Recording 10,000 Days article

[Bartok]

Hopefully not a repost:

Recording Tools "10,000 Days Album-Mixing Tool's 10,000 Days record

They used some sexy gear. The Eggleston Works monitors are about £72K
5 amps at once! Without EQ The guy sounds like a bad ass engineer.

 

[Thomas]

The article is almost a year old. Good read nonetheless.

 

[huber]

Thanks that was a good read.

 

[Drew]

Barresi used minimal processing when recording. “I tried to get by with as little as possible,” he says. “There was no EQ on guitar. There was really no EQ on the bass either. I EQ'd a little bit on the vocal. But if there was an effect on the vocal, then it would be drastic EQ'ing. I used a slight bit of EQ on drums, but I mainly got the drum sound by changing mics out: Like if I needed a little top end, I'd find a brighter mic. If I needed more bottom, I'd try a bigger diaphragm mic.

I would pay good money to know if that was tracking or mixing.

 

[Bartok]

As in whether he EQ'd during tracking or mixing?

 

[Rick]

That's a cool article.

 

[TheReal7]

I would pay good money to know if that was tracking or mixing.

My guess is both. Engineers on his level with his gear...don't need EQs LOL

 

[Drew]

As in whether he EQ'd during tracking or mixing?

Well, more if no EQ was used in tracking AND mixing, or if he just didn't use Q while tracking.

I'd be shocked if it was the former, but, well, it's possible...

 

[Bartok]

I'd agree with TheReal7 then, I think when he says 'no EQ' he means no EQ. I think Steve Albini takes a similar approach (though I'm not sure specifically how much he does or doesn't EQ) relying on his knowledge of mic's and gear in general to put together a 'natural' EQ chain, rather than using an 'artificial' EQ. Takes some serious gear knowledge though! And a hefty recording budget . Mind you, seems to have paid off- 10,000 Days sounds fantastic.

 

[eleven59]

There was definitely EQ during mix on that album. You can't do it without it and have it sound that good.

 

[Bartok]

Course you can! It takes a lot of planning and a lot of gear but there is no reason why it can't be done without EQ.

 

[eleven59]

Course you can! It takes a lot of planning and a lot of gear but there is no reason why it can't be done without EQ.

Alright, correction: you can do it without EQ in mixing if you use a crapload of EQ (or mics with a built in EQ curve) before it hits the console in the first place. But then you have to get it right the first time. Obviously this guy does cause he's been doing it for years, but I'd hardly recommend it as a practice for everyone to use, you'll just end up with a lot of really terrible sounding recordings until you come across another guy who really knows what he's doing.

 

[skattabrain]

i just know that 10,000 days is the benchmark as far as i'm concerned. it's a masterpiece. the production is second to none, it's the whole package ... incredible song writing, incredible performances, incredible production. it's almost so good that "if you can't appreciate it ... then i question your taste". it's just so "clean" sounding ... and certainly not overcompressed, which i hope inspires other bands and labels to not demand "dynamics-deprived, loudness/dick measuring contest loud" levels.

i wonder what the budget was for that album.

side note: does adam jones use a sustainer at all? he has this control over feedback ... it's like he's calling it from his amps at will. you know what i mean? that ringing out into very controlled squeals?

 

[Bartok]

side note: does adam jones use a sustainer at all? he has this control over feedback ... it's like he's calling it from his amps at will. you know what i mean? that ringing out into very controlled squeals?

Could be he just plays very loud- 3 amps + cabs isn't going to quiet. Wkikpedia says he isn't that into pedals

 

[Thomas]

i just know that 10,000 days is the benchmark as far as i'm concerned. it's a masterpiece. the production is second to none, it's the whole package ... incredible song writing, incredible performances, incredible production. it's almost so good that "if you can't appreciate it ... then i question your taste". it's just so "clean" sounding ... and certainly not overcompressed, which i hope inspires other bands and labels to not demand "dynamics-deprived, loudness/dick measuring contest loud" levels.

I still prefer the production of Lateralus. It just sounds perfect on so many levels and I bet it was cheaper, too. If I'll ever need any reference for recording or mixing, Lateralus will be a first choice.

Regarding Adam's equipment, this might be helpful: guitargeek | adam jones of tool
The diagram is from 2001, so it may not be very accurate, but notice the EQ. I vaguely recall reading an interview ages ago where he said he boosted the high frequencies, but don't quote me on this.

 

[skattabrain]

yeah, seen all those ... i just love his ability to summon perfect feedback

 

[oompa]

very good read, alltho i might differ from you all in opinion on 10k, i really think the album is a four song album with ~20mins of filler, and for the first time in tool-history, the fillers did nothing for me. i dont really think the sound is any special either. good, sure, but not special.

lateralus > aenima > undertow > 10k > opiate + the rest, but those four-five actual songs are really top knotch good tool music.

 

[Drew]

very good read, alltho i might differ from you all in opinion on 10k, i really think the album is a four song album with ~20mins of filler, and for the first time in tool-history, the fillers did nothing for me. i dont really think the sound is any special either. good, sure, but not special.

lateralus > aenima > undertow > 10k > opiate + the rest, but those four-five actual songs are really top knotch good tool music.

I'd put 10,000 Days after AEnima, myself, but in general I agree.

The thing with this album, though, is you can;t think of it in terms of individual tracks. Think of it as 75 minutes of music that ebbs and flows rather than as a collection of songs, and it makes a lot more sense.

Honestly, if Tool were to do another album, I kind of hope that they record it as a single track. Or, if they DO break it down into tracks, then I hope it's a steady stream of sound from track to track, with very little that can be broken down into "songs" as such. It's the direction they seem to be heading in, and I'd love to see them embrace it entirely.

 

[eleven59]

I'd put 10,000 Days after AEnima, myself, but in general I agree.

The thing with this album, though, is you can;t think of it in terms of individual tracks. Think of it as 75 minutes of music that ebbs and flows rather than as a collection of songs, and it makes a lot more sense.

Honestly, if Tool were to do another album, I kind of hope that they record it as a single track. Or, if they DO break it down into tracks, then I hope it's a steady stream of sound from track to track, with very little that can be broken down into "songs" as such. It's the direction they seem to be heading in, and I'd love to see them embrace it entirely.

Agreed fully, that would be amazing. They're already getting fully into soundscapes, it'd be cool to see them blend the album completely. Though they're also still amazing at writing killer songs ("Right In Two" almost completely smokes anything they've done previously as far as brilliant songwriting, IMHO).

 

[bulb]

i guess im the only one here who thought the prodcution was horrid on that album eh?