Song sound vs. cohesive album sound?

**lowfreqgeek** · #1 06-27-2010, 09:03 PM

Justin,

Forgive me if this has already been addressed, but I'm curious about your thoughts on choosing a particular signal chain for any given song you're recording vs. maintaining a consistent or cohesive sound throughout an album.

Regarding my bass sounds, I find it easy to focus on each song rather than the entire sound of the album as a whole. But then I wonder after it's done if it wouldn't have been more congruent with a narrow selection of bass sounds.

On the one hand, I want to do what's right for each track - from note selection to gear/string/technique choices. On the other hand, I don't want to create a perceived lack of focus by hopping from one sound to another if someone listens to an album in whole.

Or does iTunes change everything (in a multitude of ways...)?

I hope that makes sense. I appreciate your input.

ryognbass · #2 06-27-2010, 09:06 PM

I built a pedalboard to achieve any tone i need, and i'm going to milk that, my jazz bass, and my amp for all they're worth. I feel that songs themselves and serving them accordingly takes precedent over creating cohesion throughout the album.

recreate.me · #3 06-27-2010, 09:14 PM

I'm a large advocator of album sounds. I strongly prefer an album that flows, not saying you have to have the same sound, just a good transition, or at least an appropriate transition between tracks.

I feel an album should be like a book, or movie, it should have a main goal. Within that you can have really great sounds or 'that hit song' that stand alone, but it should progress the album.

Peter_00 · #4 06-27-2010, 09:40 PM

I'm no JMJ, but I think that it depends largely on the aesthetic of the record that your band is making.

If you band is equivalent to, say california-era Mr Bungle then keeping a static bass sound will most likely not work so well. But if your band is like The Mummies, then you will probably jam out the whole album in a few hours with nary a change.

Both are awesome but totally dependent on the situation.

Broadbent · #5 06-27-2010, 10:40 PM

Good question.

MN_Bass · #6 06-28-2010, 08:00 AM

Great Question,I've been thinking about this quite a bit. I'm actually working on this with my bands album, its a 5 song ep, I'm going to find a tone that fits the mix overall and just run with it. I'm figure when we mix and whatnot that the engineer will have to eq it to what works best for the song. I recorded out of my comfort realm with a pick and the tone knob on my p bass all the way up, but in the rough mix it even sounded great.

Hizzoner · #7 06-28-2010, 03:31 PM

I like the artist/writer analogy..novels, short stories, poetry are all different kinds of art...albums, EP's and singles, same thing maybe? Some are masters of one form over the other...

I would imagine everything for pro musicians/songwriters has to be reconsidered/reinvented due to the digital/connected world of today..it is a tough process breaking out of old paradigms..has the "album" as we who grew up in the seventies knew it become a niche dying market? Interesting that Rush, great masters of "concept albums" just came out with a two song digital $2.49 package on ITunes with artwork and tour...I know it is a preview of their unrecorded next album, but it is a break from tradition.

I would guess that looking at each song for it's inherent value(as opposed to an album concept) and the bass tone on THAT tune is becoming more important than ever...

I may of course be way off too...

JimmyM · #8 06-28-2010, 09:53 PM

That is a darn good question...I have no idea what Justin will say, but here's what I say:

There's no reason the album can't have cohesion even if you swap out the bass for every song. I personally think cohesion comes from the writing and the instruments you use are just a small part of it. Some may disagree, but I've heard albums where the sound of everything varies from track to track, and they still sound cohesive. OTOH, if every track on an AC/DC album didn't have the exact same sound, it would be pretty odd, so I guess it's something every band has to decide for themselves.

jmjbassplayer · #9 06-29-2010, 10:24 AM

I don't really think about it, I just kind of react to the particular scenario. Sometimes that means the same one or two instruments, the same one or two pedals. Sometimes that means fifteen instruments and a whole floor full of pedals.

There's no way that I can plan it. I'm incapable of premeditating that much. Sometimes I just, out of whimsy, just bring two three instruments to an album session that I think might be "fun" or "interesting", and I limit myself to those two or three, and they become the voice of the bottom end. Point being, they might be three totally different instruments than the record I did last week, but I want to enjoy the exercise of making them work.

On the M83 record which I am currently co-writing and co-producing, I have an Eko bass and a Tony Franklin P-Bass. The album is barely even 1/3 done, because we're lazy and slow, and exploring lots of keyboard stuff. But those two basses just happen to be at that studio, and they'll stay there until it's done. The limitation of that feels nice.

JMJ

**lowfreqgeek** · #10 06-30-2010, 12:48 AM

Thanks for all the responses. I've probably put too much thought into it in the past. A rehearsal tonight confirmed my thoughts that the cohesion and continuity will come from the personnel (players, writers, engineers, etc) rather than the specific gear chosen for any song. I took a completely different bass and rig than I've been using and it worked just as well, though slightly different.

The reality is that I could probably use a different bass and a whole set of different pedals on each song and it would probably work out just fine. Or I could use one bass and no effects and each song would still have it's own unique flavor. Situation dependent, I guess.

So I'm not gonna worry about it much.

Thanks again!

casio · #11 06-30-2010, 04:15 AM

I've done three records this year, and all of them have been completely different experiences, honestly.
The first was one band I play in, where i brought in five completely different basses (active MM, jazz, pbass, custom "washboard 5string, hollowbody) and my entire setup of pedals and used all of the gear on different occasions for 14 different songs.
Another record i only used one bass straight into a DI and that was it.
The third record was also only one bass (different one), my whole rig and all the pedals and that was it.
It depends on the occasion, but cohesion can be a great thing depending on the setting.
JMJ's work is a great example: for instance you can't quite expect the Beck stuff to be done on one bass and one pedal for an entire album, yet it sounds like a whole. On the other hand the Dixie Chicks stuff I can imagine wasnt that complex (I may be wrong).
It depends on the artist, and you have to mend your approach to fit what the whole should sound like. Then you can get cohesion even if youre using 15 different basses and setups for 15 different songs!
At least I think so

fullrangebass · #12 06-30-2010, 04:41 AM

IMHO I think that the bass tone of an album should be cohesive (in the same direction, so to speak) yet allowed to be versatile (a good versatile bass in hand with the proper pedal board for those who wish so is a must, in this case). This really applies in a "concept" album, rather than a bunch of irrelevant tunes and styles just put together in the same CD.

When the bass tones are vastly different, it's a valid choice, yet, live reproduction of the work will be virtually impossible (if one really sticks to the original way of the way was produced). I have played 10 VASTLY different basses on a CD of a friend (I did the studio work), and when he wanted to play the tunes live, I refused to let his bass player borrow the basses, to replicate the tones. And I had told him, even before I started recording with him, that there would be a major problem with the reproduction of the bass tones in a live setting. Now he has realized it.