 am:

Mr.McLean, I posted on Sun about an analog recording I participated in. An LP mastered by Stan Ricker.

I would love to send you a copy ; for you to give an honest appraisal. I am categorically not attempting to solicit any thing other then the opinion of an expert. I do hope you will respond.

By Ralph (209.240.222.130 - 209.240.222.130) on Friday, May 03, 2002 - 01:32 am:

THIS THREAD IS CLOSED. PLEASE CONTINUE ON MIKE MCLEAN 3

By M.McLeanTech (64.236.243.243 - 64.236.243.243) on Friday, May 03, 2002 - 02:39 am:

NOTICE

THIS THREAD "MIKE MCLEAN 2", WHICH IS NOW CLOSED, IS A CONTINUATION OF A DISCUSSION THAT STARTED WITH THE THREAD "TECHNICAL DISCUSSION WITH MIKE MCLEAN"

TO CONTINUE ON WITH THE DISCUSSION, GO TO "MIKE MCLEAN 3"

TO READ THE DISCUSSION FROM THE BEGINNING, START AT THE TOP OF "TECHNICAL DISCUSSION WITH MIKE MCLEAN"

THE THREAD YOU ARE NOW IN IS CLOSED.