Page 2 of 2
Posted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 12:26 am
by Tone
right, right and right!
the proof is if u listen to one of his beat tapes (he was notorious for soliciating theese to industry circles) they are easy to find on the net. Thoose tracks/grooves are straight mixed from whatever he used into pro tools to add a "deez nuts" voicover track so noone took his shit without perrmission. then bounced to disk (he prob was techy enough to throw a limiter and such) and thats it. So the mixes on theese are much harsher, sometimes clipping bass. The man WAS a genius but he still just turned eq's up like me and you when he wanted more base
dillas playlist
Posted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:41 am
by donmagicwand
brilliant topic, i've been thinking about for a while now.
Apart from his skills, we have to look at where dilla got his samples from and what he listened to. Donuts was based on his library of stuff he treasured. the man listened to and enjoyed a vast amount of music across all genres from galt macdermot's golden apples (the guy responsible for the musical hair), the sylvers (one can win), the understandables, 10cc, kc and the sunshine band, janet jackson, smokey robinson and many more. its this open minded listening and genuine appreciation for all music that is a big part of his genius.
Posted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 5:06 pm
by v00d00ppl
illtrooper wrote:Jay Dee, what a guy. Unfortunately it took his absence to get people on his jock like they are now...
I only have one disagreement:
"A lot of the time during the 70s they really didn't care about their levels"
I actually think the 70s are the best decade for recording quality: Analog studios and boards, unprecedented money going towards recording and musicians, and engineers with experience creating recordings for radio, home, and clubs. Of course, all of this right before the 80s and the digital, home and project studio innovations...
But that's just my opinion.
As for the bassline question, the question about 'compression':
It's easy to listen to donuts, wonder about the production, hear it was from a powerbook and a portable turntable, and think "how is it so fat?"
Well, several factors:
1. The man was very good at what he did and had a lot of experience.
2. Many of the sounds are sampled from records, so he's getting the benefit of a mastered, properly compressed, and well-recorded sound from another decade, when studios gave things a 'sound,' be it from the board, the room, or the engineer and what type of pre-amp or outboard gear (compressors, reverb, etc.) was used.
3. Unlike many of our own home projects, much of what you hear from professionals with a label behind them is MIXED and MASTERED by a professional that focuses on the final audio quality, and has the proper experience and knowledge of how to take a good recording and make it sound as good as it possibly can. That is, if you are ever able to hear a song before it's properly mixed and mastered, you might be surprised to find that it's not that much more silky, popping, smooth, or fat than something you did yourself at home.
It's really worth looking into if you really feel your project needs to 'go there.' Keep all of your stuff multitracked if you can, so it can be mixed by someone if you feel you can't handle it yourself. It's OK, you're not surrendering any 'creative' monopoly if you don't want to, and you have a LOT to gain by having someone more experienced than yourself help if you feel you aren't getting enough 'oomph' from the bass or 'spray' from the highs.
So, it's almost a sure bet that Wolf/Stone's Throw took the songs to get them mixed and mastered to give them a final polish before you heard them. It can be different for each project, but I bet that if you look at the credits on ST records, you might see some consistant names, as people generally like to build relationships and understandings with studios and engineers, to get that sound they're looking for, that is, EQd and compressed/limited for maximizing the sonic quality. Sometimes you can do this sort of thing at home, sometimes with the exact same plug-ins the professionals use, but you still might be missing the key element: the mixing engineer's experience and knowledge.
This is a great thread, good read fellas. Thanks for the links and info.
ooops i miswrote the 70s remarka bit......what i meant to say was certain artists didn't care about ttheir levelsdue to lack of gear just so they can have a brighter sound.............for example look at any artist during that ime on the studio ne catalog....then of course you can check out smaller funk bands who really were hitting yello to orange to the red on the levels.........but it all mattered on the studio../.......
so i would also like to say the late 60s was also a good time for analog warmth.........the 70s did have uch a strong sense of production.....analyze a couple of disco records and listen to it closely.....hhmmmmm makes you realise why so many people sample from disco.
can we bump this thread just a little bitlonger? good post folks
Posted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:40 pm
by grainshifter
thanks for all the insight and info...i'm sure everyone who has browsed this thread has learned something.
not just about dilla but music production in general
hell yeah!
Posted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:19 pm
by wax115
u bet!
good thread...