Where is Rudy Van Gelder's "sound" actually made? — Recording- and mastering-stage sound shaping

Where is the RVG sound made? — Recording- and mastering-stage sound shaping

Question answered on this page: Where is Rudy Van Gelder's "sound" actually shaped? Is it determined by the cutting EQ curve, or is it built up at other stages? This page organizes the recording stage (microphones, studio space, active EQ) and the mastering stage (Hoffman's interpretation, the LD+3 memo, the engineer's own testimony) through quotations and primary sources. The concrete measurement case study lives in the related FAQ Somethin' Else 3-way LTAS.

← For the cutting equipment and EQ curve discussion, see the related FAQ: What equipment did Rudy Van Gelder use for cutting?

The "RVG sound" is not about the EQ curve

Van Gelder's recordings have a distinctive sonic character known as the "RVG sound." Some have attributed this to differences in EQ curves, but the entire signal chain is what created "that sound."

Around 1951, Van Gelder acquired a Neumann U47, a German condenser microphone that barely existed in the United States at the time, and began using it on sessions from January 1953. Its sensitivity and detail in the high frequencies, unrivaled by the American RCA ribbon and Western Electric microphones that came before it, was one of the starting points of the RVG sound (RVG Legacy).

Beyond microphone choice, program EQ, tape dubbing techniques, and compression processing all combined across multiple stages to shape a single, distinctive sound. Van Gelder's work divides broadly into two stages: the session recording stage (microphones to tape) and the mastering stage (LP cutting master creation, and later CD remastering). His involvement with the sound was qualitatively different at each stage.

Session recording stage — stable consistency and active sound shaping

In the article Rudy Van Gelder in Hackensack: Defining the Jazz Sound in the 1950s, published by jazz historian Dan Skea in Current Musicology nos.71-73 (Columbia University, 2002), there is a quote from a 1999 telephone interview with guitarist Les Paul, who knew Van Gelder over many years:

"The most impressive thing about Rudy ... is that Rudy was conservative and not being radical with any equalization or extreme experiments. He was one to remain stable. ... if something good went in, it came out that way."

— Les Paul, telephone interview, 1999, quoted in Dan Skea, "Rudy Van Gelder in Hackensack: Defining the Jazz Sound in the 1950s," Current Musicology nos.71-73 (2002), p.67

This testimony requires careful unpacking.

First, Les Paul does not explicitly distinguish in this testimony which stage he is referring to (the session recording stage, the LP cutting stage, or his overall working approach). Skea himself places this quote in the article immediately after writing that "while other engineers overdid the stereo effect, Rudy used the new technology with restraint," and contextually the most natural reading is that it refers primarily to the cautious use of stereo.

Second, "stable / consistent" and "conservative (light-touch processing)" are separate matters. As to the consistency and stability of the entire recording chain, contemporary engineers involved in Blue Note reissues such as Joe Harley and Kevin Gray also agree with this "stable" / "consistent" assessment. The interpretation of "conservative (light-touch processing)," however, calls for a second look from a different angle. Music producer Joe Harley, of the Blue Note Tone Poet series, characterizes Van Gelder's sound shaping as "putting a little 'bump' in the upper midrange so the result sounded as live as possible" and "making the cymbals and drums sparkle just a hair more than they did originally," calling it "a clever approach given the gear of the time" (Joe Harley — Blue Note Tone Poet Interview, uDiscoverMusic Japan). This is a picture of active sound shaping that differs quite a bit from "light-touch processing."

Van Gelder's studio equipment was an Altec console without per-channel EQ; EQ operations were performed through an outboard Pultec rack and the like. Within this limited configuration, Van Gelder actively used EQ and signal processing, and this probably produced the "live feel" and "sparkle" that Joe Harley describes. Steve Hoffman's interpretation taken up in the next section, and the 3-way LTAS measurements in the related FAQ, both show that even bolder signal processing was added at the LP cutting and mastering stages.

The "stable / consistent" part of Les Paul's testimony (the stability of the recording chain) can be taken at face value, but the "conservative" part (light-touch processing) does not square with Joe Harley's observation or the evidence from the mastering stage (Hoffman's interpretation, the 3-way LTAS). The most sensible reading of Van Gelder's sound shaping is the combination of microphone choice and placement, use of studio space, and active EQ and signal processing within the limited equipment available.

Another major factor at the recording stage was the use of his Hackensack home living room as a recording space, and the choice and placement of microphones for each instrument.

The Hackensack studio was the living room of the home Van Gelder's parents had built in 1946 (25 Prospect Avenue). With its 10-foot (about 3-meter) ceiling, the archway opening into the adjacent dining room, and the corridors and irregular nooks running off toward the kitchen and bedrooms, the space happened to produce a sound well suited to recording small-group jazz: moderately dry, but with a sense of dimension that did not muddy the reverberation (Skea 2002, pp.57, 68).

Rather than the standard practice of the time (placing a single microphone at a significant distance from an orchestra), Van Gelder adopted a style of using multiple microphones, including the Telefunken U47, placed close to each individual instrument. The U47's amplifier section was not designed for such close-range use, but engineer Rein Narma modified its circuitry so that it could handle close-miking without distortion (Skea 2002, p.61).

For the piano in particular, Van Gelder painstakingly tried different microphone positions, asking the player to repeat the same phrase while he experimented, in order to arrive at his distinctive piano image. Pianist Billy Taylor, who recorded at Van Gelder's studio, later recalled:

"He was the first engineer that I worked with who was that sensitive, and really just took time and cared about mike placement and all that sort of stuff. ... I'd play something, and he'd put a mike in one place and go back in the other room. And then say, 'Okay, let's try that again,' and put a mike somewhere else. ... And he actually captured the sound that I was looking for, and ultimately that seemed, to my ear, to be the basis of his piano sound."

— Billy Taylor, telephone interview, 1999, quoted in Dan Skea, "Rudy Van Gelder in Hackensack: Defining the Jazz Sound in the 1950s," Current Musicology nos.71-73 (2002), pp.59–60

In 1959, Van Gelder left the Hackensack living room and built a dedicated studio in Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. The design was entrusted to architect David Henken, a student of Frank Lloyd Wright. Van Gelder drew on Boston Symphony Hall, where he had recorded and studied the acoustics, and also on Columbia Records' 30th Street Studio. Of the latter, Van Gelder said, "I liked virtually everything I heard out of there." The construction featured cinder-block walls cast in tan-pigmented blocks, a tall pointed ceiling supported by four massive laminated Douglas fir arches with cedar tongue-and-groove decking. No professional acousticians were hired, and none of the contemporary soundproofing practices were used. Until isolation booths were added in the 1970s, the live room was a single large space, much like Columbia's 30th Street Studio (RVG Legacy Construction, Opening).

Whereas the Hackensack era relied on the room's accidental acoustics, at Englewood Cliffs Van Gelder deliberately designed the room sound itself. The direction of effort and money he poured into it shows that the center of his sound shaping at the recording stage lay not in EQ manipulation but in the design of space and microphones.

This sound shaping (the studio's acoustics, close-miking of each instrument, and the trial-and-error microphone work exemplified by piano) is locked in once it is captured to the recording master tape. It cannot be rewritten at later stages such as LP cutting or CD remastering. It is the recording-side fingerprint that all reissues derived from the same recording master tape inherit in common.

Van Gelder himself also described his role at the session recording stage in a 2005 Michael Cuscuna interview, quoted in Chris M. Slawecki's All About Jazz article:

"I had a different responsibility at that time. ... I was trying to make these individual people be heard in the way that they wanted to be heard."

— Van Gelder, interview by Michael Cuscuna, quoted in Chris M. Slawecki, "Blue Note and Recording Master Re-Present RVG's Heritage – Rudy Van Gelder," All About Jazz, June 14, 2005

Van Gelder himself, in a 2012 JazzWax interview that journalist Marc Myers conducted at the Englewood Cliffs studio over the course of a year, recalled that the Blue Note sound was not his judgment alone but was the technical realization of producer Alfred Lion's intended sound:

"Alfred was rigid about how he wanted Blue Note records to sound, so I just had to give him what he had in mind."

— Rudy Van Gelder, interview by Marc Myers, JazzWax Pt.4, February 16, 2012

And in Pt.3 of the same interview, Van Gelder made it clear that he did not intend to limit his work to the recording stage but treated the subsequent mastering as his own area of responsibility:

"I always wanted to be in control of the entire recording chain—from the initial recording through mastering. Why not? It had my name on it."

— Rudy Van Gelder, interview by Marc Myers, JazzWax Pt.3, February 15, 2012

The original Blue Note sound, then, is the result of joint work that includes Van Gelder's recording, Alfred Lion's sonic direction, and the entire mastering process that follows. It is a finished product built up by stages distinct from the sound captured on the recording master tape.

Mastering stage — the "intentionally changing the sound" process

Distinct from the choice of the cutting EQ curve (RIAA, etc.), we use "mastering stage" broadly here to mean the process of adjusting volume, frequency balance, dynamics, and stereo image. The constraints and goals differ between LP cutting master creation and later CD remastering, but they share the trait that some kind of sonic shaping is added on top of the recording master tape.

Van Gelder himself, in his 1995 Audio Magazine interview, frankly admitted that he is "intentionally changing the sound" in this mastering stage:

"Intentionally changing the sound! Changing the loudness to softness, the highs to lows. Yes, it's a very elaborate procedure; it is a part of the recording process that most people don't even know exists."

— Van Gelder, interview by James Rozzi, Audio Magazine, November 1995

"Changing the sound" here refers not to the choice of the cutting EQ curve (RIAA, etc.) but to program processing such as level, dynamics, and frequency balance.

Van Gelder's view of LP as a medium constraint is equally direct:

"The biggest distorter is the LP itself. ... It was a constant battle to try to make that music sound the way it should. It was never any good."

— Van Gelder, interview by James Rozzi, Audio Magazine, November 1995

About the Blue Note RVG Edition CD series that began in 1999 (the reissue series in which Van Gelder himself remastered the original recording master tapes for CD), Van Gelder said in the 2005 Michael Cuscuna interview, quoted in the Slawecki article:

"When you first called me, I thought, 'Wow. That's the best job I ever had.' ... This is my opportunity to present my version of how those things should sound. What a great job this is!"

— Van Gelder, interview by Michael Cuscuna, quoted in Chris M. Slawecki, "Blue Note and Recording Master Re-Present RVG's Heritage – Rudy Van Gelder," All About Jazz, June 14, 2005

"The remastering series has enabled me to get closer to the music ... much closer than I ever could before. ... I could do a much better job."

— Van Gelder, interview by Michael Cuscuna, quoted in Chris M. Slawecki, "Blue Note and Recording Master Re-Present RVG's Heritage – Rudy Van Gelder," All About Jazz, June 14, 2005

Van Gelder's own phrases ("how those things should sound" and "do a much better job") show that the RVG Edition CDs were not work to recreate the LP-era sound on CD. They were Van Gelder reconstructing "how those things should sound" within the freedom of the CD medium.

Van Gelder himself, in JazzWax Pt.4 (2012), recalled the process of cutting a lacquer master from the final tape as follows:

"I'd put a blank lacquer disc on the Scully's platter and make adjustments for lines per inch and levels. Then I'd start the platter turning and lower the lathe's stylus."

— Rudy Van Gelder, interview by Marc Myers, JazzWax Pt.4, February 16, 2012

Van Gelder himself describes the lacquer master cutting process only as "adjustments for lines per inch and levels," without speaking to specific operations such as EQ or compression. What kinds of sound shaping took place at this stage cannot be derived directly from his 2012 testimony alone, and must be examined through other testimony or measurement.

Steve Hoffman's interpretation and Van Gelder's own account

Regarding what specific sound shaping took place at the mastering stage, and especially what happened at the LP cutting master stage, the U.S. mastering engineer Steve Hoffman has published an interpretation on the web along the following lines:

1. at least 3:1 dynamic range compression
2. a +5 to +6 dB boost in the upper midrange (around 3 to 6 kHz)
3. a boomy boost in the upper bass
4. a complete cut of the low bass (below 60 Hz)
5. a complete cut of the tip top end (above 12 kHz)

Hoffman's interpretation is that these five items combined as a "midrange-forward 'old hi-fi' tonal shaping with heavy compression" formed Van Gelder's sound shaping at the LP cutting stage (Hoffman's own website, and a Music Matters Blue Note reissue forum post).

This is Hoffman's interpretation, not Van Gelder's own statement. Van Gelder, in the 2012 JazzWax interview, tends to avoid going into technical details:

"nothing is simple and everything is complex."

— Rudy Van Gelder, interview by Marc Myers, JazzWax Pt.3, February 15, 2012

He does not commit to specific EQ-and-compression numbers.

We are not entirely without a primary source for Van Gelder's specific choices, however. Steve Hoffman has also published separately the cutting notes that accompanied the master tape of Lou Donaldson with The Three Sounds, "LD+3" (Blue Note BLP-4012, 1959 mono LP, later reissued in 1967 stereo as BST-84012). The LD+3 memo is marked "4012," which suggests it belongs to the mono pressing lineage (whether from 1959 or from a later 1960s mono reissue is uncertain). It is a precious primary source that points directly to Van Gelder's specific choices.

"Mastering notes for LD+3: Cutting instructions: LOW FREQ CUTOFF: 45 cycles, HIGH FREQ CUTOFF: 12,000 cycles Compression ratio: 8:1 High EQ: +5 @ 5,000 cycles"

— Steve Hoffman, post on Steve Hoffman Music Forums "Rudy Van Gelder mastering notes for a Blue Note LP from 50 years ago"

All of these sound-shaping items belong to the mastering stage, and are a separate process, independent from the choice of the cutting EQ curve (RIAA, etc.). What Hoffman's 5 items (interpretation), the LD+3 memo (primary source), and the 3-way LTAS (observation), three anchors in total, show together about Van Gelder's sound shaping from the LP stage through to the CD stage is unpacked as a concrete measurement case study in the related FAQ: Somethin' Else 3-way LTAS.

Further reading

• Somethin' Else 3-way LTAS — A case study that takes the "mastering-stage sound shaping" organized in this FAQ and measures it concretely on three CDs of the 1958 Somethin' Else recording
• What equipment did Rudy Van Gelder use for cutting? — RVG's cutting equipment lineage, the AES → RIAA transition, and Van Gelder's own 1955 Down Beat testimony
• EQ curve vs. mastering — which determines the sound? — A conceptual organization of how large the mastering-stage influence is
• What factors besides the EQ curve affect the sound of a record? — How each stage of the signal chain affects the sound

Acknowledgments

This FAQ belongs to a four-part set on RVG cutting and mastering. Richard Capeless of RVG Legacy provided advice and review comments that shaped the revision and split. My thanks for the help.

← Back to FAQ