THE GREAT JWFAN STUDIO DEBATE.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,508]

Blood's comments on THE HOBBIT recordings, got me thinking.

What studios really get the best out of an orchestra, or is the sound of a score determined in its remixing?

Does it depend on the talents of the engineer, or the quality of the mixing-desk?

Ideas, anyone?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I really don't think it's something you can catagorize per studio anymore. The days of the studio orchestra are long over. It depends mostly on the composer and his team.

[Nick1Ø66 4,689]

Yeah, it's like the days when an actor or director were attached long term to a specific studio.   Those days have been gone for a while (though I can see that coming back).

[Naïve Old Fart 9,508]

So...are you saying that it doesn't really matter what studio a OST is recorded in? Does Abbey Rd. "sound" different to, say CTS, or is it the placement of the orchestra, of even the micing of the orchestra?

I will admit that whether it's recorded in London, or America, a JW OST sounds just like what it is...a JW OST.

I just can't help thinking that the physical space that music is recorded in, does affect the overall sound.

 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

of course it matters. But its only one aspect. Its very easy to mix out the aspects of eveb a great room.

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

Haven't I made a thread about this, or do I just bring it up often? 

 

Anyway, in London, Watford has the ultimate sound.  In LA it was the late Todd-AO, now it's probably Fox.  

 

And it's not at all easy to "mix out" a room.  The space plays a huge role.  It's not just about reverb.  The materials, shape, size of the room color the sound of the ensemble itself.  

[Naïve Old Fart 9,508]

By "Watford", do you mean The Colosseum?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Watford = Elton John as far as I'm concerned!

[Faleel 5,342]

Watford = Middle-Earth to me.

[Gnome in Plaid 219]

The LOTR scores sound great, but I'm not sure I know enough about audio production to separate the skill of the orchestra (and soloists and choir, which I understand were often recorded separately) from the acoustics of the room and the skill of the mixers (there's no way that reverb is entirely natural).

 

That said, I have a number of recordings from Chicago Symphony Hall that sound phenomenal, all sounding like I'm attending a personal performance by the CSO.  Sadly, Lincoln is the only film score I know of that they've recorded.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

It's not unheard of to have the strings in one studio, the brass in another, and the choir in a church. This thread is from 1920 I guess. 

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

That's a useful method when you want each part of the ensemble to be a discrete element with its own sonic and acoustic characteristics, be it a soloist or orchestral section.  Something like Interstellar could not have been achieved without this approach, which obviously owes a lot to modern recording technology and the recording studio revolution.  It makes for a deep and engrossing soundscape when done well. 

 

However, I can't at all condone the recording of an essentially symphonic ensemble, in a traditionally symphonic context, group by group.  There's just no reason for that, as there's also no reason to have a billion mics all over the place even when you do have everyone in the same room.  

 

Whatever you're worried about compensating for with these methods, fix it through conducting or orchestration or actual composition instead.  Record simply, mix simply, and if those other things have been done well, that's all you need. 

[A24 4,327]

What Steef means is: What is the value of a great live room if the final recording is fucked up with too much reverb in post? (think the original OST of The Phantom Menace)

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yes!

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

Whether or not you like the artificially added reverb, the value of the room in those cases, again, is to color the sound of the ensemble itself in non-acoustic ways, like a natural EQ, that then lends itself more to additional processing.  A group recorded in a small, brittle room which you then pump through a reverb unit with a lush setting will sound quite unnatural.  

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

How can it be non-acoustic?

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

Poorly worded, I mean "acoustic" here strictly as reverb and reflections. 

 

It's why a lot of people have trouble with "dry" libraries like VSL and SM.  You can slap reverb on them, but the dry source itself is still the sound of an instrument recorded in a room with little to no reflections, and so they have a strange "body" quality.  EQ before reverb helps this, or totally killing the dry signal in some cases.  

 

Same thing with real recordings.  If you have a tiny, nasal room to record in, you'd better manipulate that initial recording before you try to virtually place it in a cathedral or something.  I know there are examples of recordings where this has been done badly but I can't come up with any names at the moment.  It's an awful, shrill, brittle sound.