[Dixielandjazz] Recording Jazz

[James Kashishian]

     Pat Cooke wrote:
    That's the way it's done now.  You don't need complete isolation,
usually a Plexiglas shield in front of the drums that's a little higher
than
the tallest cymbal will usually suffice.  They are even using the
shields .  in
clubs now so the sound man can balance things easier. (Please don't tell
me
about sound men...I know!)
     Your band may be acoustic, but you still have to play into
microphones
in order to record.  The shield is to keep as much drums as possible out
of
the other players' mikes.  The drums are miked separately.  The guys in
the
studio can still hear him but it allows a better balance in the final
mix.

****************************************************************

Pat, I've left your whole message intact (which is not my usual form),
only to be able to express that it is completely, entirely wrong!  Don't
get your back up, Pat.  I'm not calling you a fool, merely saying you've
got it all wrong.

Firstly, it's not that "that's the way it's done now", that's the way
they've been doing it since multitrack recording came into style (early
70's).  Clinical is the key word to this type of recording.

Your second point is about the "sound man balancing things easier".  For
an experienced drummer, he should get the balance of his drum set
himself, in his style of playing, just as a band should do amongst all
of its members.  Listening is the key word, something that a lot of
so-called balancing engineers aren't all that good at, and it's
something most of us musicians do quite well.  Nope, to overhead mikes
and a bass drum mike is plenty for most occasions.  And, I darn well
want to feel my pant legs blowing from the wind that pumps outa that
little whole in the front skin of the bass drum when he kicks that baby.
Hit me with your rhythm stick!   :>

On the subject of live mixing, I often prefer one mike between the
trumpet and trombone, that way Pepe & myself can do our own mix, at
will.  We move away or close in on the mike depending on the moment
desired in the song.  If you leave that up to a mixing engineer, he's
likely to raise or lower you to HIS desire.  And, of course, since
they're feeding you an on-stage monitor mix, you have no idea what the
audience is hearing.  Nope, if I don't know the guy, and suspect there
may be problems, give me one mike for the two of us.  I can even use
that mike for vocals....just set the volume for the voice, and the brass
just won't go in so close to the mike, because it's set higher than
normal.

I certainly don't wish to keep the drums out of my mike, as you state
thirdly.  Maybe the mixing engineer would like that, as it makes his job
much easier.  Nevertheless, the whole reason of recording music is to
hear what is played, and you can never, ever just hear the drum set on
his own on stage (accept in a solo, and even then there are resonant
sounds in the strings of the piano...the sound of the room, etc.) and I
want to hear the recording as the music was played.

Ok, for these modern groups, it's groovy to have a section of the song
where all you hear is the lead voice.  We know he was singing  to the
backing tracks in his earphones, but due to fantastic noise gates, etc.,
all you hear on the recording is this guy's voice.  (Don't believe they
can keep the key, the beat so well all on their own!!)  Great effect,
fine!  Not usually a part of our Dixieland gig, though.  So, I don't
need that kind of stuff on my recordings.  

Nope, acoustic is acoustic.  Alright, try to keep more bass in the bass
mike than in the drum mikes, or piano mikes, but if there's some
bleeding, no sweat. 

I want my guys close to me.  We're a cozy group!   :>

Jim
p.s., please accept that none of this is a personal attack on you, Pat.
It's merely an attack on this particular type of recording mentality.
I've got the accreditation, both as a session musician & engineer, to
have these opinions.