producers "cutting up" my playing

Bruce Bouton · Post by **Bruce Bouton** » 13 May 2005 5:54 pm

Unless a record is a private venture producers don't put up the money. It's not like the film business where the producers foot the bill. In fact a producer on a record is akin to the director on a film. A producer is hired by the label and paid an advance against royalties. John Macy understands the biz as well as anyone I know.I would say he is spot on in what he says.
BB

Bruce Bouton · Post by **Bruce Bouton** » 13 May 2005 5:56 pm

Unless a record is a private venture producers don't put up the money. It's not like the film business where the producers foot the bill. In fact a producer on a record is akin to the director on a film. A producer is hired by the label and paid an advance against royalties. John Macy understands the biz as well as anyone I know.I would say he is spot on in what he says.
BB

Jim Phelps · Post by **Jim Phelps** » 13 May 2005 6:21 pm

OK Bruce, but aren't these producers representatives/employees of the corporation and the bigwigs upstairs... whose money it is, and that's why it's fair to say that the producers, being employed by the corporation ("the money") are representatives or agents of "the money", no matter if it's their own or not, and therefore have the power and authority of the money, and as long as the project isn't bankrolled by the session man's money, the producer has "the power"?

It wasn't my intention in the first place to say that ALL producers put up the money out of their own pockets. All I've been trying to say is, some producers have a monetary investment and therefore have more control in what happens in the studio than the musicians, and some producers have no financial investment in the project but are working for the guys upstairs who do have control over the money, and that gives them more authority than the musician, who is just there to supply a track which is then the property of the production.

Is that not true?

I have nothing against producers,only trying to explain why they have the authority to do what they choose to do with the tracks, mix, etc.

I don't have a problem with it, it's business.

As Bruce pointed out, in the case of a private project the producer might have his own money in it, it might be his own project, or he's been hired by the label, who has big corporate money in it. Either way, the producer has the authority, the musician has none unless it's his own project or is involved in it. Geez, I found that out the first little session I did. It's not saying that the producer is necessarily a bad guy...!

I was a producer/director/editor at a TV station (before I went into Engineering) doing talk shows, commercials, promos and videos. I could give a long list of superstars I worked with.

I'm sure a TV station is not exactly the same as a music studio but I was in the same situation. It wasn't my money in the project, but their money paid my salary. I used the takes/shots/footage that I knew would give the best final product, even if the talent didn't agree and the talent didn't have any say about it, unless it was their project and they were paying for it. It was my job to know what would look and work best for the project, unless the money-people had other preferences. The "talent on camera" would never even be allowed in the edit bay unless of course they were paying for the project or buddies of whoever was paying (or they were a big star). I would think that much is the same for the record business.

In fact, remembering again those years in production at the station, I apologize again if my previous post sounded anti-producer. I can't say I or anyone will always like what they may do with a track or mix, but it's their right and their job to do as they see fit.

Understanding producers? All you have to understand is, they're doing their job as they believe they should, they're in charge and paying you, and whatever you play is theirs to use as they wish, like it or not. There's not much more to understand than that.

<center>
Edited for bad spelling, typos, misc. screw-ups, national security and world peace</center>
[This message was edited by Jim Phelps on 14 May 2005 at 01:30 AM.]

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 13 May 2005 6:25 pm

I detect a little ambivalence and also in some posts a slight resentment towards producers..reminds me of a saying about biting the hand etc.

I'll NEVER understand producers

Players should !! the "A" team do ..

------------------

Steel players do it without fretting

http://www.waikiki-islanders.com

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 14 May 2005 12:37 am

Producers are people who get things done.
They get "product" out and into the market..

Successful ones are people who get the product sold
for a living income for all involved

The ones who make the best income are the ones
who sell to the largest audience,
and stay in tune with what that
continuosly changing market place is paying for.

There are certain production rules you can't avoid when producing for the mass market.
The producer, while often an artist himself in some situations,
is also a constructor within the parameters of what works.

Sure you can play VII minor major7 chords...
but where in a popular production would that go?
You could do that in the 30-40's but not today.
It is a very cool chord, but too much for most kids ears.

If we as "artists / instrumentalist" don't want to sell to that larger market,
then that is OUR choice.
You can go "create art.", and feel satisfied.... and work a day gig.

But if we also want to make a living from it,
we have the option of using the prevailing construction techniques,
and making something salable.

As an example Paul Franklin works on many pop country sessions,
and has a good handle on where steel fits into the modern country motif.
Whether he actually likes this current style he keeps to himself,
but he clearly understands what is needed.

But he ALSO goes home and does his Christmas songs,
and Spiro Gyra songs, that only play on steel radio.
And gets out and plays with The Players where he can stretch out and just blow.

ie He has decided that ALL 3 aspects of his playing can find a place,
and he sees no reason to cut out one,
just to have the other two.

Paul has produced his own material,
and worked for top level producers,
and we all love what he does.

I am both artist and indie producer, each hat is a different view
on how the song or composition is done.
As some of you know I can, and do, produce in many different styles;
commercial, "period commercial", or retro or avante garde.
If I draw the line at looking at a song and it's projected market only one way,
and only produce it in ONE style,
I could likely short change the material.

I could also produce the same song in 5 completely different ways,
using many of the same players,
but in different ways.
And would likely look to use each players personal strengths
in the best way, to support the production style.

The rare and best producer is the one :

Who gets an artist in his prime of creativity

Gives them a wide scope of experimentaion in pre-production

Finally pins them down to general stylistic over view
before the studio session commences.
And then sticks to it throughout.

Makes sure there is 2-3 comercially viable songs produced
close to the current markets wants,
with just a touch of different to them

And makes sure it is all cleanly recorded and produced in a compatible style ;
something connecting the whole album to itself, and to the artists previous work.

Gives the artist space to stretch out and be themselves, show growth,
while still maintaining that access to the commercial market, ie
making sure the artist is sustainable
as a business over the longer term.

Why starve for art if you can be an artist AND eat well too.

Remember a "one hit wonder" with the right contract, can get royalties for decades.
2-4 hits can make you comfortable for life,
and able to produce whatever art you want in the future.
This ain't a bad thing.

So producers are often looking after the long run
best intersts of the artist they are producing.

Their job is not to look after the best interests of the hired sidemen.
Even if the best producers will try to get the best out of their sidemen,
and treat them well too.

[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 14 May 2005 at 01:07 PM.]

Jim Phelps · Post by **Jim Phelps** » 14 May 2005 1:18 am

I don't think it can be better said than that.

Roger Woods · Post by **Roger Woods** » 14 May 2005 1:29 am

Pro Tools

Now, if only it was available to work with XP. Or is it?

Roger Woods

John Macy · Post by **John Macy** » 14 May 2005 6:23 am

I'm sitting here right now comping a vocal on ProTools at home running on XP

.... (gotta love those deadlines...)

Bob Hoffnar · Post by **Bob Hoffnar** » 14 May 2005 6:53 am

If you are not interested in playing what producers want then there is no reason to play sessions.

------------------
Bob
intonation help

Herb Steiner · Post by **Herb Steiner** » 14 May 2005 6:56 am

Sometimes I like what they use, sometimes not so much but so long as they keep calling me...I'll go with it.

Amen, brother Mike. That says it right there.

------------------
Herb's Steel Guitar Pages
Texas Steel Guitar Association

Larry Bell · Post by **Larry Bell** » 14 May 2005 7:23 am

Folks often express frustration with the lack of work for steel players. Perhaps attitude may have a lot to do with it???? This thread includes opinions / facts from some folks who have been actually running studios (Macy, Van Allen, Miguel, and others) that turn out product and make money. Listen to them. They speak the truth.

If you were a painter hired to paint a house and you insisted on painting the walls a different color than those the designer or homeowner wanted, you'd be kicked out on your butt. Studio work is the same way.

------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps

Nate LaPointe · Post by **Nate LaPointe** » 14 May 2005 7:27 am

I AM interested in playing what the producer wants. It helps when the producer actually knows something so that we can cummunicate efficeintly. I like hearing the producer say "I think that A chord was a bit out of tune, let's take another pass," It raises my bar(no pun intended) and I know I can't play any bs. I also trust him when he says "I haven't heard your best, do it again."

------------------
www.natelapointe.net

Dave Grafe · Post by **Dave Grafe** » 14 May 2005 9:28 am

Outstanding thread. This should be added to some educational archive or something, an excellent source of perspective and useful information for anyone going into the studio for the first time.

Mr. David L. Donald my hat is off to you, you have already said perfectly everything that I could possibly add and more.

Jon Light · Post by **Jon Light** » 14 May 2005 9:37 am

I've only done one hired pro session and I've got a couple more coming up soon.
If I came into the studio to lay down tracks on a song I've never heard before thinking that I have a better idea than the producer what the song needs, then I'm an arrogant delusional jerk. Of course it's possible that he is clueless and I'm a genius. But let's assume that there are people with ideas for this particular material that are better developed than I can bring to the game, cold.
Now--the fact is, I was hired because I am a steel player and they wanted me to do whatever it is that I do, fairly carte blanche. I gave them what they needed in the first take, asked for another go-round just to make myself a little happier, and then asked if they were interested in an idea I had for a different entrance, just so they could hear an alternative that they probably hadn't thought of. But I didn't come off like a know-it-all and in fact I think in the end I leaned more toward the original take and told them so.
The world is different from the days when Lloyd Green and session mates would go in, hear the demo, make the charts and create signature licks that we still listen to and go crazy over (I know I sure do).
I actually don't know how to define the change but it certainly does seem that a lot more creative control rests with the producers with their 17 zillion available protools tracks.
I just accept that the more you give them to whittle away, the better equipped they are to make their creative choices. The game has changed.
As has been said so well several times already in this thread, the fact that you were hired for what you (or the steel--or both) bring to the music doesn't mean that it is about the steel. I have actually heard stuff that was about the steel and made me wish that a producer excersized more artistic judgement over the music. Great steel playing, boring music.
But of course I have heard plenty of music that had me pining for more steel.

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 14 May 2005 10:20 am

I don't have much to add here, except this: "When in Rome ..... ". On a paid session, one needs to try to add to their concept, as they see it.

Alas, that's one of the reasons many of us choose not to "live in Rome".

chas smith · Post by **chas smith** » 14 May 2005 10:51 am

I've already spoken above, and I'll add to that. The producer's job is to sell the artist, not the steel player. I'm not getting called to make a demo tape of myself to show the next guy what I can do. From the producer's perspective, if I stand out too much, that draws attention from the artist. This is in contrast to some of the "bluegrass" things I've heard where every player gets to shine and collectively they are spectacular. Then again, you don't see a lot of bluegrass at the top of the charts.

Everything I've worked on, whether it was building things or playing on whatever, my job is to make my boss look good to his boss. It's as simple as that.