I have to ask the studio guys, Led Zeppelin II

[Ray18]

Why the heck is it so muddy?

was this just bad recording equiptment...or did they just EQ the master so it was notsolinear

I'm willing to bet low-fi recording wasn't the issue, since black sabbath was even poorer at the time..and their first album (recorded in 70 I think..a year after zep II) was clear as a bell


any of you guys could maybe pull some strings and get me a clear copy of zep two :eek:

[rog951]

Must be high-frequency hearing loss. How old are you? ;)

Actually, since Zeppelin II was my first ever album purchase, it is what I expect all albums should sound like. I've always wondered why everything else sounded so damn clear! :mad:

[Ray18]

Originally posted by rog951
Must be high-frequency hearing loss. How old are you? ;)

Actually, since Zeppelin II was my first ever album purchase, it is what I expect all albums should sound like. I've always wondered why everything else sounded so damn clear! :mad:

Led Zeppelin II was my first album purchased too..no fooling

I bought an old tape of it at a garage sale when I was 8

[Phil O'Keefe]

Zep II's sonics, like most albums, was a combination of many factors - the room used to record it in, the instruments and players, the arrangements, the preferences of the producer and the engineers, and yes, the gear used to record it.

I was never a huge Zep fan (GASP! :eek: ) while in high school (when they were arguably the biggest band in the world), and I didn't really appreciate them until later, so I'm not as "up to date" on all the details of their recordings as I would be with say, the Beatles stuff... but IIRC, Zep II was recorded to 16 track 2" analog. It's a guess on my part, but I think it's quite possible that someone messed up and stored the master tape "heads out" - IOW, they rewound the tape before storing it... which is usually NOT a good idea with analog tape due to something called "print through" - when you store tape "tails out", the print through isn't any better or worse, but where you'll hear its effects is different - you'll hear things BEFORE they happen if you store the tape heads out, and after they happen if you store the tape tails out (where it sounds more natural and tends to be "covered up" by the music). The breakdown section on "Whole Lotta Love" is one of the things that makes me suspect the tape was improperly stored...you know, where you faintly hear Plant singing the lines before he actually sings the lines... you can also hear the same thing with the guitars, bass and drums in that section if you listen carefully.

I think Page was going for big and heavy, with lots of low mids and bottom end on that recording. IMO, they certainly got that on the final release. And remember, this was still fairly early in the "hard rock" days, and so standards and expectations were not really carved in stone at that point... they were doing something fairly "new". Was it a bit dark and muddy? IMO, yes... did the music suffer? That's subjective, but it would be hard to overstate the influence that the record had on subsequent rock albums by a wide range of bands.

[Caevan O'Sh!te]

That's so cool to read, Phil...

I had no idea of anything like "print-through" with magnetic tape, let alone the proper and improper way to shelve it (are there any other orientations/positions to beware of?).

I do remember listening to Zep for the first time back in '79, cassette tape, on a pair of Audio Techica headphones that I dearly loved. It was their fourth one ("Zoso"); I thought at the time that I must have gotten a botched copy, or that it was something wonky with the playback heads, as I noticed that sort of pre-bleed-through/reverse-order echo effect that you cite there, Phil. Primarily on the vocals, most any time that there was a little more space. It still sounded so good to me that I didn't care too much, I just wondered.

In later years and media, I just took it for granted that it was either deliberate, or the artifact/side-effects of some deliberate process. I kind of came to embrace it similarly to the way many folks do other faults and traits of old analog and tube based recordings.

It would stand to reason that such "heads-out" print-through artifacts would be further and further "pre-delayed" as the recording playback progresses, due to the spiraling, growing circumfrance of a reeled-tape. Right? If you can determine this lagging or speeding-up of the print-through doppleganger- and whether it ramps up, or down, in relation to the "actual" recording-proper, it would certify that it was in fact "heads-" or "tails-out" print-through...

I'm not gonna be the one to laboriously test for this, though; we'll leave that for the guy who played 'em all backwards and hipped us to all that devilish backwards-masking, right? ;) :D

[raw-tracks]

It been a long time since I've sat down and listened to Zep II or the first Sabbath. But I do remember that first Sabbath record as actually quite bright. I always attributed it to high monitoring levels causing fatigue and alcohol. Both of which can cause a mix to be too bright.

I'll have to round up a copy of Zep II and take a listen. I only have it on a beat up copy of a copy cassette tape. That'll certainly be dull.

[Phil O'Keefe]

are there any other orientations/positions to beware of?

Well, there are a few... first of all, when you're going to store the tape for a long period of time, it's best to pack the tape at a slow speed... IOW, don't fast forward it to the end and then remove it from the machine and box it up. The "pack" will be uneven, with the edges of the tape sticking out in an uneven way. It's better to play the tape back all the way to the end, which will result in a tighter, more even "pack". The edges of the tape are far less likely to get damaged this way.

For similar reasons, it's not a good idea to lay the tape boxes "flat" when storing them. They should be placed on the edges - kind of like a book on a shelf in a library. Again, the tape is less likely to be damaged that way.

Environmental conditions are also important when storing tape. You don't want to expose tape to high temp / high humidity conditions, nor do you want to expose them to magnetic fields.

[Ray18]

Originally posted by raw-tracks
It been a long time since I've sat down and listened to Zep II or the first Sabbath. But I do remember that first Sabbath record as actually quite bright. I always attributed it to high monitoring levels causing fatigue and alcohol. Both of which can cause a mix to be too bright.

I'll have to round up a copy of Zep II and take a listen. I only have it on a beat up copy of a copy cassette tape. That'll certainly be dull.

I didn't think the mix was too bright...its got a very nice balance

but hey, if you're digging out that copy of Zep II on tape..check to see if the lemon song is labeled as "killing floor"

my zep II tape has it written like that...I wonder if its a rare thing

[bjorked]

Being a "Zep Head" at one time in my life I remember reading that that specific "pre" echo section on "whole lotta love" was deliberate and Page's idea (being the producer). Whether this is true is uncertain.

I am also under the impression that british recordings in the sixties sounded sub - par because, in fact, the brits were way behind the US technologically in terms of recording. Just listen to any british rock recording around that time and compare it to most of the jazz recordings on riverside, blue note, or columbia. For example just listen to "Kind of Blue" - that was recorded in 59' and it's quality is leap and bounds ahead of most british recordings from even the mid - sixties. Ditto w/ "Blue Train" recorded in 57'. Sonically, the american recordings just seem to sound better. Actually, I think Tom Dowd touches on some of this on his dvd. The brits were just behind in recording technology although, I don't think the Zep Albums sound terrible. ;)

[seaneldon]

Originally posted by bjorked
The brits were just behind in recording technology

that's funny. i've spent thousands upon thousands of dollars on British preamps and EQs. thousands upon thousands.

[bjorked]

Originally posted by seaneldon


that's funny. i've spent thousands upon thousands of dollars on British preamps and EQs. thousands upon thousands.

from the fifties and sixties? There is more to the recording than the preamp and eq equipment - what about the boards and the tape machines? And of course the recording technique. Les Paul didn't even invent multi-tracking until 1947 - around the time that Tom Dowd invented the linear fader. But yes british preamps and EQs have a certain sound. Being a guitarist I am well aware of the "british" tone.

[seaneldon]

no i was agreeing that british recordings from the time sounded pretty poor in comparison, yet i've put a considerable amount of time into making sure i get the "british tone" in at least 50% of the tracks I do.

[bjorked]

Definately! That's why I have a matchless amp (pretty much a birtish vox AC30 on steroids!) also why I listen to my stereo through B&Ws. Guess the brits eventually figured out what was what. :D

[Ray18]

Originally posted by bjorked
Definately! That's why I have a matchless amp (pretty much a birtish vox AC30 on steroids!) also why I listen to my stereo through B&Ws. Guess the brits eventually figured out what was what. :D

voxes set on fire....often


but yes, I agree the brits were lagging as far as recording went


listen to buddy hollys stuff...it was like it was recorded yesterday

can't say the same for the beatles :(

[Kiwiburger]

I'm fairly certain The Beatles recorded "Yesterday" ;)

[Johnny Storm]

IMHO, the "pre-delay" on the vocals in the breakdown section of Whole Lotta Love is headphone bleedthrough of the scratch vocal tracks. Jimmy Page probably left it in the mix because it sounds cool.

To my ears, it doesn't sound like print-through. For one thing, print-through has a characteristic severe decrease in the high end, and this doesn't sound like that to me. But, the thing that clenches it, if you listen to the recording, is that the "pre-delay" vocal gets panned around between the right and left channels, while the lead vocal stays panned straight up the middle. There would not be this obvious discrepancy in panning if it were truly print-through - it would be a copy, and therefore panned identically.

I've been carefully studying Zep records since I was about 12 years old, though, so please forgive my ultra-pickiness. Don't ask me how long ago 12 was. Heheh.

[Strryder]

If my memory is correct, most, (if not all) of Led Zeppelin II was actually recorded in the US as they toured in support of their 1st album, and was tracked/mixed in different places as they moved around the country.

It also might very well have been an 8 track production.

:)

P.S. Here's a little more info..

http://www.answers.com/topic/led-zeppelin-ii

[Caevan O'Sh!te]

This thread is becoming more and more interesting, no matter whether any given suggestion is "right" or "wrong"! :cool:

[Crawling Wind]

I think it might have to do with which version you have. The initial cd issue of LZII sucked. I think I sold mine shortly after buying it. I believe the later versions were much better.

[Ray18]

Originally posted by Crawling Wind
I think it might have to do with which version you have. The initial cd issue of LZII sucked. I think I sold mine shortly after buying it. I believe the later versions were much better.

I bought it in 2003


and my album version was muddy too...first pressing

[Crawling Wind]

Well, there goes THAT theory. But imagine it sounding worse.

<I bought it in 2003


and my album version was muddy too...first pressing>

[Ray18]

Originally posted by Crawling Wind
Well, there goes THAT theory. But imagine it sounding worse.

<I bought it in 2003


and my album version was muddy too...first pressing>


wanna hear my theory about people who don't use the quote button :mad:


;)

[Johnny Storm]

>>>wanna hear my theory about people who don't use the quote button :mad:

Sure, what's your theory? :p

[kylen]

<font size="2"><b>Johnny Storm</b></font><br>
<font size="1">Junior Member</font><br>
<p>
<font size="1">Registered: Jul 2005<br>
Location: <br>
Posts: 54</font></td>
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" width="100%" valign="top">
<font size="1"> <b></b></font>
<p><font size="2">&gt;&gt;&gt;wanna hear my theory about people who don't
use the quote button <img src="
../ubb/mad.gif" border="0"
alt=""> <br />
<br />
Sure, what's your theory? <img src="../ubb/tongue.gif" border="0"
alt=""></font></p>

<p><p><font size="2">__________________<br>
AKA Bunny @ MP <img src="../ubb/wink.gif" border="0" alt=""></font></p></p>

Yeah - what's the answer? (Can I say that here?):confused:

BTW - I got the cassette of LZII when it came out a few years ago and it was the bassiest cassette in my collection, John Paul Jones bass guitar was huge on that thing!

[Johnny Storm]

Originally posted by Ray18


wanna hear my theory about people who don't use the quote button :mad:


;)

Wanna hear my theory about people who don't use proper punctuation? :mad: :p

[Crawling Wind]

Well, I usually use the quote button, but I thought it would be the next post and an obvious reply. Since it went to the top of a new page, I went back and added in the comment by edit. Does that fit in with your theory?

Originally posted by Ray18


wanna hear my theory about people who don't use the quote button :mad:


;)

[Ray18]

Originally posted by Passing Wind
Well, I usually use the quote button, but I thought it would be the next post and an obvious reply. Since it went to the top ofa new page, I went back and added in the comment by edit. Does that fit in with your theory?



I dunno

[MikeyE]

Originally posted by Johnny Storm


Wanna hear my theory about people who don't use proper punctuation? :mad: :p

Wanna hear my theory on your theory about people who don't use proper punctuation?

I actually don't have a theory on that. But it sure did sound cool.

[Johnny Storm]

Wanna hear my theory about people who theorize about other people's theories?

I didn't think so... :p

(I'm still trying to build my post-count here. :rolleyes: )

[2180]

IMHO, I'm not so sure about the front end echo before the song starts, but whom-ever "re-mastered" LZ into CD really F-ed-UP badly, can't stand the crap. And that was one band that I thought was my guiding-light for many years, next to (American) Hendrix (then dead), maybe a few other English bands from that time, they were really great for a few years, mid-to-late 60's to early-to-mid 70's.

[Ray18]

I saw of pic of them with the master tapes coming off a plane..the boxes were all ratty and dog eared

[Ray18]

bump

[UstadKhanAli]

Much of this album was recorded quickly live in various studios around the world, including A&R Studios in NY, Olympic Studio in London, Juggy Sound Studio in NY, Mystic Studios in LA, Mayfair Studios in NY, and other studios in various locations including Vancouver. The album was mixed at A&R Studios in NY by Eddie Kramer in one weekend (source: Led Zeppelin: Heaven and Hell", Charles R. Cross and Erik Flannigan, Harmony Books).

Eddie Kramer does not like the sound of Led Zeppelin II (or "Are You Experienced", for that matter), saying that it's not a good quality recording and is distorted (source: an actual conversation I had with Eddie Kramer).

The "pre-delay" thing in "Whole Lotta Love" is to the best of my knowledge purposeful. How it was done I'm not really sure, but I had read somewhere that it was done on purpose and is not print-through or a mistake.

In my opinion, the recording is may not the greatest in terms of audio quality, but captures an incredible vibe, and for that alone, totally transcends any "technical" problems it may has. If you compare the recording to other recordings made in 1969, it really doesn't sound that bad, and sounds more alive and dimensional than many recordings of that time.

[rog951]

Originally posted by UstadKhanAli
>>>The "pre-delay" thing in "Whole Lotta Love" is to the best of my knowledge purposeful. How it was done I'm not really sure, but I had read somewhere that it was done on purpose and is not print-through or a mistake<<<

This very subject was addressed by Eddie Kramer in the current EQ mag. I kinda speed read it though and I can't remember 100% what he said. I believe he said it was bleed over from an adjacent vocal track? There were two vocal tracks on the 8-track tape and apparently they were recorded very hot; so much so that they couldn't keep the unused track out of the final mix...so they decided to dump a ton of reverb on it. An "engineering mistake" that is now part of history...

Anyone out there with better reading comprehension skills please feel free to correct me!

:wave:

[UstadKhanAli]

So it was a mistake! I don't have the new EQ yet, but that would make a lot more sense than print-through, especially considering how loud and distorted it is.

[ZenFly]

When I first heard LZII on LP I was amazed at how great the bass sounded. Not muddy but really big through Wharfedale speakers.

Page always "left the mistakes in" he said in an interview.

The remastered CDs from a couple years ago sound fantastic through good speakers.
That said, old recordings on CD will never sound "the same" as when they were released...no surface noise from the needle, which actually did color the sound quite a bit.

Actually since the "How the west was Won" CD and DVD came out, I've not listened to any of the studio stuff except for "When the Levee Breaks". LZ were a great live band. Page was an excellent producer in that he could capture that essence on tape.