Tim McPhate | KissFAQ
In a KissFAQ exclusive, award-winning producer/engineer Jeff Glixman gives his first-ever in-depth interview about his involvement on Paul Stanley’s 1978 solo album. Below are excerpts from his interview with KissFAQ’s Tim McPhate:
KissFAQ: Jeff, let’s rewind to summer 1978. What are your recollections of coming onboard for Paul Stanley’s solo album
Jeff Glixman: Well, they’re pretty clear. We had some huge success with Kansas with our album in fall 1977, “Point Of Know Return.” The band had done a big tour and a lot of things had gone on and they wanted to take a break for a little bit. So we all decided, “Let’s take a little break and go to Hawaii and take a few months off.” I returned from Hawaii and my attorney called me and said, “Paul Stanley is in the midst of an album. I know you’ve got another album coming up, but there’s a little window of opportunity, would you like to work on it?” I was thinking, “Vacation or work with Paul Stanley? I’m going with Paul.”
KF: You came onboard for the album’s sessions in Los Angeles. Do you recall being at the Village Recorder?
JG: I remember working at the Village. We worked at the Record Plant too.
KF: Legend has it that Paul visited a studio in the valley and decided it wasn’t up to par. Does that ring a bell
JG: He might have taken a look at Sound City, I don’t know. I had produced out of Sound City, which was funky to look at but an awesome-sounding studio. As you know, Dave Grohl just completed a documentary film about Sound City and the history of that place. It was a funky place but a really good studio. I just remember the studios being tossed around but I didn’t handle the bookings.
KF: When you were brought onboard, was it with the understanding you were going to produce the entire album?
JG: (pauses) Originally, I didn’t have the time to produce the entire project. I had a time constraint because I had another record coming up that I had to get to that had a hard start date. As I said, I had planned to take some vacation time. It was my understanding that we’d certainly work on all the tracks — that there were certain things that either needed to be recut or worked on or that we’d recut parts of, or whatever. And I never intended to get to the mix unless we went really fast.
KF: As you alluded to, the first four tracks on the album were recorded at Electric Lady Studios in New York, prior to your involvement: “Tonight You Belong To Me,” “Move On,” “Ain’t Quite Right,” and “Wouldn’t You Like To Know Me?” Paul has stated that the recordings in New York were designed to be demos and that they originally were going to be recut. Do you remember giving these tracks another go in Los Angeles?
JG: No, I don’t believe we did. “Ain’t Quite Right,” we might have given a shot. But from the start, I don’t recall recutting any of those New York tracks. I wasn’t around for the New York tracks, but what’s interesting is those were the four songs I first heard. Obviously, as evidenced from my later production with artists like Georgia Satellites, I’ve got a real rock and roll edge to me. Those were the most rock and rolly of the songs; they were kind of blues rock. “Ain’t Quite Right,” I love that song. But I don’t recall that we recut those tracks.
KF: In listening to samples of those first four tracks, does anything stick out as being deficient?
JG: You mean, would I like to go back and do them again?
KF: In other words, given that there were tracks cut in New York that were designed to be demos alongside tracks cut separately in L.A., is there a lack of cohesion?
JG: I don’t think so. There’s a different vibe to them. But are we talking engineering or are we talking production? You know, a great song performed well could be recorded in any condition and it can sound great, regardless of the technical aspects. A poor song poorly played, no matter how technically well you recorded it, it will still sound like crap. You just won’t go on listening to it. So, I think from my standpoint as producer the question is: do you get off listening to the song or do you not get off listening to the song? And that’s about it. You know, I just listened to “Ain’t Quite Right” and it still sounds great!
KF: I should share with you that Paul’s album is still highly regarded by fans even 35 years later. My question was coming more from an engineering perspective, as far as if there was anything glaring sonically.
JG: You know, I’m not going to make that statement. Like I said, I try to look at the piece of work as a whole. I can look at every project I’ve ever worked on, and certain things were under duress. I’ve never had a project that was free from the limits and constraints of time and money so there’s always compromises that are made and things that could be done differently. I think you can always look around and find things. But in my experience, I know it’s highly regarded by fans and personally people have always said to me how much they enjoyed the record.
KF: Jeff, I feel obligated to ask this next question. There’s been a few things I’ve read over the years about your involvement on this album. One quote from Paul Stanley I want to bring up was published in the authorized KISS autobiography, “Behind The Mask.” Paul said: “When I started recording with a co-producer it wasn’t what I hoped it to be and I went back to doing it myself.” Jeff, you have the floor, how would you like to respond to that?
JG: OK, I want to say that there was a major misunderstanding going into this thing: Paul’s idea of a producer and my idea of a producer. And this is something I’ll share, I never worked in the studio as a studio engineer, I’ve never taken that role. For me as a producer, I’ve always been involved in determining the sonic landscape, the visual close-your-eyes aspects of how it was going to be done. I’m making this comment with all due respect to Paul, I believe what he really wanted was an engineer. What he needed was an engineer because he had very definite ways he wanted to do things. And that’s not really the position I intended to be in. Paul said, “We’re going to double-track every vocal.” Well for me, when you double-track a vocal, your performance gets averaged out. He wanted to double things for effect and oversee how everything was going to be placed and everything was going to be done. So to be honest with you, Paul’s really the producer of the record, regardless of what it says. I think his idea of producer was an organizational producer, what I might call an executive producer or a strong label person, not a creative person. And Paul had very definite ideas of what he wanted to do, how it was going to go. “This is going to go there. We’re going to put this part on.” I’m used to being more involved in the arrangement of the songs.
When I was very young, I spoke to Arif Mardin, who I was fortunate to meet because my manager was Jack Nelson, who was Queen’s manager. Jack and Arif were friends. And I said, “What about songwriting?” He said, “Don’t worry about taking a songwriting credit. You’re going to get paid as a producer. And you’ll find that if you assure your artist up front that you’re not interested in taking a songwriting credit, they’ll be very lenient in letting you get your ideas across.” And so I’m used to co-writing a song, changing lyrics, moving melodies around, changing arrangements … everything. For me, it was really odd to be in this situation, “I want this. I want more high-end on the guitar. I’m looking for this type of sound. We’re going to double this track. We’re going to do that.” It was very much an engineering position. I don’t know how Paul really looks at it. But to be honest with you, I’ve never been in the position where the artist, every single note that was played or sung, he said, “Let me hear it to approve it.” I’m used to saying, “OK, that was it. Let’s move on.” Do you know what I’m saying? It was a much different position. And I don’t want this to come across negatively, because I just feel great about Paul’s talents and abilities and what he does. But I was very young, I was only in my 20s. I come from playing in bands, writing songs and performing. So it was a very different situation for me. And going forward from that day, I never did another project without spending time in the studio with the artist before I accepted it.
KF: Well, to be honest Jeff, it’s refreshing to hear your side of things. I don’t know that the fans have heard your perspective.
JG: I don’t mean it in a negative sense, but it wasn’t what I hoped it would be either. It was very much Paul as the producer, and he is quite capable in that role. He wanted to give the instructions, the direction. There was a point in time, I suppose, when the producer was the guy who had the money, hired the musical director, hired a songwriter, and this, that and the other, but this was not role that I assumed. After that, I was very leery of working with any artist who was successful before I worked with them. I loved working with Gary Moore in his formative days and taking him to platinum status. Same thing with the Georgia Satellites. The next time I worked with a really big band that had already made it was Electric Light Orchestra because I find that English artists, in general, are just great about, “Hey, your job is on that side of the glass and mine is out here to play.” I worked with these guys and you never heard: “let me hear that” before we moved on. If I said it was right, it was right. We’d line up to do millions of tracks of vocals and start at 8 in morning. Never once did they want to play something back until it was completed and we could review the creative aspects of the performance. I worked with Ritchie Blackmore, same thing. He might say, “Let me hear what I played.” But if I said we needed to do it again or it wasn’t really what I was looking for, I would never get that conflict. It was very different working with Paul. It really changed my approach. I think he made a good, accurate statement there. That’s why he continued on his own. To be honest, he wanted to be the producer, he deserved to be the producer and he should have been. You know, I would have done loads of things differently, sonically and musically, had I had the opportunity, but this was Paul’s album and his prerogative.
KF: That’s all very interesting, Jeff. And I appreciate your honest thoughts.
JG: Good. Because I’m very positive about the record. It was just different from what I anticipated. One of the records I did after that was with Gary Moore. He loved the first thing I said to him. He said, “What do you like? What’s your approach toward recording?” I said, “Let’s get the songs where we’re happy with them. Once we’re happy with the songs, I want to put you in a situation — a room or wherever it is — where you can perform at your best. I want to record this room. Paul’s record was a much tighter approach, more recording parts to make up the whole. It’s just a different approach. Mine’s much more free-flowing. Mine is like, “Well, you didn’t hit that tom-tom as hard in that place.” “Well, that’s because the drummer didn’t hit it that hard. You don’t even it out or work it over.” I don’t know how to explain technically what I’m trying to say any better than that. It’s just a different concept all together.
So about the sonics of Paul’s album, to me, the New York tracks sound better because they were done quickly in a demo fashion with the drums kind of loosely miked as opposed to all the care and attention that goes into, “OK, we’re in an expensive studio cutting the master, let’s put a mic on everything and balance it out; we’ve got loads of tracks.” To me, that’s not the best decision-making process. Even when I record today in the day of 9 zillion tracks, I want to make the decisions upfront. We recently did a 40th anniversary reenactment of “Carry On My Wayward Son” for Kansas and I got a call from Sony. The guy was flipping out. He said, “I don’t think these are the original tracks.” I said, “Why?” He said, “Well, the drums are only on four tracks. They’re premixed to four tracks.” I said, “Yeah, Phil [Ehart] knew what he was going to play. I knew how it should sound. It’s on four tracks, what’s the problem?” So I think the demos, with all due respect, I think they’re better. They just have a vibe, do you know what I mean? They’re just, “Let’s set up and play.”
KF: Staying with “Take Me Away (Together As One”),” this song is considered to be the epic track on the album. It’s got a lot of acoustic guitar, cinematic lyrics and dynamics galore. As a matter of fact, this tune has a strong Kansas vibe. Did you have any influence on the direction of this song?
JG: That’s the one I had the most input on because it was a big complex song. And I think that’s the kind of song Paul was less familiar with.
KF: It was a departure for Paul at the time. He hadn’t written a song like that, and I don’t think he’s written one like it since.
JG: It was a departure. It was one of those songs that I liked. Of the songs I worked on, I was the most attached to it because I was very comfortable having a song that you could play on acoustic guitar or a piano that you expand into this bigger epic rock thing. That’s always been my other stipulation, if you couldn’t sit there and play the song on an guitar or a piano, and make it sound like a song, it really shouldn’t be recorded. I was very comfortable in saying, “OK, let’s build this thing up and add various things to it.” I think it came out well. I think that’s the one where Paul was more open to suggestion because he wasn’t used to working on a track like this.
KF: What are your thoughts about Paul Stanley’s vocal performance on the album?
JG: I think Paul accomplished what he wanted to accomplish with the vocals. Some of it has really stood the test of time well. He was comfortable with all the keys he wanted to sing in and he knew what he wanted to sing.
KF: Jeff, we’ve spoken about the difference in your definition of a producer compared to Paul’s, but I feel I have to ask this question as well. I’ve heard that there was some tension between you and Paul during the sessions. Is that what you recall?
JG: I don’t know if tension is the right word. But yeah, there was definitely a conflict. Basically I wasn’t prepared for it to be, “This is the way it is. Record it.” I made a commitment and I wanted to fulfill my commitment. But as I said, I changed my whole interview process following that record. You know, Ritchie Blackmore was one of my heroes and I was hesitant to work with him. We had about six meetings and spent about four days in the studio and I told him I’d pay for it if we didn’t continue just because I wanted to make sure that it was going to work. It worked beautifully but I’ve been very cautious. I’ve had at least three productions with Yngwie Malmsteen. I’m sure you’ve heard the rumors about Yngwie and how difficult he is. I don’t find him so at all, I just think it is imperative to take the time to make sure there is a producer/artist match.
Paul knew exactly what he wanted and he was prepared for it. I was prepared to make a record where I had certain input. There was never, “Let’s get together and you and I work over the songs. What do you think of these lyrics? What do you think about this for a melody line?” There was never, “OK, but Paul, in that second verse, why don’t you try going up to an A instead of down to the F#.” It just didn’t happen.
KF: In hearing your side of the story, I guess my natural question is: Why did Paul even bring someone in in a production capacity if he already had such a clear vision of what he wanted from a production standpoint?
JG: Well, I think it was about the definition of producer. Because a lot of producers out there are engineers. They are really fine engineers and they deliver. Not to sound immodest or anything, but in ’76 and ’77 the sound of Kansas was pretty strong on the airwaves. George Marino at Sterling Sound told me that he’s had people for 30 years use “Carry On My Wayward Son” as a reference, “Man, this sounds amazing.” Maybe Paul thought my position as a producer was to engineer those records. But I played with the guys in Kansas prior to those productions. Recently we were inducted into the state of Kansas Hall of Fame, which was really weird because you’ve got Amelia Earhart and Eisenhower and people like that in there. I was really humbled by the speech the guys gave and Kerry talking about how I was the real seventh member of the band and was integral to them. That’s where I came from. I came from a position of having that kind of input. Was mine always considered and did I dominate the room? No. I’ve never been put in a position in any of my productions, except for this project with Paul, where we couldn’t find a place where we were both happy. I think, in retrospect, had I been more experienced and understood more at the time, I would have just said, “Paul, you need an engineer.” But I thought, “Well, it’s just me adapting.” I didn’t have a lot of projects under my belt. You ask a very good question. In retrospect, I think Paul and I would say, “Hey, let’s shake hands and be buddies.” And I’d say, “I want you to have a great record but call up Paul Grupp or Keith Olsen, or one of the killer engineers of the time and let them do the record.”
Full Jeff Glixman interview: