Why on Earth did you decided to become a producer/engineer?
Mitch: My dad came home with a little Sony tape recorder in about '63 and I was entranced by it. Soon I was putting paper over the erase head for "overdubbing", running the tape backwards, etc. Despite what you can do with a computer nothing will probably ever be as much fun for me as these rude 'n' crude techniques.
When did you decide to do it as a 'career'?
I was alarmed by the fact that when I graduated from high school I couldn't just seamlessly slide into my proposed Rock Star career- nothing was going on. But a year or so earlier, Chris Stamey had bought one of the first Teac 2340s, which was a 1/4" 4-track with sync, so you could overdub. A breakthrough machine-installed in my basement, it allowed us brash teens to try to make records as opposed to just play in a band. It was really satisfying to build up a song with overdubs and I think what I understand about how all this stuff works came from the Teac Era, mostly. Naturally I thought the truly unlistenable results we got were pretty fine, and only lacked more tracks to be right up there with the heavy greats of the time. So during college I was trying to figure out a way to get some kind of studio going. The okay results we were getting on the Teac by this time (mainly due to the addition of the fabulous Tapco mixer, which had EQ!) convinced me that I might be able to avoid getting a real job if I got some kind of rock band-oriented place going. The notion of "producer" never occurred to me. I just wanted to record myself and also record other people to justify getting better equipment. I guess this was in '77, when I graduated from college. This was an exciting time in recording- megalith records were giving way to punk rock and quickie sessions as championed by people like Nick Lowe- you listened to those things and it seemed like fun as opposed to work. The words were better, it was more about guitars and there was a complete absence of mellow electric pianos! It seemed possible to "rock" again without being a total dumbass. Nothing against dumbass rock, but at the time I was more intrigued, recording-wise, with what would quickly become labeled "quirky". (Ugh.) Also, David Bowie's Low had come out around '76 or '77 and that record is still one of my all-time faves for its boldly odd sound and its attitude of "departure". I was always more interested in "messing around" than "perfecting"- these records suggested you could do that and people would listen to it. All inspiring to me as I contemplated my version of being in The Biz. Of course nowadays, the spectre of Total Perfection is more suffocating than ever, with equipment that pushes things ever more in that direction. Even if you're working in the "funny noises" department, I'm still struggling with the lengthy time frame that is standard for a commercial release. The emerging standards of the late 70's and early 80's looked good to me, though, so I actually tried to go for it. After a few false starts, the Drive-in studio got going in July of 1980, so I suppose that indicated that I had a "career."
Here's the obvious part of interviews that you will never escape: REM's Murmur is one the finest and timeless records ever made and there are a million interviews and books out there for those who are interested. However none that I have read cover production specifics. (Most likely because no one cares except people like me, you know, the nerds and geeks who read recording magazines.) For instance how did you get the amazing snare sound on "Radio Free Europe?"
Bill really wanted to play in the drum booth at Reflection. They had the definitive '70s booth down there which we affectionately called "The Tiki Hut"- a little sorta' octagonal thing with a lot of glass and a cedar shake pointy roof. It was pretty small and we had trouble with the hi-hat just consuming the entire drum sound. We were doing stuff like Dolby A decoding the bass drum track (which was not encoded) to get a sort of expander effect to get hi-hat racket out of the bass drum. This has always mystified me- I mean, the hi- hat didn't seem that loud, but I guess it just filled the Hut. Anyway, because of that we just couldn't get any kind of decent sound out of the snare drum on "Radio Free Europe." So one night, just out of exasperation, we played another snare drum by itself to add in for more clarity. I hit the drum and [Don] Dixon punched me in. We mic'd it from up high, like maybe 15' away or so, and compressed it. The room at Reflection and that distance gave it that sort of nice fake sound.
What console was Murmur recorded and mixed on?
An MCI 600. I always liked that thing- it got hot- always the indication of the best gear. Reflection had a really snazzy one with the fabulous "Plasma" meters and automation. We never used the automation, though. We did sometimes use the grouping function, and then just mixed manually from there. A song or two on Murmur were left over from earlier sessions in my garage, so that would have been the Quantum QM-12 + 8EX.
I have heard you mention in other interviews that REM were a little apprehensive about production from their nightmare sessions with Stephen Hague. How did you and Dixon convince them to try some of the more exciting production ideas on the record?
Well, it was a shame that the band's brush with the big boys was so horrific, or maybe not, actually. The band was probably wise to be wary of "Producers", since producers are likely to be working more for The Man than the band and their ideas might be really tacky. We had great fun doing Chronic Town and the more I suggested tape loops or whatever the more they dug it. When we started Murmur the band had become utterly conservative because of the horror of synthesizers being wantonly applied to their sound by the producer IRS wanted to use. (R.E.M. were completely anti-synth at the time.) Also, they had been required to do like a million takes at the big time session and it had shaken Bill's confidence, I think. All that standard-issue studio crap was inappropriate for R.E.M. We (Don Dixon & I) had to show them that we were paying attention to their aesthetic sense instead of imposing something on them. Despite generally gaining their confidence, there was a wonderful showdown where Dixon had to let them have it after their grumpy comments about "Perfect Circle." We had to be so dainty with modifications to their live sound that it was kind of stifling. Dixon and I both felt like a mere "recording" wasn't enough to make a "record" and so when our sympathetic, subtle, and genius production touches were dissed one too many times, Dixon wisely announced to the band, "Don't blame me when nobody buys your DEMO TAPE!" I have no idea what effect on the band's thinking this produced, but it does need to be said sometimes. I think the vibe of great wariness made us do a lot of "producing" when the band was out of the building!
I have noticed that you didn't get performing credits on either Murmur or Reckoning; you did play some guitar on those, correct?
The bits and pieces Dixon and I played were just for convenience, or when we'd think of something when nobody else was around. Both of us were able to think in those kind of mechanical terms, like- "drag it a little when it goes to A"- so it was quick and easy. There was never anything like bringing in the "session guy"- we liked the band and how they played. Dixon played bass on "Perfect Circle" because we did a bunch of stuff on that one by ourselves and we wanted to hear a bass part. I think Peter Buck usually played bass on "Perfect Circle" but he liked Dixon's part just fine and it stayed on. I played the backwards guitar on that song, Bill and Mike played pianos, Michael sang, and I think everybody played acoustic on the chorus, campfire-style. This was all fun and I had no concern at all about credits. That was the attitude throughout- I mean it's still their record no matter what.
I agree completely, sometimes it simply takes too long to translate per- formance ideas. Often I find myself grabbing a guitar and guiding musicians through their parts. Do you enjoy, as a producer, per- forming on artists records?
Absolutely- if it's okay with the band I can usually add some color really fast and it helps us all stay interested. I think I can usually think of parts that are economical and make the song sound more "like a record". As much as I admire no-overdubs kind of productions, I never feel like it's quite all there when I try to do that. Like with Murmur- the band's sound was great, but that one extra thing, to me, could make all the difference. I especially like those "what is that" kind of additions.
Is there ever a point when you have had to fire a band member or hire a session guy to fill their shoes?
Nowadays I'm ready to do some firing. Looking back at stuff I did years ago I sometimes regret taking that "friends with the band" stance because the thing that lives on is the recording, and you really should do what you can to make it stand up. On the other hand, the whole feel of the ultrapro sessions still grosses me out- there are so many examples of that third album where the band is down to one or two original members and they're using the awesome rhythm section of the day and it just sucks and is completely unlikeable. If recording pop music has to be like that, I'd rather pump gas! You need to figure out what the band is about. You can always find some idiot who to this day thinks the Beatles would've been okay if they'd had Neil Peart on drums, or recorded on Pro Tools, etc., and of course those records are perfect as they are (misguided CD remixes excepted!). And, sure, sometimes the bass player or whoever has to go. I suppose I'm a lingering softie in this area, but my ability to listen to bad playing is about used up. But it's all about context- "bad" in one band is "fantastic" in another. I mean you cannot improve upon the Troggs, and they were not exactly hotshots. I did a record with a band around 1990 where we ended up doing the drums on a computer after much pain all around. Everything about that was awful- from suffering through the initial bad takes right on through telling the drummer "you must hear that this is just not good enough..." and I hope to never repeat it! At least in that case the drummer actually enjoyed working his parts up on the machine and the record turned out okay, but this whole firing business has to get sorted out before you set foot in the studio. It seems lame for a band to not figure this out on their own, but sometimes the alliances that make up the band outweigh what you gain by using a better player. I suppose that notion has no place in today's ultracommercial, hits-only world, though.
What records are you most proud of?
I can't really answer that without some kind of list in front of me, sorry. In general, upon completing something I am still worrying about it, then about 5 years later I can hear it and think "Hey, that's all right!" At the time I usually liked the Game Theory and Loud Family ones because they were so varied and usually had several good songs.
You have worked with many heavy hitters in the industry, John Leckie, Scott Litt, John Hampton, etc. What Producer/Engineers out there inspire you these days?
Well, just when I think I've figured out how to do this stuff, I hear some record that just freaks me out. Everything that Flood works on sounds great, for example, but so do those Motley Crue records, you know? The level of craft nowadays is impressive, and as usual I must cite my inability to compile lists to explain my reluctance to answer this. If you played me a bunch of tracks, I could make pithy comments. I also have an overall comment that almost everything is too bright and too compressed and has too much ultrasheen on it these days. So you've got all these "killer" sounds going on now but somehow all '70s records still kick ass in this superior gutsy way. And they were made using the standard console preamps, a couple of 1176s and crummy Belden wire. So I kinda think everybody is trying too hard now. There is certainly too much emphasis on gear. Of course using a bunch of esoteric garbage is part of the showbiz of impressing artists, labels, and peers, so I understand how we've gotten to this state of affairs.
How do you feel about others mixing your recordings?
I am all for it in theory. Sometimes I've been disappointed- in one case the highly popular awesome mixer dude just made the vocal and snare too loud and put the usual tiresome compression on the whole thing. For that I am sure he was paid drastically more than I was for making the record. That is an example of how using The Mixer has become a sort of business cliché and a waste of money. But I'm sure it works out well most of the time. It is stupid how there are always like 3 guys who mix everything.
You did some sessions with Wilco which eventually saw the light of day on Summerteeth. What was it like working with them?
