Does this bother anyone else? Songs on albums that are recorded to just fade out. It seems so idiotic. I would much rather hear what the band/ artist actually did at the end of the song even if it was just stopping. Plus, sometimes you can tell a group is really jamming & into it, and guess what? Faaaade ou...t. How much more great music was missed at the end of that session? Man, to get my hands on some master tapes or tapes of master tapes, or even CD's of masters would be really interesting. That's something I'd invest in. There isn't such a source, is there?

Even better, the music that does come to an end but gets faded-out by the DJ so he can gift us with his voice all the sooner....

(note fade-out "....") :D

I've been playing and recording music for over 20 years I can tell you that many times we've used the fade out for three main reasons:

1. you can't figure out how to end a song so you play the last part for a while and then "implode". Thus you need to fade pre-implosion
2. you do have an ending and play it and you don't realize that you've effed it up until production time and don't have the time or will or funds to fix it.
3. the song is too too long with the ending and is a better piece faded.

I'm sure the other musician members, particularly Paul C, can add to this list.

I've been playing and recording music for over 20 years I can tell you that many times we've used the fade out for three main reasons:

1. you can't figure out how to end a song so you play the last part for a while and then "implode". Thus you need to fade pre-implosion
2. you do have an ending and play it and you don't realize that you've effed it up until production time and don't have the time or will or funds to fix it.
3. the song is too too long with the ending and is a better piece faded.

I'm sure the other musician members, particularly Paul C, can add to this list.

All salient points, but let us not forget the copious amounts of weed consumed by musicians during the 60's and 70's, a time when getting them to stop playing usually meant the use of a baseball bat!

Think of The Beatles A Day in the Life, probably the most famous fade in all of music.

All salient points, but let us not forget the copious amounts of weed consumed by musicians during the 60's and 70's, a time when getting them to stop playing usually meant the use of a baseball bat!


See number 3. Also applies to alcohol.

subdermis2000, I understand what you're saying. A "clean" fade out is more marketable and packageable to fit a into media with a limited length of time. Personally, I would rather hear it in full, the actual way it went down. Even with the implosion. To me, that's the true piece of art. Of course, I realize on vinyl that would drasttically cut down on the number of songs. Again, finding recordings of masters would be really cool. IMHO.

A "clean" fade out is more marketable and packageable to fit a into media with a limited length of time.

Not always. Sometimes it's a question of suckage. I've recorded some great stuff, imho, but it would have been pure crap without a timely fade.

Again, finding recordings of masters would be really cool.

Agreed. We've got some gems, reparteee and banter wise, on our lowly masters that still make us and others chuckle after 20 years. "Big" time stuff would bve great to hear.

To me, that's the true piece of art.

Well...they don't call it the "entertainment industry" for nothing. 99% of the time they aren't selling art...they're selling entertainment.

Even better, the music that does come to an end but gets faded-out by the DJ so he can gift us with his voice all the sooner....

(note fade-out "....") :D

I heard that radio DJ's are required to talk over the end or start of a song or track so that people can't get "free music" from the radio and to buy the recordings, how this reasoning applies to the current state of things is unclear.:scratch2:

Mark T.:music:

See number 3. Also applies to alcohol.

Kudos to you sir!:thmbsp:

No doubt you've spent time in the studio when the musos' have been nicely toasted, thinking they're putting down some killer tunes, when in actuality, it's just a typical muso wank.:yes:

Are you nuts? I LOVE the fade. Artists today don't know how to end their songs. They just pick a chord and bbbruunngg--we're done. I hate that!

Some fades are annoying, but I agree that sometimes, it is the only option during recording/mastering. How do you end a relationship? If you ask me, it's best to just fade out slowly :D

I think instead of fade outs, all rock songs should have multiple fake endings. I love being fooled by fake endings.

The Beatles and the Who (Pete Townshend) new how to write a song that ended!

Think of The Beatles A Day in the Life, probably the most famous fade in all of music.
Not a fade in the way it's being referred to in this thread. A Day in the Life has a DECAY at the end. It does NOT fade out artificially, the piano is simply recorded for as long as the strings were vibrating. And yes, if you turn it way up at the end of that, you can hear a lot of ambient noise from the studio space.

Neil Young said: " It's better to burn out, than to fade away!":guitar:

No doubt you've spent time in the studio when the musos' have been nicely toasted, thinking they're putting down some killer tunes, when in actuality, it's just a typical muso wank.

At times I must include myself in this group as well. The difference between what you think you heard and what was recorded can be quite shocking at times.


I've also thought of reason number 4 to add to the previous list.

4. When you used to have to record analog or even to DAT what you recorded was usually what you produced. In todays world of the home studio, entire song structures are easily changed after most if not all of the tracks have been recorded. For example, I recently worked on a song that had the chorus and verse flipped after all the instrumental tracks had been recorded. Therefore, what was a chorus with a song end no longer fit and we had to fade out on the verse.

Point 4 is a very good one.

The snot nosed wannabes that come to my studio don't seem to realise that what you can do in the studio is practically impossible to replicate live, particularly if they aren't prepared to rehearse, it's almost as if these kids have ADD. Don't get me wrong, some of these kids have some really cool ideas, but keeping them focused enough to pull them off in a live situation, which they are perfectly capable of, if the attention span was longer, makes me want to pull out what is left of my hair!:no:

It certainly doesn't bother me as much as it bothers others. I do know that I end songs when I write them.

Not a fade in the way it's being referred to in this thread. A Day in the Life has a DECAY at the end. It does NOT fade out artificially, the piano is simply recorded for as long as the strings were vibrating. And yes, if you turn it way up at the end of that, you can hear a lot of ambient noise from the studio space.

Including the air conditioning.

Originally Posted by ManFromPorlock
Even better, the music that does come to an end but gets faded-out by the DJ so he can gift us with his voice all the sooner....

Actually, it's a bit more complicated. Radio rarely still plays CD's, everything is run off hard drive with various systems, ENCO, AudioVault, LinusRadio, Rivendell and a bunch of others. We use MacRadio. The music is sent to stations via a music service, with fades, cues, crossfades already setup. Those are setup by a master programmer somewhere who's job seems to be to get the music on and off as fast as possible.

I'm only pointing that out because most announcers don't have that control and hate those guys.

Announcers end up diving in as the recording that is supplied drops off, if running a voice track function announcers get access to the last five to seven seconds before the fade.

as originally posted by subdermis2000 4. When you used to have to record analog or even to DAT what you recorded was usually what you produced. In todays world of the home studio, entire song structures are easily changed after most if not all of the tracks have been recorded. For example, I recently worked on a song that had the chorus and verse flipped after all the instrumental tracks had been recorded. Therefore, what was a chorus with a song end no longer fit and we had to fade out on the verse.

as originally posted by Gordy Smiff The snot nosed wannabes that come to my studio don't seem to realise that what you can do in the studio is practically impossible to replicate live, particularly if they aren't prepared to rehearse, it's almost as if these kids have ADD.

I find that all really interesting. You don't have to answer all these questions but...
Don't the the "wannabe's" come prepared with a plan for what they are recording or do they just show up and play? Then don't they pay for an editor/re-mix of some sort? Who finances all that studio time without a plan?
You would think they want to make a total recording "x" minutes long, made up of "y" number of songs, at least knowing the approximate time of each.
Can I ask what does average studio time go for?

Back to your original question meggy, yah, i agree that the fade can suck at times. If you want to hear the opposite, give a listen to Paul Weterberg's "Dirt to Mud". Probably one of the best no-fades you will hear.

P.S> It's late but I will answer more on your last post later today. :D

I answer these questions from the perspective of just one wannabe amongst many. I should also mention that I still haven't popped my studio cherry -- I.E. I haven't seriously recorded an "album" yet.Don't the the "wannabe's" come prepared with a plan for what they are recording or do they just show up and play?Sometimes. A serious wannabe will come in with songs written from beginning to end, but might run into the desire to change the song at the last minute. A not-so-serious wannabe -- well, he will run up a tab at the studio. Heck most of my wannabe friends (including myself) have no plans whatsoever to ever actually pay for a studio, except maybe for vocals and serious lead acoustically recorded lines (like piano, or a specific guitar through a specific amp and cab), and maybe drums (drums, especially, are less and less frequently recorded acoustically these days). (I don't except maybe for the vocals, because I play mostly electronic based music.) They will send their multitrack masters to mastering studios and that's it. Then don't they pay for an editor/re-mix of some sort? At the recording level, there's the producer and the engineer. At my level of spending, that's about all I'll be able to afford. Sometimes they're even the same person. The engineer these days handles the ProTools. If the musicians are savvy enough, they may act as the engineer. I know one guy who does everything himself (http://www.skydiversmusic.com/). He does have other guys come in and play parts, but when he's writing, he does it all himself, and those often turn into the final master. He's like a shoegazer/brit-pop version of Prince. Sounds pretty good if you ask me.Who finances all that studio time without a plan?Well, the record label fronts the money, but ultimately, it comes out of overhead, meaning the musician pays for it out of the profits coming from his record sales. Why do you think so many musicians are broke?You would think they want to make a total recording "x" minutes long, made up of "y" number of songs, at least knowing the approximate time of each. No. No no no no no. That's too calculated. We're musicians, not accountants. We just know we've got songs in the bucket, and we usually need 8-12, if they're average length. Most musicians have more than that, and just cull their best.

as originally posted by subdermis2000

as originally posted by Gordy Smiff

I find that all really interesting. You don't have to answer all these questions but...
Don't the the "wannabe's" come prepared with a plan for what they are recording or do they just show up and play? Then don't they pay for an editor/re-mix of some sort? Who finances all that studio time without a plan?
You would think they want to make a total recording "x" minutes long, made up of "y" number of songs, at least knowing the approximate time of each.
Can I ask what does average studio time go for?

These kids have raw talent, with the emphasis on raw. They've usually done a few gigs and written some original tunes. The idea is they come to the studio to make a demo cd. Four or five of their best tunes, maybe one cover version amongst it. Playing in a studio is a whole world away from playing live, it can be quite a shock the first time, which can cause tension among band members, particularly when one members playing isn't up to par. More often this is down to nerves, or plain ignorance. Belting it out in a loud sweaty club can hide a lot of mistakes, in a studio it's all exposed.
I find it's usually the vocalist that has the largest and most fragile ego, best handled with kid gloves to get a reasonable result.
I may have been a little harsh with the "snot nosed wannabes" handle, but I seem to have had quite a few of these through the door lately, too much X-Factor viewing perhaps?
I'm only a one man operation and do all the mixing and editing before burning a master cd for the customer. I don't know what the industry standard rate is for studio time these days but being a "cottage industry" I'm sure my rates are quite a way below it, and with enough encouragement a six hour booking ends with very happy and exhausted clients.

Thanks for the insight Peter. Learn something new everyday.

Some fades that are planned actually work. Certain performers use the fade very effectively to set a tone or mood. I especially like it when a track is of the full band with many parts playing full blast that slowly fade out leaving only a solo instrument or vocal. It can be used in a cool way to bring a single voice out of the mix or simulate a single player "walking away" from the full band.

I do hate it when a band is jamming hard to only have the producer fade it away. It does make you wonder what gets left behind the faders sometimes!

I think instead of fade outs, all rock songs should have multiple fake endings. I love being fooled by fake endings.

Nesticle (his given name, I might add) hit my idea: The fakeoutfadeout.



AS for songs where cool stuff is going on, but they choose to fade out, listen to Cream.

I have often had to write endings when doing covers of pop tunes.

Artistically, the producer will tell you it was done in order to give the feeling the music continues playing.

But really, the fade is sometimes done because the writer doesn't know how to write an ending. (Hint, go out of the same door you entered.)

Sometimes it is done for radio play, to make for easier segue from record to record, the next record is begun as the first one is fading. The DJ hears the fade, and is not caught offguard, having to know how each song ends. This also allowed a radio DJ to do an early fade in order to meet time constraints of commercials, news at the top of the hour, etc.

as originally posted by saxmeister Some fades that are planned actually work. Certain performers use the fade very effectively to set a tone or mood. ...It does make you wonder what gets left behind the faders sometimes!
as originally posted by doctorbongo AS for songs where cool stuff is going on, but they choose to fade out, listen to Cream.

I'm with ya. Blind Faith does the same thing taking a good minute or so. Actual fades/ drop-off's don't bug me because it's what they really did.
It's the volume turn down thing that's screwy. Just me, but I'll take the "implosion" or the radical stop over a volume turn down.

I know all recordings aren't just a bunch of musicians being taped jamming live. A good example of the art of production comes from an original thread by Celedon Pink Flyod - Money in the Making (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trlNhT8ebqo)

In the end, I guess artists that choose a final release with a volume fade out is the way they intended it to be, or settled for. It is what it is.

The fadeouts I hate are the ones they use on some various artist type albums comprised of songs that are originally released in long version form, for example Ina Gadda divda(Spelling?) Time has Come today byt the Chambers Brothers of Frankenstien by The Edgar Winter Group. They will fadeout long before the original release, and sometimes this is the part with the most feeling in it. I also hate when they edit the lead breaks to fit the shorter format.