Interview with Andy Sneap

I've found a great interview and i'd like to share it with you.

All rights reserved to maelstrom.nu

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


interview by: Roberto Martinelli

If you’re a self-proclaimed metal fan and haven’t heard of Andy Sneap, you’re either downloading all your albums based on what other people on your hub are burning, or you think the last killer metal records were by Anthrax and Slayer.

And even if you fall in the latter category, you have no excuse, as Sneap was in one of the most cult thrash bands ever, the British Sabbat. (Ask our staffer Chaim Drishner for a lesson.)

Still scratching your head? Ok, ok. Grammy-award winning Andy Sneap is one of, if not the, biggest names in producing in metal today. His most famous work has come with Arch Enemy, Killswitch Engage, Opeth, Machine Head, Soulfly, and most recently, Exodus and Nevermore (compare the original and Sneap re-mixed versions of Nevermore’s Enemies of Reality to get some instant appreciation for the man’s talents).

Sneap is very forthcoming with all of his tricks and techniques. You can read up on them on his message board at www.andysneap.com, the site for his now-famous Backstage Studios in the pastoral countryside near Nottingham, England. We’ll let the man tell you first hand about his career history and some specific recording techniques.

Maelstrom: How did you get started in producing?

Andy Sneap: I did three albums as a member of a band called Sabbat, a dodgy English thrash band from the late ‘80s. We signed to Noise back in the day, which was the same label that had Helloween and Celtic Frost. By the time the band split up in the early ‘90s, I was so fed up with the egos and the battles that were always going on with other musicians. I got out of the business for a couple years, and then started doing demos at the old rehearsal studio. I used the money I made from the band to buy a little eight-track set. I’d also started doing live engineering. I’d always seem to be getting better at guitar tones on the demos, so I took the route of doing some small album projects with smaller bands. I built a bit of a reputation up, started doing some live sound, and started working at a bigger studio in Nottingham. Colin (Richardson), who was doing Machine Head and Fear Factory, came through the studio, and I ended up working with him on a couple of projects. I ended up with him in the States in ‘96 to do the second Machine Head album, The More Things Change.

Maelstrom: Oh, man, and his Bolt Thrower records... Colin Richardson is the sixth member of Bolt Thrower as far as I’m concerned.

Andy Sneap: Hahahahaha! I’ll tell him that! He’ll be really pleased about that one! Hahahahaha! But his Carcass Heartwork album was groundbreaking in the guitar sound. Colin and I got on well because we were into the same sort of music. From then on, I made a lot of good contacts out in the States, and started working with Century Media, Roadrunner and Nuclear Blast, and it just kept going, really. When they find someone who works well, does things on time and within budget, they’ll keep coming back.

Maelstrom: What would you consider your biggest successes in your career?

Andy Sneap: Well, we got a Swedish Grammy for the Opeth album Deliverance, which was nice. The last Killswitch Engage album, The End of Heartache, got nominated for a U.S. Grammy. That album is up to 500,000 units sold, so that’s probably the most successful thing I’ve done, sales- and press-wise. That second Machine Head album did pretty well, as well.

Maelstrom: That’s public acclaim, which is certainly worthwhile, but how about on a personal level?

Andy Sneap: I think probably the first Blaze Bayley album that he did after he left Iron Maiden. You know, everyone had written him off. He was a real underdog; he had a rough ride with it. No one’s going to replace Dickinson in Maiden, so you’ve got a losing battle from the word “go.” And although I never really had the public respect for doing those records – I did three albums with Blaze, plus a live album – the fact we made a really strong record after his ousting, with music written more for his voice... once he was pushed, he could really find his place within his vocal range...

It was a bit of a task and a great achievement to make everyone sit up and sort of go, “oh, yeah. That’s alright!” I actually had Steve Harris turn around and say, “oh, yeah, that album turned out good, didn’t it?” almost surprised about it, you know... So I was like, “yes, Steve. It’s pretty cool.” (Laugh)

With anyone, you have a few days in pre-production, where you have to get on their level, try and connect with them and try to make them feel easy in the studio, really. That’s what we did with Blaze. He’s got a reputation for being a bit of a madman, but he’s actually one of the sweetest guys you could wish to work with in the studio.

And the whole Maiden thing... I don’t think anyone even produced him on the two albums he was on. They expected him to go in there and deliver like Dickinson does, but sometimes you gotta steer the ship a little bit more.

Maelstrom: How much technology is too much in producing, and will technology be the downfall of a band’s being honest and true to how good they really are?

Andy Sneap: I think it’s already gone past the point of bands being honest in the studio. I mean, as soon as we started dropping in on guitar solos with a machine that didn’t make a click when you dropped in and out, that’s when the honesty went out the window. But at the end of the day, it’s whatever it takes to get the job done. You’ve got a certain amount of time; a certain budget, and if you have to cheat to get the job done, then it’s up to the band to deliver it live after that. If it’s the case of going back and rehearsing it for two months to be able to go on the road and play it properly... they shouldn’t be writing the riffs that they can’t play. But a lot of these guys, when they realize what you can do in the studio, will go beyond their means. But people know their limitations, and as a producer I’d rather hear a slow and melodic guitar solo played well than someone who’s trying to play blisteringly fast and can’t do it.

There is definitely more ways to cheat now.

Maelstrom: Always new ones, it seems.

Andy Sneap: Well, there is, isn’t there? If you’re going to be honest about it, you’ve got Beat Detective, you’ve got Auto Tune... or the guitar player is in fact the producer! HAHAHAHA! I won’t tell you how many albums I’ve played on! Hahaha!

Back in the day, there were session musicians. Like, you’d hear stories about session musicians on Kiss albums.

Maelstrom: That’s hilarious! Like it’s so hard to play, or something.

Andy Sneap: Yeah, I know. But once you’re under the microscope, you’d be surprised. From a very early age, when I was playing, when I was totally into the thrash thing and the accuracy of playing... some of the early thrash players where some of the best that have ever been in the metal scene. Just the sheer technique, the tightness of the playing... Back in the mid- to late-‘80s, you had to be able to play well. When I work with someone like Gary Holt from Exodus, it’s so apparent that he’s such a killer player, where some of the kids that are coming up now just haven’t got the feel.

Maelstrom: Yes, Paul Bostaph was saying how Gary Holt is the best rhythm guitarist he’s ever played with.

Andy Sneap: He’s an absolute animal, Gary is. It’s hilarious to watch him while he’s playing: it looks like his head’s going to explode. He’s holding his breath and his face is bright purple. But he’s still alive, just. Eric Petersen of Testament as well. He’s totally got it down. You’d be surprised at how little gain these guys actually need to use to get that crunch out of their amps. It’s actually all in the hands, the way they scrape the strings.

You don’t have to cheat with the old-school guys, because they learned the craft. It’s almost like kids are trying to run before they can walk now. I think as a producer, you have to draw the line a little bit: use technology as a tool, tidy bits up and knock it into shape, but be realistic. If a band is really struggling on a part, say, “well, look, guys, are you going to be able to play this live?” But at the end of the day, you have to be able to deliver a product within deadline and budget, and if cheating a little bit helps you do that, and you know the guys will be able to play it with a bit more rehearsing, then it’s the right thing to do. At the end of the day, the album has to be THE definitive version of the songs, doesn’t it?

But editing has always been going on. With 2" tape, people were always chopping it up and inserting different parts in; it’s just a lot easier now. We’re not using $150 [of material] for 15 minutes of music.

Maelstrom: What can a drummer who’s never had experience with triggers expect?

Andy Sneap: It can be a weird thing sometimes when a drummer has gotten used to playing acoustically; [using triggers] can bring out a lot of inconsistencies. Obviously, [triggers] make the mix a lot punchier – it gives a lot of clarity to the kicks – but it can highlight timing errors, in there are any. So you have to be careful with them. There’s quite an art to getting them to sit in the mix properly without it sounding too drum machiney.

I usually replace the kicks 100 percent with a sample, but I’ll mix the snare sort of 50/50 with the natural snare [sound] to try and keep a bit of realism there. I sometimes trigger the toms – sometimes you can’t get away with it: the real fast stuff sounds too artificial sometimes. That’s where a bit of common sense comes in.

Maelstrom: What module do you find yourself using a lot for the kick drum sound?

Andy Sneap: I’m actually using it all within Pro Tools now, so I’ll throw my DDrum transducers on the kit, and I’ll use either Drumagog or Sound Replacer within Pro Tools. I’ve actually got a DDrum 4 and an Alesis B4, which I’ve used in the past. There are pros and cons to both those units. The B4 is a lot cheaper, but it’s a slower unit. The response time is 13 milliseconds, where the DDrum is seven milliseconds. It’s one of the fastest. This time difference doesn’t really matter live, because with all the amplification and slapback, you don’t notice it. But if you’re recording, and especially if you’re using the natural sound as well, you have to slide the audio back in time. I remember when we were using 2" tape, we had to fire it off the repro head and use a decay unit to get it back in time. It’s always been a bit of a fine art, that one.

Maelstrom: As you were mentioning, triggers are used mostly on bass, less on snare, and even less on toms. It’s odd; do you think the technology hasn’t improved enough on toms?

Andy Sneap: Myeahhhh... well, with multi-samples now, you’ve got units – again, within Pro Tools – where you can trigger five or six samples per drum randomly, so it doesn’t sound like the same sound every time. That’s a good trick. It makes the ear think it’s more natural. Obviously, with really fast double bass stuff, if there’s no alteration to the sound whatsoever, it sounds like a machine gun going off in the background. This is for toms as well: you get a totally different nuance with each hit (especially with floor toms and buildup); and with really fast rolls on toms, it’s really difficult to get the triggers to sound right

So what I’ll do at the start of each session is sample each kit – when it has fresh heads on it. I’ll record each drum, so I have a good, natural sound, so if I’ll need to replace a hit (say, if there’s a lot of cymbal bleed on a tom hit, which undoubtedly there will be with some of the faster metal stuff, because you’ll get a guy playing his cymbals right next to his toms, so he can get to them quicker) I can use the natural sound as opposed to having to find one in the database.

Maelstrom: You mentioned about triggers bringing out a lot of drummers’ inconsistencies. What do you mean?

Andy Sneap: I won’t mention any names, because I’ll get myself in trouble, but I mixed a lot of the old school guys, as well; you go back and listen to some of their old recordings, especially the earlier thrash albums where everyone was thinking, “these guys are killer!”

But you can’t actually hear the bass drums that clear... it’s more of a low rumble going on. I guarantee you, if you put a sample there you’d be quite surprised to find out what’s going on with people’s feet.

Although triggers have made it easier for a lot of guys in terms of not having to hit quite as hard, it’s made people more accurate with the hands and feet. You’ll really notice if someone isn’t landing exactly on the snare and kick. You’ll be getting flams all over the place, which is something you could get away with on just an acoustic kit, because there isn’t the sharpness to the attack of the sound. The sample will make each hit very clear, so people have to focus on their timing.

Maelstrom: People talk about the problems of double triggering. What is that?

Andy Sneap: You can get cross talk, like when one tom triggers the second tom, or the kick triggers the snare. When I do a session, I have to go back and listen to every kick drum track and make sure the sample is on with the kick. It’s a good two days of watching the screen and making sure there are no mis-triggers. Live, again, you probably won’t notice it, but when you’re doing the recording side of things, you want everything to be deadly accurate. A lot of time and patience, really: you go through and notice if the ghost notes on the snare are triggered, and that the fills are all there; a lot of the faster, buzz rolls that you’ll do on a snare, a lot of the time the trigger won’t pick up every single hit. You have to go back and make sure every hit is in there. It’s a very boring job, but...

Maelstrom: You get paid for it...

Andy Sneap: Hehe. Exactly. It annoys me when people don’t do that. I get sent a lot of sessions to mix where the engineer phoned me up and said, “don’t worry, it’s a clean session. I’ve gone in and edited all the tracks for you; tuned these bits; everything’s triggered...” And I’ll be like, “yeah, ok.” (Laugh) And I’ll still spend two days going through it. You’ve got to be really careful with it. There’s no fast route to do this.

Maelstrom: It’s inevitable to have overbleed from one mic to the next when recording acoustic drums. Is it possible for the vibration of one drum to trigger another?

Andy Sneap: I use the DDrum transducers that clip on to the hoop. You won’t get any cross talk with those. I’ll record that through a mic pre right into Pro Tools, and not even bother with the DDrum brain. Say I have a five-piece kit. I’ll have a mic on each part of the kit, but I’ll also be recording one of these transducers from each part of the kit. And you can imagine, you soon end up with 24-32 tracks for your drums. But it’s good, because you can actually see where every tom hit is. You can actually see that trigger into the side chain of the gate as well, to open the natural sound. That works pretty well. You can trigger straight from the spikes that it gives you within Pro Tools. That’s the most accurate way I’ve found of doing this.

Maelstrom: Tell us more about this Drumagog program you use. This means people no longer have to invest in a physical drum module to get triggered sound?

Andy Sneap: That’s right.

Maelstrom: Does it come with Pro Tools, or is it a separate program?

Andy Sneap: It’s a separate program. It’s only just come out for Pro Tools, actually. I’ve been beta testing it for them for about six months, but it’s been out on the market for Cubase. It’s been a VST plug-in for quite a while, now – for about two years. Within Pro Tools, I had been using Sound Replacer for the past three or four years or more. It’s an audio suite plug-in. It’s ok. It’s a bit old hat now. The actual timing of it is pretty good – it’s better than the old days of having to use MIDI and sync up the old Akai sampler or the old TC unit.

I’ve found Drumagog to be pretty much sample accurate: you can multi-sample – layering samples up – and you do this random sample with it. There’s another program called Drum Rehab that’s about to come out. They’re still having a few problems with it.

Maelstrom: Since technology turns over so fast, do you find that it lends a facet of obsolescence to older recordings because they don’t sound as good as new ones, whereas something like an acoustic drum kit will always sound classic?

Andy Sneap: Yeah, it’s weird. The last recordings I did on 2" tape were about four or five years ago. I was listening to those a few weeks ago, thinking that I was really going to notice a difference. But I was pleasantly surprised with how tight everything was back then. I’ve been triggering since 1990, on an old Akai that you would link the old S1000 sampler up with. There’s always been a way to do it; it’s just a question of making it more convenient.

I think with Pro Tools, you spend more time looking at the screen and less time trusting your ears. Back in the day, it was literally on the fly, whereas today things are more accurate... it’s nice, but you do tend to do things by the numbers: you’re doing it half the time without even listening to it.

Maelstrom: Is that something that irks you?

Andy Sneap: No, I don’t mind. I’m actually a big fan of Pro Tools. A lot of people who invested money in the older gear are still paying it off: you’ve got a lot of studios that spent a quarter of a million on a piece of equipment, still paying it off, and then everyone’s coming in wanting a Pro Tools rig in there. You’ve got a lot of the old-school guys that are steadfast in the old way being better, but I think that a lot of people haven’t moved with the times. I’ve always tried to keep one step ahead of things, and I came along with my studio just when the digital side of things took off. I’m quite fortunate that I went with the Pro Tools route when I first came out.

It’s become second nature to me, but I still try to apply the method of listening to the music. I’ve had certain guitarists in the studio who would literally look at the wave to see how tight the playing was. And I was like, “listen to it.” What does that tell you?

An interesting contrast would be Rob from Machine Head, who had never used Pro Tools until the last album, Through the Ashes. On the first day in the studio, I set up with him, and by the time I saw him a couple weeks ago, he had seen the power of what it can do and totally came around to it. I figure the trick is to use it as a tool and not to cheat.

Maelstrom: I see you like DDrum triggers. The people I’ve spoken to so far this weekend also seem to prefer them. Is that because you don’t like other companies so much, or just because it’s what you have?

Andy Sneap: It’s really what was available at the time. I remember hearing good things about the Roland stuff – especially the mesh head pads. I’ve also got a set of mesh heads that you can put on a standard acoustic kit, and that works pretty well, too.

Maelstrom: Flo Mounier of Cryptopsy was saying how the companies who make these products, and the magazines that push them aren’t really catering to the right crowd; that the drum magazines are mostly for the rock, blues and pop scenes, but the people who really want to use the triggers are the metal people because of the necessity of it. But beyond metal, would you recommend getting triggers for any other style?

Andy Sneap: I won’t use triggers on the slower, rock stuff I produce – it’s really just the faster metal stuff, where you’ve got to get the clarity to the playing. And the way guitar sounds have gone now, where you’ll have four guitars that are really thick – and you’re trying to get a good low end for everything – and if you try to use a natural kit on that, you’ll never get the clarity – the smack of the high end from the kick drums. So I don’t know if triggers would really apply to other styles... then again, you’ll see the jazzy drummer on the “David Letterman Show” with the whole DDrum set up, won’t you? There’s that side of things: the session guy that needs to set up quick and get a good sound out of things.

Maelstrom: When was the last time you didn’t use triggers?

Andy Sneap: Oh, God... *didn’t* use triggers... ummmm... I did an Opeth DVD about a year and a half ago.

Maelstrom: Oh, the <Lamentations> DVD?

Andy Sneap: Yeah, that’s right. They did the acoustic set and the heavy set. On the clean set we didn’t use a trigger at all.

Maelstrom: Sure, ‘cause the guy’s playing slow.

Andy Sneap: It’s right for the music and you want that natural ambience to the kit in all its variations. It does apply to this type of music. On the new Nevermore album, there are acoustic parts where you want [the drums] to sound natural. If you put triggers in, it sounds so fake. But when it’s heavy, [the natural sound] doesn’t work. Not for me, anyway.

Maelstrom: I find it really ironic when you have drummers like Nick Barker, who have multi-thousand dollar, top of the line kits, and then trigger everything. It’s like, why not get yourself a $500 drum kit and trigger that instead? It’d be just as good.

Andy Sneap: Yeah... well, you know... that’s Nick. I nearly made him sick at this festival the other day. I’m quite proud of that. (Laugh)

Maelstrom: What? You drank him under the table?

Andy Sneap: (laugh) We were heading that way.

Maelstrom: I haven’t heard you talk about triggering cymbals.

Andy Sneap: It’s something I’ve never had a great deal of joy with. I did some pre-production with a band down here that had an entirely electronic kit, which was quite good. But the cymbals never quite sound natural. I did the latst Biomechanical album for Earache... that’s actually a whole MIDI kit on that – we used Battery within Pro Tools. They actually recorded the whole album in John (the singer’s) front room. We got a pretty good sound, I think. You never get it quite there: you’ve got so much separation... you can’t pan your cymbals hard left and right, because they’ll sound so fake. Think about it: you’re not getting any bleed on the cymbals. You have to bring everything in a little bit. Also, with the hi-hat, where you’ve got a lot of variation (you’ll never get two hi-hat hits the same), and if there’s a lot of fast hi-hat patterns going off, that’s always very difficult to program and get right.

Maelstrom: Even with that random program that you were talking about earlier?

Andy Sneap: Yeah, you can do the same thing on Battery. You can never get it quite right. Think about it, when you play a proper hi-hat, the cymbals are in a different position every time you hit it, with them all swising around. So to get that natural feel to the cymbals is really difficult with MIDI.

Maelstrom: Let’s talk now about the virtues of recording using an amp modeler as opposed to miking an amp the traditional way. Now, Line 6 is about the biggest producer of guitar amp modelers. They put out a variety of product, the most expensive of which is more expensive that a lot of guitar amps out there. A lot of people are recording direct nowadays. I’d like to hear your thoughts on the topic.

Andy Sneap: I’m a bit dubious about the whole amp modeler side of things. I’ve never really heard them sound that good, until the POD XT Pro came out. I started getting a few mp3s up on a forum, that kids were doing. I started checking them out and they sounded really good, so Line 6 sent me one. I’m actually really impressed with it. I still wouldn’t put it above a good amp with an SM 57, and a good cab with Vintage 30s. But if you’re in a postition where you can’t make a lot of noise, or you’re recording at home, the POD XT Pro is definitely the way to go. I’ve got programs like Amplitube and Amp Farm, and I haven’t found any of them that sound as good as that POD, but then again I haven’t found anything that sounds as good as a Peavey 5150 or a Boogie with an SM 57 in the right place.

Maelstrom: How many microphones do you use when you mic your amps?

Andy Sneap: Usually it’s just one SM 57. It’s straight in the middle, and maybe I’ll move it off to the side to get rid of some of the really harsh top end. But only very slightly. I’m taking half an inch. Sometimes I’ll throw another mic (another 57 or a Sennheiser 421) on there, but it’s very, very slight in the mix, like about 20dB down from the main mic. I’ve found that the actual speaker makes as much difference as the amp we use. I always used to use (Celestion) Greenbacks, the 25s. But I’ve gone to the (Celestion) Vintage 30s more recently. It depends on the player a little bit more, and the tuning as well. If the band’s in the more regular 440 tuning, sometimes you find that the 75-watt Celestions work a little bit better.

Maelstrom: How did you record the guitars for Arch Enemy’s Anthems of Rebellion?

Andy Sneap: That was two tracks of Peavey XXX going into a Marshall vintage cab with Celestion 30s in it, wide to 8 ohms. We also did two tracks of Peavey 5150 the same way. There was also probably an Ibanez Tube Screamer (the old green one) in front of the amp as well... not with the gain on, but just to tighten the sound up a little bit.

Come to think of it, some bits on the new Nevermore (This Godless Endeavor) were done with POD. Not the main rhythms, but there are a couple of whammy solos. We’ll record a clean DI and the amp modeler as well, and feed that back to the main rig later.

Maelstrom: The whole idea for this article was born because I interviewed King Diamond, who told me he didn’t bother miking an amp anymore, and jsut goes direct through his old POD, and...

Andy Sneap: And have you listened to his albums recently? Hahahahaha!

I actually mixed one of his tracks last week for the Roadrunner 25th anniversary album coming out, with 50 Roadrunner musicians on it. I got the King Diamond track. I was quite pleased about that. I’m an old-school King Diamond fan. But I know what he’s saying: the way people are recording now, there aren’t the bigger budgets of what there used to be. The POD is an easy way to get a good sound, isn’t it? You just plug in and go. I feel that if you work a little bit harder, with the right mics and if you know what you’re listening for, you can get a much better result. And I think that’s where people like me and Colin Richardson are still in the business, because we know what we’re after. There is that extra 10 percent that you can get out of the guitar amp, if you work at I. I don’t think amp modelers are the do all and end all. There are a way to get a good, workable tone very fast. At the end of the day, it is an imitation of something.

Maelstrom: How about daisy chaining the POD into the amp to affect its sound?

Andy Sneap: I tried that all out. I was running it literally straight into the Boogie. It’s ok; it’s quite convincing. I think if you were a guitarist that needed a lot of tones, it could work for you quite well. But when you put the real think side by side with the imitation... it’s close, it’s real close, and I think you’re getting real value for money with these units, but if you want the actual deal, there’s only one way to get it.

I’m not putting the units down. I use them and like them: if you need something particular in a mix, like a Box AC 30, there’s no point in going out to a store to get one just for that.

Nice gobbet!!! He's one of my favorites!!!