Home Recording's Dirty Little Secret

[Bob's Mods]

Its interesting to see that I wasn't the only one who expected to obtain at least a near studio quality result from moderately priced offerings on the prosumer market. Its simply a challange to get the professional results of tape based old school recordings of even the sixtys or 70's. Fully one third of those who got hooked into home recording felt that obtaining the quality of commerical releases was a possiblity when they took the plunge. I was not alone it seems. One third is a large number if this sample base is an accurate representation of the many home rec'rs out there.

 

[cusebassman]

I stink. But I still enjoy doing it. I just got a great new Pre-amp, and it makes my cheap crappy guitar sound insane!

I think that's how it goes for a lot of us... not a lot of songwriting talent, or performance abilities (maybe one or the other, or both ), but we also love the gear. I know I didn't need to spend anywhere near what I've spent so far on audio equipment in comparison to how much I have created, but its been a fun, if not sometimes frustrating, ride.

 

[rayc]

The band I was in had recorded in a commercial studio before I began home recording. Home recording was about writing song sketches, demo'ing songs for other band members, then possibly demo'ing in the hope of getting gigs & then getting into a studio.
NOW it's me making the best of working at it as a hobby with my limited musical skills & using the internet to pull in some real TALENT to augment that. The intention - to make music that some-one-some-where might hear & like.

 

[Middleman]

I truly expected to be famous and rich by now from my recordings.

Somewhere along the way I became more of an engineer which improved my production, arranging and musicianship. I am really good now but the music business fell apart and now no one will ever get to hear how good I ended up being.

I do own a lot of really cool gear however, some consolation.

 

[shockingcandy]

When I got my first cassette 4 track it was simply to get help me get my ideas across to other people. However, over the years my expectations of what I can achieve have increased exponentially with increasing knowledge and experience. I can see the progress I have made from those early days and now I aspire to make recordings to a so-called commercial standard. Ultimately though, I think it is the songs and the performance that make a great record. As the saying goes, "you can't polish a turd".

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Fully one third of those who got hooked into home recording felt that obtaining the quality of commerical releases was a possiblity when they took the plunge.

I interpret the results even more pessimistically. I read it as only 1/3 had proper expectation, that a full 2/3rds did not. I'll bet you a Neve to a Portastudio that the majority of those that "did not consider" it were still dissappointed at their first playback, and though they did not consciously think about it too much, still experienced a letdown.

G.

 

[hipskind]

I chose option 1, but if I'm being honest, it was a little of all 3.

I figured it would be an uphill climb--and huge learning process--when I started doing it. I also had experienced around me (and worked with) MANY people who were doing it, with piss-poor results, and had always thought, "if I had a home-recording setup, I'd do this, this and this differently...", not thinking it would be top-notch studio quality necessarily, but just better than that.

Out of general ignorance, I wasn't completely sure what it would take to get my recordings to sound at or near the level of those $100+/hour studios I've recorded in. At this point in time, the gear you need to get up and running is relatively inexpensive enough to invest in so that any uncertainty isn't as big of a deal.

I probably hoped in the back of my mind that I could achieve ultra-professional results without years of practice/experimentation/classes or exhorbitant investments in tons of high-end gear. But again, your key word here is reasonable. If I can come *reasonably* close I think I'm happy.

Also, it's certainly a matter of taste. I have lots of professionally-produced recordings done in high-end studios that I really don't like the sound of--particularly (me being a drummer) the drum sound. In my case I'm focusing all my energies towards tracking and mixing my drums (which really sucks financially because you need the MOST channels, the MOST mics, the MOST preamps, etc., out of any self-recording instrument ).

But in the end, for me the deciding factor was that I always had the desire to do it. "Let's make the investment and see what we can do!"

 

[mattkw80]

Most people agree they can't make a commercial CD at their own house or Private studio.

However, what is a big name producer / engineer had to record a professional band at your house, using your gear.

Could someone else get good results at your house?



My simple studio has Reaper (let's say Pro Tools though), 32 tracks / 24-bit. A few LDC mic's, mostly under $1000. SM57's, SM58's. I do have the room treated somewhat, all corners have traps in them - and I don't seem to be having many acoustical problems. I've got some Pre-amps (all under $400) and a handful of the usual pro-sumer pieces of gear that most of you guys have at home.



So if Aerosmith and Bruce Fairbairn came over to my house to record 1 song - could it be of commercial quality ?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

So if Aerosmith and Bruce Fairbairn came over to my house to record 1 song - could it be of commercial quality ?

The only way to really tell is if they were to produce and release it anonymously, as if they were just another of the millions of HR self-recording band.

I think it's important to recognize that most of us at least on occasion, if not always, tend to listen through the filter of who's name is on it. If you had two copies of the exact same recording, one with the aboves names plastered all over it, and the other submitted under unknown names, the one with the names on it would be the majority favorite.

G.

 

[mattkw80]

Southside,


using the gear I described, if you had to, would be confident in doing a decent job at my house, on my gear ?

 

[Bob's Mods]

In the beginning years I was crashing and burning all the time. "Surely I must be doing something wrong...it couldn't sound this bad. Either I've got real junk or those studio's have got some voodoo goin on." "How is it that my 'junk' sound card can play back these great commercial CDs and sound good but yet they record my own stuff like crap?" I thought.

 

[cusebassman]

So if Aerosmith and Bruce Fairbairn came over to my house to record 1 song - could it be of commercial quality ?

First of all, excellent reference... probably the best producer Aerosmith had, at least from the perspective of the albums that were made on his watch. A shame the man died, since Aerosmith has really lost their way.

Could they produce a professional sounding album in MY "studio"? Probably not... it would sound perfectly fine, most likely, but definitely not as good as what you would get in a pro studio.

The only way to really tell is if they were to produce and release it anonymously, as if they were just another of the millions of HR self-recording band.

I think it's important to recognize that most of us at least on occasion, if not always, tend to listen through the filter of who's name is on it. If you had two copies of the exact same recording, one with the aboves names plastered all over it, and the other submitted under unknown names, the one with the names on it would be the majority favorite.

G.

Its nice to see someone mention this point... it rarely gets mentioned that we make a lot of assumptions about a product based on who put it out.

I am trying to get the best possible recording quality I can, and I am recording folk-ee acoustic music... Bob Dylan is (shockingly) a big influence - and his early 60s recordings are some pretty rough tracks - quiet finger-picked pieces that have a decidedly noticeable background noise, and certainly not perfect sound in general.

The magic on those records / songs is Dylan, not the fact that tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars of recording gear were or were not used. I don't think my material has any merit, so I obsess over the quality of the sound

 

[mattkw80]

Don't want to get too off topic, but cusebassman..... did Dylan have a typical setup or set of mics usualy used for his vox / guitar ?

First of all, excellent reference... probably the best producer Aerosmith had, at least from the perspective of the albums that were made on his watch. A shame the man died, since Aerosmith has really lost their way.

Could they produce a professional sounding album in MY "studio"? Probably not... it would sound perfectly fine, most likely, but definitely not as good as what you would get in a pro studio.



Its nice to see someone mention this point... it rarely gets mentioned that we make a lot of assumptions about a product based on who put it out.

I am trying to get the best possible recording quality I can, and I am recording folk-ee acoustic music... Bob Dylan is (shockingly) a big influence - and his early 60s recordings are some pretty rough tracks - quiet finger-picked pieces that have a decidedly noticeable background noise, and certainly not perfect sound in general.

The magic on those records / songs is Dylan, not the fact that tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars of recording gear were or were not used. I don't think my material has any merit, so I obsess over the quality of the sound

 

[wbalsam1]

I can only imagine how much better a musician I would have been had not my addictive nature drawn me off into recording multiple tracks of my stuff. All the learning curves dealing with computers, machines and outboard gear have drained me both financially and mentally....

and spiritually I think I've missed the gift I was given... to play....not record. But, here I am stuck right in the throes of it all...hanging on for dear life trying to find that elusive sound I first heard years ago. I loathe the day I ever got into recording, or for that matter, music in the first place..but being an addict...what the frig choice do I have anyway?

I've dumped so much time and coin..it's just insane. All just to leave behind a legacy...

 

[cusebassman]

Don't want to get too off topic, but cusebassman..... did Dylan have a typical setup or set of mics usualy used for his vox / guitar ?

Well, from the footage and photos I've seen, there was no particular setup in terms of mics, etc., from recording to recording, but he did have a particular set of guitars he played on various recordings:

http://www.dylanchords.com/professors/dylans_guitars.htm

That's a pretty informative site. I'd love to know more about what was to record him, but Im not sure

 

[soundchaser59]

I wanted to record my own songs, and I was cocky enough to think I could make it sound like a store bought cd.....or at least thought I could figure out on my own how to make it sound that way.

But now I know there are many, many production secrets that are never shared with us Little Joes. And most of those secrets I cant afford anyway.

However, as time and circumstance would have it, NOTHING absolutely nothing in the last 30 years combined has improved my "production quality" as much as what I've learned in the last 2-3 years on the 5 or 6 forums I surf. I thank you all for sharing, in particular the guys with the real backroom pro experience who are willing to come here and share with us little guys. It is impossible to put into words how your help as made my music engineering experiences leap to life, even just in the last 6 months.

 

[Highsteel]

I started home recording purely so I would remember the tunes I wrote. I enjoyed doing it so much that it became more than that.

Quoting Cubaseman too
"I think that's how it goes for a lot of us... not a lot of songwriting talent, or performance abilities (maybe one or the other, or both ), but we also love the gear. I know I didn't need to spend anywhere near what I've spent so far on audio equipment in comparison to how much I have created, but its been a fun, if not sometimes frustrating, ride."

I just want to get some tunes down so I don't lose them, or forget them. Its not like I'm going to retire on my music but I'd like to retire to just playing music, getting yet more gear and messing around with it.

Highsteel

 

[soundchaser59]

....but I'd like to retire to just playing music, getting yet more gear and messing around with it.

Well put. If we are honest with ourselves, we must admit that this end would be truly plenty of reward all by itself. Would be fine with me!

 

[DavidK]

I'm working on my 3rd CD. I expect it to be of commercial level. The reason is simple: I'm putting in the hours needed. I have prosumer gear, but its not holding me back yet.

I also use tons of synths, and they are much easier to work with. No mic placement, just general musicianship and a good ear.

 

[SonicAlbert]

So if Aerosmith and Bruce Fairbairn came over to my house to record 1 song - could it be of commercial quality ?

Yes, but it would be better quality if done in a commercial studio with all the bells and whistles.

It's important not to underestimate what a big factor skill is in all this. You see two extremes on message boards fairly often: People that feel you have to have the gear to do a great recording, and people that feel gear doesn't matter much at all, it's mostly about the talent.

The reality falls in between those two extremes. An engineer and band with lots of talent can make a surprisingly good recording using plain-jane gear, but indeed it would sound better if they had better tools to work with. Likewise, incredible gear will help mundane talent sound better, but won't get them all the way where they need to go.

Part of what gets overlooked is the concept of a "sweet spot". Most gear has a sweet spot, that place where if you hit it just right it sounds at it's best. The sweet spot on budget gear (if it has one) is very very slim, and limited at best. However, a good engineer will know how to listen for it and will use the gear within it's capabilities.

Great gear, on the other hand, has a much bigger sweet spot. Meaning that you can use the gear at it's optimum in a wide range of settings. This opens up creativity on the part of the engineer, and allows him or her to follow their muse more and work around the limitations of the gear less.

Engineers/artists/bands that are less experienced tend not to know what a sweet spot is, what to listen for, or how to work around and with it. When you read about big name producers and engineers using the occasional bit of budget gear, it's important to know that for the most part they are using it for a specific narrow purpose and are well aware of it's limitations and how to get the best out of it.