A Beatles Virtual Instrument

[Frodo]

Okay:

Fab Four 1.0.021 is installed. Jury is still out because of a somewhat different set of issues than previous versions. There is *some* improvement, no doubt (still exploring). DP's GUI behavior is better, but I notice that Fab Four's response is a bit slower. Some cc# functions have yet to be implemented-- as confirmed by Zed.

It's at the "not bad" phase and may indeed be usable enough presently.

With that said, UPS has just delivered my new Epiphone Casino Elitist and my Rickenbacker 330 six-string. Busy day, but I'll open them and try them out later this evening.

I'm now eager and ready to get going with Fab Four in combination with these instruments.

Interesting side note-- the Epiphone Casino was coincidentally purchased on October 9th. Only die-hard Beatle fans will know the significance of this date.

[zed]

GUI behavior is better, but I notice that Fab Four's response is a bit slower.

I hadn't noticed that. I think it has much improved in it's management of resources and generally seems much more efficient... expect for the bug that still has you having to click into a DP window before certain functions and dialogue boxes can come up.

With that said, UPS has just delivered my new Epiphone Casino Elitist and my Rickenbacker 330 six-string. Busy day, but I'll open them and try them out later this evening.

Congratulations. That's great news. How can you resist opening them up right away? What is try them out later this evening nonsense!?!?

Interesting side note-- the Epiphone Casino was coincidentally purchased on October 9th. Only die-hard Beatle fans will know the significance of this date.

Well I guess I am not such a die-hard Beatle fan as I thought, because I have no idea.
BUT... I am a fan enough that I could look it up in my Beatles diary and reference books, outlining their acheivements on each an every day. Too bad I am feeling lazy.

[Frodo]

GUI behavior is better, but I notice that Fab Four's response is a bit slower.

I hadn't noticed that.

Yeah-- the last release appeared more responsive in some ways. Certain other glitches appear to be gone, but sounds are loading considerably slower, it seems. Not a big deal, I suppose.

I think it has much improved in it's management of resources and generally seems much more efficient... expect for the bug that still has you having to click into a DP window before certain functions and dialogue boxes can come up.

That window clicking thing has got to go, imho! But I won't argue with resource management. In fact, I'll accept the slower loading if it means greater stability and accuracy.

]
Congratulations. That's great news. How can you resist opening them up right away? What is try them out later this evening nonsense!?!?

Well, the "puppies" were delivered to one location and I'm in another. I can't get to them until later this evening-- just going on word of mouth on delivery condition, time of arrival, etc., etc.

Well I guess I am not such a die-hard Beatle fan as I thought, because I have no idea.
BUT... I am a fan enough that I could look it up in my Beatles diary and reference books, outlining their acheivements on each an every day. Too bad I am feeling lazy.

No prob-- October 9, 1940 was a very special Beatle birthday....

[zed]

October 9, 1940 was a very special Beatle birthday....

Ahhhh. Birthdays, birthdays.

A belated Happy Birthday John!! Frodo will be carrying the torch for you!

Now, if only I had a Beatles wall Calendar for this year, I would have known that already, and baked a cake or something.

I think it would have been his 67th birthday... because Harrison's song "It's Johnny's Birthday" was a gift for John on his 30th. Always fun to listen to... because that song has a twist (and probably only a die-hard Beatles mushroom listener would know that!)

Pretty cool that you bought a Casino on that day! Sounds like some stars aligning, to me.

[Frodo]

Fab Four vs George Martin question of a sort.

So much of what we've (I've) grown accustomed to have been the early mono mixes and the limitations of cheap LP turntables which, for good or ill, actually became part of the character of the "sound" ingrained in memory. (I even recall every scratch in each song, too!)

So, I'm checking out various Beatle tracks from the CD reissues to the remixes done for the movies to the totally restored takes done in surround for the Anthology and for the Love project. What I'm discovering is that the effect is quite different on each version where assessing amp and guitar sounds are concerned. I've not finished doing a complete comparison with the mixes vs the Fab Four samples, but it is leading me in various directions with fashioning sounds to capture a bit more of the authentic sound.

And, with all the versions of the mixes floating around, the most vivid discovery is just how different Fab Four sounds, despite its similarities.

So, I guess my question is what would be the preferred reference track in terms of sound to work with? Do the digital and 5:1 versions get "closer", so to speak, to the right sound where the right sound may be very different then what I grew up hearing through the flaws of analog--- or does digital in some way "ruin" some aspects of the analog character of the sound?

I'm just trying to figure out how to continue laying a sonic groundwork. This is going to take more trial and error than I thought.

[zed]

So, I guess my question is what would be the preferred reference track in terms of sound to work with? Do the digital and 5:1 versions get "closer", so to speak, to the right sound where the right sound may be very different then what I grew up hearing through the flaws of analog--- or does digital in some way "ruin" some aspects of the analog character of the sound?

I'm just trying to figure out how to continue laying a sonic groundwork. This is going to take more trial and error than I thought.

I have an opinion on this.

You will drive yourself mad trying to match any Beatles sounds exactly. Even the Fab Four VI project faced situations where they had something all set up on one day and recorded some samples, and then came back the next day to record more samples and found that things just didn't sound the same... so much so that they could not mix the samples within the VI instrument they were creating.

I often have trouble recreating the sounds I created myself, on a recording, even though I am in the same room with the same mics, guitars, and amp modelling, etc. Sonic signatures are difficult to reproduce... especially when you start going back and forth A/B comparing between them. You quickly start to lose perspective about which sound is better or worse or different or the same.

My advice, based on years of struggling to get sounds in the Beatle ballpark, is to spend less time listening to the actual sound on the recordings, and more time trying to match the way you think it ought to sound in your mind. You will end up with a new sound that has some similarity to what you were going for, but which has its own signature and it might even fit in better in with the song you are working on.

Many times, I have come up with a sound that I thought sounded like some Beatles guitar solo or other, and found that it was quite different when I compared it to the Beatles recording. Sometimes I like the quality of the newly created sound even better.

With regards to which versions of Beatles recordings you should use for reference, I think it depends on your setup. I would listen to a song or two in its vinyl version, a CD version, and anthology 5.1 mix through your main studio monitors. You should determine which version sounds best in your studio, and then match to those versions of the recordings. Any necessary adjustments can be done later with some EQ during mastering.

Just get it in the neighbourhood. Don't try to get it bang on or it will eat you up and make you miserable.

Those are my two cents and a nickle.

[zed]

Having said all that, there are a few other things to consider:

(1) All the original master tapes of the "final" Beatle mixdowns went to the Abbey Road mastering room where the sonic signature were further modified before the recordings were pressed on to vinyl, reducing bass so that the needle would not skip out of the grooves, and compensating for frequencies that are amplified or reduced in the vinyl environment.

I believe I read that when they released the original CDs in 1987, the masters they used were the ones which had been created POST mastering... and so they are not the same master mixes which would have come out of the mixing studio. I may have this wrong... but I think that is what I read in "Recording the Beatles".

(2) Remember that those Fab Four VI sounds, and most sounds will sound noticeably different once compression has been added, and the sonic quality changes further when mastered onto magnetic tape... warming and rounding things out out nicely. Sometimes I mix down to cassette tape, and I love hearing the magnetic tape effect on those mixes... it just adds that magical element that you want to hear.

(3) EQ and reverb can turn bread crumbs into a can of artichoke hearts.

[Frodo]

Thanks, Zed.

I think what I'll do, as long as a greater portion of anything i could produce will entail a considerable amount of digital processing, is to shoot for something somewhere between the Anthology/Love approach and the Rubber Soul/Revolver approach in terms of a ballpark end game sound. My first assessments reveal that Fab Four itself falls somewhere within this range.

[Frodo]

Having said all that, there are a few other things to consider:

(1) All the original master tapes of the "final" Beatle mixdowns went to the Abbey Road mastering room where the sonic signature were further modified before the recordings were pressed on to vinyl, reducing bass so that the needle would not skip out of the grooves, and compensating for frequencies that are amplified or reduced in the vinyl environment.

I believe I read that when they released the original CDs in 1987, the masters they used were the ones which had been created POST mastering... and so they are not the same master mixes which would have come out of the mixing studio. I may have this wrong... but I think that is what I read in "Recording the Beatles".

(2) Remember that those Fab Four VI sounds, and most sounds will sound noticeably different once compression has been added, and the sonic quality changes further when mastered onto magnetic tape... warming and rounding things out out nicely. Sometimes I mix down to cassette tape, and I love hearing the magnetic tape effect on those mixes... it just adds that magical element that you want to hear.

(3) EQ and reverb can turn bread crumbs into a can of artichoke hearts.

Ah, you beat me to it. All good stuff there, bud.

Yeah-- you're a bit ahead of me at the moment. As with anything, a new production will take on a life of its own, but for now I'm still getting a feel for the lay of the land.

Again, I was watching "A Hard Day's Night". I have two versions: one on VHS and one on DVD. The DVD version took all the songs and digitally remastered them in stereo. This really stood quite apart from there mono versions, for example-- but it really is a glaring contrast on the DVD with the dialog track. The songs are almost too clear and too loud by comparison-- although I like the clarity of the mixes a lot.

Thanks again for the insights!!

[Frodo]

Here's some reasonable yet brave revelations by two people who probably knew best:

Regarding the remix preps for the Anthology...

George Martin: In the spirit of the exercise I couldn't justify using modern effects processors like digital reverb, or even echo plates, which didn't exist in the 60s. The only way we could achieve echo was by using either a chamber or tape delay. Unfortunately, neither of the two echo chambers that we used at Abbey Road was available. One has an enormous electrical plant in it, emitting terrible humming noises. Eventually they were able to dig out and refurbish the second chamber to make it work for us the way it used to, even to the extent of putting back a lot of the old metalwork sewage pipes, which were originally glazed and actually contributed to the chamber's acoustic qualities.

As each item was eventually given approval by the Beatles, it was passed onto Geoff Emerick and his assistant, Paul Hicks (son of Hollies guitarist Tony Hicks) for remixing.

Geoff Emerick: I have fought very shy of being pushed into using alot of the modern devices. So many of today's digital processors are based on the sounds that we used to achieve manually, but quite honestly I don't think they sound as good. We can still get those sounds by old methods quite easily, and much quicker too. In fact, thinking about it we haven't really progressed that far, if anything it's probably the opposite. The old 4-track masters are on one inch tape, so every track is almost a quarter of an inch wide. As a result, apart from the lack of noise, the quality of the bass is outstanding, you just can't create that now. The same applies to the snare and and bass sound, they sound so natural it's uncanny.

To say that they went the extra mile would be an understatement, but there are some interesting clues given about the integrity of their approach to caring for the old recordings which may spawn some ideas within the context of a DAW with a virtual instrument intended to recapture some aspects of the original sonic spirit.

[Frodo]

For Zed and others:

Looking for something closer to the Beatles piano from the "Let It Be" sessions? How's about a Blüthner?

http://www.proaudiovault.com/

Interesting-- they compare this piano using, of all things "Lady Madonna" against, of ALL things the Fab Four "Madonna" piano:

http://www.proaudiovault.com/PAV_BDMO_Madonna.wav
http://www.proaudiovault.com/East_West_ ... adonna.wav

Strange-- of course, if the idea is to make their own piano sound better. Notice how the Fab Four piano is down a half step? Wonder why that is.... not that the Fab Four piano is the cat's meow, but it would be nice for the sake of comparison if the demos were in the same key at least.

In any case, there are other demos online done by prominant artists as George Duke, Russell Ferrante, Don Grusin, Glenn Gould for the sake of comparative listening.

See what you think.

[zed]

Looking for something closer to the Beatles piano from the "Let It Be" sessions? How's about a Blüthner?

http://www.proaudiovault.com/

Thanks Frodo. Sounds pretty good. I am not so blown away that I had to order it during the night. But it may, indeed, be a good option. I wanna wait to hear those EW Quantum Leap Pianos before I make any new piano purchases.

But the best thing that came out of this so far is that I viewed the recommended link from their site, with the Beatles performing "Let it Be": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oZYqAeIdYk

In it, George can be seen playing a Telecaster. And when I followed this by viewing some songs from rooftop concert I found George playing a Telecaster up there too! It made me even more pleased with my recent Telecaster purchase. Those groovy guitars on the Let it Be album seem to be the Casino and a Telecaster playing off each other, almost exclusively.

Maybe we should start a band!?!?!

Do you happen to have that link handy which lists which guitars the Beatles used on each song/album? You once posted a good link on this... but if it is not handy, then no need to worry yourself.

[monkey man]

Maybe we should start a band!?!?!

Yes! Great idea, Zed.

You could call it "The LadyBugs" and start a new thread...

[Frodo]

Do you happen to have that link handy which lists which guitars the Beatles used on each song/album? You once posted a good link on this... but if it is not handy, then no need to worry yourself.

Is this what you meant?

http://beatles.ncf.ca/guitars.html

Interesting aside, re; Telecasters:

Paul did guitar work on "Good Morning" and "Mr. Kite" using a Fender Esquire through a Selmer Thunderbird twin. I suspect that it's also him doing the lead solo work on "Everybody's Got Something To Hide..." because the picking style is not at all like John's or George's-- and the sound of the guitar rings a bell.

Another discovery:

The video clip of the Lads doing "Hey Jude" shows George using a Fender Bass VI-- which was a 6-string bass. It was actually a six-string guitar tuned an octave lower. Interesting combo, that session: John was using is stripped Casino with Paul on piano. For the longest time, I'd suspected that some of that track was done with live vocals over a pre-recorded track (and the orchestra probably was taken from the session tracks). But the combo of instruments indicates that some musical thought went into the video shoot: that the choice of instruments they used went well beyond the mere utilitarian use of instruments as props. This was quite different during the filming of "A Hard Day's Night" where songs that clearly had John on his J-160E during the final concert were all done with John and George on their Rickenbackers.

[zed]

Is this what you meant?

http://beatles.ncf.ca/guitars.html

That was it, thank you. I sure wish there was a page that listed each guitar used in every song and the amps and mics used as well. Maybe that new version of the Beatles Gear book?

I suspect that it's also [Paul] doing the lead solo work on "Everybody's Got Something To Hide..." because the picking style is not at all like John's or George's-- and the sound of the guitar rings a bell.

Hmmmmm. I'm not convinced. You may be correct, but I think it is more likely that it was George or John. During the White Album phase, I believe they were doing a lot of sessions separately. It seems statistically less likely that that was Paul... and I'm not sure that that kind of guitar playing is something they wouldn't all have been capable of.

But you may be right. <-- pondering smiley

On another note, how could anyone have ever thought that Klaatu were the Beatles?? It is so obvious that they are different. I remember a guy who worked at a record store in New York telling me: "Klaatu sound more like the Beatles than the Beatles themselves."

Yeah right.