As a producer, what's your job?

[j.troup]

I been struggling with something lately...


Some of the clients that I deal with are..umm...less than stellar. They aren't really seasoned studio people, so sometimes they are off beat, sometimes they are off pitch, etc. All things that can be fixed in the mix.


So my question is, as a producer, where do you draw the line? Of course, with these tools, we can make people sound amazing. We can make them sing notes they didn't sing, we can create lush harmonies from just one take, we can put effects on voices to make them sound different, etc.


So where do we draw the line? Is it your job as a producer to maintain artistic integrity and stay true to the performance that the artist gave on the microphone (which is a true representation of their capabilities), or is it your job as a producer to do what it takes to make the greatest record you possibly can, even if that means "manufacturing" the record yourself?



What's ur take on your role?

 

[BiggRome 2.0]

Since the invent of autotune... you don't really worry about what happens in the booth.

It's like getting an old junker vintage car... it's got rust and dents, you restore it and paint over it and put rims on it.

Then you take it to the car show and win.


P.S.: I learned that I should've used "ADVENT" instead of invent. Failed educational system

 

[KelevraOne]

Depends on the artist, genre and level of popularity. For example if you're working with a soul singer (like Adele) and she's having problems nailing the take. I say you have to keep at it until she gets it right, because that genre goes for a much more natural sound without a bunch of effects. Same thing with local rock bands, because these people have to perform these songs live to an artist. So we can't have them sound amazing on record, but shitty when live.

When you're dealing with Electronic artists and artists who don't perform live too much then you take every step you can to make it sound like the best record ever. Just make sure that they know that how they sound on record is the result of you though.

IMO you just have to play it by ear because your duty varies from artist to artist.

 

[j.troup]

Since the invent of autotune... you don't really worry about what happens in the booth.

It's like getting an old junker vintage car... it's got rust and dents, you restore it and paint over it and put rims on it.

Then you take it to the car show and win.

I like that perspective.



Cuz usually, I'm like "no, you stay in the booth until you get it RIGHT". But now, I just kinda take the best that they can do, then I spend 10 hours making them sound perfect.

Cuz to be honest, today, it's all about having a hot record. Especially with the advent of LIVE pitch correction.



As long as they get an amazing sounding record, and I get my check, it's up to them to live up to the record in their live show.

---------- Post added at 01:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:36 PM ----------

Depends on the artist, genre and level of popularity. For example if you're working with a soul singer (like Adele) and she's having problems nailing the take. I say you have to keep at it until she gets it right, because that genre goes for a much more natural sound without a bunch of effects. Same thing with local rock bands, because these people have to perform these songs live to an artist. So we can't have them sound amazing on record, but shitty when live.

When you're dealing with Electronic artists and artists who don't perform live too much then you take every step you can to make it sound like the best record ever. Just make sure that they know that how they sound on record is the result of you though.

IMO you just have to play it by ear because your duty varies from artist to artist.

Well of course that's the case. But even with genres that are purely vocal, you can do things to alter the performance so it doesn't sound like it.


I can let you hear a record I did, where I spent like 20 hours editing vocals of a soul singer...and you can't tell a bit.



I'm just talking about, doing what it takes to make the BEST record possible, even if it's above and beyond what the artist will EVER be able to sound like on their own.

 

[BiggRome 2.0]

I like that perspective.



Cuz usually, I'm like "no, you stay in the booth until you get it RIGHT". But now, I just kinda take the best that they can do, then I spend 10 hours making them sound perfect.

Cuz to be honest, today, it's all about having a hot record. Especially with the advent of LIVE pitch correction.



As long as they get an amazing sounding record, and I get my check, it's up to them to live up to the record in their live show.

---------- Post added at 01:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:36 PM ----------

Cassey had a big hit...

Ryan Leslie and Cassey ate good for awhile.

They put Cassey on stage and people threw tomatoes.

BUT!!!

Ryan Leslie came out looking like the star for making somebody that sounded so bad have a hit song.

... he just shouldn't have tried to sing on his own. Kind of tainted himself with his personal releases.

 

[kenworth]

to form the best end result possible with the material you have i guess. judging how far people can go and how far they are willing to be pushed comes into it. from what ive read in interviews dre is a master at that, pushing people to breaking point to get their absolute best.

 

[BiggRome 2.0]

It's like using a paper map vs. a navigation system

Sureeeee... you can tell people "You don't even know how to read a map!!!" and they'll say "So, why should I?"

Times have changed. It's almost like being able to fix a song is like being a new age mechanic... you fix up bad recordings.

Hell, it's a selling point, lol. Throw up some BEFORE vs. AFTER and showcase your song fixing skills... more clients will come.

"can you make me sound like that?"

"Sure I can... for a price..."

 

[j.troup]

to form the best end result possible with the material you have i guess. judging how far people can go and how far they are willing to be pushed comes into it. from what ive read in interviews dre is a master at that, pushing people to breaking point to get their absolute best.

I see your point. Not everybody has the best skill set. So you gotta make the best meal you can with the ingredients that are in the fridge.



And you're right, Dre is a master at it.



My homie J-Hype told me not to let my ego get involved. Getting people to do things that I want them to do on the song, that may be beyond their current skill set is ego. Take what they have and make the magic in the mix.



Thanx for the input y'all.

 

[KelevraOne]

I like that perspective.



Cuz usually, I'm like "no, you stay in the booth until you get it RIGHT". But now, I just kinda take the best that they can do, then I spend 10 hours making them sound perfect.

Cuz to be honest, today, it's all about having a hot record. Especially with the advent of LIVE pitch correction.



As long as they get an amazing sounding record, and I get my check, it's up to them to live up to the record in their live show.

---------- Post added at 01:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:36 PM ----------





Well of course that's the case. But even with genres that are purely vocal, you can do things to alter the performance so it doesn't sound like it.


I can let you hear a record I did, where I spent like 20 hours editing vocals of a soul singer...and you can't tell a bit.



I'm just talking about, doing what it takes to make the BEST record possible, even if it's above and beyond what the artist will EVER be able to sound like on their own.

I got no doubt on the editing skills it's just things could turn bad for an artist when they get on stage and everybody finds out that he/she isn't as good as they sound on the recording. But depending on your level of involvement with that artist it could be a positive or a negative.

 

[Wedges2]

The end goal should always be "make the best sounding song possible."

After that, it's all about efficiency.

It's easier to get the artist to do another take, then it is to spend time fixing something in the mix, but at the same time, some people are not going to be able to get the perfect take.

So whether you like to push the artist to their true potential, or whether you like to fix it up in the mix - it doesn't matter. They are both tools that producers have at their disposal, and whether you want to stick to one, or mix together, is up to you.

 

[j.troup]

The end goal should always be "make the best sounding song possible."

After that, it's all about efficiency.

It's easier to get the artist to do another take, then it is to spend time fixing something in the mix, but at the same time, some people are not going to be able to get the perfect take.

So whether you like to push the artist to their true potential, or whether you like to fix it up in the mix - it doesn't matter. They are both tools that producers have at their disposal, and whether you want to stick to one, or mix together, is up to you.

Artists and Technology are tools that the producer has at their disposal. I like that.


Great perspective...I like that.

 

[epotts06]

I think you draw the line with what is put in the contract...I know you know that though...

 

[AFDRecords]

best the best take and move on

 

[901_Rice_Street]

Everyone has magic in them (I like to think) even if their voice is not that great. That is all I'm trying to find. Their are no plug ins for that kind of magic. So I record as much as possible.....even if I already found that magic in a take. The ones that aren't keepers may have benefits for later. Some types of music require you to leave all the fix em plugs alone and try to go for the best with what you can get for the moment.

I could hear the autotune and slightly bad punch in editing in one of Whitney's songs and it bothered me a little....in a Yolanda Adams song also and it bothered me a little. Both were powerful ballad type music. It just bothered "ME'' though....no one else could hear it...some got mad at me...."THAT'S ALL HER....THAT'S ALL HER".......I'll take the L....I knew the truth though.

 

[Zell]

If your role is an actual record producer, I believe the quality of the output should be the main focus regardless of the accuracy of the vocals/instruments coming in. I'm not saying to not coach the best that you can get out of the artist though. Whatever it takes to make the best record, especially if you're being paid. If you take on that record producer role, people are putting their faith in you and expect that you can make them sound great on record, no matter what since you're the head of the whole recording process.

The artistic integrity goes out the window to a certain extent in my opinion the moment someone pays you for your services. It's kind of why you have records like the Kim Kardashian joint that the Dream produced. Services. Do your job! If you don't, someone else will.

 

[j.troup]

i think the job of a producer is to bring the artist to a place they have never been before... i.e. "that take was "nice" but i am not looking for "nice"... i am looking for "greatness"... ok?... lets take it from the top!!! we are not going thru the motion here... and if you think that is what we are doing... you may need to find another producer... ok? go take a break... come back... and put some "love" into your performance... ok? the reason i am working with you is because you have the talent... now that it has been said... it is time to put it into action..."

question is... as producer, what is your job... first getting the session together... next... being a psychologist... getting the artist to a level he/she has never been before...

What happens in the event that they CAN'T execute what you're asking them to do?

---------- Post added at 01:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:33 PM ----------

If your role is an actual record producer, I believe the quality of the output should be the main focus regardless of the accuracy of the vocals/instruments coming in. I'm not saying to not coach the best that you can get out of the artist though. Whatever it takes to make the best record, especially if you're being paid. If you take on that record producer role, people are putting their faith in you and expect that you can make them sound great on record, no matter what since you're the head of the whole recording process.

The artistic integrity goes out the window to a certain extent in my opinion the moment someone pays you for your services. It's kind of why you have records like the Kim Kardashian joint that the Dream produced. Services. Do your job! If you don't, someone else will.

Very well said. I like this perspective.

 

[as20gp]

if you really care about the artists well being, what you can do. Is next time theyre around. Play them the before & after. And point out the differences, should help them a lot. A lot of the mistakes artists make is because they arent aware of the language youre using. So if you say "yo youre not on beat, youre not in tune" lol to them theyre like "what are you talking about, yes i am"

until they hear the difference between a completed project and the takes they recorded

 

[j.troup]

if you really care about the artists well being, what you can do. Is next time theyre around. Play them the before & after. And point out the differences, should help them a lot. A lot of the mistakes artists make is because they arent aware of the language youre using. So if you say "yo youre not on beat, youre not in tune" lol to them theyre like "what are you talking about, yes i am"

until they hear the difference between a completed project and the takes they recorded

Yeah, but if you tell them "i need you to sound sexy and seductive in your delivery...and they can't do it"?


Rhythm and pitch can be fixed with no problem. But I'm pretty sure the "Make Sexy Time" button hasn't been added to this latest release of the Beatmaker VST.

---------- Post added at 01:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:50 PM ----------

that begs the questions... are we screening the artist? or is the artist paying for the session and the producer is doing it for the money? or is the bar set too high?

there are tons of variables...

if the talent is not there... the talent is not there...

you cant put a bandaid on a heart attack!!!

but in this case... as a producer... you can only do as well as the cards that have been dealt... if the artist are not being screened... the producer is limited... in this case... the producer has to make sure that everything that he/she can control is done to the best of their abilities... i.e. the artist "sucks" but the production is on point!!!

As a producer...especially in this climate...you don't always have the luxury of picking and choosing who you work with. Not all of your clients are going to be pet projects, and not all of your work is going to be the work that you'd rather be doing.

Sometimes, you work with the artist because they want your expertise on their records...and they have that check that's gonna keep the lights on for the next few months.

 

[as20gp]

lol yea that takes a little more effort and work, i wouldnt waste the time unless it was my artist personally.

 

[j.troup]

are the artist new to the music making process?

like what are the artist background?

singing in the shower?

Does any of that matter? They are an artist, and they want to make a record.



Can't necessarily tell them 'come back when you have studio recording experience', now can u?