Representations of Sound: The role of the producer in the artistic formation of sound in popular musical forms.
Becky Shepherd
University of New South Wales, Australia
This paper will canvas a component of research I am currently undertaking in reference to the art of record production and the codification of a sound, more specifically the re-birth of “vintage/retro” music and how production plays an integral artistic role in the construction of this sound.
The research will focus on the development of nostalgic sounds reproduced in contemporary contexts, subsequently investigating what I have labelled the ‘reproduction of production’
I will focus on two salient points, from both a practical and a theoretical viewpoint. The first practical focus refers to the role of the studio producer in the re-creation of what is now the “vintage/retro” sound. The former term arrives as common dialogue from popular cultural publications such as Rolling Stone, MOJO, NME and Q magazines. It is used to describe and/or represent music of a recognisably early derivation of sound. At this point it becomes necessary to investigate the extent to which the popularity of the vintage/retro sound is stifling, or conversely facilitating creativity in the realm of popular music and the recording studio as a creative space.
The second theoretical component of this discussion requires an acknowledgment and subsequent deconstruction of how and why the overt demonstration of the “vintage/retro” sound has come to gain popularity within a contemporary context, and how this music and the role of the producer works within a criterion of authenticity and artistic validity in what is often considered to be a post-modern cultural domain, or for those who reject the later, the ‘now’.
As a case study I’ll focus on the resurgence of 70s rock within the Australian music industry. In the last decade there have been a string of Australian bands dedicated to the reproduction of the 70s rock sound. Names include JET, The Vines and Wolfmother. It is the latter I wish to discuss specifically. I make particular reference to this group and ‘the reproduction of production’. While this discussion has yet to be furthered in the realm of accurate field research I will present a thorough listening analysis that I hope to confirm through the channels of fieldwork to be conducted during the remainder of 2006.
At this point it will prove useful to actually hear the music in question. After this point, our discussion can begin to focus on aspects of production in reference to this recording and earlier recordings to which it harks back, both unashamedly and in my opinion, quite cleverly.
PLAY DIMENSION – WOLFMOTHER
While it appears obvious the connection between this particular sound and sounds of 1970s rock, it is the production procedures involved and the theoretical underpinning throughout the re-creation of this sound that most concern us in the context of today’s discussion.
It can be suggested and quite obviously so, that this band from Sydney Australia sound a heck of lot like Led Zeppelin and Black Sabbath primarily. The popular music press have had a field day with this analogy but as is commonplace, there is seldom any more to their observations than one simple comment that of course appears obvious from the most rudimentary listening of the music generally.
However, it is of course, not enough to assume something sounds a heck of lot like something else without investigating the intricacies of this sound both at its point of conception and its point of reception within a larger popular cultural domain.
While it is impossible to canvas all aspects of the recording process involved, due to the time constraints today particularly, I have chosen to provide a listening analysis, as explained earlier, that I hope to confirm through extended field research throughout the remainder of this year and my candidature working on this project.
I want to break this recording into a few different components, that to me seem particularly useful ways of approaching a listening analysis of this sound generally. The production credit for this album belongs to Dave Sardy, and the engineering to Ryan Castle. The album was recorded, mixed and mastered at three different locations across the United States, Sound City in L.A. Sunset Sound Factory in California and The Pass.
The first obvious point of recognition on this recording is the treatment of the voice.
It is unashamedly noteworthy that Andrew Stockdale, lead vocalist for Wolfmother has been produced to sound as though he was recorded circa 1975, re-creating the sound of someone like Robert Plant of Led Zeppelin fame. It appears the Wolfmother vocal has been treated to a similar if not almost identical signal chain to that which was used in the tracking of Plant’s voice particularly circa Led Zeppelin III. This signal chain consists of what sounds like the use of a dynamic microphone fed through overdriven pre-amp chains, into an opto compressor. Firstly, the use of a dynamic microphone assists in the crisp and aggressive top end of the Wolfmother vocal, and the overdriven pre-amps aid the particular tone and partly contribute to the saturated sound coming from the punchy delivery. The compressor is limiting the dynamic range coupled with tape saturation creating further compression/limiting of the overall vocal sound. The vocal is placed at the forefront of the mix allowing its presence and ambience to be heard as one of the focal points of the sound. This appears to be a noted feature of the retro/vintage sound; a reverb drenched vocal situated at the forefront of an overall mix and sound.
The recording of Robert Plant’s vocal, produced by Jimmy Page on Led Zeppelin’s material possessed a noticeably natural room reverb that was achieved by recording the voice in a naturally reverberant space. It has been noted that Plant’s vocal were often run through something resembling a Shure Unidone microphone, not dissimilar to the dynamic SM58 used on Wolfmother recordings. Plant’s vocal was always situated centre of the final mix and subsequently appeared as a feature of the ‘large’ middle strength recordings of Led Zeppelin. As to the vocal techniques used by both Stockdale and Plant, while these are recognisably similar and noteworthy, they are not immediate concerns of a focus on production necessarily.
The second faction of the Wolfmother recording concerns the overall tracking and mix of the band specifically.
It appears that the band have been tracked live to tape, mixed in mono, the actual tracking of the live sessions taking minimal completion time. This mono procedure adds to the strength and bombasity of the rhythm section of the sound. Tape saturation, once considered a mistake of sorts, is now heard as a characteristic of a recognised vintage type appeal. Predominately the initial recording of the band appears to be in the centre of the stereo picture, while guitar overdubs add a further spaciousness by making use of the width of the stereo picture i.e., stereo panning. Once the track has then been mixed down to a two track or stereo mix, compression has been used overall. This creates spaciousness in the sound and yet a ‘big’ punchy presence for the overall rhythm section of the riff driven sound of Wolfmother generally, again not unlike the way Jimmy Page chose to produce the Led Zeppelin sound in the 1970s.
Led Zeppelin recordings are often praised for their spaciousness and ambience. Of course ambience was created as a direct result of the use of space in Zeppelin’s sound. Page would often use smaller amplifiers, miked at a distance to emphasis depth and tone in Zeppelin’s sound. Like the Wolfmother recordings Page’s production meant the rhythm section and lead vocal of the music was always placed centre or middle and in this way he chose to cleverly overdub guitar tracks in the stereo picture post initial live tracking. The prominence and bombasity of the drums is another feature of Zeppelin’s sonic appeal, and again this was largely a result of Page’s innovative and experimental approaches to recording the drum kit in terms of mic choice and placement, space allocation and mix placement. As the famous recount goes, Page recorded John Bonham’s drum kit for both Kashmir from within a hallway. The mic placed a significant distance from the kit. This created a ‘big’ spaciousness to the sound of the drums and subsequently came to characterise Zeppelin’s monstrous rhythm section sound. While Dave Sardy, Ryan Castle and Wolfmother have not employed the same techniques in the studio, in terms of experimentation, they have worked with available equipment to emulate this sound, recording instruments in naturally reverberated spaces adding significant depth and vastness to the mix as a whole.
Interestingly, one particularly noteworthy difference between a modern and a vintage recording is the treatment of bass frequencies. This is obvious to hear, and additionally obvious to understand. Our ability to reproduce bass frequencies is far more developed nowadays with hi-fi digital equipment. If one removes and/or at best ‘tweaks’ the bass frequencies of the Wolfmother recording for example, they are left with something that is sonically more akin to a 1970s production. Subsequently, the treatment of bass frequencies on this recording and most modern studio productions is what most recognisably situates this music within a contemporary context.
Mind’s Eye, the first released single for the group, demonstrates these same ‘production markers’ if you will. With the addition of the Hammond organ and the closely miked Lesley speaker, as you will hear, this track contains a similar amount of tape saturation, double tracked guitars spread across the stereo picture, opto compression, emphasising the bombasity of the sound, and, of course that now characteristic Stockdale vocal, recorded in a reverb drenched space through a dynamic microphone. This treatment could almost be considered ‘the vintage signal chain’, as we hear a similar approach from other Australian bands of this vein such as JET and The Vines’. The main difference between this track, Mind’s Eye and Dimension, the track we heard earlier, is the narrow stereo picture, which is instantly recognisable. This particular track has been additionally compressed so as to be best represented within the ‘singles’ market. This production approach is not uncommon for the market savvy producer and/or engineer.
Play Mind’s Eye – Wolfmother
We can now move to a discussion of the theoretical considerations of this approach to production, the role of the producer and the vintage sound generally. It would appear nowadays that the role of the studio producer of a vintage sound becomes akin to a modern interpreter of sorts. I refer now to a paper written by David Carter, presented at last years’ ARP conference. This paper outlines the responsibility of a producer across a continuum of what is represented as production practice. This continuum works from left to right, stating documentation at the far left, collaboration in the middle and composition at the far right. David Carter states that the producer role is essentially a combination of all three domains. I would add that the producer of the vintage sound specifically, is one of documentation and not purely a documentation of a musical event as Carter explains, but as a documentarian of history as a past style. The producer works as a gateway to the past.
In reference to the vintage sound, more so than a musician, a producer/ engineer is particularly offae with the manifestation of sound, be that the sound of varying genres and/or the sound of varying time periods. Interestingly, most producers of the vintage/retro sound are contemporary producers who have worked with a vast range of modern artists, creating predominately ‘modern’ sounds. Dave Sardy, for example is often, most notably associated with his work on Marilyn Manson recordings and the sound of Slayer. The objective appears to be - ‘get the sounds right, work with them a little and create something that sounds contemporary but unashamedly vintage to even the amateur listener’. If this is in fact the case within the popularity of the vintage sound, with genres such as Britpop, Americana and the Detroit sound with the likes of The White Strips for example, then is what we’re beginning to look at creativity, or merely appropriation within a new context, and/or can this music be both? There are several ways one can look at this situation and subsequently several different opinions that can eventuate as a result.
‘Sound’ is no longer a superfluous element of music; this is not at all a new realization. The beginning of this concept can be recognise during the 1960s and 70s or as I have loosely titled this time, ‘the period of technological innovation’. During this time most recognisably, sound became as important or noteworthy an aspect of a musical text as the more fundamental elements of rhythm, melody and harmony both in terms of how an instrument was used and how it was recorded in the studio.
As Paul Theberge writes,
“The various means by which musicians have coaxed new and unorthodox sounds from an instrument such as the electric guitar – the ‘bottle neck’ slide technique, B.B. King’s sustained vibrato and trill, Stanley Jordan’s right hand finger tapping, Jimi Hendrix’s use of feedback and other techniques – demonstrate that traditional instrument technologies can sometimes be little more than a field of possibility within which the innovative musician chooses to operate. The particular ‘sound’ produced in such instances is as intimately tied to personal style and technique as it is to the characteristic of the instrument’s sound producing mechanism” (187).
I would add to this, that the studio producer opens a field of possibility within which the musician chooses to operate. Sound produced in this instance is as intimately tied to musical expression and notions of genre and/or style codes, as it is to the sound producing medium and or technical content of the music as text. Wolfmother are predominately recognised and subsequently popularised for ‘sonic’ qualities often described as huge, ethereal, and spacious, as opposed to anything specifically musical in the way of harmony, melody and rhythm. This is not to say however that Wolfmother do not demonstrate these characteristics, in fact they do quite competently and at times spectacularly. However, the music is first and foremost recognised and in most cases valorised for reasons relating to sonic material as opposed to musical technique and application.
This moves us to the question of how and why this vintage revival is popularised within contemporary society. If one considers contemporary popular culture to exhibit characteristics of postmodernity then one can more comfortably accept this re-birth of vintage production as a signifier of pastiche, irony and nostalgia – common characteristics of postmodern ideology and style.
However, post-modernism is a loose and at best multifaceted term, and it is problematic for many who deal with its conceptualisation and its subsequent implications within both academia and the wider poplar cultural domain. Frederick Jameson, a noted theorist on the subject of postmodernism, claims that postmodernism is the state of late capitalism and the decline of national and individual identity. He states that
"in a world in which stylistic innovation is no longer possible, all that is left is to imitate dead styles, to speak through the masks and with the voices of the styles in the imaginary museum" (Jameson).
The imaginary museum Jameson refers to in this case could be associated with the canon of rock music and the reproduction of history which he explains was and is, a style in itself. In this way Jameson would view the recreation of vintage music as a negative characteristic demonstrating the decline of innovation and creativity within the postmodernism context.
On the contrary much of the conceptual understanding of postmodernism is the embrace of pastiche, irony and randomness. It is the need to create coherent aesthetic value from artefacts and patterns within society as a whole, and within this creation comes works of art as social commentary. If one interprets postmodernism in this way and history becomes a style in itself, represented through nostalgic images of pop culture of the past, then it becomes easy to understand how and why the re-birth of something like the vintage sound is an honest portrayal of social consciousness and authenticity within a contemporary context.
If one does not adhere to notions of postmodernity, as many do not, I myself am particularly sceptical, then this situation become a possible dilemma, one in which this music comes to be viewed as regurgitated material with little artistic relevance and value. Theordore Adorno is an advocate of this line of thought, not only does Adorno view all styles of popular music as renegade and negative influences on society, in his view the reinvention of a popular style is another rung further down the ladder of artistic value. Similarly, the ‘pop eats itself’ mantra of the 1980s could well be transferable to the world of rock which appears at times to be less innovative than pop music. This is of course a result of rock’s general conservatism and allegiance to the canon.
Whatever the perspective, one’s outlook of the vintage sound and its place within popular society is closely linked to one’s opinion of the cultural climate of the 21st century.
The supposed fragmented cultures of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, embrace elements of pastiche and irony while seeming to cling to notions of nostalgia. In the case of rock music this nostalgia is explicitly tied to the notion of a canon of ‘valuable’ music - Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin. In this way music aficionados (still those largely associated with rock music as opposed to pop music), assign authenticity and artistic value to the criterion, which has long been established in relation to the traditional canon. Wolfmother are appropriators of a nostalgic sound. They recreate 70s rock music within a twenty-first century context. It is this association or notion of a post-modern context that appears to validate their authenticity within the wider popular cultural domain. They are, as Richard Middleton explains contextualising their music as cultural expression, “since honesty (truth to a cultural experience) becomes the validating criterion of musical value (Middleton 1990, 127). For this reason these same popular cultural groups assign artistic value to the music of Wolfmother for example, because it appropriates unashamedly and accurately the music of the canon.
We could suggest at this point that the producer appears to be at the centre of an argument surrounding authenticity and representation. While an artist may be the creator or spokesperson of a cultural climate as we have before discussed, the producer becomes the facilitator of the cultural climate, orchestrating sounds that provide a landscape or commentary of musical expression. In this way it could be suggested that a producer knows what is considered an authentic representation of a particular genre, a particular time period and a particular audience. Producers create generic codes that become characteristic markers for musical styles. In reference to this point, it becomes necessary to investigate a type of typography of referents in relation to the production of rock music. To what extent a producer adheres to these accepted conventions and/or referents is a matter for further research. In the twenty-first century can we still assign ‘production markers/referents’ to the recording of rock music, or has popular music in its various permutations become so pastiched that the production practices are becoming as hybridised and elusive as the musical elements of the text, the represented image of the musician and the reception of the cultural populace?
In reference to these codified practices and/or referents, should we consider the work of Wolfmother for example to be of lesser significance or artistic value generally. Well this is multifaceted query of course. No we cannot valorise a band like Wolfmother to the heights of brilliance and/or innovation, in reference to any vintage recreation, surely allegiance and artistic validity in this case first and foremost lies with the sounds from which the new music has originated However, despite the fact that there appears to be particular genre codes within which a producer works, particularly in reference to the vintage sound, this work should not, by association be considered ‘less creative’ or stifled necessarily. While Australia’s Wolfmother have unashamedly appropriated a sound from the past they have worked to produce this sound within a modern context. In this way, is the direct reproduction of a sound in a new context a creative endeavour? As we have previously mentioned, this music is a hybrid production, loaded with stylistic codes of 1970s rock and yet also contemporary codes that situate the music within a 21st century context. In this way the vintage sound is self-confessing, it makes no bones about its position within the pop/rock domain and subsequently its concern is an endeavour to produce a brand of nostalgia within a new and contemporary context, adding to the irony and pastiche of popular cultural expression as art within contemporary society.
Interestingly while production codes may exist and have done so since recording came to useful and valued prominence, producers, studio engineers and musicians alike constantly challenge these codes. Particularly in the mid-late twentieth century and into the twenty-first, these codes appear to be significantly less fixed. This is evident in the myriad of cross genre styles of this period; alternative rock, country rock, acid rock and cock rock, to name only a few. In this instance pre-existing codes and/or referents are now working in a more collaborative sense creating greater hybridity in sound across the popular music domain.
It is these referents that will be further explored alongside other silent points of focus in reference to record production, the genre of rock music and the twenty- first century throughout my current research project. The extent to which a producer adheres to these codes and/or referents, and the impact these practices have on creativity within popular culture and the recording studio is an interesting and relevant consideration for further research. The ‘vintage/retro’ sound is a product of the use of production codes, but perhaps within a contemporary musical domain the vintage sound is one of the only manifestations of sound directly and unashamedly adhering to conventions of tradition, wearing the production codes or referents of the past on their shirt sleeves, rather than creating a patchwork of sounds and approaches that are becoming increasingly representative of the musical pastiche of the twenty-first century.