Prog Production Values Over The Years

I find the difference in production values over the decades fascinating.  I've recently been enjoying early neo-prog (Marillion) and the early 80s sound of space between the instruments, digital synths, some gated drum, etc.  The 'sound' of prog changed over the years.  60s was a vintage reverb psychedelic sound, early 70s was a warm, 'in the room' studio.  late 70s got a bigger, more slick sound.  80s was totally slick with that digital delay on everything.  then came the 90s, and the sound of prog hasn't changed since.  it's always this BIG live sound with everything on a delay and reverb.  to me, it's been like this for over 20 years and it really does not make one band sound different from another.  i wish bands would get a bit more progressive with their sound.  maybe something akin to recent Wilco records which have a nice warm drum sound and compressed guitars along with vocals up front.  

I totally agree with you.  Modern production is not right for your classic symphonic prog sound.  the Flower Kings, for example, compose such fantastic music, but the sound wears my ears out with all of the instruments right out front slamming in my face.  I love the muddy mystery of early Yes records, where sometimes it's hard to distinguish one instrument from another, and everything blends into this amazing witches' brew of sound.  (Bitches Brew - Teo Macero's mix would be another good example of this by the way).
I have been drawn to those bands who are experimenting with archaic production techniques to get those kinds of sounds back.  Perhaps my greatest delight has been hearing the Causa Sui Summer Sessions.

i guess one of the things that alienates me from the modern releases is the arena rock-ness of the mainstream prog album. i know that in the early 70s people were just as infatuated with the studio as zey are now, but it's one of those things about the form that has progressed away from my taste

cstack3 wrote:   I'm still waiting for auto-tune to reach the prog shores....actually, could be interesting if used as a very selective effect!

I think Offord did a great production job on some early Yes albums--I wish I could say the same about some early Genesis albums---

infocat wrote: cstack3 wrote:   I'm still waiting for auto-tune to reach the prog shores....actually, could be interesting if used as a very selective effect!  Bite your tongue, man!

As a sparingly used vocal effect perhaps, but the way it's being used throughout mainstream music is just annoying.

zumacraig wrote: I find the difference in production values over the decades fascinating.  I've recently been enjoying early neo-prog (Marillion) and the early 80s sound of space between the instruments, digital synths, some gated drum, etc.  The 'sound' of prog changed over the years.  60s was a vintage reverb psychedelic sound, early 70s was a warm, 'in the room' studio. Unfortunately many of the "in the room" recordings sounded as if they were recorded in a cardboard box. This was widely known by many musicians in the early 70's as a muffled sound that was lame and they didn't have the money power to clean it up. The 60's vintage reverb psychedelic sound was haunting and inspired sound techs for new ideas.   late 70s got a bigger, more slick sound. This was so cheap because all it had to do with was.....turning up the death knob on your amp and then within the production itself came this horrible idea to cheese it up a bit. It was one thing to bring the instruments out front in production and sound...like Alan Parson and Ken Scott did so well., but the creative side to recording which was known as unorthodox recording techniques was missing from rock by then. For example Jimi Hendrix's Electric Ladyland was released in 68' and was steps beyond the 60's reverb sound ..yet it wasn't contrived. It was a straight up rock album with a unique approach in production.     80s was totally slick with that digital delay on everything. I agree.   then came the 90s, and the sound of prog hasn't changed since.  it's always this BIG live sound with everything on a delay and reverb.  to me, it's been like this for over 20 years and it really does not make one band sound different from another.  i wish bands would get a bit more progressive with their sound.  maybe something akin to recent Wilco records which have a nice warm drum sound and compressed guitars along with vocals up front.   thoughts?

TODDLER wrote: zumacraig wrote: I find the difference in production values over the decades fascinating.  I've recently been enjoying early neo-prog (Marillion) and the early 80s sound of space between the instruments, digital synths, some gated drum, etc.  The 'sound' of prog changed over the years.  60s was a vintage reverb psychedelic sound, early 70s was a warm, 'in the room' studio. Unfortunately many of the "in the room" recordings sounded as if they were recorded in a cardboard box. This was widely known by many musicians in the early 70's as a muffled sound that was lame and they didn't have the money power to clean it up. The 60's vintage reverb psychedelic sound was haunting and inspired sound techs for new ideas.   late 70s got a bigger, more slick sound. This was so cheap because all it had to do with was.....turning up the death knob on your amp and then within the production itself came this horrible idea to cheese it up a bit. It was one thing to bring the instruments out front in production and sound...like Alan Parson and Ken Scott did so well., but the creative side to recording which was known as unorthodox recording techniques was missing from rock by then. For example Jimi Hendrix's Electric Ladyland was released in 68' and was steps beyond the 60's reverb sound ..yet it wasn't contrived. It was a straight up rock album with a unique approach in production.     80s was totally slick with that digital delay on everything. I agree.   then came the 90s, and the sound of prog hasn't changed since.  it's always this BIG live sound with everything on a delay and reverb.  to me, it's been like this for over 20 years and it really does not make one band sound different from another.  i wish bands would get a bit more progressive with their sound.  maybe something akin to recent Wilco records which have a nice warm drum sound and compressed guitars along with vocals up front.   thoughts? You may not like the sound of reverb in general. It is only to be used to compliment the sound of the music. A nice warm drum sound with instruments more compressed and vocals up front can be found on the Steve Wilson re-mix of Lizard.

Well said. What has to be remembered is that a lot of prog bands in the 70's were very heavily constrained financially so they couldnt afford the best production techniques and setup available at the time, and quite a lot of them werent actually given that much time to record their albums.

I suggest that the OP doesnt listen to a particularly wide variety of prog styles, because on 2011 albums alone I've noticed a very wide variety of production styles.

Production techniques from all eras have their merits, in the right hands.

I don't really have a preference of analogue over digital, it all depends who's at the desk, and how they make the magic happen. The production on the first 4 Marillion albums - for example - is perfect for the music. The production on the first four Genesis albums, with Gabriel, was perfect for their music at the time.

I favour dry sounds, and this is getting rarer with prog these days....... limited to modern singer songwriters mainly. I just like to hear everything clearly, although at the same time avoiding a clinical, sterile feel. If reverb is to be added, I want it subtle, not "stadium".... because there really is no point in trying to fool people about where something was recorded.

I really hope Prog is one of the genres that pushes forward with the binaural thing, because I think the future of keeping the sound of music exciting depends on replicating "being there" as much as possible. Instead of 2 channels, 360 would be rather interesting. It's so expensive to engineer though.

They say drums are the hardest thing to get right, but I'd be happy to just get them as punchy and bright as Supertramp or the Mahavishnu Orchestra. They achieved that in the '70s, so it can't be that hard. Keyboards are difficult to record because they can often sound horribly artificial..... I mean, there's no actual sound waves involved in them any more, it's all electronic, so that's understandable.