Path:
number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!nntp.infostrada.it!area.cu.mi.it!diesel.cu.mi.it!seltaeb.ghgcorp.com!rmb-mod
From: "Karl Uppiano" 
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles.moderated,rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: A heavier bass line than Glass Onion?
Followup-To: rec.music.beatles.moderated
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 05:49:14 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Uppiano Family
Lines: 51
Approved: rmbm-request{at}seltaeb.ghgcorp.com
Message-ID: 
References: 
Reply-To: "Karl Uppiano" 
NNTP-Posting-Host: seltaeb.ghgcorp.com
X-Trace: area.cu.mi.it 1137044954 6241 69.44.227.18 (12 Jan 2006 05:49:14 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse{at}diesel.cu.mi.it
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 05:49:14 +0000 (UTC)
Originator: rmb-mod{at}seltaeb.ghgcorp.com
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com rec.music.beatles.moderated:16940
rec.music.beatles:978675


 wrote in message 
news:1137000666.337370.228430{at}g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I'm assuming it was laid down by Paul (I'm too lazy right now to check
> it out), but Man Oh Man, what a heavy bass line in 'Glass Onion'!!
>
> Sounds like Paul is using a rock chip for a pick over 8-guage wire.  I
> must admit, I haven't heard a heavier bass line from that era and right
> after (namely Sabbath, Zeppelin, or Who).
>
> Nowadays, due to advances in recording processes it is easily possible
> to make a bass line heavy -- but for 1968, that was pretty darn
> impressive!!
>
>
> dpat

If they wanted to record a heavy bass line in 1968 (or in 1964 for that 
matter) they could do any or all of the following in any combination:

o Use some combination of instrument pickups that minimizes the harmonics 
and boosts the bottom.
o Add fuzz or distortion in the bass amp.
o Fiddle with the microphone placement to get a particular sound.
o Deliberately overdrive the bass amp, microphone, mixer or tape.
o Skip the bass amp altogether and feed the instrument directly into the 
console.
o Use lots of compression to keep the bass at a constant loudness.
o Mix the bass predominantly in the mix.
o Equalize for more bass.

EMI had some official corporate "standards" about how records should be 
produced that IIRC, placed some constraints on how much bass could be put on 
the vinyl. I don't know if it was for artistic reasons, or for playability 
and recording time (heavy bass takes up more room on the record, and large 
groove excursions could cause skipping on the portables of the day that lots 
of kids used to listen to the Beatles). That was not a problem for the tape 
recorders of the day, or for today's CDs (or even today's vinyl and decent 
quality turntables).

I don't know if the Beatles ever reached the level of artistic control to 
override the vinyl mastering standards at EMI. The actual record 
manufacturing process may have been too far beyond the studio for them to 
have much control over it (or interest in it as the case may be). I think 
EMI manufactured Apple records. 

--

All follow-ups are directed to the newsgroup rec.music.beatles.moderated.    
If your follow-up more properly belongs in the unmoderated newsgroup, please 
change your headers appropriately.   -- the moderators
---
 þ Derby City GateWorks:  UUCP  FidoNet