Analog Rejuvenation: The Joy Of Getting Back To Basics
What is the true essence of what we’re doing?
+- Print Email Share Comments (8) RSS RSS

A few years ago, I was fortunate in joining the sound team for noted country artist Trisha Yearwood as front-of-house engineer, and it was a rejuvenating experience for me as a mixer, to say the least.

In an audio world where technology (in general) and the digital domain (specifically) seem to reign supreme, the idea of using mostly analog gear with an A-List artist might sound downright outdated and ridiculous. Yet that’s exactly the road we took with Trisha.

To put this in perspective, think about how often we use “technology” to “enhance” a performance. It becomes a whole different ballgame, however, when an artist can actually perform live at a high level.

And this has got me thinking: Is it time to take stop being so concerned with new technology and get back to basics? What is the true essence of what we’re doing?

First, we started at the source - Trisha’s vocal microphone. It was an “old fashioned” Shure SM58. Not a Beta, not an 87, not an “A” or a “C” – nope, an SM58. (Not that there’s a thing at all wrong with those other fine models, but this is what worked for Trisha.)

Wireless? Absolutely not! (Sorry to blaspheme…) But we just connected that mic with an “Average Joe” 50-foot mic cable, which ran right to a splitter (or console in some cases).

The snake fed one of my all-time analog favorites, a Midas Heritage 3000 console, but you don’t need one of these to get great sound. I’m also partial to the smaller Midas Venice. To each his own.

Here, we let the mic preamp do the hard work, because, well, that’s what it was designed to do! We didn’t run the faders at +10 and the VCAs or subgroups at +10 just because the input might be weak.

Rather, we grabbed some more gain if it’s needed. (Another option would be to tell the singer about it, but that certainly was not a problem in our case.)

While one of my pet peeves is a weak vocal, the other is over-equalization. Too many people mixing these days are “over EQ-ing” everything on the console, and it’s time to stop! (Sorry, rant off.)


Source: Live Sound International

Discover the art of sound through insightful and in-depth coverage of the people, technologies and ideas that are transforming the professional live audio world.
Subscribe today!
Comments (8) Most recent displayed first | All comments in chronological order
Posted by brad000143  on  10/20/11  at  12:45 AM
Information system degree programs focus on applying computers to business problems. The curriculum includes course work in business, accounting, computer programming, communications, 646-230 | 1Y0-A05 | 000-153 | 1z0-053 | 650-369 | 650-378 | EVP-100 | HP0-J45 |
Posted by Wayne Pauley  on  10/12/11  at  08:53 AM
Hey Guys,

Thanks for taking the time to read this article! I actually wrote this about 6 or 7 years ago (before the digital stronghold of today) and didn't know it had been reprinted until very recently. It's funny how some things are quite different, and yet the simplicity of just "Listening" is still very much the same. I have since gone on to mix several hundred shows on a digital desk (against my better judgement, but it's what the gig required) and have learned quite a bit more about the differences and why. But in the end, it all still comes down to ONE thing ....... how's it sound ?

Thanks again and Much Love ...

Wayne

me@waynepauley.com

Posted by Mike Smith  on  09/26/11  at  11:04 AM
Great article. Been working in this field for over 25 years and one of the most difficult things I have to deal with in the younger guys is to get them to take the headphones off and really listen to the product they are putting out to the audience. I have resisted the digital equipment for our company and plan to do so as long as good analog gear is available.
Posted by Jim Richards  on  09/24/11  at  10:52 PM
Great article!! I've always said you don't necessarily need the latest and greatest to make it sound good. The technology is a great assist and it's great to have when something's headed the way of the porcelain throne in a hurry, but I've seen too many guys 'mixing with their eyes' and not their ears.

Take it back to the senses that matter and quit leaning on the toys......

Posted by Larry Kohlruss  on  09/23/11  at  02:40 PM
I don't have the exp. most of you on here will have, but what I do have is VERY good ears. And unfortunately, that's a problem. I am pickier than ANY one I know when it comes to sound. I "LOVE" music to sound natural, but louder. I like analog. I don't mind that little bit of high end hiss, if it allows me to hear a clean "s" sound in a song, or the very high tones of the cymbals. I like a "clean" bass. Like a quality stand up. I've trained in 2 studios and mixed for a few singles and groups. I prefer mixing for singles or small groups, on a smaller system. Less electronics, cleaner pure sound. Unfortunately, I can hear tones way above what most can, (dog whistles, computer screens etc) and the lows that usually only blind people can hear. ( half feel, half hear),so it makes mixing for public a little tough, as I forget the average listener can't hear it. And fortunately for me, analog systems don't produce as many of those highs. The compensated part of the highs that kind of swirl around. (I was told a tech. name for it, but that was long ago). I have gone to lots of concerts and bar shows, and pretty much cringe every time. BUT, I went to a FREE concert by Michelle Wright here in Edmonton. Out-door small stage. Best live sound I've heard in a long time. I like working as a team. One person to handle the technical stuff like compressing, limiting, noise gates, wires, and then my ears. I run a small, very simple system in a bar, for Karaoke. We are the No.# 1 Karaoke bar in the city. One of the main reasons,.... SOUND. I listen and ride the faders constantly. My fingers almost work on their own. It's VERY rare that I get sound complaints. I do home recording on my laptop, and can appreciate what it can do. But, I still prefer a clean acoustic song. So, simple works well for me.

+ View all comments on this article

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.