What the master tapes tell us about this Doobie Brothers track
The sound engineers at OEM Inc. have spent thousands of hours with the original masters of the most famous songs ever recorded. They use them to create products like Jammit, an iPhone app that allows you to remix and play along with those original tracks. There are many, many things to learn from those original tracks. Through a partnership with Gearhead Communications, OEM Inc. engineers are sharing their discoveries exclusively with Premier Guitar readers in what we like to call Secrets of the Masters |
“China Grove” by The Doobie Brothers
From the album The Captain and Me (1973 Warner Bros.)
Produced by: Ted Templeman
Engineered by: Donn Landee
Written by: Tom Johnston
Recorded at: Warner Bros. Recording Studios in North Hollywood, CA
Available in the JAMMIT “Classic Rock Vol.2” application
One of the many great things about ’70s music (besides all the artificial stimuli) is that most bands recorded a new album almost every year. This was the case for The Doobie Brothers when they returned to the studio shortly after the release of their 1972 album, Toulouse Street, to start production on their third studio album. After having success with Ted Templeman at the helm for their first two albums, The Doobies continued the proven formula for what was to become their most successful and recognizable album to date, The Captain and Me. Recorded in North Hollywood at their record label’s recording studio, the song “China Grove” would help propel The Captain and Me to double platinum sales status and become one of the band’s most loved singles.
I always love the opportunity to peek into the recordings of some of my favorite engineers and producers, and both Ted Templeman and Donn Landee are near the top of my list when it comes to albums from the `70s. From Van Halen to Montrose, the simplicity and focus, yet size and depth of their productions always seems to catch my ear. Upon dissecting the multi-tracks for “China Grove” I wasn’t all that surprised to see (and hear) everything laid-out and organized nicely, and immediately sounding familiar with the faders at zero and without EQ or effects. I spent a few minutes listening back to the album mix to get myself reacquainted with the overall vibe and sonic imprint that I’d be trying to match for the Jammit version of the song. After several passes through the timeless song, I dove in headfirst.
Tracks (in no specific order):
1) Bass Drum
2) Snare Drum
3) Drums
4) Hand Claps
5) Tambourine
6) Bass
7) Guitar Rhythm-Tom
8) Guitar Rhythm Overdub-Tom
9) Guitar Lead
10) Guitar Harmony
11) Piano Lo
12) Piano Hi
13) Lead Vocal
14) BG Vocals
15) BG Vocals Hi Harmony
16) BG Vocals Lo Harmony
At this point in recorded music history, most bands were still playing together while tracking in the studio as opposed to overdubbing almost all of the instrumental elements. It was evident right away that this was the case, as I could hear some guitar amp sound leaking into the drum tracks and some drum tracks leaking into the guitar track. The leakage was very slight, which most likely meant that the guitar amp was well isolated in another room or booth.
Drums Just Keep on Lookin’ to the Left
The drum recording appeared to be relatively simple with only three tracks—kick, snare and a mono drum track that could have been an overhead or room mic, or a combination of several microphones bounced down to a single mono track. The drums sounded great as is and didn’t need much more than a little high-frequency equalizing. The one anomaly about the drums was that they were panned slightly off center. Usually in rock music, the kick and snare are both straight up the middle, but this song had the kick in the center while the snare was slightly to the left and the drum track even more to the left. That’s a bit strange, but it sure created a nice pocket on the right side of the spectrum for the guitars and percussion.
The production on this song was pretty standard for a song of this time period. Aside from the drums, there were some additional percussion, tambourine, and handclap overdubs. The bass performance and sound on this song is top notch. It sounds to me like Tiran Porter played the melodic line using a pick and plugged direct into the board. Matching the sound was a cinch. The vocal tracks were also quite easy to mix, as they sounded darn good right off of the tape. A little reverb and slight EQ was all that was needed to get it sounding like the original.
Talkin’ ‘Bout Rhythm Groove
Other than the guitar solo and harmony overdubs, the guitar on this song is relatively straightforward, as well. From what the track- sheet read, the main rhythm guitar track was played by “Tom,” which I’m assuming was Tom Johnston, the band’s lead singer at the time and the writer of the song. An additional guitar overdub was added later to fill out the sound and thicken up the rhythm section. I spent a significant amount of time balancing and panning the rhythm guitars to get them to match the original album version, but couldn’t quite seem to nail it. I threw on some headphones to get a closer inspection of the original and noticed that the quarter-note delay that is on the main guitar track in the intro and re-intro is bypassed once the verse kicks in. This one subtle change allowed the rhythm guitars to sit properly in the mix.
I added a bit of reverb to both guitar tracks, but automated both the reverb level and the track volume of the cleaner guitar track in the bridge. Back in the day, this would have been done manually by whoever in the room could lend an extra hand to the mixing console. In 1973, fader automation on a recording console wasn’t a standard feature like it is today, so any volume, pan, or effects rides would have to be done in real-time as the mix was being laid down. This used to be part of the magic of mixing. It was a performance in and of itself. Today, one engineer can replay the mix over and over recording each and every push of a fader and turn of a knob until it’s just right before having to commit and print it as the master mix.
Mix Masters
In the days predating automation, it wasn’t uncommon to find the engineer, producer, band members, and sometimes even assistants performing these same moves all in one pass, like a well-rehearsed orchestra. If someone didn’t hit their cue, or adjusted the wrong knob, the whole mix would need to be done again from the beginning. Everything from grease pencil marks on knobs to razor blades taped above the faders (to block it from moving too far) helped make this cumbersome process a little easier. In many cases, the relative inaccuracies of this method produced some really magical results.
I have fun mixing just about every song we release for Jammit, but for some reason this one made me feel slightly nostalgic, even though I wasn’t even a glitter in my mother’s eye at the time it was made. It made me remember the stories I’ve heard many times over of how things used to be done when motorized faders on a console was as far-fetched as a little white box that can hold 10,000+ songs in your pocket. Having these limitations really put a premium on talent and ingenuity. Now I’m not going to go as far as to say that today’s music isn’t as good as it once was. (I wouldn’t want to sound too much like an old fogey, would I?) But it definitely makes me wonder if a lot of these songs that we call classics today would have been the same, worse, or better had the musicians, producers and engineers had all the tools and freedom from limitations that we seem to have today. I guess the only way we’d ever be able to find out is if we could take a nuclear-powered DeLorean back to 1973. Unlikely, just like the iPod 37 years ago.
To see/hear how you can play along to (with tab) and make new mixes of “China Grove” and other songs from the original multi-track masters, check out www.jammit.com.
Chris Baseford is a Canadian-born recording engineer/mixer/ producer who has worked with some of the top names in the rock music world. Having spent many years mixing on large format analog consoles, Chris has made the transition to mixing “in-the-box” and continues to push the boundaries of what is possible in the all-digital domain of music production.
Don't miss your chance to win a Yamaha Pacifica Standard Plus – the perfect blend of versatility and style. Enter now and make this go-to guitar yours. Giveaway ends January 7!
Yamaha PACS+12 Pacifica Standard Plus Electric Guitar - Sparkle Blue, Rosewood Fingerboard
Pacifica Standard Plus guitars were designed for players seeking to discover their own unique sound. They deliver exceptional sound and playability, and feature a newly designed alder body, slim, C-shape maple neck with a rosewood or maple fingerboard, Reflectone pickups co-developed with Rupert Neve Designs and a choice of four vibrant finishes.
PG contributor Tom Butwin takes us through three exceptional solidbody electric guitars: the versatile Gibson Les Paul Studio, the uniquely styled Zemaitis SCW22, and the dynamic PRS CE 24. Each brings a distinct flavor—find out which one matches your style!
Gibson Les Paul Modern Studio Electric Guitar - Worn White
When a guitar is “the one,” you know it. It feels right in your hands and delivers the sounds you hear in your head. It becomes your faithful companion, musical soulmate, and muse. It helps you express your artistic vision. We designed the Les Paul™ Studio to be precisely that type of guitar: the perfect musical companion, the guitar you won’t be able to put down. The one guitar you’ll be able to rely on every time and will find yourself reaching for again and again.
PRS CE 24 - Faded Blue Smokeburst
Classic PRS design and quality meets bolt-on construction with the CE 24. Its 25” scale length sits comfortably between short and longer scales and dual 85/15 pickups and patented PRS tremolo bring modern appeal.
Zemaitis SCW22
The body shape without metal top but developed based on an iconic Zemaitis Disc Front model.
Zemaitis guitar without a metal top, but you still see the legacy of Zemaitis in detail.
Our columnist ponders the business-to-consumer model, and how the design of online stores might be more crucial to the stompbox industry than we’d like to admit.
Let’s open things up with a TV/movie trope. The character on screen has a speech that they’ve been preparing for once they’re called up onstage to address the audience. When they finally get up to the lectern to deliver it, they pause, give the attendees a look over, and rip up their script in a dramatic fashion before pursuing an off-the-cuff, heartfelt message that goes on to invigorate the crowd and inspire a roaring ovation. For right now—I’m at least doing the first part of that. I’m abandoning my planned topic. Consider this me ripping up my finely curated index cards.
Before sitting down at the computer, I was thinking about the title of this column—“State of the Stomp.” Perhaps I’m being a bit too on-the-nose, but I started to ask myself, “What is the state of the stompbox world?” As in, this niche section inside of this niche industry that we find ourselves traversing. But, I can only speak for myself and what I’ve experienced firsthand and heard secondhand. That being said, let’s chat about the current state of the stompbox world.
This year marks my 10-year anniversary in the boutique-effects world. In speaking to the state of affairs in those 10 years, I’ve witnessed trends, domestic growth, international growth, product collaborations, companies closing doors, others opening doors, dealer decline, e-commerce growth, and more. The last, e-commerce, is the current state that we find ourselves in—an ever-growing, bustling digital presence that brings with it the B2C (business-to-consumer) model.
This isn’t completely new terrain for us by any stretch. It is, however, something that was only a minor percentage of our business. I have often referred to our sales as being 80 percent dealer and 20 percent direct. I would say that was the case from 2014 to 2020, but over the last few years the dealer vs. direct numbers have pretty much flipped.
Why has it flipped in favor of direct sales? That’s a simple yet complex question that would rob me of sleep if I let it. I would also frame the question in the inverse: “Why have dealer orders and reorders slowed down?” Market oversaturation? Economy? I would find it difficult to imagine that economic changes haven’t been trolling consumer purchasing. Us manufacturers know that it has directly impacted raw materials. As a niche corner of the MI world, that’s scary. Especially when you’re a manufacturer of nonessentials. When essentials go up in cost, it doesn’t feel great, but more easily gets shrugged off. When nonessentials go up, purchases of them get scaled back or hauled off completely.
“Why has it flipped in favor of direct sales? That’s a simple yet complex question that would rob me of sleep if I let it.”
In conversations I’ve had with industry colleagues, there’s almost a universal trend—sales are slow. This brings us back to the “why?” A place that my company finds itself in right now is close to the opposite. We are swamped with direct orders and dealer orders. However, of all the direct and dealer orders that we have been flooded with since May, 90 percent or more are for our DIY offerings. A big reason for this is due to the fact that the DIY market is smaller than standard pedals, we offer tools that don’t already exist, and the pricing is very attractive.
In May, “Short Circuit” launched. A recurring segment on the ever-popular JHS Show on YouTube, “Short Circuit” features founder Josh Heath Scott explaining effects-circuit basics while breadboarding them—using our DIY products. This, along with giveaways and kit collaborations between CopperSound and JHS, has led to a huge sales influx in what the community has coined “the JHS effect.”
I also find it important to highlight that my affinity for the brick and mortar has not diminished. But I will say that their ability to offer an array of gear from various manufacturers feels like a double-edged sword. If a particular store carries 20 brands, they can more easily give appropriate attention to each brand and subsequent model they stock. This includes website pictures, videos, copy, and SEO for each product. Now, if that same store expands to 200 brands, the bandwidth for each product gets significantly decreased.
So, while that dealer has 200 brands to focus on, we, the manufacturer, only have ourselves, making it easier for us to tend to our website. In a world where 70-plus percent of consumers shop online, it really makes me wonder if this is the make-or-break factor when it comes to where and how people choose to do that shopping.
And now, I’d like to thank you all for the standing ovation in response to my inspiring, off-the-cuff speech.
Loud, evil, searing hot, and unexpectedly versatile, the Fuzz War’s demented bass cousin has a bold and more-complex personality all its own that sounds radical with guitar, too.
Evil. Just plain evil. Unexpected and vast variation. Responds interestingly to bass volume and tone attenuation. Wet/dry mix control. Sounds amazing (and extra evil) with guitar.
None.
$195
Death By Audio Bass War
deathbyaudio.com
If you like your fuzz measured in megatonnage, the Death By AudioFuzz War is one of life’s great joys. And if you’re a bass player with similar predilections and accustomed to watching guitar players have all the fun, the new DBA Bass War will be sweet revenge.
The original Fuzz War is a creatively twisted derivative of the Colorsound Supa Tone Bender But while you can hear some family resemblance among the Tone Bender, the Fuzz War, and Bass War, the latter is a very different animal indeed. I’m pretty sure it’s louder than the Fuzz War (holy #@*!). The fuzz is also much brighter than a Fuzz War, which sounded positively muddy by comparison.
That means a bass player has lightyears of headroom and range within which to shape their tone. And for such a loud, hectic pedal, it can be really precise and surgical. The experience of reshaping fuzz sounds is made easier, more fun, and much more expressive for the oversized outboard tone and fuzz controls, which can be swept with your toe to achieve wild filter effects. Along with the cutting fuzz tonalities, that lends the Bass War an almost synth-like feel and functionality. The pedal also responds in interesting ways to bass volume and tone attenuation: Lower bass volume generates less compressed, more focused, but still very insane tones that can be boosted to superheated levels with the pedal’s volume knob. Add in the dry/wet mix knob, which lends exponentially more complexity and range to the Bass War’s voice, and you’re talking about an exceedingly varied and evil fuzz device. Oh ... it sounds freaking amazing with guitar, too—yielding psychotically piercing lead tones, vintage biker fuzz, and vicious punk and metal grind. Wow.