'That Sound' - another significant variable?

[Cruachan]

I think we are all agreed that achieving accurate reproductions of what is being constantly referred to as 'that sound' presents a huge challenge and depends on the presence of the correct mix of so many variables. The 'Hall & Collins Signature Echo' +/- some appropriate EQ tickling has suddenly brought us within a whisker of scoring that goal. For the vast majority I am guessing that this is proving now to be close enough and making many players, myself included, very happy indeed!

There is, however, one significant variable which has not really been discussed in any great depth and that is the recording setups used back in the 60's and later to capture those sounds we all remember and love. In particular, the microphones used and the position of those mics in relation to the speaker cone of the chosen amp. Nowadays many have come to rely on the ubiquitous Shure SM57 or are bypassing the physical amp by capturing into software, possibly amp modelling software, by using the line input on a laptop or PC. The latter, of course, obviates the requirement of micing an amp but, arguably, may make it harder to arrive at 'that magical sound'.

Back in the 60's sound engineers did not have the luxury of modern computing capabilities, but their skillful use of the hardware available at that time produced something very special nonetheless.

It would be interesting to hear what the members are now using, if anything, along with the 'Hall & Collins Signature Echo'. If you are micing an amp where do you place the microphone and is the position being dictated by the tune? Do you compromise by maintaining an optimal position as is the case, presumably, with stage setups. Are similar compromises regarded as being acceptable to you in a studio/home setting?

Mike

[Charlie Hall]

Hi Mike,
I thought I read Abbey Road used the Neumann U47 on Hank's amp. The U47 is a valve mic, so that is another factor that is easy to overlook. The SM57 is a pretty good mic for guitar amps but it won't sound like a U47.
I liked the result I got with the little plastic Vox AC1 and the SE R1 ribbon mic, but how much the sound depended on each item I'm not sure.
Direct recording misses two things. The interaction of the guitar amp power amp and its speaker(s), and the ambience of the room. Of course, many rooms don't have the right sort of ambience so maybe that is not such a bad thing, but all the same, something will still be missing. I think this is partly why miking the AC1 worked well for me.
I don't think studio engineers were looking for a magic sound. They certainly didn't always get one! You only have to listen to various other recordings of the day to hear that. All they were interested in was getting an overall result that would translate well to disc.
Regards,
Charlie

[racoon51]

Hi Charlie & All on the site

Just a quick question regarding the sound. Did or does Hank use any form of a compressor pedal or alike to compress the sound and "tightened" the sound up in any way. If he did what type of units were used.

Thanks

Mike B

[Charlie Hall]

Hi Mike B,
As far as I know Hank has never used a compressor. Studios do of course.
Regards,
Charlie

[racoon51]

Hi Charlie

Thanks for the answer to the question regarding compression. It's amazing how many modern and not so modern guitar players cite Hank as a major influence in their guitar playing and it shows everyone just how great he is in his playing style and also shows that you don't need a thousand & one effects pedals to be great just simple plain talent and a good pair of ears. It would be interesting to see how the more modern players would have got on with basic equipment that was available when Hank first started recording - how would they cope?. The real question is does good tone create good feel or is the feel for the music the mother of the tone - I think listening to anything Hank has done answers the question with no arguments.

Thanks and regards

Mike B

[Charlie Hall]

Hi Mike B,
I think Hank's style is most of the reason for his tone. I've seen at close range how his style makes the echoes seem to sustain a lot longer, so much so that the echo feedback had to be reduced for some tunes.
Regards,
Charlie

[sandytuck]

Hi all, I was listening to an interview with Chet Atkins and Les Paul also Jerry Reed
and they all mentioned that a lot of that special sound we love to hear comes from the fingers and
also how we feel at any given time. Maybe something in that too.
Cheers Les.

[didier]

Jun 27, 2015 20:55:26 GMT Charlie Hall said:

I don't think studio engineers were looking for a magic sound. They certainly didn't always get one!

The Beatles' first recordings were also made in Abbey Road, yet the sound isn't very good...

Didier

[Deleted]

The other factor of course, is that in those days they recorded to tape, whereas today it's all digital. There are various tape emulators out there but don't think they really cut the mustard. I liken it in a way, to the difference between listening to vinyl and cd. Although the cd sound is noise free and very crisp, somehow the vinyl sound is richer and has more presence.....

Jim

[Cruachan]

Hi everyone,

Well, despite this thread having strayed somewhat from the questions asked in the original post, it appears to be evolving into areas which are just as interesting, so please carry on!

I think analogue is written into our DNA. Basically we, as humans, seem to derive much greater pleasure from music recorded using what many would regard as being imperfect technology. Digital is fine, but for audiophiles lacks the subtle nuances introduced by the equipment of old. This certainly is part of the explanation as to why we are witnessing a strong comeback for tracks cut in Vinyl and why it is we can appreciate the lasting contribution made by valves over transistors. It also has given birth to many poetic obfuscations which are used to describe what we are hearing. Instead, perhaps the most important terms in fact are:

Distortion
Signal to Noise
Dynamic Range
Frequency Response
Digital Artifacting
Channel Separation
Reverb
Compression

With Analogue you might add:

Pitch
Harmonics
Wow and Flutter
Acoustic Feedback
Ground Loop
Dropouts

A few years back, after nearly 40 years, my Sony HMK 70 Music Centre finally gave up the ghost. I have quite a decent collection of good quality Vinyl recordings and it was then I discovered that in recent times there is an increasing resurgence of interest in the medium. I needed a good replacement for my beloved belt driven Sony turntable, but most of what was available at that time, and still in production, seemed almost prohibitively expensive. Further research revealed an active market for secondhand decks and soon I made the decision to purchase a little used Technics SL -1210M3D Quartz Direct Drive Turntable System. Several weeks of obsessive behaviour followed by which time the deck and tracking had been thoroughly checked out. I fitted a Sumiko headshell with a Denon DL110 Moving Coil Cartridge and a KAB Electro Acoustics Tonearm Fluid Damper. A Marantz PM6004 Amp and CD6004 CD Player along with a pre-existing set of Bose Speakers with Sub Woofer completed the setup. To say that the resultant sound production was and is glorious is somewhat of an understatement! There really is no comparison with my old system. My only regret has been missing this experience for so many years.

There can be no doubt that the accuracy of the Direct Driven Turntable is contributing greatly towards the faithful reproduction of the complex analogue information carefully cut in those vinyl grooves. The Amp and CD player are both solid state and yet Marantz have succeeded in injecting a certain magic which has made all the difference to the sound stage heard in our living room. To my ears, and those of others, it is quite extraordinary! And yes, the fidelity of CD reproduction is almost as good as Vinyl...but still not quite!

Regards,
Mike

[garyallen]

Jun 27, 2015 23:33:03 GMT Charlie Hall said:

Hi Mike B,
I think Hank's style is most of the reason for his tone. I've seen at close range how his style makes the echoes seem to sustain a lot longer, so much so that the echo feedback had to be reduced for some tunes.
Regards,
Charlie

Hi Charlie,Looking at Hanks technique,Ive noticed he is very good at hiding the echo pattern by using the tremelo arm,on slow songs he hits most notes upwards with the pick, on this tune for example, do you remember what patch he used on the Q20 for this?  kind regards   gary

[Charlie Hall]

Hi Gary,
Hank used patch 0-36 (without added reverb) on the Q20, although it wasn't at that location as all his patches were arranged in set order and renamed with the tune names.
Regards,
Charlie

[sixchannel]

It has always struck me that it all depends on how you HEARD "That Sound" that you are chasing.
Is it "That Sound" as you heard it on your tiny, tinny transistor radio from Radio Luxembourg, as you heard it from your 7" vinyl on your Dansette record player with its 5" elliptical speaker, or your Gran's all valve sideboard sized wooden cabinet Radiogram, even "Live" - and so on?
Ian

[Charlie Hall]

Hi Ian,
I reckon all of it! It shows the harmonics and distortions are the most important part of the sound. Once they are there (generated by the amp and any other equipment in the chain), you can't get rid of them other than altering their balance with EQ, so they become part of the sound.
Regards,
Charlie

[Cruachan]

Jun 29, 2015 8:35:30 GMT sixchannel said:

It has always struck me that it all depends on how you HEARD "That Sound" that you are chasing.
Is it "That Sound" as you heard it on your tiny, tinny transistor radio from Radio Luxembourg, as you heard it from your 7" vinyl on your Dansette record player with its 5" elliptical speaker, or your Gran's all valve sideboard sized wooden cabinet Radiogram, even "Live" - and so on?
Ian

Hi Ian,

I too have fond memories off building a crystal set and a short wave radio and listening to Radio Luxembourg in bed late at night. Where has all the excitement gone? However, in my case, the real introduction to those sounds of the 60s came while hearing them through my parent's Dynatron Radiogram. I forget which model, but it looked very like the Windsor RG22/23 which boasted 6 speakers in two banks - 2 Woofers, 2 Mid Range and two tweeters. Vinyl discs were played on an integrated Garrard SP25 Record Deck which had auto change capabilities - my father was a wise man and this feature was seldom used, if at all.

The model was similar in appearance to this one: www.radiomuseum.org/r/dynatron_windsor_rg22.html#b

However, I am sure the output of our Dynatron was 20+20W RMS and, as I said, it had 6 speakers.

I remember the sound produced by this model was very good indeed. However, I cannot recall any specifics and certainly nothing that would influence the search for 'That Sound' as heard today on modern equipment. I suggest that, for most of us, accurate memories for such musical sounds does not in fact extend that far back and, as you have hinted, would, if taken in isolation, likely have a negative impact on any attempts to recreate the experience. Nowadays I think our memories for those sounds are based on hearing original recordings, often remastered, played back on contemporary equipment, performances at live concerts and audio files created by folk like Charlie who, having lived through those years and as a result of their intimate involvement, have cultivated the unique skills and knowledge necessary to analyse and reproduce those now familiar sounds.

Regards,
Mike

[Deleted]

One other thing, We all have ears, but we all hear things slightly or hugely differently, because each human being is a unique individual....

[didier]

Jun 29, 2015 8:35:30 GMT sixchannel said:

It has always struck me that it all depends on how you HEARD "That Sound" that you are chasing.
Is it "That Sound" as you heard it on your tiny, tinny transistor radio from Radio Luxembourg, as you heard it from your 7" vinyl on your Dansette record player with its 5" elliptical speaker, or your Gran's all valve sideboard sized wooden cabinet Radiogram, even "Live" - and so on?
Ian

In the early sixties I had a 2x10W Hi-Fi valve amp built from a kit, a pair of home made speaker cabinets, each with a 8x12" elliptical speaker and a tweeter (with a real L/C crossover, not just a single capacitor), and a Dual 1009 turntable with a Shure 44 cartridge.

This was much better than the usual "Teppaz" record player (the french equivalent of the "Dansette") !

Didier