First Studio Date, Feb, 2005

So, now it starts...

Our first studio date was on Wednesday, February 9, 2005. We went in to kill two birds with one stone; First, to record the first song of the new album, "Daddy." This was, up until the day of recording, called, "She Calls Me Daddy," but Jon suggested shortening the title to not give any "sexual" connotations to the title. Our second objective was to get a final "demo" version to submit to local radio station, WKLT, for consideration for their Northern Michigan Rocks compilation album. This, for those of you outside our local area, is an annual record put out by a local radio station that features local talent, and is played on-air, thereby giving all of us some exposure in the Northern Michigan market, and is also submitted to the various record labels KLT deals with.

We recorded the song, as we have recorded most of our material, at Jay Star Recordings in Gaylord, MI. The owner/engineer is Jim Tobin. Jim is a fine recording engineer, with great ears, a nice, laid-back way of dealing with things, and a great sense of humor. All of these things are definitely needed when dealing with a group like Mojo. We found Jim when the original studio we were working with for our first record went out of business. Jim has since been our "go-to guy" for recording MATB albums, and I can't think of anywhere in Northern Michigan I'd rather go for recording our stuff.

We use a 2" reel-to-reel analog tape machine at Jim's. This was what we used to record our last record, got mojo?, and we were really pleased with the sound the analog tape gives us. Analog is the medium used for the "old school" recordings up until the advent of digital recording systems. Some folks like the crispness of the digital media, and record all their stuff completely and totally digital. This is great for hip-hop, classical, modern rock, and the like, but for blues, soul, jazz, and styles in that vein, the analog sound is warmer and more "natural" sounding. Really it all boils down to a question of preference.

In the past, we have recorded all the parts, but only concerned ourselves with getting a usable drum and bass track on the first time around for each song. Everyone played, but the emphasis was on getting the drums and bass as we wanted them for the final version of the song. All other parts would be "layered" on later. This has worked for us, but we could never be very spontaneous within the songs. Once the rhythm tracks were down, the soloists had to keep their parts within the confines of those tracks. If Jon, Charlie, or I wanted to extend or shorten a certain section, we couldn't, because the rhythm track dictated what was going to happen. The same is true for any use of dynamics (making the music quieter or louder for emotional/dramatic effect). Once the drums and bass were down, the dynamics were set in stone as well. The other down-side to this approach was that the drummer and bassist are trying for a "keeper" take, and the rest of us knew our tracks were what are referred to as "scratch" tracks. In other words, the drummer and bassist were trying to play their very best stuff, and the guitar wasn't really "dialed in" right, I may not have sang the song to my best ability, and the whole group wasn't really going for a "take." This gives those that are trying for that keeper track nothing, or at least very little, to draw from for inspiration, leaving the tracks wanting for a little more "sparkle" for lack of another word.

This time around, we decided to try to record as much of the band "live" as possible. Jon, AJ, and Bill were all in the main recording room of the studio, with Charlie in the hallway outside the control room, and me in the control room with Jim. Jon's amp was set up in the isolation room (aka the "iso" room, or the "closet"), AJ and Bill set up in the main part of the main studio with a big piece of cardboard separating the bass amp and the drum to reduce what is known as "bleeding" of the tracks. You want as little bleeding as possible with the tracks, so if you want to increase the volume of, say, the snare drum, you're not bringing in the bass and guitar with it as well. A good amount of separation is needed for the final mixing of the song. Charlie was blowing into the Neuman mic that Jim uses for recording vocals, as this tune wasn't going to need an amp-driven harp sound. We were going for more of a country-blues sound on this tune, and the harp sounds great acoustically. Mine was the only track that would be a definite scratch track. That didn't mean I could lay down on the job and save myself for later when I got to put my final vocal track down. No, I needed to give the guys as much to work with as possible, so that I had the best tracks possible to work with later for my part.

Now, before, when we went for just a good drum track, we only had to worry about getting the drums recorded right for the take. This time, we were trying to get everyone to get a good take at the same time, which can much more difficult. We went through two tries of the tune, and on the third we hit the keeper. There are some things that could have been done better (I won't tell you what they are), and some that one guy or another thought they could have been done differently, but all-in-all, the track had the right sound, feel, and groove we were looking for.

Some bands look for the "perfect" take to commit to tape. The part has to be played exactly like the player had in mind or it has to be re-done. For Mojo & the Boogieman, we go with the philosophy, "If it feels good, it is good." This means that, while the part may not have been the what the player had in mind, if the overall feel or mood of the part is good, then that's a take, and we move on. If Jon plays a run and the third note isn't quite there, but the sound makes everyone happy, we'll keep the part. If the fourth note is a little flat, but it gives the part a unique sound without sounding out-right wrong, we keep it. If the tempo of the song speeds up in one section, and then slows down in another, as long as the feel isn't thrown off, it stays. That being said, we went with the "feel good" philosophy for our third take of "Daddy."

After the guys got their parts down, we set the Nueman back up in the main studio area, and recorded a little bit of what Quincy Jones calls "ear candy." Listen to one of your favorite tunes. Do you hear some maracas shaking in the background? Maybe some congas or a tamborine? That's ear candy. It's not an intregal part of the song, but it accentuates the tune a little. Think of all those Motown tunes. Listen to the tambourine. Not really needed, but if it wasn't there, you'd know. Ear candy. Our ear candy was a little shaken percussion to accent the shuffle beat used for the tune. It has a kind of "clip-clop" , lazy feel to it, so I put some accents to that feel with something called a "One Shot." basically, this is a maraca that only sounds once when shaken. Instead of the "shicka-shicka" sound, it's "shick, shick." The second half of the shake is dampened inside the instrument. Now, this is something you really have to listen for, but it does accent the shuffle groove of the song nicely. After running through the song once with a couple of stops for me get back with the rhythm of the song, we went back and cleaned up a few spots I got off track by "punching in" the fixes. This is a process where the engineer hits the "record" button, and only records a small bit of part, recording over a mistake or an unwanted section. You "punch in" at the beginning of the part, play the new part, and then "punch out" after the new part has been recorded, leaving the track the same before and after. So a couple of punches, and the ear candy was in place!

Next, it was time for vocals. We ran through the song once, and got a good vocal track. Jim always teases me that he makes no money off me, because I am fortunate enough to be able to do my vocal tracks in one or two takes. Since he charges by the hour, I kind of help reign in the budget. The only thing I needed to fix was the very last line of the last verse. I had come up with a part on the way to the studio that night, and as we were recording the other tracks, I kept trying it out, and fine-tuning it, so when it was my time, I could do it right. Unfortunately, I needed one more pass at it before it came out right. The first time around, I didn't really commit to the part, and it came out sounding kind of weak and strained. So, we punched in the last line, and voila! "Daddy's" done! Now, all we have to do is mix...

mixing is the process of getting all the instruments in the right space and at the right volume within the song. For blues, the drums should be in the background, with snare just a bit above the other drums, and the kick (or bass) drum has a nice "boom" to it. You don't want a hip-hop "thud" here, or a heavy metal flat "whacking" sound. Just a nice, round sound out of it. The tom-toms are panned extreme left and right to give the stereo feel, and the cymbals are given the same treatment. Next, the bass comes in, and kind of fills the space between the drums and other instruments. The bass is not actually mixed in the "center" of the sound space, it just kind of fills the middle ground. After that, bring in the guitar. The guitar should be closer to the front of the sound space, same for the harp. The trick here is not cluttering up your sound, but keeping everything evenly spaced, so the listener can hear each instrument individually and pick out the subtleties of each part. Finally, the vocal is added in the center of it all, and just on top of everything else. You have to be careful not to put the voice too far out front, or it sounds like the singer is singing right in front of you, and the band is three doors down and to the right, near the Men's room. The ear candy gets tucked just inside it all, so that you can hear it if you listen for it, but it isn't out front screaming, "HEY! Listen to this! Isn't it cool!?!?"

The other concern with mixing is equalization, or "EQ." This is controlling the high, mid, and low frequencies within the song, as well as the frequencies of the instruments. If your mix is too heavy on the high frequencies, it sounds "tinny" and thin. If the bass frequencies are too high, then it sound muffled, or as we like to say, "muddy." If the mid-range frequencies get too far out, then the sound is something like listening over a telephone line or maybe two tin cans and a string. The old "garbage in, garbage out" philosophy comes into play here, too. If the original tracks are recorded poorly, then there's not a lot you can do to fix it with EQ. As Jon likes to say, "You can't polish a turd." So, you have to have a good recording of the track before you even start to mix, or you're in for a long, frustrating night. Fortunately for us, we have an engineer with wonderful ears that can dial this stuff in just right, and mix it well, too. After three-and-a-half hours of work, we were rewarded with a final mix of "Daddy," and on our way to having a new Mojo album for you guys very soon. Just think about 12 or 14 more songs to go!

IS IT REALLY STEALING?

This time around, I want to talk about how I get my ideas, and how Mojo uses influences and ideas from other sources. In the blues, the same lyric ideas, chord progressions, even titles are borrowed by different musicians. Keb Mo uses a BB King line in his song "Perpetual Blues Machine". It's the line; "My mother says she loves me/But she could be jivin', too." This is more common in the blues and jazz world than in other music genres that I've heard. A soloist might even quote a part of someone else's solo or melody in their solo. This isn't looked at as stealing, it's more of a sign of appreciation. It's kind of like saying; "Hey, man, I really dig that line you used, so I'm gonna throw it in my tune, too."

Now, that's not to say if I write a song, and then 10 years down the road, somebody just took the song, note-for-note, that that's alright. It has to do with the tradition of the blues. Many of the interviews and biographies and autobiographies I've read on my favorite blues musicians all say the same thing. The new guy talks to the old pro, and the old pro tells the new guy to take the music "further than where you found it." In other words; go ahead and use the ideas of those who came before you, just make sure to put some of yourself in there as well. Don't do my thing exactly like I did it. Do something new to it. A good example is the work Eric Clapton has done with his last album, Me and Mr. Johnson. On this record, he does a bunch of tunes by the late Robert Johnson, thought by many as the "King of the Delta Blues" and one of Clapton's biggest influences. On this record, it isn't just rehashing old Delta blues tunes with Clapton playing a bottle neck slide and singing. Instead, Eric brought in a group of some of the best musicians around like Jerry Portnoy (former harp player for Muddy Waters as well as a fine solo performer) and Billy Preston (the "Fifth Beatle" and world-famous keyboard player), to name just two. With a full band of two guitars, drums, bass, keys, and harp, they take the old Robert Johnson standards and give them a whole new sound, while still maintaining that old, Delta feel. Clapton is a master at this art of creating new takes on the old material.

A good analogy is how we as human beings first learn to talk. We imitate those around us, and slowly we develop our own speech pattern. It's uniquely our own, but it still has bits and pieces of all those people we have heard in the past and those we are hearing today. Our slang changes not only as the years go by, but as we come into contact with different people. A friend of mine moved was born and raised in Northern Michigan, and when he was in his early 30's, moved to Tennessee. After a year of living in the South, he came back home for a visit with a brand new way of talking, complete with southern drawl and new slang terms.

The same goes for musicians. We soak up all the music we've heard since we were born, storing it up for later use. From all the nursery rhymes we heard, to the songs on "Sesame Street," to the "School House Rock" songs, to the Pop music of our youth, to present day- all that just floating around, waiting to come out. So, one day, that musician is writing a song about waiting for his baby like "a bill on Capitol Hill" or telling some girl he'll be her "Gangster of Love". Some blues writers have turned nursery rhymes into songs; like Buddy Guy doing "Mary Had a Little Lamb," or Rufus Thomas singing about "Mary, Mary, quite contrary" in "Walking the Dog." Some of these things are premeditated, others just come out. Is it stealing? Well, yes and no. It's just drawing on past experience for a lyric idea.

As for the instruments, the same applies. Now, in blues, there's a couple of standard beats used for many of the song forms. There's shuffles, and these are usually referred to by the regional style that they're used in. A Chicago shuffle sounds different from a Texas shuffle. There's a swing beat that is used in a lot of "jump" blues. Different drummers have their own way of doing these beats, and may use the same type of beat in different songs, subtly altering them to fit the mood of the song. Guitarist use a lot of the same patterns for songs as well. Again, there's a Chicago-style pattern used by the likes of Muddy Waters, Howlin Wolf, and Willie Dixon. There's a Texas sound, a West Coast sound, a Kansas City sound, too. Each player plays these same rhythm patterns in their own way, giving them their own "voice." You know when Eric Clapton is playing a song without anyone telling you who it is on guitar. Same of Stevie Ray, Jimi Hendrix, all the great musicians had their own style of playing that is unique to them, even though they may have played the same songs. This how they moved the song "further."

As for Mojo & the Boogieman, we've done the same thing. We've drawn on all our past musical experiences, and used that to cerate our own sound; Northern Michigan Blues. It's part rock n roll, part blues, part soul, part funk, all mixed together. My lyrics are a combination of original ideas and phrases and melodies I have borrowed as well. In our song "Angle Blues" from our first disc, I patterned the lyric after BB King's "Sweet Little Angle." BB's goes,

"I've got a sweet little angle
I love the way she spreads her wings
When spreads her wings around me
I get joy in everything"

My lyric had the same idea, I just put my own spin on it;

"I love the way she'll squeeze me
In her velvet wings
And when my sweet angle loves me
I think of her and not another thing"

I always liked that lyric from BB, and wanted to do my own thing with it, so I thought up my own version of "Sweet Little Angle" and called it "Angle Blues." Now, the rest of the lyric is totally, 100% mine. It has no resemblance, that I know of, to any other song. I just borrowed that particular idea from BB King.

Another more recent example, is our new tune, "She's So Fine." As I said before, this one wins the award for "Most Musical Accompaniments for One Lyric Idea" for Mojo. The arrangement we've settled on is borrowed from a song we heard by Ronnie Earl, called "My Buddy, Buddy Friends." It was very similar to an earlier version of the song we had done many years ago, but had something our version lacked, so we took that idea and made our own. There's a few stops in ours that the other doesn't have, and of course, the lyrics are totally different.

So, before you go saying, "Well, this song is just a rip-off such n such," remember this; Take a listen to Led Zeppelin's "Whole Lotta Love." Then listen to Muddy Waters' "You Need Love." The lyrics are almost word-for-word identical, just Zeppelin put a different music arrangement to it. Stealing? You be the judge.

this just added (2/15/05); Jon informed me that a judge decided what Led Zeppelin did was stealing, and awarded Muddy a fairly big settlement for it. Because the lyrics are nearly identicle in the two songs, it is legally copyright theft. So, maybe that wasn't the best example, but I hope you get the point!

-B