What made you want to shift from being an engineer to producing? How did it transpire? Was it gradual or sudden?
I kind of feel like I've always been a producer. Even when I started back in 1988 with my first 4-track. I did it to record my own band. I immediately started producing.
It had to have been a Tascam Porta 01 or Porta 02.
It was actually a Tascam 688, the 8-track model. I still have it and use it all the time.
So, out of the gate you had a predisposition towards arranging, guiding, and all those amorphous things producers do that is the glue for the whole project.
I always felt like I was a producer, but I needed to learn how to be an engineer.
Now that you've paid your dues as an engineer, do you feel that makes you a better producer?
Totally. Definitely. Because I understand the recording process and can communicate with both artists and engineers. An artist can describe to me how they want something to sound and I can do exactly what they want because I can engineer as well.
Can you give me an example when this has happened recently?
Actually, it happened today. I'm doing some mixing for Dave Grohl right now. He came in today on a mix I just did, and he's describing to me what he wants his drums to sound like. In my head I instantly knew what two pieces of gear I was going to hook together to do it with. I did it. He loved it. It was perfect, exactly what he wanted. So it was cool as the producer of the project to be able to do that. I spend a lot of years working on my engineering. I mean really, really focusing on my skills. Spending time on how to record different types of sounds. It's hard. Ask anybody who does this. It can be tough to make a whole recording sound good.
On the records you've done there seems to be a similarity among the bands' styles. Do you have to like the band's music to work on their project?
I have to like it. I can't put one hundred percent into something I don't like. I mean, I can't put a hundred percent into something I have to listen to for fifteen or sixteen hours a day! I have put myself in that position in the past [of not liking the material.] All that does is compromise the whole project. Maybe you think you can 'make something' out of it in the beginning, and sometimes you can, but usually it doesn't work that way. For me, if I don't get a vibe from something from the first time I listen to it, then I usually know that it's not going to work.
So, do you feel you should be a 'fifth Beatle' where you sort of participate and contribute to the sound and direction, or do you take the Albini approach, kind of like the Star Trek Prime Directive of "I do not interfere, I just translate the band's vision to tape?"
That's kind of a tough question. It kind of depends. For example, for a young band like The Reunion Show, I essentially joined the band for two and a half weeks. For a band like Foo Fighters, I don't have to go in and 'join' the way you would with a younger band. You don't need to be a member in the same way. Those guys have experience. They know how to make a record. They've done it before.
The Reunion Show was a whirlwind project [the album Kill Your Television].
The Reunion Show. I love that album. That's a good record to talk about, man. I mixed it all in two to two and a half days. It was a tornado! We spent twelve days recording that record. Drums, bass, vocals, everything was done that fast. Then I spent two and a half days mixing. We did it all in the same studio.
How do you keep your ears fresh in that kind of situation?
I listen really quiet. When I'm mixing, I mix for fifty minutes, and I take a ten-minute ear break. I only really crank it towards the end of my hour.
Do you calibrate the level to a certain dB or do you find a spot without measuring?
It varies. I mix in different rooms, and they are all different. Most times I look for that spot where things sit well in that particular room.
When you are mixing, do you do several versions of a mix, an up vocal, etc.?
I usually do two or three versions of a song. Never more than four because then there are too many decisions. I don't do a kick up .2 dB, snare down 1.5 dB mix like some of these guys. It's either up 1.5 dB or down 1.5 dB. I usually do a master, then a vocal up, a guitar up, and an instrumental. Otherwise too many decisions just gets everyone confused. You either nailed it or you didn't.
That record sounds very even. How did you mix at such a breakneck speed?
Well, there are two tricks to that. The first was I recorded the record the way I heard it in my head. I specifically knew I wasn't going to have a lot of time to mix. I went in knowing exactly how the end product was going to sound.
So, do you commit things like EQ and compression at the time of tracking or do you wait until the end?
I will do both, but I usually commit. I don't go wild with things that I know could be like that forever. I'm pretty mild on many effects. But I do like to make decisions. I like to commit.
You said you had two tricks to get you through that project?
The second thing was I didn't automate the mix. I mixed it all by hand. Automation is what takes forever. You spend hours — just spend hours — automating a mix that is ready to be printed. [laughs] But I constantly ride everything. I'll tape a pencil across faders, or use a coat hanger. I do whatever. I'll get the band involved. I'll make the drummer sit at the board and ride the snare fills. I'll get the bass player to ride his fills.
That's cool because who else knows better what's coming up in a song and where their instrument is going?
Exactly. When you record that fast, there is just no time for it. It enabled me to focus on the sound and crushing it instead of constantly worrying about all the moves I have to do. I get the whole band involved.
Is anything off limits for guitar recording? Will you use a Pod or a SansAmp device instead of an amp?
