Topic: How'd Paul Lango' Record Phish?

[stevetoney]

OK, I still love listening to Phish ().  Last night listening to some Live Phish I've bought from their site, I was wondering if anybody knows the rig/setup/techniques that Paul used to record all of the Live Phish stuff.  IMHO, he always got the matrix pretty much spot on perfect!

[baustin]

I think Paul ran multiple recordings. I'm pretty sure he always ran multi-track, 2 channel DAT (possibly ADAT) and a computer workstation. He also ran a pair of onstage AKG 414's as well as a stereo pair of AKG 414's from the soundboard area up until 2000 (give or take a few years).

He wasn't very talkative (at least to random me), but I managed to get a bit out of him at one point. He said that he had gotten the 2 track recordings down pat, so he felt he didn't need to use the multi-tracks for Live Phish (nor did he need the 414's from the soundboard). If I'm not mistaken, he also said he used the computer workstation for the LP series because it was much quicker then doing a transfer, etc.

[cleantone]

I think I recall an mbox being used for the two tracks when they were new. I didn't see much post hiatus Phish. Just a few shows I think.

[baustin]

Also, I've spoken with Steve Young (moe.'s sound engineer) a few times about his setup...

He, too, runs straight 2 channel from the board (DAT or ADAT) for their Warts and All series. As far as the AKG 414's that are split onstage, he said that they're primarily so the band can hear the crowd between songs (moe. runs in ear monitors). Steve said that the AKG 414's run through a compressor or limiter, so as soon as the band kicks in the 414's go WAY down in the mix. You only hear the 414's between songs when the band is not playing or if somebody yells loudly/whistles during a song.

[T.J.]

cool info bri! thanks

[stevetoney]

I think Paul ran multiple recordings. I'm pretty sure he always ran multi-track, 2 channel DAT (possibly ADAT) and a computer workstation. He also ran a pair of onstage AKG 414's as well as a stereo pair of AKG 414's from the soundboard area up until 2000 (give or take a few years).

He wasn't very talkative (at least to random me), but I managed to get a bit out of him at one point. He said that he had gotten the 2 track recordings down pat, so he felt he didn't need to use the multi-tracks for Live Phish (nor did he need the 414's from the soundboard). If I'm not mistaken, he also said he used the computer workstation for the LP series because it was much quicker then doing a transfer, etc.

OK, I'm kinda ignorant to this, so if I can break that info down a little bit more to get a better understanding....

You're saying that Paul was recording several different ways for each show 1) multi-track tape recorder 2) two track stereo tape recorder and 3) computer workstation. 

So, taking this one step further, I'm wondering about the specifics.  For example, the multi-track recorder would probably be recording each on-stage mic and instrument directly onto it's own track.  So, maybe Trey's vocals would be one track, guitar amp a second track, Pages vocals a third, keys a 4th, mikes bass amp the 5th, mikes vocals the 6th...and so on.

For the two tracks...would those then be just the on-stage stereo 414s setup kinda like we would setup our mics to up-close record a band? 

Maybe the computer workstation was recording as downstream backup for both of the above setups in case tape ran out or boogered up?

Finally, I guess for the Live Phish series then, we're either getting multi-track masters (probably mixed together with the two track for crowd ambience) or two track masters?

Just kinda throwing some specifics out there on how I am imagining the setup based on the feedback.  Would appreciate any corrections in my assumptions.

[bluegrass_brad]

Steve said that the AKG 414's run through a compressor or limiter, so as soon as the band kicks in the 414's go WAY down in the mix. You only hear the 414's between songs when the band is not playing or if somebody yells loudly/whistles during a song.

It's called "ducking".  That technique is used alot to bring levels of some things down so that something else is placed out front. One example would be live sporting event broadcasts where you hear the crowd, and then when the play by play announcer speaks the crowd level goes down. In the case of moe.  the board feed is sent to the side chain input of the compressor being used on the 414's.  When the board feed signal goes up (band starts playing) it reduces the output of the 414's, then increase's it if the signal to the sidechain goes down (band gets quiet or stops).

[baustin]

OK, I'm kinda ignorant to this, so if I can break that info down a little bit more to get a better understanding....

You're saying that Paul was recording several different ways for each show 1) multi-track tape recorder 2) two track stereo tape recorder and 3) computer workstation. 

i'm almost 100% on all of this. i am most certainly open to being corrected though.

So, taking this one step further, I'm wondering about the specifics.  For example, the multi-track recorder would probably be recording each on-stage mic and instrument directly onto it's own track.  So, maybe Trey's vocals would be one track, guitar amp a second track, Pages vocals a third, keys a 4th, mikes bass amp the 5th, mikes vocals the 6th...and so on.

i'm pretty sure. and if i'm not mistaken, paul also ran a board (the one that sat to his left) specifically for fishman's drums. my guess is that he mixed the drums, then sent them via 2 channel to the main mixing console. again, please anybody jump in and add or correct me.

For the two tracks...would those then be just the on-stage stereo 414s setup kinda like we would setup our mics to up-close record a band? 

split very far apart onstage. basically on the far left and right of the stage. i'm guessing he used the "ducking" method as described above for the onstage 414's.

Maybe the computer workstation was recording as downstream backup for both of the above setups in case tape ran out or boogered up?

Finally, I guess for the Live Phish series then, we're either getting multi-track masters (probably mixed together with the two track for crowd ambience) or two track masters?

Just kinda throwing some specifics out there on how I am imagining the setup based on the feedback.  Would appreciate any corrections in my assumptions.

i believe that all of the post hiatus shows that were released immediately are 2 track masters, recorded either straight to DAT or the computer workstation. i believe that every show was also multi-tracked but more than likely just archived. the multi-track mastering process i'm sure was a time consuming process. they have released some multi-tracked shows. off the top of my head i'm not sure which ones. most definitely "a live one" and "live in brooklyn". if i'm not mistaken they re-released some shows that had originally been released from the 2 track masters.

[bluegrass_brad]

I ran onstage modded Oktava 319 LD mics when I was multi-tracking for Yonder.  one on either side of the stage, pointing out towards the audience and pointed out so that if they would have had laser beam coming out of them, it would have crossed right about FOH.  This was to get crowd on the multi-track.  I would jump the signal from one of those mics into our monitor board so the guys would have crowd in their in-ear monitors if they so desired. I should have kept those mics.  After I modded them they sounded really good.

[baustin]

The show notes from the first night of Brooklyn:

http://www.livephish.com/show.asp?show=335
"the audio tracks of this show were recorded live from 2-track by Paul Languedoc. The "Live in Brooklyn". DVD, CD and livephish.com video clips are re-mixed and mastered from digital multi-track tape for maximum fidelity."

[anhisr]

I believe the CD releases of the Live Download series are only remastered from the 2 track tapes and not mixed with the multi track tapes.. 

[baustin]

I believe the CD releases of the Live Download series are only remastered from the 2 track tapes and not mixed with the multi track tapes.. 

yeah, i was just looking on their website and i don't think i really made that clear.

[Tim]

So, taking this one step further, I'm wondering about the specifics.  For example, the multi-track recorder would probably be recording each on-stage mic and instrument directly onto it's own track.  So, maybe Trey's vocals would be one track, guitar amp a second track, Pages vocals a third, keys a 4th, mikes bass amp the 5th, mikes vocals the 6th...and so on.

Yes, all of the instrument and vocal mics as well as the mics for ambient crowd nosie on stage and at the board go to a separate track on the recorder to be mixed later

For the two tracks...would those then be just the on-stage stereo 414s setup kinda like we would setup our mics to up-close record a band? 

No. The 2 track mix is just the Left and Right that come out of the board and into the amps and speakers. AFAIK he wasn't making a separate mix for the 2 channel recording, just recording his own mix of the show.

Finally, I guess for the Live Phish series then, we're either getting multi-track masters (probably mixed together with the two track for crowd ambience) or two track masters?

No and this is my one bitch about so much of the phish archive releases. They are just the 2 tracks. The LivePhish series is only 2 tracks. A Live One, Brooklyn and a few others are multitrack (I think NYE 95 is) but most are just the 2 tracks from the show.

[stevetoney]

No and this is my one bitch about so much of the phish archive releases. They are just the 2 tracks. The LivePhish series is only 2 tracks. A Live One, Brooklyn and a few others are multitrack (I think NYE 95 is) but most are just the 2 tracks from the show.

OK, all that makes sense.  Thanks.

I can understand what you're saying about the multi-track, but I have to say that the Live Phish downloads that I've bought I think sound really good, so I guess for my own tastes, I don't see $12.95 to be unreasonable for what I'm buying...which is to my ears a very nice sounding SBD mix.  I have to believe that if any of the two track mixes were lacking something (like a good balance or whatever), they'd 'fix' them through multi-tracking.  For that manner, I'd imagine that when making selections of what to put out, they skip over the two-tracks that don't have good sound and only put forward the good sounding two-track shows.  So, from that perspsective, maybe the two-tracks that they're producing sound almost as good as if they were to put together a multi-track mix.  Just some thoughts. 

[baustin]

and how can we forget this picture of mike grace with phish's grace 801 setup?

[Tim]

My ears greatly prefer the multi-tracks

The prices are fine for the 2 tracks but I'd gladly pay more for multi-track releases

that's just me though, I understand why they don't do a lot of multi-tracks. It's a lot more labor intensive and the 2 tracks sell just fine.

[cleantone]

I understand why they don't do a lot of multi-tracks. It's a lot more labor intensive and the 2 tracks sell just fine.

One of the Live Phish releases that I produced (not Phish, The Duo with Mike) was multitracked but they basically said if it couldn't be mixed in a day they would sell the 2 track DAT. When the band was gigging the 2 tracks were faster and cheaper. Now they are just cheaper and easier to sell than the multitracks. Well still faster but there is no rush to get them online if you dig.

[morst]

Seems to me that Paul used Panasonic SV3700 DAT decks to record the 2-track SBD feeds, then added the Tascam Hi-8-based DA-88 multitrack recorders around 1993. (I first remember seeing them in KC in August 1993)

When I started seeing Grateful Dead shows, Dan Healy used a pair of Panasonic SV3700's, as well as a high-quality professional 10-well cassette duplicator (I can't remember the brand, but it was a widely used system, though the GD's rig was the only time I ever saw it used in the field.) Starting around 1992 or 1993, they used the Alesis VHS-based ADAT multitrack recorders. Thinking back, I don't know if I ever saw the multitracks in the Dead's system before spring 1993 (Chapel Hill was the first time I recall noticing them)

[run_run_run]

I wish phish released more multitrack boards, it seems lazy not to.

[Matt Quinn]

I wish phish released more multitrack boards, it seems lazy not to.

It might be economically prudent to hold on to a good chunk of them for later in life.

[run_run_run]

I wish phish released more multitrack boards, it seems lazy not to.

God bless capitalism



It might be economically prudent to hold on to a good chunk of them for later in life.

[Swampy]

Really doesn't make sense for them to release the multitrack versions. They donate all the money for the live Phish series right? Studio and engineer time to mix a three hour live show is pretty outrageous. IMO, I'd rather listen to the two tracks, engineers that mix live Phish in the studio don't get it right to me... They tend to mix it like a normal rock band, lots of kick, keys pretty low, ect... I don't think that works for Phish

[stevetoney]

Good points Swamp.  yes, I think the stuff from Live Phish goes to their charity.  I remember when they quit, a couple of the guys said that their biggest regret was that they felt bad that their foundation would suffer financially as a result.  I guess this is a way to keep that alive.

Regarding your comment about engineers and mixing, I see what you mean.  I'm not so into that either.  I kinda consider it to be an outside opinion about what the music should sound like.  For the most part, I don't think the artist is present when the mixing is done, so the fancy panning and all that tend to be just interpretations of what the music should sound like by the engineers.  OTOH, you've got guys like Hendrix that control everything and have a clear vision in their mind as to what each track should sound like. 

Hendrix's albums were studio masterpieces as well as musical masterpieces.  They should be required linstening through headphones only.

[stevetoney]

By the way, I find no fault in a band keeping their options open for the sake of future commercial considerations. 

First, none of us on this list works for nothing right?  So, how can we criticize an artist that wishes to capitalize from a job well done? 

Second, I honestly doubt that anybody here would not do the same thing.  If someone has the potential for profits later because of your work, don't you also want a piece of that action?

Once again, Phish should be commended for being a great band that worked hard to make great music.  The fact that they still can sell this music some years after their band stopped is testament to that fact. 

Good for them (and us) that they did it so well...they deserve whatever comes their way by way of future profits.  Besides all else, it's not like the fans don't have access to an aud copy of almost every show they ever performed...at least after a certain point in time.

[rokpunk]

Steve said that the AKG 414's run through a compressor or limiter, so as soon as the band kicks in the 414's go WAY down in the mix. You only hear the 414's between songs when the band is not playing or if somebody yells loudly/whistles during a song.

It's called "ducking".  That technique is used alot to bring levels of some things down so that something else is placed out front. One example would be live sporting event broadcasts where you hear the crowd, and then when the play by play announcer speaks the crowd level goes down. In the case of moe.  the board feed is sent to the side chain input of the compressor being used on the 414's.  When the board feed signal goes up (band starts playing) it reduces the output of the 414's, then increase's it if the signal to the sidechain goes down (band gets quiet or stops).

this is done all the time for in-ear rigs. the problem with in-ears is that you loose the ambient noise of the venue since you have molds shoved in your ears. an experienced engineer will point a pair of mics (shotguns are often used, but 57's, 414's, or just about any mic can be used for this) at the crowd, and between songs, will bring the ambient mics up in the bands ears so they dont feel so isolated from the crowd.

[Gutbucket]

Steve said that the AKG 414's run through a compressor or limiter, so as soon as the band kicks in the 414's go WAY down in the mix. You only hear the 414's between songs when the band is not playing or if somebody yells loudly/whistles during a song.

It's called "ducking".  That technique is used alot to bring levels of some things down so that something else is placed out front. One example would be live sporting event broadcasts where you hear the crowd, and then when the play by play announcer speaks the crowd level goes down. In the case of moe.  the board feed is sent to the side chain input of the compressor being used on the 414's.  When the board feed signal goes up (band starts playing) it reduces the output of the 414's, then increase's it if the signal to the sidechain goes down (band gets quiet or stops).

this is done all the time for in-ear rigs. the problem with in-ears is that you loose the ambient noise of the venue since you have molds shoved in your ears. an experienced engineer will point a pair of mics (shotguns are often used, but 57's, 414's, or just about any mic can be used for this) at the crowd, and between songs, will bring the ambient mics up in the bands ears so they dont feel so isolated from the crowd.

^^^
If I recall correctly, that was the original application of the Healy method mic technique, for onstage communication as well as audience connection.

[willndmb]

imo, to me, this thread is one of the best at ts
great info and fun to read for me
+t

[Tim]

I try and contribute something useful to the board every 4 to 6 weeks

[bluegrass_brad]

this is done all the time for in-ear rigs. the problem with in-ears is that you loose the ambient noise of the venue since you have molds shoved in your ears. an experienced engineer will point a pair of mics (shotguns are often used, but 57's, 414's, or just about any mic can be used for this) at the crowd, and between songs, will bring the ambient mics up in the bands ears so they dont feel so isolated from the crowd.

I used an onstage mic in the ears with Yonder, but we didnt duck it. they preferred having it in their ears all the time with no ducking, just at a low level, so they could hear the crowd reaction and energy. And it gave a nice natural reverb.

[grider]

Steve said that the AKG 414's run through a compressor or limiter, so as soon as the band kicks in the 414's go WAY down in the mix. You only hear the 414's between songs when the band is not playing or if somebody yells loudly/whistles during a song.

It's called "ducking".  That technique is used alot to bring levels of some things down so that something else is placed out front. One example would be live sporting event broadcasts where you hear the crowd, and then when the play by play announcer speaks the crowd level goes down. In the case of moe.  the board feed is sent to the side chain input of the compressor being used on the 414's.  When the board feed signal goes up (band starts playing) it reduces the output of the 414's, then increase's it if the signal to the sidechain goes down (band gets quiet or stops).

this effect is very obviously noticeable on 90's era Dead soundboard recordings, once the music stops the audience source feed jumps way up in an unnatural way, and often fluctuates in source and level too, then drops back down when the next tune begins, I don't understand why it was done and it is annoying to say the least

[rokpunk]

this effect is very obviously noticeable on 90's era Dead soundboard recordings, once the music stops the audience source feed jumps way up in an unnatural way, and often fluctuates in source and level too, then drops back down when the next tune begins, I don't understand why it was done and it is annoying to say the least

perhaps the soundboard recordings you are thinking of are monitor mixes.
make sense now?

[fobstl]

this effect is very obviously noticeable on 90's era Dead soundboard recordings, once the music stops the audience source feed jumps way up in an unnatural way, and often fluctuates in source and level too, then drops back down when the next tune begins, I don't understand why it was done and it is annoying to say the least
[/quote]
I always understood that this was a result of the audience sound coming through the bands vocal mics. When the individual band member stepped off of the pad that was in front of his vocal mic that mic was turned off. Thus the crowd noise that was coming through the vocal mics was eliminated.

[morst]

I always understood that this was a result of the audience sound coming through the bands vocal mics. When the individual band member stepped off of the pad that was in front of his vocal mic that mic was turned off. Thus the crowd noise that was coming through the vocal mics was eliminated.

Yup, they side-chained a burgler alarm pad to a gate on Bobby's mic, with the hold timed so he could jump and it would not cut out, but when he stepped away from the mic, it would mute. Otherwise the cymbals come through the vocal mics and fill up the mix with high frequencies. Plus, the fewer open mics you have, the more gain-before-feedback.