The Role of the Engineer

The role of the engineer has developed in response to social, political and economic changes in the field of record production from an: ‘emphasis on technical correctness, concert hall realism, strict division of labor’ (Kealy, 1990: 208) to being: ‘responsible for much of what we hear on a recording – from the quality of the sound colours to the refinement of the smallest details in the mix’ (Zak, 2001: 165). The engineer’s role in contemporary record production is that of a translator in which: ‘musical ideas, human presence, artistic personalities, the sounds of the instruments, voices and rooms must all be translated from their original state into the medium of the recording’ (Ibid). Added to these technical and musical responsibilities, the engineer must also:

Afford performers a sense of well-being in the studio, keeping technical worries from impeding the creative flow and preserving the inspiration of the intuitive moment in the midst of what is often a tedious process (Zak, 2001: 166).

The engineer therefore has two specific tasks: to address the technical aspects of the record production process from selecting and setting up microphones to operating the recording equipment, and translating the musical intentions of the musicians and the record producer into ‘technical action’ (Zak, 2001). Darren initially undertook the task of engineering during production at Elevator Studios. Through Darren’s residency in Elevator studios he had acquired intimate knowledge of Elevator studio’s layout, the studio equipment and some of its inner workings such as signal routing and his role included selecting and positioning microphones, operating the mixing console and maintaining the flow of the recording session by facilitating the requirements of the performing musicians and the record producer. During the latter stages of production and post-production, record producer Marc performed the task of engineering inside the recording studio, which also included selecting and positioning microphones, operating the mixing console and maintaining the flow of the recording session, and

further included recording overdubs and overseeing the technical requirements during the stages of mixing and mastering.

During the task of engineering in the recording studio, the engineer must draw their knowledge from the domain of record production and reference the mechanisms of selection by the field. The process of viewing the creative system in action is possible by selecting specific moments in time (Csikszentmihalyi, 1988) and, as in the previous example of performing inside the recording studio, examples have been drawn from the ethnographic research undertaken inside the recording studio during the stages of pre-production, production and post-production. These examples form the basis for analysis of the creative practices that occurred during the task of engineering in the recording studio.

7.2 Pre-production

Typically, pre-production is the preparatory stage before the artist, band or record producer enters the recording studio and the task of engineering during pre-production requires a process of translation (Zak, 2001). The first stage of translation refers to the combination of musical, technical and cultural aspects of the domain in which a specific ‘sound’ of the record is discussed with the record producer as Darren mentioned in an interview below:

The producer will sometimes have a definite idea of the sound that he wants and it’s just figuring out how to get that kind of sound. Usually that’ll be over the phone the day before the session but every producer’s different,

sometimes they’ll ask me to get the sound that I think works best.

Translating sonic references or descriptions of sounds into technical action requires musical, technical and cultural knowledge of the domain and an applied knowledge of the mechanisms of the field. ‘Figuring out how to get that kind of sound’ is a process of identifying the elements that contribute to that sound, which are often a combination

of musical and technical attributes. From the engineer’s perspective a fundamental part of the translation process involves selecting appropriate microphones in order to capture the intended sonic aesthetic of a recording. The engineer therefore has to develop an applied understanding of a range of microphones, their individualities and: ‘best applications’ (Swedien quoted in Hatschek, 2005: 40). Engineer Darren

acknowledged that this had been developed primarily through experience, from collaborating or assisting others in the recording studio. Darren further identified the use of experimentation and trial and error in developing his knowledge of microphone characteristics as in this example of microphoning drums below:

Usually the default thing for toms is the 421s13, that you see used, and quite

often I just used them without even thinking, y’know that’s what you put on a tom. But quite often I couldn’t get the floor toms to sound right, the rack toms usually sounded pretty good. I remember tying out the mid-side technique on drums, y’know the Glynn Johns type thing with two overheads, two U87s or

67s14 I think, one was quite close to the floor tom and I remember it sounded

great, it had everything I was missing from using the 421. It was a much bigger, more open, warmer kind of sound. So now I generally like those on both of the toms.

Selecting microphones during pre-production began with a telephone call between Darren the engineer and Marc the record producer. During an interview Darren described the conversation:

I spoke to Marc on the phone before the session and we chatted about the microphones but I don’t think we chatted about sounds so I decided to set up in a way that would give us options from a close sound to a big, roomy sound. I think I went for the default drum-type of sound because I thought that’s

13

A 421 is a large diaphragm dynamic microphone made by Sennheiser.

14

probably the safest place to start and then we’d go from there. If he [Marc] wanted something a bit different then we could work at it through the session.

The process of selecting microphones first drew from the technical aspect of the domain of rock record production by considering the way in which the microphone captured the sound of the instrument. It was then auditioned, considered and then verified by the immediate field, principally the record producer. The constraints of the domain, specifically the style of music also influenced the selection of microphones as Darren explained:

If I was working with a Hip-hop artist or a metal band, say, then that would have changed the microphones I’d chosen and the way I would set them up but because I knew it was a soul-rock band situation then I chose the microphones that I thought would complement that type of sound.

Engineering inside the recording studio therefore required an ability to alter perspective between the microdomain and the immediate field, which included the song and the participants inside the recording studio, to the broader domain and field of rock record production.

7.3 Production

The stage of production primarily involves the processes of recording, often termed tracking and overdubbing. The engineer, under the supervision of the record producer, typically records the performing musicians. However, the task of engineering inside the recording studio began before the other participants had arrived at Elevator studios as Darren had already addressed the layout of the room by placing microphones, guitar and bass amplifiers, and microphone stands in particular places in the live room. Whilst setting up he explained that:

Darren – For a live-type of recording the band need to see each other so it’s important

that you set up in a way that can help that.

Darren had already connected the microphones to the wall boxes using microphone cables, which are in turn, routed to the mixing console in the control room and once the performing musicians had set up their instruments in the live room the task of

‘microphoning’ began. Microphoning involved selecting and positioning microphones on the instruments. Darren explained during an interview that microphoning began with the drums because:

If it’s going to be like a live band session then the first thing I’ll do is set up the drum mics. I’ll usually do that because I want to get the drum sound right before we do anything else because if anything is going to be re-done it’s usually going to be the other stuff like guitars or vocals. It’s more often that you do guide tracks on other instruments rather than drums. It’s usually the most important thing you’re going for in those live takes is the drums so I use all the best mics I can on the drums.

Darren had already selected the microphones before the musicians arrived and once drummer Phil had finished setting up his kit, Darren started placing the microphones across the drum kit. He added microphones above the drummer’s head (referred to as overheads), a close microphone pointing at the top of the snare drum, a microphone pointing underneath the snare drum and one at the side of the snare drum. Darren added a close microphone to each of the tom-toms and more distant microphones in front of the bass drum, in front of the drum kit and room microphones placed around the live room. Darren also placed a microphone both inside and outside the bass drum. Darren also used a piece of material and a number of microphone stands to build a tunnel at the end of the bass drum. He explained as he did this that it was to isolate some of the sound of the bass drum:

I’ll use material around the kick drum to make a tunnel fairly often. It’s just to cut some of the bleed of the cymbals off in the kick drum mics so I can get them [the microphones] a bit further out without too much of the shimmer from the cymbals being picked up.

During microphoning, the characteristics of the instrument were balanced against the way in which the microphone captured the instrument’s sound. This was also done with specific reference to the ‘sound’ or sonic aesthetic of the song, a process termed ‘getting sounds’ (Zak, 2001: 168). Darren described his process of getting sounds during this study as he watched the video recording below:

I like to put a U67 outside the kick drum because I was trying to get a more open kick drum sound [Q - what do you mean by open?] Sort of like a bit more air to it so it’s not like the dead, close sound that you get from metal style kick drum sound, y’know like a more vintage, more full kind of sound where you get all the air. I’d heard about using the one in and one out sort of technique so I just worked on gradually moving them further back...it just gives it a bit more depth to it. Having a few mics further back on the drum kit makes it sound like a whole instrument, if you only have just the close mics it can sound a bit separated or disjointed.

During this study, the creative practice of microphoning rarely involved a single microphone and the task of engineering further included the combining and balancing of signals from multiple microphones. This was done in order to capture the various characteristics from the same instrument such as the drums. Darren also used a combination of microphones on the electric guitar amplifier in which he used a dynamic microphone (Sennheiser 421) and a less sensitive ribbon microphone (Royer 121) to capture different sonic characteristics of the electric guitar sound. Whilst watching the video recorded in the live room, Darren explained his thought-process: