STUDIO-BASED SONGWRITING: MUSIC PRODUCTION AND SHAPING THE POP SONG

Patrick O’Grady

Adv. Dip. Mus. (CMC), B. Mus. (UWS), M.R.A. (Macquarie).

A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Macquarie University

Department of Media, Music and Cultural Studies, Macquarie University.

2016

i Table of Contents

List of Figures vi List of Tables vii Abstract viii Statement of Candidate ix Acknowledgments x Introduction xi 1. Literature Review and Methodology 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Literature Review 2 1.2.1 Technology and Recording 2 1.2.1.1 Digital Technologies and Music Practice and Production 4 1.2.1.2 The Art of Record Production 5

1.2.2 Technologies and Composition 6 1.2.2.1 Studio as a Compositional Tool: Experimental Practices 6 1.2.2.2 The Influence of Brian Eno 6 1.2.2.3 Focus on Producers 9 1.2.2.4 Key Examples 11 1.2.2.5 Technology and Songwriting: “Studio-based Songwriting” 13

1.2.3 The Field of Studio-based Songwriting 16 1.3 Methodology 17 1.3.1 Problems with Researching Songwriting 17 1.3.2 Problems with Musicology 18 1.3.3 Musicology of Record Production 21 1.3.4 Analytical framework 22 1.3.5 Production Practice 25 1.3.6 Understanding The Field 27 1.3.7 Case Studies 28 1.3.7.1 Brian Eno 30 1.3.7.2 The Beach Boys 30 1.3.7.3 Gotye 31 1.3.7.4 The Bee Gees 32 1.3.7.5 Michael Jackson 33

ii 2. “Producing” a Song: Considering Songwriting and Recording Roles in Pop Music Styles. 35 2.1 Introduction 35 2.2 The Role of Songwriter as “Textual” 36 2.3 Dominant Understandings of the Score as Text 36 2.4 What does Understanding of the Score as Text Provide? 37 2.5 Music Literacy 38 2.6 Recording and Scores 40 2.7 Tin Pan Alley 40 2.8 Complexities 41 2.8.1 Ordering of Textual Elements 41 2.8.2 Merging Roles in Music Production 44 2.8.3 Categorization and Collaboration in Songwriting 46 2.8.4 Cover Songs 48 2.9 Music Production and Songs 49 2.10 Capturing Sounds and Studio Constructed Sounds 53 2.11 Conclusions 56 3. Studio-based Songwriting in Songwriting Processes 58 3.1 Introduction 58 3.2 Brian Eno 59 3.2.1 Brian Eno, Anti-musician 59 3.2.2 Studio as an Instrument or Compositional Tool 60 3.2.3 “Treatments” in Roxy Music 62 3.2.4 Solo Work 63 3.2.5 Producing for Others 65 3.2.6 Analogue Versus Digital 65 3.3 The Beach Boys 68 3.3.1 Surf Culture And Sound 69 3.3.2 Shift to a Focus on a Studio-Constructed Sound 71 3.3.3 Use of Hired Studio Session Musicians 72 3.3.4 Use of Non-rock Instruments 74 3.3.5 Tape Synthesis 76 3.3.6 Splicing Song Sections 77 3.4 Gotye 79 3.4.1 Virtualizing Instruments 80 3.4.2 Sampling 81

iii 3.4.3 Signal Processing 82 3.4.4 Constructing Value Through Collecting Media 82 3.5 Active and Latent Elements Associated with Studio-based Songwriting 83 3.6 Symbolic Capital and Discourses on Processes 85 3.7 Conclusions 87 4. Latent Elements in Studio-based Songwriting Practice 89 4. 1 The Bee Gees 89 4.1.1 Documenting the Songwriting Process in the Studio 90 4.1.2 Blurred lines between Demo Recording and Songwriting Process 93 4.1.3 Use of Reverb in The Bee Gees’ Songwriting Process 94 4.1.4 Use of Studio Instruments 96 4.2 Michael Jackson 99 4.2.1 Building Instrumentation 101 4.2.2 Composing Vocal Melodies 105 4.3 Latent Elements and Consumer Digital Technologies After 2010 107 4.3.1 Consumer Digital Technologies as Tools to Compose Vocal Melodies 109 4.3.2 Documenting Songwriting Process in a DAW 111 4.3.3 Use of Software Instruments in Songwriting 113 4.3.4 Latent Effects and Instruments and Demo Recordings 114 4.3.5 Latent Studio Process in Performance 118 4.4 Types of process 119 4.5 Conclusions 121 5. Spaces and Technologies in Studio-based Songwriting Practice 122 5.1 Commercial Large Recording Studios 123 5.1.1 Large Commercial Recording Studios as Expensive and Exclusive spaces 124 5.1.2 Large Commercial Studios as Shared Spaces with Various Workflows 126 5.2 Private Large Recording Studios 127 5.2.1 Customization of Private Large studios for Specific Workflows 130 5.3 Commercial Project Recording Studios 131 5.3. 1 Live Room and Control Room in a Single Space 133 5.3. 2 Differences in technologies 134 5.3. 3 Social Hub 135 5.4 Private Project Recording Studios 136 5.4.1 Autonomous Spaces 137 5.4.2 Recording and Other Technologies 139 5.4.3 Single Channel Chain 140

iv 5.5 Constructing “Recording Studio” 142 5.5. 1 Representations of Recording Studios 143 5.5. 2 Attitudes Towards Space and Technologies 145 5.6 The Democratization of Recording Technologies and Practices 148 5.7 Conclusions 152 6. Music Production Roles and Studio-based Songwriting 153 6.1 Introduction 153 6.2 Context: The Shifting Politics of Music Production Roles 155 6.3 Album Credits 156 6.4 Brian Wilson as producer 157 6.4.1. Comparisons with The Beatles 160 6.4.2 Use of Synthesis 161 6.4.3 Brian Wilson as “Genius” 162 6.5 Michael Jackson and his Tensions with the Producer 163 6.6 Eno and Subverting the Roles of Producer, Musician and Songwriter 164 6.6.1 Producing others 166 6.7 The Bee Gees 167 6.8 Gotye and Music as A Social Practice 169 6.9 The Politics of Production Roles 172 7. Conclusions 173 7.1 Studio-based Songwriting: A Changing Field 173 7.2 The Fields of Studio-based Songwriting and Music Production 177 7.3 Agents, Distinction and Symbolic Capital 178 Bibliography 180 Audio Visuals 195 Music Recordings 197 Appendix: Production Work 201

v List of Figures

Figure 1 A widely circulated photograph of a recording session in the early 54 twentieth century (Beardsley 2009)

Figure 2 Screenshot of a UAD plugin “Lexicon 224 Digital Reverb” in a 111 Logic Pro X session. Figure 3 Screenshot of a recording session in a Logic Pro X session. The 112 tracks shown are vocals, piano and acoustic guitar with multiple audio clips

Figure 4 Screenshot of a virtual drum sequencer “Drummer” in a Logic Pro 113 session

Figure 5 Screenshot of step drum sampler “Redrum” in a Reason 118 Figure 6 Screenshot of Google Image search results for “recording studio” 144 on December 13, 2014

Figure 7 Advertisement from the 1970s that is now widely circulated on the 148 Internet to humorously show the changing price of technologies.

vi

List of Tables

Table 1 List of select artist names, albums titles, year of album releases 123 and recording studios from case studies.

Table 2 List of the recording technologies at The Bee Gees’ Middle Ear 129 Studio during the late 1990s provided by John Merchant in email.

Table 3 List of some of the recording technologies in Gotye’s home studio 141 provided in his self-published YouTube videos.

Table 4 List of some of the recording technologies in my recording studio 142 during this study.

Table 5 List of select producer credits of specific albums from case 160 studies.

vii Abstract

In this thesis, I explore studio-based songwriting in order to identify the ways in which this practice both disrupts and reorients “traditional” ways of thinking about pop music production. In particular, I reconceptualize the role of the songwriter: why have they been historically linked with scores representing melodies, chords and lyrics? How have recording technologies changed this representation and disrupted longstanding roles in the field? Similarly, I ask broader questions that interrogate the way studio-based songwriting has influenced, and in turn been influenced by, changing attitudes towards aesthetics, taste and value within the field of music production. How have these changes impacted on the ways in which songwriters construct and represent their identities within the broader social and political field?

Studio-based songwriting is the confluence of recording and songwriting practice. Although the use of recording technologies in composition originate in “art” music, the practice developed in popular music during the 1960s. I argue that the role of songwriters expanded with the advent of recording as a dominant mode of consuming music. Using a number of case studies from 1965 until the present, along with my own creative practice submitted as two CDs, I examine the practices of studio-based songwriters. I argue that these practices can be understood as a series of latent or active processes, which are determined by their audibility on the final recording. Studio-based songwriting has developed with shifts in recording studios and associated technologies, which have been understood as “democratization.” I explore how these developments have disrupted the production roles of “songwriter,” “musician,” “producer” and “engineer.” I use Bourdieu’s work on cultural production to examine tensions between the so-called democratization and ongoing negotiations on taste, aesthetics and value within the broader field.

viii Statement of Candidate

I certify that this thesis entitled “Studio-based Songwriting: Music Production and Shaping the Pop Song” is an original piece of research that has been written by me. It has not been submitted to any other higher degree at any university or institution. In addition, I certify that the sources of information the work of others is correctly acknowledged.

Ethics Committee approval has been obtained for this thesis. Protocol number: 5201300678

Patrick O’Grady

The following publications have emanated from this study:

O’Grady, Pat. 2013. Review of ‘The Art of Record Production: An Introductory Reader for a New Academic Field’ In Dancecult. Vol 5, No.1. Available at: http://dj.dancecult.net/index.php/journal/issue/view/8/showToc O'Grady, Pat. 2013, Flow in the Studio,” In Shifting Sounds: Musical Flow: A Collection of Papers from the 2012 IASPM Australia/New Zealand Conference.

O’Grady, Pat. 2014 “Studio Hubs: Changing Recording Environments,” In Communities, Places, Ecologies: International Association for the Study of Popular Music 2013 Australia and New Zealand Chapter Conference Proceedings.

ix Acknowledgments

First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor Denis Crowdy. His ongoing guidance, mentorship, support and patience throughout this project were truly appreciated.

During this study, I was privileged with the support and friendship of staff and post-graduates in the Department of Media, Music, Communication and Cultural Studies at Macquarie University. I want to thank the department for its support.

I would also like to acknowledge contributions of Steve Collins, John Scannell, Julian Knowles, Rachael Gunn, Brent Keogh, Liz Giuffre Bruce Johnson, Diane Hughes, Waldo Garrido, Alex Chilvers, Sam Newton, Cameron Henderson and Chris Walkerden, all of who provided valuable feedback along the way.

On a personal note, I would like to thank my parents, Terry and Judy, whose ongoing support and encouragement gave me the confidence to undertake this momentous task. Finally, I would like to thank my partner Jillian. My gratitude for her love and support throughout the later part of this project cannot be overstated.

x Introduction

In 2000, as a teenager, I used to sit in my bedroom surrounded by old HiFi components and instruments writing songs. I used double deck cassette players to construct pop style ensemble tracks through overdubs. I then used these tracks to compose a melody and write lyrics. Later, I took advantage of the changing digital landscape and upgraded and invested more heavily in equipment. Eventually, I had quite a productive space to work in. For me, technologies were merely production tools for songwriting. I assessed their usefulness in the specific applications in which I needed them. After leaving school, I was exposed to the broader field of music production. I studied music production, theory and practice at a technical college, whose teaching staff were a mix of semi-retired and active professional musicians and engineers. One of the first things we were taught was to avoid using the term “high end” to describe high frequencies in music. Such usage of the term was widely considered to be the language of amateurs. Further, we were taught that Neumann microphones were the “best” microphones, and to make sure we never pronounced it as “Newman;” that, too, was the language of amateurs. Moreover, we were taught that Behringer products were “poor” in their build quality and function, and if we used them we would not be considered a professional. In the following years, I found that my efforts at networking were far more productive when my thoughts on technologies were aligned with the attitudes we had been taught at college. This was the case with a wide range of both seemingly professional and amateur people, conversing with retail assistants who sold audio technology or live and studio engineers. Reproducing such attitudes in conversations seemed necessary in order to establish my position in the field. Contrary to my initial attitudes that technologies were merely tools for production, it become apparent they were also political tools for distinguishing between professionals and amateurs. However, to what degree these two things aligned was not clear.

Throughout this period, I was often asked about my production processes. When I explained that I used recording technologies to aid in the songwriting process, it was predominantly inferred that my style is “experimental” or “electronic.” This was not, however, representative of my sound; my sound drew from influences of singer-songwriter, pop, rock and country styles. While recording technologies play an important role in my practices, they function as latent in the resultant sound. Put differently, these recording technologies are used within the songwriting process, but they are not necessarily audible in the final recording. Here, attitudes towards recording technologies appeared to be more aligned with a notion that they are audible filters of sound, rather than production tools.

xi In this thesis, I explore the tensions between recording technologies as political tools and production tools mentioned above, as part of a broader phenomenon in pop music called “studio-based songwriting.” It is a practice that emerged in pop music from the 1960s, in amateur, semi-professional and professional recording environments, in which conventional notions of songwriting and recording come into dialogue with each other. In order to examine the field of studio-based songwriting, its processes, environments and social practices, I ask a number of questions:

1. Why have songwriters been historically linked with scores representing melodies, chords and lyrics? 2. How have recording technologies changed this representation and disrupted longstanding roles in the field? 3. How has studio-based songwriting been influenced, and in turn been influenced by, changing attitudes towards aesthetics, taste and value within the field of music production? 4. How have these changes impacted on the ways in which songwriters construct and represent their identities within the broader social and political field?

In order to answer these questions, I have structured this thesis as follows. In chapter 1, I examine relevant literature within the field of pop music production and outline the methods in which I undertake this research. In chapter 2, I expose how current understandings of the role of songwriting in music production have been shaped through the technological and cultural conditions of the early twentieth century. I argue that such understandings have overlooked the emergence of recording as a dominant mode of music consumption and, in turn, the subsequent influence of recording technologies used in the production process on recorded songs. In chapters 3 and 4, I examine the processes of studio-based songwriting from the 1960s until 2011 through a number of case studies. I argue that these uses of recording technologies can significantly shape the resultant sound of songs and sound of the associated artist. Further, I argue that the particular use of instruments and effects within recording studios can be understood as either active or latent elements, according to their audibility on the final recording.

In chapters 5 and 6, I expose the spaces and production roles associated with studio-based songwriting and its relationship with music production more broadly. In the first instance, I outline the distinct spaces and technologies of recording studios that have emerged from shifts in the technological landscape of the second part of the twentieth century. As a result, I argue

xii that the size and components of studios determine their workflows and, as a result, their suitability for studio-based songwriting practice. Despite the variations of spaces and technologies, I identify how a single dominant notion of “recording studio” has been reiterated in a number of discourses. Following this, I situate this analysis within discussions of a so- called democratization of recording technologies. In chapter 6, I then examine the relationships between studio-based songwriters and the more conventional production roles of songwriter, musician and producer. I also identify the ways in which these conventional roles are both a practical measure that disrupts both the work associated with music production and complex hierarchies. As a result of these disruptions, I expose how the practices of studio- based songwriters have subverted the power dynamics associated with these hierarchies. To conclude the thesis, I situate the tensions between recording technologies as political tools and production tools within the thinking of Pierre Bourdieu.

In these chapters, I draw from a number of case studies from pop styles, including Brian Eno, The Beach Boys Gotye, Michael Jackson and The Bee Gees. These case studies were selected based on the availability of discussions on their production processes and establishing a range of practices from the 1960s until 2010 in a variety of recording environments. The specific combination of these case studies are used to demonstrate the diverse range of practices, technologies, environments and social assets associated with studio-based songwriting.

In addition to the written component and case studies of this thesis, my research questions are informed by a creative component, which is presented as two CDs located on the inside of the back cover of the thesis. The CDs contain two albums of original recorded songs with an attached appendix of the track order. The contents of these CDs are referenced in the outline of my methodology in chapter 2. They also help answer research questions 3 and 4.

xiii