Corollary to this thread on Paul McCartney’s recent appearance on the show.
It’s debatable how much of the problem was due to Sir Paul’s aging vocals, but there’s no denying that the sound mixing flat-out sucked. At the beginning of “Jet” it sounded like his mic wasn’t even turned on.
And this is pretty much par for the course, for SNL, and has been ever since I started watching it in the mid-80s. The show has been on the air for 35 years now (!!) in the same damn location and they still can’t figure out how to do the sound correctly for their musical guests?
<Seth and Amy>REALLY!???!</>
I’m nowhere near a sound expert, as evidenced by the fact that I don’t even know the proper terminology to complain about this stuff in this post, but it just seems bizarre to me that SNL seemingly can’t figure out how to fix this ongoing problem. Is there something special about the studio they’re broadcasting from, or do they just not give a shit, or what?
It’s live, that’s probably part of it. On recorded shows, a musical performance might get remixed to improve on it. Also, there’s the inevitable time crunch and unanticipated problems that come with a live performance. Prepare and practice all you want, something unanticipated may occur. Someone may hit a dial or slider or a setting, lines of communication may get crossed, etc. Another thought is that it doesn’t always suck as bad as you say it does. I’ve heard some great performances on that show that seemed to be mixed fine to me, going back 30 years.
True. I would not say that every performance has sound issues by any means. It’s just that it happens often enough for me, at least, to notice and wonder what the deal is.
I think this is an important point. Especially since the 80s when mixing became a major part of music.
I find it interesting that when I listen to old time radio and musical performers like Jo Stafford, Dinah Shore, Frank Sinatra, they sound almost identical on live radio to their studio recordings.
But as you go through the 50s, 60s and 70s, you see this becoming less common.
It depends on where the artist starts out. For instance, Juice Newton (one of my favorites) started out singing county fairs and small clubs. They had bad setups and the mikes and equipment wasn’t the best. Juice had to learn how to belt out a tune to be heard at a county fair. To be sure, Juice Newton, doesn’t have the world’s best voice, but it’s powerful.
On the flip side, Janet Jackson herself, acknowledges her voice isn’t very strong so she needs good microphones and her equipment needs to be set up by her staff so it’s done correctly.
Wayne Newton is known for traveling with his own band. Even when he performs charities, he brings his own bands in. (He pays the cost out of his pocket that is why he is so favourably viewed by charities). He does this as he says he is so in synch with his people that he has to have them to perform at his best.
Some performers can use house bands
Like most things it’s pretty much a collection of a lot of little things that can throw a performer off and it adds up quick.
I always wonder how much of a pain-in-the-ass it would be to get a band’s equipment through NYC traffic, into Rockefeller Center, and up to 8th floor, and set up on a cramped stage for 2 songs.
Well, I make the same comments about BBC live music (Friday Night with …, Jools Holland) - the sound sux. And my daughter who got to a recording of Graham Norton said that the in-studio sound was just as bad (and that was James Blunt, who you can’t make sound much worse)
All professional setups are handled by specialty cartage companies, who break down and pack everything, transport it, and set it up somewhere else. All large instruments are done this way, also performers who use several instruments for one performance, like a row of guitars. Some performers may even have multiple sets so one can be in the transport phase while another is being used.
And the setup people will tune and test everything beforehand so that all the performer has to do is show up, play and leave.
That may be part of the problem. They have six days to put together a 90-minute show, and I get the feeling that a lot of musical guests show up pretty late in the week, maybe even Saturday afternoon. (Although Paul had a bit in the digital short so he must have been around a little earlier.)
Since most musical guests do only two songs instead of a full concert, they probably don’t have time to do a complete sound check. Remember that there are a limited number of stages in that studio and they are constantly being used to rehearse all week.
On something like a daily late-night show, there’s little rehearsal and the band can come in and do a proper sound check that day, and their stuff doesn’t need to be messed with to make way for a dozen skits before they go on. And the fact that they’re not live helps.
The musical acts are always terrible, in my experience. Even stuff I really like sounds just awful. You’d think after 30 years of doing this show they’d be able to get it right.
The thing is, the TV/Live distinction isn’t that hard to take into account. All it takes is having two sets of sound operators, one set working with the live feed, and one sequestered off watching the show on TV. My church can pull it off (or at least could before we couldn’t afford a full-time music minister.)
In reference to the 3rd parties handling the set ups: How do you guys think Paul’s Hoffner is handled? I know it’s speculation, but I can’t imagine anyone but him being entrusted to even hold the thing for a second.
Just checked with a friend of mine who is a die hard McCartney fan and he had this to say:
“I know he has had the same chief roadie his entire solo career, John Hammell, and I saw him handle it in an interview. (Picking it up and saying, “Most iconic instrument in the world.”) So I assume he is the guy given personal responsibility for it.”
Not a definitive answer by any means…