So... What do YOU think a producer does?

[juppu]

Relating to my previous thread about studio nightmares, I'd like to ask the good old question that nobody has the 'right' answer for...

Boys and girls:

What does a producer do?

This is still an interesting question though I call myself some kind of a producer and I've been credited as producer on some microscopic releases etc.

As we know, there is no one type of producer (George Martin and Walter Afasianeff don't grow in the same trees [in fact they don't grow in trees as far as I know]).
But what is the common thing? Is there a common thing? What does it take to get there?

I'd just like to hear what you people think about it and share my thoughts (in a later post, I need food now...).

?

Juppu

[jecahn]

Producer / Project Manager's caveat emptor...

...Thou shalt be aware of and manage all of thy resources deftly. Thou shalt be aware that the most important resource is manpower. Thou shalt, above all else, be an extraordinary manager of personalities...


It doesn't matter what YOU think a producer should do. It's what your client thinks a producer should do that determines your role and involvment. Above all else, you must be a guidance counselor, parent and social worker.

[juppu]

hi

I agree - it really depends on the project or band you're working with, and the first most important thing is to get this figured out with the client.

And not everybody is suitable for all projects...

Managing personalities indeed. Sometimes I wish I had a degree in psychology or group psychology...

Juppu

[eusagc]

...and it also depends on what the producer is capable of doing really. is he also a musician? is he also a technician? is he primarily an audio engineer? if he is just a "producer" per se, he can cover much of the psyche-pr thing, and look better at the project aspect (deadlines, budget, schedules, etc.), but not very adequately the technical details of production or the nitty-gritty aspects of guitar playing let's say.

was that bend out of tune? i need more sheen on the vocals, but how do i actually execute it? i've got a broken op-amp, would this lm741 do as a replacement? how do i identify that it's actually the piano's intonation and not the playing that makes this tracking session sound bad?

i work on other projects mainly as an engineer, in my studio or out, and have never really "produced" anything (in that sense), except on my songs, my band, and my own projects. i remember doing a heavy metal project with a producer perpetually behind my back (very awkward for me!), and during mixing i tried every trick in software to get this sloppy rhythm guitar part tighter, and got very temped to just clone-replace that track with my own playing, just to make the song flow better.

of course i didn't do it.

cheers,
albert

[Robert D]

Producers are the evil entity that force re-writes onto poor helpless musicians/songwriters who are bound by their contract to accept them, and then bring in outside players to play the parts the band thought thay were gonna play. They run the budget through the roof, knowing that it will all come out of the artists royalties before the artist gets to keep a dime. Then they drive away in their BMW's to go to another coke infused hollywood party. Just ask Tom Petty, or Fee Waybill.
Ok, there are good producers. Their job is supposed to be the visionary that sees, or hears how the project is supposed to sound, and coaches the artist into performing that vision, and they know enough about engineering to tell the engineer, irrespective of the particular studio and equipment, how to arrive at that sound. They usually have a few additional arrangements in mind, be they vocal arrangements, or strings, horns, etc. , and can make them happen with a couple of phone calls. They are the overseer of the projects budget and schedule, and the emotional well being of the artist until the project is finished.
There's more, but I've rambled on enough, and it's time to go home.
Cheers, RD

[narcoman]

Well, I am a producer for my sins. I earn my living either ruining or making other peopls recordings. I work mostly for EMI and my own production company and generally when I make a record it is MY record. Up till the band comes into the studio its their SONG and it will remain their song after the session. However, my role is to make a RECORD. It is my role to listen to the ideas and ideals of the artist and the record company and other people and make the final decision. Its my way that gets recorded. If the artist or record company doesnt like it then they dont use it, but make no mistake, it is a producer that in one form or another (whether his role be popping in every now and then to check on progress or sitting there screaming at vocalist to sing right and sorting out drum beats) who actually is responsible for the outcome. We get the perfomance from the artist. This may all sound arrogant, but basically you are supposed to be in control of the session and recording.

one whisky too many

cheers

[ElectricAuntJemima]

The producer gets paid to do a whole lot of nothin..

[bombastique]

Ah - if only that were the case!

Do you happen to know anyone that would pay me to do a whole lotta nothin'? I need more jobs like that...

[juppu]

Good opinions, folks...

I think one of the most important thing producers do is what narcoman said - get the performances out.

In a way a producer can be seen as the aspect that is heard on every single instrument/note/hit/word. A band can be responsible for their own sound, but a producer can be instrumental in "making" their own sound. Look at Guns'n'Roses - their producer (whose name I can't unfortunately recall) basically was the catalyst for creating Slash's guitar sound.

On the other hand, what I described above can be a bit of a problem in some cases - which is what Robert was talking about - i.e. the producer interferes destructively with the songwriter (or the bands "signature" sound).

It all really depends on what kind of a producer you are and what kind of acts you produce. As Albert said, a producer can lean towards the musical side of things (e.g. producers who play all the instruments and program everything - Walter A., Babyface, Jam & Lewis), the technical side of things (more producer/engingeer-sort of people) or a very conceptual side (the Brian Eno-type genius). This partially determines what acts you're likely to get - I wouldn't hook up Flood with Britney Spears or Max Martin with Radiohead (A&R might want to - big names, ya see)...

Producing a song has been described in a variety of ways, which my favourite might be the Nile Rogers idea of building a house - both sonically and musically. If the song is not solid, you can't build a big production on it.

Other random thoughts are the descriptive credits producers can get. These are both from Bob Dylan albums:

(Desire, 1975) "This record could have been produced by Don DeVito"

(Street Legal, 1978) "Captain In Charge - Don DeVito, Second In Command - Arthur Rosato, Queen Bee - Mary Alice Artes, Secretary of Goodwill - Ava Megna, Champion of all Causes - Larry Kegan"

Weird, eh? I like the idea of the ship crew (here combined with random things like the Queen bee - could this mean executive producer?). And I especially wonder what the first credit might mean. Did the album get out of hands of the producer?

Hmm... Thoughts?

I'm off for 3 weeks, but will be checking this site regularly, though not every day.

Juppu

[juppu]

Forgot something: narcoman, you're based in Oxford, UK? I might be around your town maybe in late May-early June.

Fancy a pint then? http://www.audioforums.com/forums/smile.gif

Juppu

[BagHun]

I had a course in college (Music Business degree) called "Production", taught by a guy who had produced a few hit records. During the semester he said, over and over, that there were no qualifications for being a record producer.

On the final exam he asked the question, "What are the qualifications for being a record producer?" He subtracted a point for every answer listed!

I guess the producer is the guy listed as the producer on the label copy. That's what a producer does...gets his name listed as producer.

[narcoman]

Ha ha, i like that last one !!
I guess he didnt get paid and was angry or something !! Boy, i just read my response that i put up. I'd been drinking whiskly with for several hours ! Shows. Thats pretty aggresive for me !!

Juppo, sure. You should come over and see what we're doing here. Exciting stuff. Check out www.nimrodproductions.com (http://www.nimrodproductions.com) for contact details

cheers

[eusagc]

narcoman,

i thought i was the only one on booze when i wrote my response!!! http://www.audioforums.com/forums/biggrin.gif

my dream session is to have bob katz do the tracking, with george massenburg mixing and engineering, and bob ludwig do the mastering, with groups like the london symphony orchestra, or itzhak perlman, or a rock band like dream theater. that should be real edgy... i just wanna be a fly lurking somewhere in the studio... http://www.audioforums.com/forums/smile.gif

cheers,
albert

[huxtable jones]

I think a *good* producer knows when to be a fly on the wall and when to be a raging bull. Surely it takes some of both for every project.

[Robert D]

Hux - Excellent......yes, recognizing genius when it's happening, and just letting it happen, and then providing it when it's not.
Enabling, not controlling. Inspiring, not directing. Music and film both have producers, but there can be no directors in the creation of music.
RD

[narcoman]

On the nail, Robert


on the nail.

[ElectricAuntJemima]

Yeah, where would the "Beatles" have been without Phil Silvers????

[This message has been edited by ElectricAuntJemima (edited 04-21-2002).]

[9MileSkid]

Originally posted by ElectricAuntJemima:
Yeah, where would the "Beatles" have been without Phil Spector????

Same place the Ronettes were without George Martin? http://www.audioforums.com/forums/wink.gif

-m

[juppu]

Yes, and what would have Beethoven done without ? (Fill the blank space)

Been ill, haven't been around, happy that the thread is still going!

Narcoman, part of your email address doesn't show on the website, I guess the rest is just "ons.com". http://www.audioforums.com/forums/smile.gif

Yes, Huxtable, very good point. I like that.

About the directing thing, I have to partially disagree, the reason being that I have had the 'joy' of working with numerous second-, third- and fourth-rate musicians, who just need that extra bit of attention and coaching. And I see coaching/heavy instructions as the equivalent of directing an actor or actress.
It's something that shouldn't be a problem generally, because if you're producing a band, you'll generally let them play how they play, helping with arrangements etc. and giving general (and/or abstract) guidance in playing. If you're producing a solo artist and you hire musicians and they can't do the job, you fire them. Unfortunately there is a twilight zone between them, luckily it's not very big.

Gotta go,

Juppu

[ElectricAuntJemima]

Wasn't Beethoven under the magical spell of the church??

[narcoman]

juppu, i'd better have a look at that.

Just for interest, phil spector did produce one of the beatles albums !! Let it be would be the crime in question. The beatles themselves were so dissapointed that they went back to george martin asking if he'd produce there next record. He agreed but only if he'd let HIM produce it and not fall into there usual self destructive nonsense. They agreed and Abbey road was the result. Let it be was shelved, but in the hype surrounding there "divorce" it was released AFTER they split, thats why it appears after abbey road as a release even though it was recorded before. I'm also pretty sure that the production that Spector did amounted to turning all faders to 10 and adding very ugly strings on the long and winding road. Rubbish album, but the live tracks are pretty good (one after 909 and two of us).

cheers

[bobl]

From baby sitting to provoking. I've been in enough studios to see the gamut.
Did Phil Spector make Jack Nietzche or vice versa. I never met Spector but have read tons of stories about his peculiarities. I was on a session with Jack in the seventies. After staying up all night in the studio with the group, and everyone pretty bent out of shape, things wrapped about 4 a.m. Jack then went home and wrote a string arrangement. He then called a session at 9 a.m., and rehearsed the strings. Took about 2 hours to nail down. Jack's professionalism amidst rock 'n roll neophytes was exemplary. He could joke and laugh with all of us and still had the presence of mind to stay the course. I still have the original charts for the strings.

[juppu]

Been away again,

I think Nitzcshe was slightly younger than Spector, though he did some work pretty early.

He was a truly great composer and arranger and is still sadly missed...

Juppu

[Craft]

I'm just a sucker for the powertrip.....

[juppu]

You've gathered a bit of gear to be in it just for the powertrip.... http://www.audioforums.com/forums/wink.gif

You seem to do pretty much everything from songwriting to remixing for artists. Sounds interesting, but not my cup of tea.

How come you went into taking a more dominant attitude? Just interested...

Juppu

[SortaPop]

Hi All!

I've had some good laughs and reflections reading your posts!
I have only recently in the last year accepted the title of "Producer". Before that I was an Engineer/Muscian. A Producer has only one job requirement...to produce or make a product. It really doesn't matter how it is done as long as it gets done. The rest could be a debate on what a GOOD Producer is.
You really don't know that you are until people start telling you.

Later,

[juppu]

Hi,

Nice studio you got there... High rooms and so. And weird pictures of you. http://www.audioforums.com/forums/eek.gif

http://www.audioforums.com/forums/smile.gif

Your post brought in mind another little side of the subject - i.e. are you the right person for the project/band/artist? [OK, wrong and right don't exist, but maybe you get the picture]

Someone said part of the producer's job is to know wheter to do something or not to do something. I guess another one is whether to even go for the project, if you know somebody else would be better for it.

I've personally turned down work opportunities because I didn't think I could bring anything more to the project and I didn't want to do it for the money. I've given projects to other people who I thought would be appropriate - and the results have alway been better than what I could have done. The same has also worked vice versa.

Greediness doesn't get one far in this business. Should have I done those projects I turned down, my reputation would be worse...

Just more random thoughts again... http://www.audioforums.com/forums/smile.gif

Later,

Juppu

[SortaPop]

Thanks!

Just finished building in December.

Ya, I have to agree with you about job selection. Working on something you love makes it great... the money will come later!

[juppu]

Yep!

Just came back from a studio session (it's 3 AM in England), which has been a wonderful pleasure to do (for a change - see thread about my studio nightmare about a month ago). Recorded two songs yesterday (drums, bass, guitar, keys, vocals + percussion) and overdubs to a further overdubs today and all I have to say is that it's been a wonderful 2 days.

You know when that little magic happens? Well, this time it was a perfect vocal take that was supposed to be a guide track. The mic was a Beta 58, but I'm not even considering an overdub with some fancy condenser. The take was just pure magic.

- so what a producer does is has the courage and vision to keep a guide vocal take and call it THE take. I guess I had yesterday.

Another thing that happened was that the other song (previous magic was on the other) worked like never before. We had a wordclock problem in the studio and it took a while to sort out, which obviously made everybody quite cranky. But when they heard the good news that the problem was fixed, they got this extra boost to nail the song on the first take. Beautiful! Besides, the band wanted to overdub that particular song, but as the producer of the project I convinced them that we need 'the live feel to it' and this happened.

-so the producer knows better than the band (sometimes, obviously, not)

And one more thing that happened: We've been recording a ballad, but only today we realised we started working on it from a completely wrong perspective. The singer/leader wanted programmed drums, which I did and they just don't work. The guitar doesn't work with it, the keys are indifferent and the overdubs we tried today sounded cheesy. So... We decided to do it acoustically and forget the old version completely.

-so the producer must see when things are not happening and must be ready to start again if necessary to make the product as good as he can.

Well that all sounded very arrogant... It's not meant to be about how great and wonderful I am and how perfect my sessions are, I just wrote it to get some discussion going.

Anyone else? Magic moments lately?

[Oh, btw you can hear two tracks from the band at www.artistcollaboration.com/users/juppu (http://www.artistcollaboration.com/users/juppu) - the tracks are Nanana and Tricks, I'd be glad for comments]

And now to bed.

Juppu

[SortaPop]

Sounds like a good session...the only thing I would do is try an other vocal take (or 10) on a different track with a large diaphram condenser mic. Then wait about a week to listen back to both tracks so that you can remain objective. Sometimes part of the magic is in the clearity.

[juppu]

We actually tried it yesterday, recorded another take on another track, but it just didn't have the same impact. I'll wait a week. I'll upload the tune(s) as soon as they get finished.

Cheers,

Juppu

[narcoman]

hey juppu,

when R you coming over ?

cheers

[juppu]

Early June would be the best time for me, quite busy (and skint) until then... I'll give you an email about it soon.

Juppu

[jackcu]

just listened to Nanana - very good! Is this commercially available anywhere?

Cheers,

Jack.

[juppu]

Thanks!

It's going to be available on a self-release cd very soon. If you're interested, email me and I can sort something out...

I'll be uploading plenty of new stuff in the next few days, it just takes a while with a 56k modem :-(

[And there will be a new long and boring thread about the tunes and the like]

Juppu

[juppu]

I have uploaded the new songs and started a thread in the prod. tips forum (just for a change, I'll be still posting the same old bollocks).

Go to www.artistcollaboration.com/users/juppu/front2.html (http://www.artistcollaboration.com/users/juppu/front2.html)

Juppu

[spacemonkey28]

"producer" is an abritrary title that holds as much meaning as the phrase "sell-out", i.e., none at all.

despite who's name ends up in the credits- it is the musicians who are the producers as they actually PRODUCED the sounds.

[EssDee]

Originally posted by spacemonkey28:
"producer" is an abritrary title that holds as much meaning as the phrase "sell-out", i.e., none at all.

despite who's name ends up in the credits- it is the musicians who are the producers as they actually PRODUCED the sounds.



Left completely to their own devices, you'd be surprised at what most musician's can't accomplish without an objective opinion/approach on the opposite side of the glass. In addition to the things that have already been mentioned, one of the primary functions of a producer would be to accept nothing less than perfection. That can be difficult to do from the standpoint of a musician.
You can have world class tone, perfect intonation, and an immaculate performance and still have the wrong PART for the song/composition that you are creating. To me that is one more very important function of a good producer - to recognize, write, create, or extract these PARTS that fit with the work in progress. "Less is More" and many musicians never seem to grasp that small but important fact.

[juppu]

Good post, EssDee, that's very true. You have to be very skilled as a musician to be able to successfully 'self-produce' your stuff.

There are many examples of this, but there's even more examples of less skillful musicians trying to produce themselves with poor success. Usually a member of the band records and mixes all and emphasizes his own instrument/stuff he's written - ending up with a piece of crap with a lousy balance, poor structure (the famous 128-bar guitar solo), obvious omissions and flaws in arrangement, and otherwise careless and bad production.

As I said, there are exceptions. Look them up in your CD collection.

Juppu

[bombastique]

Traditionally it was the producers job to manage the budget allowed by the record company, arrange for studio time, hire additional musicians (if needed), buy tape, keep the production on schedule, do re-arrangemnts and generally just take care of all the little things that keep the band focused on making music.

It is not an 'arbitrary' thing - anyone who has done any producing knows this.

[spacemonkey28]

I don't disagree with any of the responses. My comment was more geared towards the perception that the job description of a producer can vary greatly. The presence of this form would suggest that. Just because someone is calling themselves a producer, does that necessarily mean that they are doing those "traditional" functions of one? The reverse is also true- someone could be doing those things but not be credited as a producer in the liner notes.