---

---

MPR4C001R-001 Production Log Book 1 Template

Task 2: Production Log Book

1500 Words

Please use the sections below to evidence your personal contribution to the production for the portfolio. Please include details for all the tracks produced as a part of this portfolio.

Provide rationale for any of the production decisions that you made as a group. Include any multimedia (pictures, videos, audio recordings etc) evidence to the relevant sections.

Consider the following:

---

Method 1 – Live Band/Ensemble Capture

For this session, there were no formal rehearsals prior to recording. We went directly into Room 109 with the full ensemble, which consisted of a drummer, guitarist, bassist, and saxophonist—a quartet. The limited space of Room 109 presented a challenge in terms of fitting all performers comfortably while maintaining clear sightlines, so positioning was carefully considered. We set up Gobos to provide a degree of acoustic separation, particularly around the saxophone, without obstructing the musicians’ ability to see and communicate with each other. This arrangement helped reduce spill from the louder instruments while preserving the live feel of the ensemble performance.

The session was approached as a live multitrack recording. During the recording, we adjusted levels on the fly since Room 109 does not have a mixing desk, meaning no visual gain-stage meters were available. Balancing had to be managed in real-time to ensure each instrument was captured clearly without distortion. The live performance itself doubled as an opportunity for the ensemble to rehearse the piece, which contributed positively to the cohesion of the recording.

The drums were captured using the Glyn Johns technique, using the drum mic pack which provided a natural, balanced kit sound while retaining some room ambience. The bass guitar was recorded via DI, giving a clean and direct signal. The guitar was close-miced with a dynamic microphone, the Sennheiser MD 421. The saxophone was captured with a SM57 positioned parallel to the instrument to take advantage of the proximity effect, emphasising the low-end richness. A Gobo was placed in front of the saxophone to reduce spill from the other instruments.

The small size of Room 109 required careful consideration of mic placement to minimise bleed while allowing performers to interact visually and aurally. The musicians were instructed to play together live with minimal interruption, which allowed natural dynamics and ensemble communication to be preserved. Level adjustments were made during recording to achieve an appropriate balance across the instruments.

The focus during mixing was primarily on level balance and stereo placement. The drum overheads were panned left and right to provide a natural stereo field, while the rest of the instruments remained relatively centered. We did not employ EQ or heavy processing, except for the saxophone, which was recorded with specific mic positioning to shape its tonal character naturally. Spill from instruments was generally tolerated to maintain a cohesive live sound, with the exception of the saxophone, for which separation was prioritised using a Gobo.

Time management and session organisation were crucial, particularly given the constraints of Room 109. The absence of a mixing desk required proactive monitoring and level adjustment during tracking. Responsibilities were distributed across the team, with my role focused on microphone setup, level management, and capturing a clean performance while maintaining the performers’ comfort and communication.

Despite the limitations of Room 109, including its small size and lack of a mixing desk, the session successfully captured a live multitrack performance with clear instrument balance and minimal interference. The use of Gobos allowed effective isolation for the saxophone while maintaining visual communication among the performers. Real-time level adjustments and the musicians’ live playing ensured a natural, cohesive sound. This session highlighted the importance of preparation, adaptability, and problem-solving in a live recording environment.

---

Method 2 – Overdub Production

For the overdub production of Message in a Bottle by The Police, pre-production involved careful preparation of the original track. The track was stem-split into its individual components, and session markers were added to aid performers during recording. These stems were used as backing tracks during the sessions: for example, the drummer wanted to play along with the vocals on the track, while the guitarist preferred them muted, allowing each performer to focus on their part while remaining in time with the original arrangement. The performers were already familiar with the piece, which allowed recording to proceed immediately without additional rehearsal. To ensure a consistent tempo across all recordings, the original track was warped in Ableton to establish a fixed BPM, which was used throughout the session along with a click track.

The arrangement closely mirrored the original song, including harmony guitar parts and lead lines. While the harmonic sections were played as written, the lead guitar parts were improvised by the guitarist during the appropriate sections. This approach balanced fidelity to the original with creative input from the performer.

All instruments were recorded separately in individual sessions. This allowed for focused capture of each element and created a clean multitrack for mixing. The initial session, which included both guitar and vocal, was lost, necessitating a complete re-recording. This highlighted the importance of rigorous session management and file backups: all digital files from the second session were backed up in multiple locations to avoid further loss. Clear roles and responsibilities were defined for the team, with performers focusing solely on their individual tracks while the engineer managed mic placement, recording levels, and track organisation.

The guitar was captured using an AB technique on the amplifier, employing both an SM57 and a Sennheiser MD421. A chorus pedal was applied to the signal chain, enhancing the tonal texture. During this session, the bass was recorded via DI, and all guitar and bass takes were comped to create a final performance.

Drums were recorded in Room 109 using an ORTF overhead configuration, with mics placed at a 110-degree angle to capture a stereo image. Individual microphones were used for each tom, a hi-hat mic, a snare top and bottom mic, and dual microphones on the kick drum (kick in and kick out). The vocal was captured with a Warm Audio 251 condenser microphone. Levels were adjusted in real-time using faders, as Room 109 lacks a mixing desk, meaning no visual gain stage indicators were available. All instruments were recorded in accordance with the assignment guidelines, meaning that no EQ, compression, or additional effects were applied.

Mixing focused primarily on balance and basic stereo placement. The overheads were panned to create a stereo image, while individual instruments were kept centred. Adjustments were limited to fader levels, reflecting the assignment restrictions. This ensured a faithful capture of the recorded takes while meeting the brief.

Time management was crucial, particularly following the loss of the initial session. The team learned the importance of meticulous organisation and redundancy: all digital files were backed up in multiple locations to prevent data loss. Structured planning, clear communication, and division of responsibilities allowed the re-recording process to run efficiently. This experience reinforced the value of preparation and contingency planning in music production, ensuring that the project could be completed without further interruptions.