Talk:Recording practices of the Beatles

Plagiarism

Much of this article seems to be plagiarised from the following site: http://www.allaboutjazz.com/php/news.php?id=21640 96.36.87.233 (talk) 09:27, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

It's the other way around; the cited site had it's article posted around a year after this article was started. I've mentioned this on their site, hopefully they'll at least acknowledge Wikipedia Apepper (talk) 23:09, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Really quick response from All About Jazz! They've asked for a link to this article and offered to remove their article or acknowledge it; I've asked them to acknowledge - I had a look at the wikipedia terms it looks like anyone's free to use the material, but I'd like our hard work to be acknowledged. Apepper (talk) 00:21, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

References and notes

Raymond arritt, I noticed you fixed the reference in Geoff Emerick's book; do you think you could look up the page number for the missing reference about close miking strings.

Ta!

Apepper 19:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. I have tons of Beatles books so if you need anything specific, give a shout on my talk page. Nice article you're working on here! Raymond Arritt 20:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick! Thanks, that question mark's been anoying me for ages.

Apepper

Try sorting out these sections. You can look at McCartney and Mimi Smith's pages to see where you're going wrong. The books quoted also need page numbers adding. Looks good so far. andreasegde 20:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

"...to see where you're going wrong."? I'm certain that Snr. du Regarde meant "...for an example of Project practice."! Vera, Dave & Chuck 21:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Lol... who's this geezer following Sir Sean around and telling 'im he's a dipstick? Give that man a medal (Oops, he's already got one - bugger... :) Sir Sean hereby voluntarily revokes his membership of the 'Smarty-pants Club' in Mayfair.

Anyway... :)) I fixed the first two citations for Apepper, and I hope he's profoundly grateful. (Sorry, Apepper, but we have a bit of a laugh on these pages, which keeps us sane - I think...) andreasegde 21:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I am! I couldn't a guide for citation of books - so I copied another article's. I don't actually own a copy of Geoff Emerick's book, so if someone could add the page numbers, I'd be jolly grateful.

The innovations are almost in chronogical order, so my next plan is to make that actually true - the sampling has been pushed back to Yellow Submarine; until I started researching this, I was fairly certain it was Mr Kite. I'll try and add the page numbers - presumably I should put the edition number? Apepper 22:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I've added the page number and book editions to the notes - apart from the Geoff Emerick reference; I don't have that book. I'll let Andreasegde explain to other authors that without the book editions, the page numbers are worthless :). Apepper 10:50, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I've changed the references to become book citations Apepper 11:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Section Order

I've re-ordered the sections so that they are now, hopefully, in chronological order. Apepper 10:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Missing Sections?

There are a few innovations which I havn't described - mainly because they didn't seem to have become widely used outside of the Beatles; I'd welcome opinions:

This article is about the Beatles recording technology and how they recorded their music. It should not be just about who it influenced only. There are plenty of example I have given but it keeps being deleted. sydfloyds12

Vocals through a Leslie speaker - used, of course, for Tomorrow Never Knows.

Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Grateful Dead and Jethro Tull have used it.

Varispeed recording - recording at one speed and playing back at another, to introduce a different texture (by shifting the harmonic balance). The Beatles used it a lot in 67, 68 but it didn't seem to catch on outside of them.

Using speakers as microphones. This was done to record Paul's bass - almost as a variation on DI; an identical speaker to the bass amplifier's was placed facing the bass. The engineer who set it up was almost sacked for that!

Apepper 10:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC) There so many on the Beatles you need to add some more

The bass drum to 'deaden' the sound while the bass drum microphone was positioned very close which resulted in the drums really being heard on the album. Eleanor Rigby, on a split with Yellow Submarine features just Paul and a double string quartet that has the instruments miked so close to the string that 'the musicians were in horror'. In Got to Get You Into My Life, the brass were miked in the bells of their instruments then put through a limiter. Both I'm Only Sleeping and Tomorrow Never Knows had the guitar notation written out backwards, played as written, recorded, then played backwards, a much more labor intensive project than simply recording the guitar and playing that backwards. Click here to here the guitar notation played 'forwards'. In I Want to Tell You, Paul's bass is overdubbed separately which allowed for specific treatment as opposed to being lumped on the rhythm track. This would become more common during the years that followed.

The setup of the album of Sergeant Pepper band. Between songs, there is virtually no silence, only split seconds or a cross-fade, the first merging into the second. After the piano crash of the last song, a 15 kilocycle whistle for dogs is played then there is gibberish in the concentric run-out groove. In this way, there was theoretically no silence at the end of the album.

The Beatles use of Indian instruments. The Beatles were the first rock band to actually record or release song with Indian instruments. Sitar, tamboura and tabla.

Fuzz Bass through a Fuzz Box on "Think For Your Self" acting like a lead guitar. Also on that track a regular sounding bass doubling the fuzz bass

Categories

I've added some categories to the page. Apepper 23:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the Beatles use of Indian instruments were a huge influence on Pop and Rock Music —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sydfloyds12 (talk • contribs) 23:46, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Artificial or Automatic Double Tracking

The entry for ADT has been changed to Automatic Double Tracking; I'm changing it back to Artificial as it was named Artifical Double Tracking when it was used by the Beatles; I would also argue that it isn't automatic - an unpopular job for Abbey Road button pushers was wiggling the control that varied the speed of the second track to make it sound like a second voice.

Apepper 21:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Joe Meek and DI

Is there more information about Joe Meek using DI? The modification to the article is rather vague. The Joe Meek wikipedia article is unreferenced, although it would be entirely in Meek's nature to try DIing instruments, it would be good to have some more background.

Apepper 22:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Is it known if Meek used impedence matching DI boxes?

Apepper 21:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

From what I recall of my book on Meek he was very secretive (to the point of paranoia) about his working methods, so I doubt if it can be verified. Remember he acted as his own engineer for most of his recordings, and virtually handbuilt the studios in his flat. What was and wasn't technically possible (and what was tried) may never be truly known. LessHeard vanU 22:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I've changed the emphasis on Meek using DI from "did" to "believed to do". Apepper 14:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I note from discussions on his talkpage that User:Vera, Chuck & Dave has done edits on the Meek article. Perhaps they have an answer (or a book containing said info). LessHeard vanU 18:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Sort of, User:Vera, Chuck & Dave was told about DI by Chas from Chas and Dave who worked with Meek. Apepper 23:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Access to facilities

There's been a couple of changes to this section - are there any references for John, Paul & George having home 4 tracks? ISTR Paul saying that he and John had stereo machines which allowed them to do some overdubbing - but these weren't four tracks and he didn't mention George having anything like that.

Also, it seems odd for the Beatles having to pay for tape - which is the property of EMI. What's the references for this? I haven't read Geoff Emerick's book so it may be in there.

Apepper 18:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

If it isn't referenced then stick a {{fact}} template on it, give it a little while and then remove it if not cited. I am aware that Lennon, Macca and Harrison used stereo tape recorders for working on songs, which when used with another similar machine could be used for primitive overdubbing. Perhaps someone got confused about two pairs of stereo tape machines and a four track recorder? LessHeard vanU 20:46, 20 June 2007 (UTC) ps. nice to see you back here.

I think you're right about the tape recorders; I'd be pretty amazed if EMI charged a band for tape which EMI continued to own. I'll factorise the items as you suggest. I've been on hols!

Apepper 21:40, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Since EMI put an entire Abbey Road studio at their disposal (at cost against record sales, as I remember reading) it seems unlikely that they would charge the few shillings for a reel of tape... Hols!? What was it, a world cruise? LessHeard vanU 21:56, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I live abroad for some of the year, Internet access is a bit patchy there. Apepper 09:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I know Harrison had a four-track recorder at his home, this was used for the White Album demos I believe (and probably his experimental electronic album as well I would assume), though I am not sure where you could find a source for that (though I must have read it somewhere, I'll check any books I have at home). McCartney bought a Studer four-track in 1969 and recorded much of the McCartney album on it at his home, but I had always assumed that he had never owned a four-track prior to this. As for Lennon, I was under the impression that his home studio consisted of mono and stereo recorders, I seem to remember McCartney saying he went round to his house one evening and linked them up so he could overdub and have tape delay effects and so on. I have never read anything about John owning a four-track during his time in the group and most of his home recordings I have heard sound as though they are unmixed and recorded straight to mono (Two Virgins I presume is in stereo but I have never heard it). Seems unlikely to me that Lennon would be bothering to link up a load of mono recorders if he had a four-track. I'll check in whatever books I have and see if I can find anything, but I as far as I know the only Beatle to own a four-track recorder during his time in the group was Harrison. MarkB79 19:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks! If any of these books you refer to mention bouncing tracks between stereo/twin track recorders to perform primitive overdubbing that would be fantastic! LessHeard vanU 20:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I checked through most of the books I have which I thought may have contained the stuff about Lennon's home studio and I haven't been able to find the specific reference about McCartney setting up his tape decks and so on. I thought it was most likely in Many Years From Now by McCartney and Barry Miles because I seem to remember it being a quote by McCartney and he discusses a lot of stuff to do with his own experiments with tape decks in there, but I haven't found it (although it could still be there somewhere, I only checked the obvious chapters, it's a very large book to check right the way through). I have a number of books on the Beatles, and have read countless others since the early 90's, so I could have read it anywhere I suppose. If I remember rightly, it was a quote from McCartney saying he went over to Kenwood to help John create the same set-up that he had in his own home studio at that time, and he basically linked up all his mono recorders so he could overdub and get some tape delay effects going. As I say, I haven't listened to Two Virgins but I have heard a couple of clips of it and there is a lot of weird echo delay effects on it, so Lennon must have had some tape delay system in his studio (possibly a Copycat delay unit, if they were around then which I think there were, but if McCartney set up a tape delay from a standard deck he wouldn't have needed that). However, I did manage to find one online source mentioning McCartney setting up Lennon's studio, which funnily enough is the Wikipedia article on Kenwood here [1], but it dosen't go into any detail, just mentions Lennon being unable to do much with his studio until McCartney came over and linked up his tape decks, and it dosen't name a source. Aside from that, I did come across some stuff online on Lennon recording demos here [2], but it appears to be a reproduction of the sleeve notes from some bootleg album, so I am not sure if that is a reliable source. It's interesting reading though, it states that to create his Strawberry Fields demo's Lennon had to use two mono recorders to overdub, copying from one to the next while adding new overdubs ("sound on sound" in other words), but that he had to mike up his speakers in order to do the copying (maybe that's why McCartney linked the recorders up later, so he could just copy direct from one recorder to the next without using microphones). Also I found a quote from Many Years From Now that says Lennon's home studio was called 'The Den', with the mellotron kept outside on the landing, and that Lennon and McCartney wrote a lot of their songs from Pepper in there.

I did manage to find the source for Harrison owning a four-track, it's in Lewisohn, Recording Sessions, p. 135 under the entry for 30 May 1968, it does state that the group's White Album demo's were made on four-track at Harrison's home in Esher, so that does confirm that George had a four-track in 1968 at the latest. I'm very skeptical that John ever had a four-track though, the Wikipedia article for Two Virgins claims it was recorded direct to stereo, so clearly he didn't have one in '68, and I don't think Paul did either until he bought the Studer model in 1969. Maybe whoever added that to the article was just assuming they all had four-tracks in their home studios, it is a bit odd that Lennon was messing about with mono recorders when he could easily have bought a four-track like Harrison.

In any case, I'll keep looking through whatever books I can find to see if I can locate the stuff about McCartney setting up Lennon's studio and anything about the exact set-up he had, and anything else I can find. I'm sure you or someone on here must have Lewisohn's Sessions book, but if not (I'm not sure if it's still in print) I have it here and it's invaluable for this subject, even if there are a couple of minor errors. Two books I don't have but would like to read are the book on the making of Revolver, I forget the title, and Recording the Beatles (though I can get hold of a copy of the former from my university library). MarkB79 00:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I remember hearing Paul talking about fixing up John's recorder - he said something like it was a bit daft as he could barely wire a plug, but John was even worse. I have a memory of an interview before the time of the Anthology - but that's all I can remember, alas! But it was a spoken interview, not in a book so a bit harder to reference.

Yeah, it sounds like what I'm thinking of, though I'm pretty certain that I read it in print somewhere rather than seen it discussed in an TV interview. However, I did tape a BBC documentary on McCartney last year or the year before, featuring him performed at Abbey Road I think for a small audience, where he was discussing similar stuff so maybe I should check to see if he mentioned anything to do with Lennon's studio on that. MarkB79 17:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Thinking about it, George was an apprentice electrician before he was fab; he does seem to be the most technical minded so it makes more sense that he had an early 4 track. 4 tracks in 1968 were non-trivial machines to operate; putting the tape on would fox me!

Apepper 20:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to let you two sort this out, you both seem to have forgotten more than I ever knew...

...but, I do know about the Copicat; it was an early sixties effects device, just a variation of a big reel to reel recorder with a mechanical means of altering the distance the tape had to travel between the two heads (without the change in pitch that speeding or slowing the tape speed would have produced). I think Hank Marvin used one, but Dick Dale (and the rest of the Surf guitarists) certainly did! When I was learning guitar all I wanted was a pre-63 Telecaster, a Vox AC30T combo, and a WEM Copycat... A bit pointless since I was never more than a simple strummer. ;~) LessHeard vanU 20:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Nothing on WP about the Copycat? I will have to put that right. LessHeard vanU 20:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I found this which dates the Copicat as 1959... LessHeard vanU 21:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I used to own a copicat, essentially it was a loop of tape player with one record head and 3 playback heads - there wasn't much choice in those days for echo. I recall that Real Love demo was recorded on two cassette players bounced using microphone transfer, John never really grasped technology!

Yeah, I used to be in a band in which the keyboardist had a copicat, he used it on stage. I hadn't heard of them prior to that. He told me that he preferred analogue delay, which is odd, as he had little interest in other vintage gear or sounds. I believe a lot of guitarists in the late 60's used to use them on stage, or alternatively similar devices based upon it. I think Syd Barrett owned one and did gig with it, but he preferred a 'Binson Echorec' or something, whatever that is! MarkB79 17:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm feeling that the home tape recording stuff should be in a new section - home recording are there citations that Harrison's Electronic Sound being the first home recorded album to chart. Was there an earlier one? This was well before the days of portastudios - 4 track recorders in the late 60s would have needed professional operators.

Apepper 10:16, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I've found that Brian Wilson had a home studio in 1967, so I don't think its a particulary strong influence, I would imagine that most professional musicians would have a tape recorder at home in the 1960s. I may well remove the references unless there's a strong argument for keeping it.

I think there should be some mention of the Beatles' home recording, if only because some people will come to this page hoping to find out about it (I for one would actually be quite curious to learn more about it from somewhere, and it would be nice to have such information gathered in one place, even if it's relatively brief). However, I don't think it should be suggested that this is especially 'influential', except perhaps in two areas. Firstly, if Harrison's Electronic Sounds was the first ever album to be recorded at a home studio, this should be mentioned (although I'm not sure how 'influential' this is as such, somebody would have done somthing similar eventually). However I can't confirm that this is actually the case, and somebody would have to source such a claim. Secondly, I believe the group created the tape loops for 'Tomorrow Never Knows' at home, mainly McCartney. It's probably already mentioned elsewhere in the article, but it might be worth pointing it out under 'Home Recording' as well, because this is essentially an early form of sampling (indeed, I have heard Tomorrow Never Knows described as the very first pop record to make use of samples). This obviously grew out of their own experiments with tapes at home (particularly McCartney) which were not especially meant for 'Tomorrow Never Knows'. McCartney has written quite a bit about this in Many Years From Now. The fact that the group were messing about at home with tape loops and distorting sounds with tape saturation and varispeed, and that this was eventually used on one of their records in a very influential manner, is certainly a notable example of home recording.

Quite a lot of the follow up to Pet Sounds (including Heroes and Villains) was recorded in Brian Wilson's home studio - this is a little misleading as Wilson didn't leave his home much so there wasn't much choice to keep him working than to build a studio. This was a year before Electronic Sounds so the Beach Boys' work is earlier and much more well known. Apepper 07:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

As for the thing about four-tracks, I don't think it's actually true that you would need a professional operator for a four-track in the 60's. McCartney has said that when he received his Studer four-track in late '69, he recorded McCartney on it without any mixing desk or VU meter. He says all he had was the four-track, and he did not use an engineer (he says he just used his ears to determine levels). Presumably he must had either some DI boxes or something similar, or else there must have been mic jack on the four-track itself (unlikely, but possible). In any case, he claims to have recorded most of the album entirely in this manner with no help, with only some tracks being overdubbed and all of them being remixed later at Abbey Road. So it must have been possible to use a four-track at home without professional assistance, even without a mixing-desk. Also, it's certain Harrison had one earlier, using for the White Album demos, and he seemed to have no problem using it. I don't suppose there was anything to stop others purchasing a four-track to use at home if they knew what to do with it, so I'm not sure how you could establish how unique McCartney and Harrison were in this regard or whether they were the first. Les Paul might well have had multitrack recorders at home, if I remember rightly he actually had a home-made multi-track and later oversaw the development of a professionally built eight-track recorder as early as the mid to late 50's. It's plausible that he may have had a home studio with multi-track recorders years before the Beatles. I don't know about Brian Wilson - I know he used an eight-track recorder long before the Beatles, in '66 I think - but I don't know what set-up he had at home.

I think the stuff about Lennon owning a four-track should be removed though. He wouldn't have been messing around with mono recorders if he owned one, if he did get one it must have been very late in the group's career like McCartney and I can't find any evidence that he actually did. He had his own professional eight-track studio at Tittenhurst, but this wasn't built until '71.

MarkB79 18:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd still argue that 4 tracks were quite a big thing to own - Harrison had engineers to help him record Electronic Sounds. Most home multitrack workers I know about in the 1960-70s (admittedly not that many!) used two good quality stereo recorders and bounced tracks between them. The stereo machines were aimed at domestic users so were easier to setup and use.

I think the consesus seems to be that the Beatles didn't particular influence home recording - it was going on before the band existed. As I've said, most musicians would have had a tape recorder at home during the 1950s/60s.

Leaping across to Tomorrow never knows as the first recording to use sampling; I think I'd stick with Yellow Submarine - TNK used recording of natural sounds - but that wasn't new by any means, YS used samples of other music tracks. Apepper 07:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

4-tracks certainly were big in the 60's, there is a picture here of the model used by Abbey Road, which is also a Studer [3].

This may well be the one purchased by Harrison too, though I'm sure I remember reading that the one purchased by McCartney was 'portable'. Certainly this is long before Portastudios so if it was portable, it must have been a new Studer model, a much smaller open-reel device (it may have taken tape of a lower width too). I'll see if I can find out which model McCartney actually owned, all I know is that is was a Studer, but it cannot be the one pictured there, there is no way that is portable. If you were doing what McCartney did - and what Harrison appears to have done for the White Album demos - you wouldn't need an engineer (they didn't use engineers for the White Album demos) because they appear to have just been plugging straight into the recorder by whatever means, however if you wanted to set up a proper studio and have the four-track wired-up to a mixing console, I'm sure you probably would need engineers, certainly to at least set it up correctly and then also to work the desk, unless you learnt quickly how to do the latter yourself. I know little about Electronic Sound, I'm not sure if he used engineers on the recording or just the later remixing (McCartney credits engineers on McCartney, but who only used engineers for overdubs and remixing back at Abbey Road).

As for the sample issue, Tomorrow Never Knows is often credited as having the first use of samples. I suppose it depends on how you define the term. Most of the loops are of mellotrons, while one is a distorted sitar (it's not clear whether this was taken from a recording, or whether they created the loop themselves), and the 'seagull' loop is either McCartney laughing or a slowed-down guitar, depending on which account you believe. There is however one example of a loop on TNK which is definitely taken from another recording, which is a loop of a single orchestral chord, which was supposedly taken from a recording of a Sibelius symphony (I forget which, although I can look it up). MarkB79 18:12, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I've bitten some bullets and removed the suggestion that the Beatles had to pay for the tape, I've added the cited fact that all the Beatles owned Brennel tape recorders as I'd agree that musicians bringing their own bits of music intro the studio was quite unusual - and is now widespread.

Apepper 10:15, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Synchronizing tape machine

It's been some time, but this section needs some citations - the Wikipedia article on SMPE timecode is poorly cited, so does anyone have some citations for SMPTE timecode being used to sync tape machines? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apepper (talk • contribs) 10:56, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm thinking about adding a section on this, George Martin claimed it was done for the first time for day in the life - ken townsend did it by recording a 50Hz tone on one recorder and using that to control a second one.

It didn't work all that well, apparently - without a time code it must have been a bit hit and miss.

I'm slightly hesitating because I don't know that synchronizing tape decks was particularly widespread - at any stage; I know SMPTE is used for syncing tape machines to other things (computers, film cameras et al) and it can be used to sync two tape machines, but is it or was it widely used? Apepper 11:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any other band who did this at the time, but I'm not certain. I don't know exactly how widespread it became, but I know Pink Floyd used two 24-track machines in sync to record The Wall (they actually had a 48-track recorder at their own studio in London, but they recorded The Wall abroad for tax reasons, presumably the studios they used did not have 48-track recorders). I don't know of any other examples off-hand, though I vaguely remember something about Floyd using two tapes in sync earlier, possibly on Wish You Were Here, but I'd have to check that. Lewisohn does mention SMPTE being used by bands in the 80's to sync two or more tape recorders. There must have been some form of primitive tape-sync by late '68/early '69 because Lewisohn states that the Let it Be recordings were actually made using only seven tracks on a eight-track recorder, with the eighth track reserved for a "sync pulse track for the film crew". MarkB79 18:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

So A day in the life is a good candidate for the first usage; its sounds like I imagined - occasionally done when getting a bit desparate for tracks. I'll probably work it up to a section in the next few days - I need to check my references.

Apepper 19:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I've added the section; I'm not certain it quite reads correctly - I've been deliberately vague about how many extra tracks they gained as I assume they used one to record the sync tone so they effectively had three extra tracks for the orchestra to go on, however Ken Townsend says they recorded four orchestrial tracks so I don't quite know how that would work!

Although George Martin claimed it as a "first", SMPTE timecode was announced in 1967, so it was not that far ahead of the times - does anyone know of an earlier use of synchronized machines?

Apepper 10:19, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure they used a recorded sync tone of any description on 'A Day in the Life', but I'm by no means certain and I'm certainly no expert on the principles involved. I was under the impression that Townsend just had a generator sending an identical pulse to both tape-machines during recording and play-back but without actually recording any pulse on the tapes themselves, but I can't be certain. I do remember reading - I can't remember were, but I'll check when I get the chance and see if I can find the source - that the band's tracks are only recorded across three tracks of the one tape, and listening to the stereo mix carefully does seem to confirm this - sounds as though there are guitars/piano/maracas on one track, drums/bass on the second and vocals/piano fills on the third. Supposedly the fourth track had the first orchestra overdub, with all four tracks of the second tape being further orchestra overdubs (one of them though is mainly just timpani and other percussion apparently). I do remember being surprised when I read this because I had always been under the impression that the orchestra took up only four tracks and was recorded entirely on the other tape. It would explain why they only used three tracks for the band. On the other hand, maybe there are only three tracks of the band because there is a sync pulse track on the fourth (rather than the orchestra), but that would mean there could only be three tracks of orchestra on the other tape too as that would have to have track reserved for the pulse as well. That does seem unlikely to me. I'll check out Sessions and George Martin's various books and see what I can find anyway. SMPTE being developed in 1967 sounds about right, as I say they used sync pules tracks for Let it Be in early '69. It may be worth noting as well that Only a Northern Song was recorded using two four-track recorders in sync using Townsends technique again, and obviously it wasn't so successful because after completing a mono mix, they couldn't be bothered to create a stereo mix for release, presumably because of the difficulties and length of time it took to mix the two tapes successfully.

I don't know of any other specific recording using two tapes in sync from around that time, but I've found that Ian MacDonald states in Revolution in the Head that the recording of 'A Day in the Life' was the first time that syncronising two multi-track tapes had been attempted in a British studio. While this confirms no other studio had done it in Britain, it does sort of imply that somebody may well have already tried it in a U.S. studio. At least that is a source for it being a first in the U.K., but how you would find out any details about it being attempted in America I'm not sure. My guess would be that if anyone it was most likely attempted by Les Paul, the Beach Boys or Simon & Garfunkel, since these are artists who had a reputation at the time for being the first to try out new recording technology (such as eight-track recorders) and striving for more multi-layered recordings, although there may be other artists I haven't thought of. MarkB79 19:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I got the recording a control tone from Mark Lewisohn's complete recording history, and that quoted Townsend as recording a control tone - but it has to be said using a external oscillator to control two recorders would work equally well (or badly!); I don't really know how they made sure the two recorders started from the same point. The SMPTE link is a bit vague; it was developed for syncing tape to film so syncing tape recorders would have been a secondary use. Ironically, EMI's slowness in adopting 8 track would have meant there was a fair incentive to sync two four tracks - judging by the History of multitrack recording article, the Beach Boys had 8 track a couple of years before EMI. Apepper 21:45, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I've added a little to the section having read Emerick's book explaining how they started at the same time. Apepper 09:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Direct Injection / Motown

I have researched the Motown studio for dates, since it is widely known that they used Direct Injection for several years before the Beatles. I pinned it down to around 1962. I have therefore acnowledged this in the text. EMI/ McCartney discovered the method independently, but cannot claim to be the first in a 'major studio'. (Hence I changed it to 'Major British studio'.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.161.52 (talk) 21:21, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks anonymous - I've reformatted the text slightly; looking at Mark Lewisohn's book and the DI comment, it does look like EMI were well behind Motown for recording bass - the Beatles complained that Motown records had much better bass than theirs and the DI technique was probably a response to that.

Apepper 09:07, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The Beatles' Attitude

I'm not sure I fully go along with the changes to The Beatles' Attitude section by MegdalePlace; the paragraph I have most trouble with is:

Contrary to popular perception, McCartney was ahead of Lennon in this respect, pushing EMI's recording technology through overloading the mixing desk as early as 1964 in tracks such as "What You're Doing", and creating a fade-in as a jokey counterpart to the ubiquitous fade-out in 1965 for "Eight Days A Week".

I don't agree that there's a popular perception that McCartney was not ahead of Lennon; in any case such a claim should be cited.

There's no citation for the overloading of the desk for What You're Doing - I'm not saying it didn't happen, although Geoff Emerick's book made it clear that misusing equipment was a serious "offence" within EMI so it would be slightly surprising relatively early on in their career. McCartney did say they did something similar when recording Nowhere Man; running the guitars through three lots of faders so they could add extra treble and that they did deliberately put the guitars into distortion recording "Revolution".

For Eight Days a Week, ISTR Geoff Emerick's book says the fade in was done to hide a flaw in the performance - I don't have the book with me. This kind of thing was not without precedent; one of the guitars in Day Tripper is briefly faded out then back in, presumably because of a fluff in performance and the Strawberry Fields fade out and in was to hide the Beatles getting somewhat out of time.

I'll mark the claims as citation required - although I'll modify the popular perception part as I can't see how we can cite that.

Apepper 06:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I've removed a recently added paragraph to this section which described the individual Beatles favourite albums; it was unreferenced - so we don't know where it came from, and it's not really relevant to the Beatles attitude to the recording process. I am considering adding a paragraph mentioning the high Beatles work ethic; Mark Lewisohn documents the hours worked on recording - particularly as the sessions were squeezed in between tours.

Apepper (talk) 20:50, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Backward Tapes

I've just noticed this section(!) It isn't cited, and I recall that George Martin claimed that he'd done the backwards vocals as a surprise for John - the putting the tape on backwards, ISTR was what interested the Beatles in backward guitars and cymbals.

I'm away from my Beatle books for a couple of weeks, but I'll do some work on the section in the New Year (honest!)

Apepper 20:26, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The stereo mix of Blue Jay Way also has backwards vocals....although, in fact, it is backwards copy of the entire mix, including all instruments, which is faded up at the end of each line. heck, I think I'll add that sentence as is.Sojambi Pinola (talk) 15:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Sampling and others

For some of these sections, especially "sampling", it says what they did but not what influence it had, not even if it was the first. That's really not helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stormchaser (talk • contribs) 20:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in answering - I've been away from the 'net for a few weeks - I sort of take your point, I took it as read that people would know how sampling took off in the 90s. Its a slightly ambiguous situation as I'd imagine that Tomorrow Never Knows influenced other bands to try adding sound samples to tracks; off the top of my head, I can think of the Bonzo Dog Band and Pink Floyd doing it - and both these bands had Beatle connections so they could be cited and being influenced by the Beatles sampling. On the other hand, yellow submarine is, AFAIAA, the earliest track to include samples of other music - but until fairly recently this wasn't widely known so, not particularly influencial. Of course, it may well be that other bands used samples in a similar way, but as it would have caused trouble with the MU, it would have been kept quiet.

I'll have a think about how this section could be rephrased.

Apepper (talk) 08:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm still thinking about how to phrase this section; what would be useful is a citation from the Bonzo Dog Band or Pink Floyd (say) saying they started using sampling as a result of hearing Walrus or Tomorrow never knows, otherwise its only weasel words to say the Beatles had influence in the field of sampling. Apepper (talk) 21:43, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Online radio programme - Klubb FM

I've moved this from the article; the programme may have been relevant, but no details of it are available on the website.

A program on the Irish online radio station, Klubb FM, featured a special hour-long show on the influence the Beatles had on the Recording Industry today, hosted on www.klubbfm.com

Apepper (talk) 18:50, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The "the/The" tidying up

This is of pretty low interest to most people, but the straw poll on whether it should be "the Beatles" or "The Beatles" has prompted me to check the article for, at least, consistancy. The article mainly used "the Beatles", I've been looking at Derek Taylor's articles on the Beatles official website and he used "the Beatles", as he was the band's press officer, I presume that they, at least, didn't object to being "the Beatles" - although McCartney didn't like being called just "Beatles" by Yoko (as in "Beatles will do this, Beatles won't do that." Based on that, I prefer that form; I've changed the (three from memory) occurrances of "The Beatles" to mark the article consistant.

I'll follow the debate with some interest! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Apepper (talk • contribs) 21:33, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Close miking of acoustic instruments

Can somebody expand upon this? What was the old "Mancini" effect, and how did close miking affect the sound? MMetro (talk) 10:16, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the long delay in replying; it was almost certainly Mantovani that McCartney was trying to avoid - Mantovani specialised in a "wall" of strings with strong vibrato. This produced a very sweet sound. Mancini was a film track composer; most famous for the Pink Panther theme and his instrument (ISTR) was the flute. McCartney continued to insist on no vibrato on strings - including Elenor Rigby; the musicians did two versions, one with and one without vibrato George Martin asked if McCartney could hear a difference, and he replied "Er, no"! They used the one without. Apepper (talk) 19:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Tomorrow Never Knows along with backwards tapes. Microphones began to be placed closer to the instruments in order to produce a fuller sound. Ringo's drums had a sweater stuffed in the bass drum to 'deaden' the sound while the bass drum microphone was positioned very close which resulted in the drums really being heard on the album. Eleanor Rigby, on a split with Yellow Submarine features just Paul and a double string quartet that has the instruments miked so close to the string that 'the musicians were in horror'. In Got to Get You Into My Life, the brass were miked in the bells of their instruments then put through a limiter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sydfloyds12 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

References

Classical Pop Attitude Section

I've added a new section on the attitude to recording classical and pop music. Since the title of the article was changed, it doesn't quite fit in, but OTOH it seems worth having - Emerick noted a change in attitude to pop music during the 60's and even seem to tie it down to recording a Day in the Life. ISTR in interviews he said that he thought that was one of the biggest things about how the Beatles changed recording, although I couldn't find a reference for that - if anyone can I'd be delighted!

I also added a bit to the calliope story; Emerick mentioned that they actually phoned around trying to find one, but could only find one controlled by punched cards and so abandoned that approach. Ironically, I recently visited a steam museum and they had a calliope playing When I'm 64, so it may have been possible after all!

I've also finally put the page number in for the reference to creating a sampled brass band solo for Yellow Submarine. Apepper (talk) 12:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I've merged this new section with the earlier one about classical musicians on pop music; that section was weak and seems a little stronger with the new section - there's one or two references to add to the section. Apepper (talk) 13:05, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Latest edits and tidying

I've removed the What You're Doing claim - it's been uncited for 2 years now! If someone can provide a reference for deliberate overloading of the mixing desk during it's recording, then please replace it. I've added citations, where I can find them, for some of the missing bits - now the Anthology book is available, it makes much of the interview transcripts available - if you can find them! Apepper (talk) 16:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Flanging...

The article has two derivations of the term flanging; originally I mentioned George Martin's claim that it was his description of "feedback on the sploshing flange" to Lennon that introduced the term. Later its stated that it's a term from pressing the flange wheel on the recorder.

Personally, I think it was unlikely that anyone would stick their fingers anywhere near a pro recorder flange wheel - the tape was moving at 15 inches per second after all! However, what I think is irrelevant - I have citations for George Martin's claim (he's told the story several times), I don't know of any citation of a recording engineer saying he used to press the flange wheel to produce a phasing effect. I'll add a citation for Martin's claim when I find the page number and tone down the flange wheel claim and add a citation required flag. Apepper (talk) 23:17, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the claim that Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds was the first track to use Phasing, primarily because it was contradicting the earlier statement that flanging may have derived from George Martin's pseudoscientific explanation of ADT to Lennon so it made the article look a bit odd. But also I've checked Geoff Emerick's and Lewisohn's books on LSD's recording and neither mention phasing being used for the first time. Apepper (talk) 09:58, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

There is phasing on "Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds "Beatles-Discography.com: Day-By-Day Song-By-Song Record-By-Record By Craig Cross Page 402

The Beatles or really John Lennon asked for Automatic Double Tracking to be invented because he did not like the way were using it in the past. Automatic Double Tracking also led to the chorus effect. The Beatles "flanging" is not quite the same as how we think of it now. The Beatles (actually, the techos) created the effect by either playing with the ADT oscillations (most of the time) or by running a finger along the flange of a tape real. A type of flanging effect was actually done as far back as 1945 (believe-it-or not but the famous Les Paul first did it by using two disc recorders running at varying speeds) but the Beatles engineers where the first to do it via ADT. What the Beatles did is that they extended the use of these ADT oscillations to the point where they effectively got a mixture of an ADT and phasing effect. Now EMI, George Martin, John Lennon etc lumped these together and used the term "flanging" to describe the oscillations and the phasing, as if it was one thing. However, today we would separate this out and think of them as being two quite different effects. So, the Beatles definition of "flanging" is probably more accurately described as flanging/phasing created by the use of ADT. Of course a wider use of flanging/phasing is what we today would think of as chorusing. If you push this ADT "flanging" even further you get the really wobbly effect heard on the guitar in While My Guitar Gently Weeps. As a note, it is not actually possible to create the sound for this solo unless you have a manual ADT oscillator, but again that is another story. The use of "flanging" is everywhere but particularly in Sgt Peppers (Magical Mystery Tour as well). When Lennon refers to "flanging" here he is actually referring to phasing. You have has heard of the extended use of flanging/phasing until you listen to the mono version of Sgt Peppers. It is fundamentally a different album in mono; it was not supposed to be played in stereo. In fact, if you listen to Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds in stereo (as on all the CDs you get in the shop) a lot of the instruments and effects are missing compared to the mono version because when you make a stereo image of a mono recording that has a lot of phasing the result is the cancellation of sounds. Very, very funny and I laugh when I hear the stereo version of Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds because that is not how it really sounds. Sgt Peppers is not a stereo album. The stereo version has killed a lot of the effects in the mono version. Very, very funny really. Anyway the list is way to long but here are some examples of "flanging" the Beatle/ADT way: - Vocals on the mono version of With a Little Help From My Friends (flanging/phasing) - Vocals on the mono version of Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds (phasing) - Acoustic guitar on Cry Baby Cry (flanging/phasing) - Backing vocals on the mono version of Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds (chorusing) - Backing vocals and piano on the song Magical Mystery Tour (chorusing) - Lead guitar on While My Guitar Gently Weeps (the wobbly oscillator). I laugh on this because people think Eric Clapton did some amazing bending on this, but it is all done by wobbling the ADT oscillator. - Lead guitar on tasty Sadie (chorusing). That should keep you busy :-)Matildamothers67 (talk) 22:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't have the Craig Cross book, I'll see if I can find more about the reference. I've never heard Geoff Emerick mention pressing the tape reel; the closest I can remember is putting sticky tape on the pinch wheel to produce a distorted piano effect. Mark Lewisohn doesn't mention the technique either. I think you're right that the Beatles called (what nowadays is known as) phasing, flanging - personally, my take on the history is that "flanging" came from the George Martin remark to Lennon. The actual technique they used was to have a variable speed tape deck playing a copy; EMI had to modify the tape deck to have the varispeed facility. It seems likely that other studios trying to copy the technique but without varispeed would have tried "manually" changing the tape speed. Phasing sounds like what an electronics engineer would call the purely electronic effect. Is the Craig Cross a reliable citation? There's a few books I don't trust (Shout comes to mind).

I've had a look at an extract from the Cross book and I noticed he uses references; what was the reference for phasing on LSD? That would be a better citation (assuming it's a sensible reference).

I know it's slightly sacrilegious(!), but I actually prefer the stereo mix for some of Sgt Pepper - although I do prefer LSD in the mono mix. Apepper (talk) 23:50, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

References

Question Regarding Amplifier Feedback

I see no evidence that John Lennon attempted to use feedback during the song "I Feel Fine" played at the New Musical Express. I see him turning to face Ringo who was located behind an amplifier, and after the song he turned and bowed to Ringo instead of the audience. Was he bowing to the amplifier? I heard no feedback distortion at all during this song, I doubt that feedback had anything to do with any of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tx5Bkj1VKY M^A^L (talk) 18:40, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, I have to confess this as a little original research, but during the lead guitar duet at 2:45, John turns to face the amplifier. Apepper (talk) 14:58, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

If John had succeeded at actually creating some feedback by turning to face the amp, then this wouldn't be so questionable. M^A^L (talk) 03:19, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Is "a little original research" like being "a little pregnant"? It's time to take out the reference. As interesting as it is historically, there is no evidence that John attempted to produce feedback in the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tx5Bkj1VKY . And no feedback was produced by him turning to face the amp or Ringo who was perched behind the amp. According to the "no original research" clause, the reference must be removed. M^A^L (talk) 14:12, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

I see your point about the original research and have removed the fragment; I was tempted because I noticed him turn towards the amp during the solo, which guitarists do to get feedback - and I can hear Lennon's guitar sound changing as he does it, but it seemed a bit odd seeing it done in the mid-1960s and as it could be the first filmed rock guitarist deliberately getting feedback, it seemed worth telling someone! As George Harrison said, "John invented Jimmy Hendrix!" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apepper (talk • contribs) 15:11, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

John invented Hendrix (or perhaps McCartney did by supporting him). But the Beatles reinvented rock and roll entirely, the influences on the genre were profound and all-pervasive. The Beatles "invented" everybody who came after, including the Stones. So Harrison was stating a truism.

The original feedback effect for the studio version of "I Feel Fine" was created when John leaned his guitar up against an amp. The sound was then placed at the beginning of the piece. I heard a couple of feedback tweets at the beginning of the youtube video, but they were apparently accidental because they occurred while the group was still in preparation mode. M^A^L (talk) 15:48, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the very long delay; that was the story that was (I think) put on the record sleeve, however when Mark Lewisohn listened to original tapes, every take had the feedback at the start, so it was deliberately added by John at recording time - George confirmed this in the Anthology; he described the accident happening during a rehearsal and that John worked out how to get the affect - probably he meant to control the affect; getting it is simply a case of putting the guitar near the amp.

Apepper (talk) 21:02, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Please Add Reference (or better yet, remove completely)

Part of the influence of the Beatles was the bringing closer together of the classical and pop "worlds"; the mix of classical strings with electric guitars and drums used on "Strawberry Fields Forever" led Roy Wood to co-found the Electric Light Orchestra to continue where "Strawberry Fields" left off.

Who says?? And what does this have to do with recording technology? M^A^L (talk) 14:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

It's partly a historical paragraph; the article used to be "The Beatles Influence on Recording Music", so I used ELO as an example band that had gone on record as being influenced by Beatle innovation. I'll try and find a citation for Roy Wood or Jeff Lynn talking about the Strawberry Fields influence. Apepper (talk) 15:14, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Other stuff

Could they also be considered innovators of albums without momentary gaps between tracks on albums (rills) as referred to on the Sgt Pepper and The Beatles (album) pages? And likewise with hidden tracks, and er, dog whistles... ? --TangoTizerWolfstone (talk) 11:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the 2 year delay! For some reason, I don't get notified when someone changes the comments. When the article was originally written as "The Beatles' Influence on Music Recording" I'd go for these - particularly for Pink Floyd. But now it's the Beatles' recording technology, I'm not so sure. I do recall the album cutter for Sgt Pepper being quoted in Mark Lewisohn's Recording History book, so I'll have a look. Apepper (talk) 17:29, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Fixing mixing citations

I'm planning to do some work on fixing the mixing citations. I'm away from my Beatle books ATM, so it'll be a few days but I'll probably do some editing throughout the article.

I've also changed the description of how two 4 track machines were synchronised for A Day in the Life. Geoff Emerick described a slightly different technique in an ABC interview. Originally, the article said a pilot tone was recorded on a "spare" track on one machine, then that was used to drive the second machine. In the interview, Emerick said an external oscillator was used to control two machine simultaneously. I'll try looking at Geoff Emerick's book again to see if I have it right now. Apepper (talk) 17:23, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Deepak

He lives in morappur Nerupuda (talk) 19:21, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Feedback in It's All Too Much

I added a 'citation' to illustrate that the song does, in fact, have feedback at the beginning. For no explained reason, my citation was removed and the 'citation needed' tag was replaced. I'm going to add the citation back in. This is a place to discuss any issue anyone might have with citation. --82.21.97.70 (talk) 22:29, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Linking the song is not sufficient as a source. I could link a song and claim that I heard John Lennon say my name but that doesn't make it true. We need a reliable secondary source that confirms the edit. Sundayclose (talk) 00:41, 13 March 2020 (UTC)