6 Questions For PR Maven Marsha Vdovin

Marsha Vdovin is the founder of MVPR, a full service PR agency that does media relations for music and technology companies like Universal Audio and Cycling 74. She's one of the few people in the business that everyone adores because she's not only so good at what she does, but she's a kind and gentle soul with a heart of gold.

What sets Marsha apart from others that do what she does is that she's really an artist at heart. When you check out Marsha's website, be sure to check out her photography as well (that's one of her pictures on the left). It will knock your socks off, especially the art and the food.

Marsha was kind enough to answer the "6 Questions."

1) How did you break into the business?
I went to art school in the early '80s and started doing PR for my classmates and a professor who was a performance artist. That led to more paying gigs doing Pr for experimental theater. A friend from school started a music software company (Blank Software) and asked me to help him so we started the company in his house. I was employee number one so I did every job and ran the office, eventually he hired more people and then I focused on sales and marketing.

2) What makes you unique?
I think I'm unique because I'm really interested in what makes people tick. I'm really interested in getting to know them as people and seeing how their mind works. I'm not interested in hype. I only work with great companies whose products speak for themselves.

3) Who was your biggest influence?
My biggest influence has been my former art professor who believed in me and encouraged me to trust my instincts and be creative. The great thing about art school is that it teaches you to be resourceful.

4) What's the best thing about your job?
The best thing about my job is the people that I meet and get to know.

5) When and where were you the happiest?
The happiest I've ever been is travelling in the summertime.

6) What's the best piece of advice you ever received?
The best piece of advice that I ever received was from Paul Lego, former CFO at Digidesign. He said that as a consultant it is important to always be genuine and always be yourself.

"It Might Get Loud" And It Does

I got a chance to see the movie "It Might Get Loud" again the other day when I was gifted it as a DVD. For those of you who haven't seen it, it's a movie revolving around guitarists Jimmy Page, The Edge and Jack White. You find out what makes them tick, their earliest days, and their musical development from each ones own personal perspectives, which is fascinating.

Jack White proves that being a musician is about attitude; knowing down to your core why you're making music and not caring what anyone thinks about it. He's a sloppy player technically, but he's also a real-deal guitar player; a guy that loves the blues and is constantly trying to get to the essence of his feelings and passion, much like Neil Young. I've only met a few players like this, but their vibe is so strong that it transcends any mis-fingered notes or being out of tune. The vibe is so thick you forget all that and just enjoy.

The Edge is an innovator. His technique is limited but you'd never know it because he plays within himself and his limitations so well. That doesn't work for someone playing in a cover band or as a studio musician, but it's the only way to go as an artist. He's developed a whole style around a Memory Man echo unit that is totally his. He's one of the few players in any genre that all you need to hear are a few notes to identify him. How many artists can say that? He also seems like such a nice down to earth guy as well.

Jimmy Page is an icon. He's rock and roll aristocracy. He's on a pedestal and deserves it. He's now influenced several generations of guitarists with his arrangements, choice of notes, and songwriting, and will probably continue to do so way after he's gone. Yet he's a somewhat sloppy player as well, not that that every bothered anyone. Just like Jack White, it's his passion that makes every mis-fingering a joy. His sense of dynamics is a must for any musician to learn, as evidenced in the spot where he plays "Ramble On." If I were a guitar teacher I would insist that every student watch and learn what he's doing dynamically. The notes don't matter, but the dynamic feel is the essence of great music.

Notice a pattern here? None of the three are virtuoso technicians, yet their revered for their playing. They're stylists, they're passionate, and they're masters of their heart. That's what music should be.

But probably the best part of the movie is when the three of them sit down and play together on a soundstage. There's a part in the movie (shown below) where Page begins to play "Whole Lotta Love" and Edge and White are like little kids at their first music lesson. Their jaws are on the floor and their eyes are big. For that brief period of time, they weren't stars, they were us.

Have a look.

The R&R Hall Of Fame Strikes Again

Every year I rant about the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame around this time of the year, and it looks like I'll continue to do so. Just the very fact that we even have to discuss why one artist gets in while another doesn't is the best reason why there shouldn't be a hall in the first place.

What's the criteria for entry? Is it the number of hits that an artist had during his lifetime? Is it the influence he had on others follow him? Is both? Or neither?

No I'm afraid it's random, more about the kind of dough they can bring in for the ceremony than anything else, as covered by my post last year.

I don't think that there should be a hall of fame for any of the arts, as if you couldn't tell, but if there was a good reason for a music one, consider this:

Frankie Lyman and The Teenagers are in, KISS is not.
Gene Pitney is in, Chicago (120 million records sold) is not.
The Dells are in, Yes is not.
Bobby Womack is in, Neil Diamond (owner of 37 top 40 hits) is not.
Spooner Oldham is in (you really have to know a lot about the music industry to know who he is), Dire Straits (the biggest band in the world for a couple of years) is not.

Stevie Ray Vaughn, Rush, The Commodores (17 top 40's) not in. But Iggy Pop and The Stooges just got in. Influential, maybe (it's debatable), but never big sellers even in their heyday.

This whole R&R HOF thing is so screwed up it's not even worth bringing up. Sorry for the rant. Until next year.

Feedback And Distortion

Here's a video for the first single off the new SNEW album that I recently produced entitled "Feedback And Distortion" (the name of the album is "We Do What We Want"). It's a pretty fun piece with a lot of people playing air guitar (including your truly and a lot of readers), but it has serious side to it that you can easily overlook.

Curtis DonVito is a great rock lyricist, almost along the lines of Bruce Springsteen in that every word has a purpose and a meaning that goes beyond the obvious. In this case, it's a reaction to the Guitar Hero craze that's thankfully dying down a bit. For a while, gamers thought they were musicians just because they could play the game well, a thought that generally draws the ire of real musicians (especially guitar players).

The good thing about the Guitar Hero and Rock Band games is that they enticed kids into playing a real instrument as evidenced by the entry level guitar package sales that have soared. It's also introduced an entire generation to some of the best classic rock, causing a rebirth of sorts of guitar bands like Aerosmith, The Stones and The Who.

Enjoy the video!

12 Things You Never Knew About Jimi Hendrix

It's hard to believe that this year it will be 40 years since Jimi Hendrix died, because he's still talked about and referred to as much as if he were still here.

The gold standard for guitarists everywhere, Jimi was a virtuoso, but I think more because of his taste rather than his dexterity with his instrument. Regardless, he's still revered even 4 decades after passing.

This is from the "12 Things You Never Knew About Jimi Hendrix" article on Clashmusic.com, but I refined it a bit because I think the author lost the point in places, at least from a musician's point of view.

1.

Jimi Hendrix was born John Allen Hendrix, named by his mother while Jimi's father was away fighting World War II. When Al Hendrix returned from Europe, he renamed him James Marshall. It was The Animals’ bassist Chas Chandler, who became his manager, that suggested he swap James for Jimi.

2.

Jimi dropped out of high school and enlisted in the Army in May 1959, becoming a member of ‘The Screaming Eagles’ 101st Airborne Division based in Fort Campbell, Kentucky, as a trainee paratrooper. Less than a year later he received a medical discharge after breaking an ankle on his twenty-sixth parachute jump.

3.

Jimi's first electric guitar was a Supro Ozark 1560S, purchased by his dad Al.

4.

Before breaking out as an artist himself, Jimi played with several name R&B acts, including Ike And Tina Turner, Sam Cooke, The Isley Brothers, and Little Richard.

5.

Jimi agreed to follow Chas Chandler to England only if he promised to introduce him to Eric Clapton. Within forty-eight hours of his arrival, he would take to the stage for an unprecedented onstage jam with Clapton and Cream.

6.

Jimi's left-handed playing skills were much to the chagrin of his father, who believed it was a sign of the devil.

7.

Although Jimi was most identified with the  Fender Stratocaster, he also played the Gibson SG, Flying V, Les Paul, and even the Fender Jazzmaster and Duo-Sonic on rare occasions.

8.

He called his music “electric church” because he believed music was his religion.

9.

The Experience Music Project in Seattle that honors Jimi was designed by famed architect Frank Gehry.

10.

Jimi and Miles Davis had agreed to do a project together, with Davis receiving an advance of $50,000. Jimi died before it happened.

11.

In search of a full night’s sleep, Jimi asked his then girlfriend Monika Dannemann for some of her powerful German sedatives called Vesparax. Unaware of the half-tablet dosage, Jimi took nine. His reckless mixing of drugs and alcohol had become so commonplace the previous year that his girlfriends regularly woke up to hear him gasping and had to clear his windpipe. Sort of reminds you of Michael Jackson in a way (except for the girlfriends).

12.

His iconic performance of ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ at Woodstock in 1969 was not a symbol of national pride as everyone was led to believe, but rather a symbol of Jimi's  disgust with America’s continued occupation of Vietnam. Seconds before going onstage, Jimi debated whether or not to perform the anthem, as his manager Mike Jeffrey feared it could spark a riot.

Musical Metaphysics With Ornette Coleman

He's a jazz saxophone virtuoso who's style is so far beyond everyone else that not many can understand it, and even many jazz fans can't listen to Ornette Coleman as a result. But someone understands his genius because he won a Pulitzer Prize for music a few years ago (I'd say that's a lot more impressive than a Grammy).

Coleman plays on the fringes of music, thinking so far beyond normal music theory that it just seems like noise to the majority of listeners. But he's so far ahead of everyone else that he sees the nuance of the nuance of the nuance. It's sort of like the average consumer sees an auto tire as just a tire, but the tire engineer sees it for the kind of tread, the kind and number of ply's and the steel built, but then goes further down to the molecular level of each one.

So when it comes to music, Coleman thinks way beyond the notes. Here's part of an interview from 1995:

"In music you have something called sound, you have speed, you have timbre, you have harmonics, and you have, more or less, the resolutions. In most music, people that play what I call mostly standard music, they only use one dimension, which means the note and the time. Say I'm having this conversation with you now. I'm talking, but I'm thinking, feeling, smelling, and moving. Yet I'm concentrating on what you're saying. So that means there's more things going on in the body than just the present thing that the person's got you doing. You're interviewing me, although I'm doing more than just talking to you. And the same with you.

To me, human existence exists on a multiple level, not just on a two-dimensional level, not just having to be identified with what you do and what you say. Those things are the results of what people see and hear that you do. But the human beings themselves are living on multiple levels. That's how I have always wanted musicians to play with me; on multiple levels. I don't want them to follow me. I want them to follow themself, but to be with me."

Coleman invented a musical philosophy called Harmolodics which he defines as an expression of music that goes beyond any of the tonal, rhythmic or harmonic rules that we're used to in order to attain greater expression. Essentially, it's a handbook about going beyond and even breaking the rules of music. The rules that most of us are chained to.

It's unlikely that most of us will listen to, much less enjoy Ornette Coleman's music, so why do I bring him up? He's 80 years old, was always on the fringe of jazz, and has virtually nothing to do with popular music except for some guest appearances with Jerry Garcia and The Plastic Ono Band. Going beyond the acceptable way of doing things is the only way to pave new ground, to start a new trend, and to break free from the mediocre. The music business has been in a creative slump for so long that the entire listening world can't wait for something new and fresh (although many listeners don't even realize it). Instead we get the same, the similar, the comparable, and the equivalent. It's time to break free.

And the innovative and revolutionary is out there somewhere, gestating and biding it's time. We can only hope that it doesn't die on the vine before it gets it's chance.

Coleman asks rhetorically, "Is the leap from A to Bb the same as Bb to A?" To most, it's the same thing, but for anyone who's about to break new musical ground, it makes all the difference in the world.

THX Strikes Again

If you've read my blog for a while you know that I think that the THX process is sort of like unions - they were drastically needed at one time but they now have outlived their usefulness. Such as it is with THX. In fact, you might want to read The Magic and Myth of THX for a full explanation and deeper rant.

A brief overview - in the days prior to THX, movie theaters had sound systems of varying quality. A film that sounded great in one theater would sound dreadful in another (actually, none ever sounded great except at a film studio), and there was no standard as to how they should sound. Tomlinson Holman, who was George Lucas' chief scientist during the first Star Wars movies (and a mentor of mine), created a standard called THX (Tom Holman eXperiment) that would hold movie theaters to a minimum playback quality that was much higher than we were used to at the time.

All well and good, but after a great number of theaters bought into the standard, the market was saturated, yet Lucas had this profitable THX division that was about to become unprofitable unless they could come up with another income stream. So they got the idea of designing a THX standard for home playback systems, gaining their income from installers and manufacturers that felt the need to have their products "certified" for use in the home.

That always felt pretty bogus to me as a THX cert never really bought a home theater owner much more than a one up on his neighbor and a higher bill for the install. I guess they were running out of audio gear to certify, because late last year THX began to certify plasma and LED HD televisions (I'm getting to this a bit late), which kind of leaves me incredulous. What the heck is a company based on audio standards doing certifying televisions? Does it mean that a certified TV is better than a non-certified one, or just that one manufacturer happened to pay for it while the other didn't? Does that mean if you put a non-certified TV in your home theater system that you can't get it certified?

I'm still amazed that manufacturers are duped into this. Thankfully, it doesn't seem to make much of a dent on the consumer. Maybe this is one of those rare times when the customer really knows best.

I don't want to take anything away from THX's theater certification, because it's raised playback quality to the level it needed to be, but guys, let's lay off the consumer. This is an extra charge that no one except your accountants need.

10 Reasons Why Home Recording Studios Suck

I happened to come across this post recently and found it pretty interesting. It's so easy and inexpensive to buy some really powerful recording gear these days that almost every musician has a home studio, but all of them will tell you that recording is not as easy as it seems.

This article from AudioGeekzine nicely points out what eventually becomes the "hardship" of owning your own studio.

Don’t get the wrong idea from this article, I’m not hating on home studios, I have a home studio, I host The Home Recording Show. I’m not complaining, just pointing out some of the negative sides of the average home studio. An average home studio being a room in a house or apartment that was not specifically built to be a recording studio. Purpose built home studios are the exception, they have some of the qualities of professional studios, but some of the downsides still apply.

1) Less than ideal acoustically. More often than not the home studio is a spare bedroom or in the corner of the basement. Most home studios have little invested to improve the sound in the room.

2) Noise issues. Professional studios are constructed with extreme acoustic isolation in mind. They keep sound from escaping and outside sounds interfering, allowing them to operate at any time of day. In the home studio you have to deal with your neighbor mowing his lawn, children running around and other noises. Additionally you can’t work at a normal volume too early or too late in the day without neighbors or your family complaining.

3) Never ending money pit. You may think you have everything you need but it won’t be long until you succumb to G.A.S.

4) Low perceptions of quality. If you’re trying to use your home studio to make an income, there is a limitation on the kind of work you’ll get. A major label is not going to send a band to your bedroom to make a record. There is still plenty of jobs you can do at a quality level but you’re at a disadvantage from the start.

5) Pro studio owners HATE you because you take business away and put out an inferior product. Whether that is true or not can cause some heated debate.

6) A major distraction. You just wanted to make a quick recording of a song idea. You spend the next two hours doing software updates, scrolling through synth patches to find the perfect one and oops you’ve forgotten that great idea for a song.

7) It changes your role from musician to engineer. Instead of spending your time improving your playing and songwriting abilities you must spend your time learning recording techniques, troubleshooting,

8) Equipment that doesn’t match in quality or is low quality overall. Cheap mics into a cheap mixer into a built-in soundcard using cheap cables. If you want a professional sound there is a minimum level of equipment that must be invested.

9) Less respect for your time. I’m finding I sit around waiting for late clients much more in my home studio than as a staff engineer at a studio. Another side of this, a band spends two years recording their album in their home studio but could have gotten the same or better results in two week at a professional studio. Time has value.

10) It never ends. Without strict self imposed time limits you will never finish the album. A fear of commitment and the ability to tweak absolutely anything makes things take so much longer than necessary.

So there’s 10 negative sides to this Home Studio thing we’ve gotten ourselves into. Obviously these don’t apply to everyone, and some points are very general.

Without my home studio, this website and half my income wouldn’t be here. On the other hand I’d probably have a lot less grey hair on my head and a lot more money in the bank.

I’m well aware of the limitations of my studio (the room specifically) and what it is perfectly capable of accomplishing, however this doesn’t satisfy me.

Home studios aren't going away any time soon, but neither are professional recording studios. In the meantime, let's hope we can keep the techniques of the pros alive so that the next generation of pro can easily make the leap from the home to the commercial environs.

6 Questions For Studio Bassist Paul Ill

Today is the first installment of a new weekly feature called "6 Questions."  We'll ask 6 Questions of someone in the music industry and get some insight to various sides of the business.

The first one is with studio bassist extraordinaire Paul Ill. Paul has a list of record and touring credits and mile long, including Tina Turner, Alicia Keys, Christina Aguilera, Pink, Courtney Love, James Blunt, Daniel Powter and many more.

1) What was your big break?
My "big break" was being born into a very supportive family with an extremely musically talented older sister. That prepared me to meet drummer/songwriter Brain MacLeod. He introduced me to Linda Perry, to whom I owe most of my success.

2) What makes you unique?
Honestly, I'm not that special. But what I bring to the table is this: I really am genuinely enthusiastic about creating music and I really love playing bass. I do my best to play bass in the spirit of Jerry Jemmott with Atlantic, Duck Dunn with Stax, James Jamerson with Motown, David Hood with the Fame "Swamp Rats", John Paul Jones with Led Zeppelin, Doug Wimbush with Tackhead and the Sugarhill Gang, and Sir Paul McCartney with The Beatles. I grew up on Army basses playing in Soul and Psychedelic Hard Rock bands and I have been playing music virtually non-stop since I was 12. I am also a songwriter, composer and producer, and thanks to my supportive family, I have a Bachelor of Music Composition degree from Berklee College of Music. I do my best to combine all these musical and life experiences, and remain willing to access these experiences on behalf of whoever I am working with in the moment.

3) Who was your biggest influence?
My sister Paula.

4) What's the best thing about your job?
It's fun, it makes people feel good and it makes the world a better place.

5) When and where were you the happiest?
Right here, right now.

6) What's the best piece of advice you ever received?
Trust God, clean house, help others.

The "Thriller" Console For Sale

Here's an interesting advert for the console that Michael Jackson's "Thriller" album was made on. It's a Harrison 4032 and the asking price is $200,000!

Now in its day, Harrison made a pretty good console, but even brand new it was less than half the asking price, and given the huge drop in value in recording consoles these days, this price seems almost laughable. The console has only 32 channels (you'd expect a lot more for 200k), but it's being sold more as a museum piece rather a piece of audio gear, as far as I can tell.

That's probably a good thing since there's virtually no information about the current condition of the console. Does it even pass audio? Is it automated? Does the automation work? Do all the modules work? How is the console terminated? Is the power supply OK? None of those questions are even broached in any one of three websites.

It's true that Bruce Swedien, the engineer for all of Michael's biggest hits, loves this console and even bought one like it for his personal studio, but he may be the only one. In it's day, a Harrison wasn't the most sought after console and it never had any vintage value even when console prices were sky high, that's why the price is so astounding.

Will it draw customers to a studio that features the desk? Probably some, but it's doubtful that it'll draw 200k worth. And if an artist thinks that this console will make them sound like Michael then they'll be sadly mistaken. It's never been about the gear. It's always about the ears!

Check out an article on the sale, the website for the console, and the ebay site, but unless you have more money than you know what to do with, keep it in your pocket on this one.

Getting The Best Out Of Musicians In The Studio

I'm just finishing up proofing a new book called "The Music Producer's Handbook" and I thought now might be a good time for an excerpt. Here's a section called Getting The Most Out Of Musicians that's a few simple observations that have served me well over the years. There are also a couple of other excerpts on my website.

Even if a musician is completely comfortable about his environment and headphones, there are things you can do to help him take his performance to another level. Unless  you’re a studio pro, most musicians can be very self-conscious about what they’re playing, especially after hearing a playback that uncovers some flaws they were unaware of until that moment. It’s important that their confidence doesn’t flag and it’s directly up to you to keep that from happening. Here are a few tricks that will help.

• Stay positive. Regardless of how badly things might be going, how off-key someone is singing, or how out-of-the-pocket someone is playing, never be negative in your body language or your comments. Remarks like, “You suck,” or “That really sounds bad,” don’t ever help the situation and can even completely undermine a performance. If something isn’t going as well as you think it should, give the player a reasonable chance, sit him down for a listen in the control room, then firmly but respectfully describe why the part isn’t working.

• Explain what’s wrong. Players hate it when they’re just told to, “Do it again,” without any explanation as to why you think what they just played wasn’t good enough. If the take wasn’t a keeper for any reason, explain what was wrong in a kind and gentle way. Statements like "I think you have a better one in you," or “I’ve heard you play it with more excitement before,” might work if you can’t put your finger on the problem, but players appreciate it if you can be specific so they can concentrate on that part the next time they play it through. “You’re falling behind the beat every time we come out of the chorus,” is an example of a specific statement. If the player continues to get it wrong, make sure you play the part for him so he can hear it clearly and understand what you’re going for.

• Keep the studio talkback mic on. Communication is one of the most important, yet sometimes overlooked parts of a successful session. Players hate it when they’re speaking to you from the studio and either you’re not aware that they’re trying to get your attention, or you simply can’t hear them. Make sure that the engineer puts up a dedicated talkback mic in the studio and that it’s turned on immediately after every take. It’s important that you don’t miss a single word.

• Keep the control room talkback mic on. Players also hate when there’s long periods of silence from the control room after a take. They might see a conversation going on, but if they can’t hear it, many players get insecure and feel isolated. You may be having a conversation about what kind of take-out food to order, but as far as the player can tell, you’re talking about how bad his performance was and how you’d like to replace him. Get rid of the insecurity by latching the control room talkback so he can hear you all the time between takes. Once again, communication is the key to a successful session.

• If a player asks to play it again, let him. You may think that the player just nailed the ultimate take, but if he feels he can play it better, he usually can. Players inherently know when they’ve messed something up, were late on a chord, mis-fingered or ghosted a note, or slowed down during a roll. Maybe you didn’t hear it, but the player knew it. Let him go again. This is a lot easer decision to make nowadays than it was back in the analog tape days, thanks to digital recording. Back then, you might only have space on tape for a single take and you might loose a take that was great if the next take didn’t work. That kind of pressure on the producer has now been lifted, thanks to your favorite DAW.

RE/P And Sammy Davis Jr.

Recording Engineer/Producer (RE/P) was perhaps the best audio production magazine ever. Way ahead of its time, RE/P began in 1967 and served the professional audio community with excellent articles during a time when the semi-pro and prosumer markets were mere trifles to the audio community.

As is usually the case, founder Marty Galley sold out to a large publishing conglomerate, and within a couple of years the magazine was out of business around 1989. Still, the info in the magazine is as good today as it was way back then (although the writing is a bit rough). I'm proud to say that I was a contributing writer towards the end of the good days of the magazine.

Here's an article reprint from RE/P regarding a live tracking date with Sammy Davis Jr. Even if you don't like or care about The Candyman, it's still a lot of fun to read. I get a kick out of the mics they used (lots of Sony C-37s), the 16 track console and tape machine that was such a big deal at the time, and of course, the type of magnetic recording tape they used.

Here's the article on ProSound Web, entitled "Wally Heider Recording Sammy Davis Jr. Live At The Now Grove."

If I can find the articles I did for RE/P (there were only a couple), I'll post them next week.