Hello!

First of all,pay no attention to my poor english..I'm french...

I would like if it's possible to discuss about the Rolling Stones Studios .
We've all heard about the Mobile Studio,I've found this link you may have seen before:




[www.arcavitsystems.com]

Le château d'Hérouville

Studios IBC (Londres)March ,1st 1963Première séance d'enregistrement aux Studios IBC (Londres)

What else?
Studios Pathé Marconi,

Many thanks for your help& best regards,
Sway



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-12-03 21:35 by bv.

Isnt it crazy how what this truck did in the 70s can pratically be done on a table top pc now?!! Talk about progress=seems like i read somewhere that all the computer technology that went into the first moon flight can fit into a cell phone now.(I dont know if THATS true but it does kinda illustrate a point.) It still seems like something has been lost in all this technology in the feeling of the recordings, doesnt it?

I meant "The Stones recording studios"without the ''s"
Are you able to modify the tittle?

Yep. Just hit the 'edit' button for your first post and change the subject title.

Quote
Sohoe
Yep. Just hit the 'edit' button for your first post and change the subject title.

Many thanks,Sohoe,but I don't have the edit button ..
Never mind,I guess everybody will understand my question concerning the recording Stones 'studios..

You do. Check 'options' below your first post in this thread. Choose 'edit post' and work from there.

Quote
scottkeef
Isnt it crazy how what this truck did in the 70s can pratically be done on a table top pc now?!! Talk about progress=seems like i read somewhere that all the computer technology that went into the first moon flight can fit into a cell phone now.(I dont know if THATS true but it does kinda illustrate a point.) It still seems like something has been lost in all this technology in the feeling of the recordings, doesnt it?

does to me scott; what's lost is a true sound wave. what's usually lost are analog compressors that aren't over-used...tape is the perfect electro-mechanical format for recording warm music, usually...there are exceptions...

i'm just not gonna ever record on a tiny plastic digi recorder with a tiny screen and a zillion menus...it's music. i'm too old for that shit and proud of it...great little boxes for demos and arrangements however, if not too many dang drop down menus and endless scrolling....
...I do much better with live rhythm tracks to analog tape and then switching the tracks to PT or Digital Performer for compact convenience and the ability to work it further at any studio.
All of this technology makes me sick. Engineers think they are producers and are LOOKING at at the waves and "Cleaning" them, rather than listening to the SOUND and letting it (literally) bleed a little. I am so tired of watching the back of some geeks head as he works long long period playing with himself and his computer, instead of running the session along musical, personal and 'vibe'...

I depend on good recording engineers and have much respect for them, so do not want to cause offense...but imo, the more 'pro' the consumer recorders got, the less 'professional' and warm and real were the results, for the very most part.

Everyone's got perfectly wide frequency range and a lot of what comes out is sterile garbage imo...peeps Protooling art into a rotten blaring corpse.

I've actually asked friends to come with me to the studio. they sometimes say "i've never been in one, i don't know what to say or how it works etc..."

I tell them "PERFECT" just sit with the engineer and don't let him talk to me.
Ask him about his life, his kids, his trips, and tell him yours. If I say anything into the mike to him, just say, "awww, he always works like that, he's impossible, and then start bullshitting again about whatever...do not let him do anything if i'm not in the control room.

For me it's two buttons "record" and "volume" they should be clicking away in the privacy of their own bedroom, not in a place where musical art and heart is in the room...

i need to be in the room when ANY compression or EQ is used, unless I've a great working relationship with a really trusted engineer...it is a sacrilige for someone who doesn't know the music, the songs, the vibe, to just soak your project in "THEIR" concept of mega compression and bad EQ...

...who told them they had the privilige of being paid to screw with the work of someone or ones who have lived with the project since inception...happens all the time...again, the good, kind, respectful ones already have this sensitivity but it is getting more rare imo.

i adore a good engineer with a good attitude, who does not have to do things "HIS WAY" even if they're antithetical to how I like to work and how I like things to sound....not just for my own little recordings, but on others projects I've helped produce...good engineers have soul and WANT to hear what you're about.

People are trained to have an IPOD world. EVen cars are manufactured with them.
fine and dandy we all use mp3s, but let's face it...we have PASSED the time when a true sound wave is used, our ears have gotten 'stupider'...we've been fed a line of shit and eaten all of it...no one listens to whole albums to give the artist a chance to meet you on a mutal 'stage'...stereos are sold without 'tone controls' so you have to go to one of THEIR pre-set EQ models, regardless of the room you're in, or what YOU want to adjust or accentuate or de-accentuate for your room....

we are lost, despite all the miracle huzzah...

confession is I do own a 16 track digi recorder (korg xd16) that has the highest sampling rate one could ask for or expect, analog compressors on board, and a large pop-up touch screen making things direct and easy! the sound is excellent.
you can go 24bt. 96khz if you want to, but i don't go that high usually.
It has real faders and the feel of a real board so you can have that tactile sense of long faders on each track that is part of mixing and creating music.

Of course Korg discontinued the xd16 and xd32 so they could avoid the pro and semi pro market and, understandably from a marketing view, make little plastic digi recorders with less features and a price point about 1100 USD...
more reachable for most consumers and artists and dabblers...and excellent for arrangements and demos...

good enough i guess. but they purposely discontinued the higher fidelity and more professional machines, so even if you've got the 3 grand or so these things used to list for, you cannot find one, unless you get lucky and do a lot of specific searching all the time.

they were selling, but not as much as something that retails for 11 and probably cost the retailer half of that. that does not translate to good and comprehensive components, it just does not. regardless of manufacturer...

I still use a tube pre-amp for most everything i record onto digital media.
blah blah sorry for the rant. music is important to me, and the younger folks ears and musical experience are important to me to, and it's not progress, it[s souless devolution for the most part imo.

i do think that DAT was the best we'd be given, but they took it off the market because they didn't want people to make perfect copies of audiophile stuff. those bastards...they got bit five times as hard when computer recording came in anyway...and the sound is less accurate and less fulfilling...
i realize it's dat is a digital medium on tape, but it seemed you really got the warmth of the original tape that was used inthe studio...

mp3's are the fast food of music...they can fill your stomach with nutrients, fats and poison but it's nothing like a nice eatery with someone you love in a clear atmosphere...bad analogy i know, but i miss that all the generations of younger friends, some in their teens, have NO IDEA what music from accurate sound waves sounds like, and it's like stealing the soul of this great means of expression....

as for stones recording studios. i've been at sunset sound where much of exiles was done, on business for a company i was working with at the time. I've been in the room and that's all i could think about for quite awhile.
and i've been lucky enough to attend some classes at los angeles digital film school in the old RCA building and been in the rooms, now converted, that the Stones did a lot of work in...again, i was totally blissed out by this...
next to sinatra and others of the biggest of the big, were our five boyz in a great portrait...it was very heartwarming to see those pix and stand in the room...i was kinda blissed out by it for a time.

How much AMAZING music did the stones do on just four tracks?
Amazing, warm, all of them playing together on basics...just a few tracks to dub on, all tape etc...still sounds BITCHIN' to the MAX, all those albums and classic world changning singles...then the BIG LEAP to eight tracks, haaa...

we're goin' in the wrong direction...audiophiles are a thing of the past, it used to be so common to buy a really quality stereo system for cheap.
it's a travesty really. i know it's a longass rant, i'll erase it soon, but for those interested in this stuff, i wanted to commune a bit.

whats more amazing than what they did with 4 tracks is what they did with a macbook in the middle of the room and no distractions. Thats a wonder.


OLDKR

Great post Beely!! Very interesting and I love your analogies of recent MP3 music and the iPod generation. I admit I have fallen into the trap of being seduced by the iPod. One, I live overseas and am mobile and it is easy. But I do miss my albums and really would like to invest in a new sound system that I can enjoy my albums on, and I am now considering buying new vinyl when it is released...
Great post Beely!!!!

thank you so kindly whitem8...

ol' KR stated:

whats more amazing than what they did with 4 tracks is what they did with a macbook in the middle of the room and no distractions. Thats a wonder.


OLDKR

oldKR, i'm not sure which stones recording you are referring to that was recorded on a macbook (probably 'pro' model,) most certainly thousand and thousands of dollars of digital software as well...i love the portability and flexibixity of that setup but don't know which Stones records you're speakng of. please inform...

was it a basic and dubs from something that made it to an album where all four of them playing together, or did they email files back and forth to each other???
curious and would love to know and HEAR><

also, respectfully, though I want very much to hear any laptop recordings...
i think one would have to seriously take in to consideration 'have you seen your mother baby standing in the shadow,' '19th nervous breakdown' jumpin jack flash,TIOMS, 'tell me' 'off the hook' and dozens and dozens of others...
; street fighting man (on cassette for basic rhythms tracks!) and many many very many other absolutely groundbreaking beautiful ferocious amd highly original hits and albums one after another..it's kinda hard that a laptop recording would come to close to equalling that legacy imo....tho again very interested...is it from a live rehearsal, was it used as the basics for some stuff that got released??

Scottkeef and Billyboy,I ve read with a lot of attention your posts.
you're right!
It's "amazing" and a bit sad too comparing the early recording studios with the overtecnology nowadays.

It seems the sound itself looked more real and alive in the first recordings.

I believe that the basic tracks of ABB were recorded on a laptop at Mick's castle.

Great post by Beelyboy. I also still record drums, bass and rhyhmguitar on an analogue 8 track Machine, before transferring to digital on a Tascam DA78 recorder.

Beely, I'm very interested in your remarks about DAT. I've always felt my DAT tapes sounded very good and warm. Even recording a CD to DATtape using the analogue input of the DAT recorder. My technical skills and knowhow are very limited, and I can't explain my impression in a technical way. I do trust my ears however, though I find it neccesary to listen over a longer period of time, say 15 minutes a day (with fresh ears) over a week or so. I mean, if you give me an I-pod and let me listen for a minute, then my first impression will probably be that it souds OK... If you have more info or thoughts on DAT, then I would appreciate it!

RnT

ABB was recorded onto a computer which is why it sounds lifeless and sterile.

I agree with Beely, those 60s songs just couldn't have been recorded onto a computer and still sounded the same. A big part of their sound came from the distortion produced by overloaded tape, valve compressors and other devices, valve mixing consoles. In other words, valves and tape is what does it, and no amount of digital technology can recreate these sounds convincingly.

Digital is of course a convenient way to record. The key thing then is to get the good sounds in the first place - recording to tape, using valve devices - then transfer this to the digital set up. Have the best of both worlds.

The question I would like to have an answer, is a list of all the recording studios The Stones have been used,they have tried a lot of different studios.
Unlike the Beatles how used Abbey Road "all the time" apart from Twickenham once or twice.

Quote
RnT
I believe that the basic tracks of ABB were recorded on a laptop at Mick's castle.



RnT

Yes,at "la "Fourchette" studio.I confirm.!
Lap Top?I don't know;there were a lot of trucks full of stuff.

Quote
Ruby Friday
The question I would like to have an answer, is a list of all the recording studios The Stones have been used,they have tried a lot of different studios.

This is the list,isn't it?

The Mobile entrance



The Pathé-Marconi studios"

When people record onto a computer, too often the outcome sounds like a demo, because on the finished version, there are no dynamics between the musicians on the recording because of all the ProToolery involved. It's much worse than overdubbing.

Beelyboy,just got back to looking at the posts and while MUCH of what you are talking about is greek to me(aint got near that kinda tech smarts!) I understand enough to know I agree with you. Say, since it sounds like you are in the "biz" do you know my favorite artist next to the Stones, Dave Alvin? I recently met him and hes about as real and friendly as it gets.

Quote
Ruby Friday
The question I would like to have an answer, is a list of all the recording studios The Stones have been used,they have tried a lot of different studios.
Unlike the Beatles how used Abbey Road "all the time" apart from Twickenham once or twice.

I think they did "Baby You're a Rich Man" at Olympic.

Quote
loog droog

Quote
Ruby Friday
Unlike the Beatles how used Abbey Road "all the time" apart from Twickenham once or twice.

I think they did "Baby You're a Rich Man" at Olympic.

They also used others like Trident, regent sound etc etc.

Quote
scottkeef
Beelyboy,just got back to looking at the posts and while MUCH of what you are talking about is greek to me(aint got near that kinda tech smarts!) I understand enough to know I agree with you. Say, since it sounds like you are in the "biz" do you know my favorite artist next to the Stones, Dave Alvin? I recently met him and hes about as real and friendly as it gets.

don't know Dave personally but when I first hit L.A. circa '80, The Blasters were going very strong with that "amerrican music" album (which really did 'blast' right off the record...and have seen them many times in many venues back in the day...nice to hear he's still real, approachable and friendly...he's in it for the right reasons methinks...
was fun to see both Alvin brothers really rocking it out in tandem.
he's on his own endless tour and i think fan vids from shows r on youtube.
i've seen him in interview and he's very knowledgeable, humble, articulate and devoted. glad to hear he was personable and friendly with you, way cool. one of the good guys making honest music with lots of sweat and rumble.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-12-05 19:02 by Beelyboy.

Sway, where'd you get that graphic of the band's set-up in Pathe Marconi? Very interesting...

and Beely, I mainly agree with you and enjoyed reading your post. I'm not an audiophile, and I enjoy "bad" recordings like 70s audience tapes and lo-fi punk rock albums, but I appreciate quality audio reproduction. Most listeners today don't even know what the relevant issues are (for example, "recorded on a laptop," as if that explains anything). I still can't afford a good system, but at least I have some sense of what I'm missing!

Beelyboy, thats why I suggested Dave produce the Stones on another thread since he has experience (Paladins, Derailers,his own etc.) Bet he would take em WAY back! Keith and Charlie would probably dig it but dont know if Mick would.

Are there any pics (inside and outside)
of Musicland and Dynamic Sound?
I've seen some on here of Musicland a few years ago
during the IORR sessions.

Sway where did tht graphic come from? Good stuff.
Dig should be used for demos and hurry-up stuff.
I know Beelyboy knows what I mean, when I say that I have seen engineers and "producers" spend more time in the studio trying to recreate analog sounds on digital equipment. Always amazes me that most time on Dig recordings is used to get that "warm", "vintage", "analog" sound. ???

Quote
cc
Sway, where'd you get that graphic of the band's set-up in Pathe Marconi? Very interesting...

and Beely, I mainly agree with you and enjoyed reading your post. I'm not an audiophile, and I enjoy "bad" recordings like 70s audience tapes and lo-fi punk rock albums, but I appreciate quality audio reproduction. Most listeners today don't even know what the relevant issues are (for example, "recorded on a laptop," as if that explains anything). I still can't afford a good system, but at least I have some sense of what I'm missing!

yes yes that's the point cc, you've already got it! in that those products came from the 70's and were certainly recorded on to a tape medium, and i bet there were tubes or 'valves' in that mix somewhere too, regardless of it's relative 'fidelity'...YOUR ears dear cc, most certainly do know the difference...i don't mean 'audiophile' like having technical knowledge...
you must remember...you could get a little tube stereo amp from radio shack with bass, treble and maybe mid pots...
...pick your wattage and speakers to your own ear...put it together in a few mintues, and not have a piece of plastic handed to you that has set EQ and you have to take their shitty speakers along with the rest of it...
i don't think you have to be 'audiophile' to intuitivley notice the energy in music......
i'm grateful for all the media (i think) but it's like so much distracting (and expensive) crapola instead of just getting it on till you can live with the take...
i enjoy a lotta dirty boots and badly recorded concert records...but they were captured on tape...
i'd say steve earle is maybe the exception in that he's almost always gone digital and got very warm sounds out of his records as far back as '85 when digi was relatively new in major studios...for tracking and stuff...
dunno the specific gear but would be amazed if he didn't have valve compressors and old authentic racks between the mike and the board tho...

cc, it amazes me. those elvis presley RCA recordings, and the Sun recordings too...at sun it was like one mike or something...they told which guy to stand closer or further to the mike and just kept cutting. it might have even been mono, i dunno...one track ha.
then at RCA all that production sounds so ultra-moder and hip, as alien and fresh in it's approach as anything David Bowie ever came up with, (and he's come up with some great stuff)...
it's like a mike or two, an analog simple board with valves/tubes...
and chet atkins giving the kid plenty of room to do his own thing.
this is not primitive. it's highly sophisticated.
__________________________________

i can't speak much on the technical issues re: DAT tape, i only know it was a very reliable storage device and sounded warm and wonderful, no matter how many times it was transferred...
there are guys and gals here tho, like mebbe Mathijs, who would have a much better understanding and explanation of all that.
for me it stored our master tapes and mixes into digital tape storage that was reliable, portable and never seemed to fail...

Beelyboy, I have some great Elvis vols(I think they are boot) given to me with full recording session info for each year at Sun.The sound is on DVD audio and sourced from original tapes or original acetates and 78s from personal collections and the sound is fantastic. They are on MEMPHIS RECORDING SERVICE out of Australia and also have 45 rpm s from the original mother stampers of Thats All Right and Mystery Train(of course you have all the damage from the stampers too) but the sound is GREAT. Even the dvd 5.1 audio stuff which is still in MONO only so I dont know how that works!

yeah Beely, the emphasis on having music be a portable "soundtrack for your life" I think is really changing the way it's produced--everything sounds like it's made for cheap headphones nowadays, all cranked to the max, with no sense of a room sound. Really, this is true for A Bigger Bang too, I think.

but oh--and back on topic!--thanks for mentioning the LA digital film school being the former RCA studio where "Satisfaction" and Aftermath were recorded--I'll have to check that out the next time I'm out there! The best studio for the original band, imo...

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Sway where did tht graphic come from? Good stuff.

Quote
cc
Sway, where'd you get that graphic of the band's set-up in Pathe Marconi? Very interesting...

Thanks,I must be able to find out the link,it must be the Pathé's one.

Quote
tomk
Are there any pics (inside and outside)
of Musicland and Dynamic Sound?
I've seen some on here of Musicland a few years ago
during the IORR sessions.

The only one from Musicland I 've seen is that one:
[usuarios.lycos.es]
It will be great to see the pics you're talking about!

These ones are from Dynamic Sounds,right?1972






Some more here:
[www.urbanimage.tv];

Now I am going to read your posts,it sounds very interesting!!!

Quote
cc
yeah Beely, the emphasis on having music be a portable "soundtrack for your life" I think is really changing the way it's produced--everything sounds like it's made for cheap headphones nowadays, all cranked to the max, with no sense of a room sound. Really, this is true for A Bigger Bang too, I think.

but oh--and back on topic!--thanks for mentioning the LA digital film school being the former RCA studio where "Satisfaction" and Aftermath were recorded--I'll have to check that out the next time I'm out there! The best studio for the original band, imo...

The whole RCA building is a film school.
I'm sure the studio's been gutted and remodled several times.
I don't think they knew the history of that studio.
Stones, Elvis, Monkees, Jefferson Airplane, etc...
The RCA studio never got the credit it deserves.

Quote
tomk



The whole RCA building is a film school.
I'm sure the studio's been gutted and remodled several times.
I don't think they knew the history of that studio.
Stones, Elvis, Monkees, Jefferson Airplane, etc...
The RCA studio never got the credit it deserves.

Is it the one in Hollywood where "The RS Now!" was recorded and mixed?

Quote

(RCA Studios) was a lovely big room, which meant you could work for hours and hours without getting tired. Good equipment. Great address (on Hollywood Boulevard). Also Dave Hassinger was there, who was a great engineer. In those days, for two or three years, we were basically working 350 days a year. You'd have 10 days off the tour to go to L.A. and record. RCA was the first room we recorded in in L.A. So we knew that when we got there we weren't in for strange surroundings. There was no time to check out a bunch of studios in those days. You'd just set up and go.
- Keith Richards, 2002


The atmosphere and studio, plus the fact that we knew we had good material, made the session a good one. We didn't think it would work out at first, as the studio is so gigantic we were terrified. Then Andrew hit on the idea of putting us in one corner, shutting off the main lights and just using a spotlight, to make it more cosy. The control room was also in darkness. A bit mad, but it did the trick. Me and the boys really let ourselves go. Bill should be mentioned. He really did a great job on one number, double-tracking on bass and six-string bass.
- Keith Richards, 1964