does mixing kill the soundstage?


All this talk about "soundstage" gets me to thinking how in the world do we hear an accurate (or even close) soundstage on anything other than live, acoustic, performances recorded by just 2 mics with no mixing. Why would you even *hear* where a singer is if they are being recorded by a mic right in front of them that is recorded, most likely, seperately from anything else? They run all these different tracks (vocals, drums, guitar, whatever), changing the volume of each one to get the best *sound* Why would this not create a total mess? I guess I know nothing about how the recording process is done, but just off the top of my head it seems like almost everything would just be a garbled mess, which alot are, but some are not and I KNOW they are mixed somewhere down the line. Am I missing something? That being said how does one find good quality live, acoustic recordings that DO have a great soundstage? I listen to just about every type of music under the sun so I am not picky. I just want 50-75 good CDs that will send chills down my spine......
a71spud

Showing 5 responses by bmpnyc

Just to add a bit to 61's post, there is always the actual room sound aspect of recording vocals, piano, acoustic guitars, etc. that can help an engineer create a convincing soundstage, even within the artificial environment 61 so well describes. I am about to begin a recording project that involves a "clicktrack", acoustic guitar, guide vocal, percussion, bass, piano, horns, in that order, and I will try to keep as much of the natural room sound as possible even with much overdubbing.
If the actual room sound is not that great, I will add a different room sound as discretely as I can.
Slartibart, thanks for the heads up on the Ry Cooder/V.M. Bhatt recording. I also prefer a live 2 track analogue recording at 30 ips. I have done this previously on a few demos, and love the feeling of a real event being captured. Unfortunately, time and budget prevent me from recording that way at the moment, but I am hoping to eventually do another 2 track live recording. It is an amazing energy rush!
Slartibart, it has been a long time since I paid close attention to engineering. I used to produce in the 80's, and have been teaching since the 90's. You are inspiring me to take a more active hand in the recording project I am just beginning. Thank you. Once you have tried 30ips on a Studer 16 track, and then a Studer 24 track, it's hard to go back to less expensive formats. I will be recording digitally in a very intimate and well designed studio with only mid level recording gear, but a very good engineer. If I can get enough interest in my work I will pursue a more desirable recording format in the future. Man, talk about bass authority, you a'int heard nothin' till you hear a Studer 2" 16 track. Whoa! I think that Led Zepellin's second album was 16 track and that Who's Next was recorded on 16 track, but I don't know which machines were used. Anyway, I will speak with the engineer I will be working with and attempt to formulate a plan to achieve some semblance of a true soundstage. First idea that comes to mind is to record the different musicians and their instruments in the part of the room that they would be standing in if the entire band was in the room, and then assemble a facsimile of the soundstage. I'll let you how things progress.
Slartibart, Thanks for the tips.I'll check on those aspects. The mikes will be mostly Nuemann's. I once mixed to a 2 track Studer and felt it was the best I had heard. Many of the Ampex machines I used were noisier, but they were probably older models. I have used a Nagra once or twice and loved it. Good luck with
your 2 track purchase. My old Otari 2 track wasn't too bad, now that I think about it.