Bad result from expensive pro recording.

S

Spazhands

'ere mate
This was done a good few years ago now. The band have since split, so I am ok with posting this. I won't name the studio and producer (who is very well known over here in the UK). Anyway, most of the recording, mixing etc was out of my hands and was done on a kind of 'trust me' basis.
We payed upwards of £900 for a 9 track album, recorded, mixed and mastered in house.
The session was done on a radar system.
The main issue I have with the record is the inconsistency between tracks and some obvious clipping going on. Also it is very sharp and irritating after a short time.
Anyway have a listen and see what you lot think of it.

https://m.soundcloud.com/ltfprivate/city-m
 
Agreed. Seems like it's somewhere in the neighborhood of a decent recording, w/o much time (effort) put in to work out something to allow it to have it's own nice tone and style.
What did the 'producer bring to the table? I.e. I'd expect you could get at least similar results -perhaps better from most any decent studio and engineer and modest budget.
 
Well looking back he didn't really ask how we wanted things to sound before hand and seemed very set on his 'usual' ways. Things like the front kick head.. I am fussy as hell with my kit tuning and that skin was part of the sound it produced, but he pretty much made me take I off and tape the lugs up. Thing is as well he is a rockabilly producer so I think he may have used same techniques for that genre.
. I love live and slightly dirty punk recordings but this is neither, more slap dash.
Listening to them again, one of the tracks the vocals are really buried under everything and I cant remember doing multiple guitar tracks.. Could be why it sounds a bit thin up top.
 
Arggh those hihats are damn offensive in cans!! The drums were tracked in under two hours.. For nine songs that cant be a good sign.:facepalm:
 
So why are you complaining about it years after the fact?

I do agree btw, it doesn't sound very good.
 
I see your point. I wouldn't say complaining, just a good example of how professionally produced recordings can suck. Its only the last few years I have really progressed with recording myself, so looking back things are a lot more obvious.
 
Sounds like a live recording off the board at a gig. Nothing wrong with that tho...

I would expect much more articulation for the price in a studio. Just my opinion.
 
Spazhands said:
I wouldn't say complaining, just a good example of how professionally produced recordings can suck.
Click to expand...

I know you won't name the studio and/or producer...so it's a bit of a moot point discussing just how "pro" these guys are...
...that said, don't let that make you think that all pro studio work sucks.

There could be a lot of reasons why things go shit even in a pro environment...often it might be related to simply poor communication between the artists and the "pros". You said the producer didn't communicate much with you...and it sounds like his background may not be your genre....so, you kinda walked into that.

Also...not saying £900 ($1300 USD) is peanuts...but to record, mix and master a 9-song album for that amount...is pretty darn cheap by "pro" standards, so again, without knowing the studio or the producer, kinda hard to gauge just how "pro" they really were.

Sounds more like it was knocked out quickly...which is what you would expect for £900.

Anyway...in a real pro environment, you would have had some more input...unless it was some record lable deal where they paid for it and told you guys to STFU and let the producer do it all...but when YOU are paying, you should/would have more input, and good pros will ask you what it is you are after...not "trust me" and tell you to go away until it's done.

Of course...all water under the bridge at this point. :)
 
Agree that it's not very good, but...

...you don't say how many years ago but I lived and worked in London until just over 7 years ago. Even back then, £900 is way below the going rate for a 9 track album. I'm not saying it's peanuts (and I couldn't find that money in my bank account just now--well, I could but the rent is due next week) but, for example, that would have equated to just over 10 hours in our smallest V/O booth-type studio with an engineer but not a producer. If we had to send video post out of house because we were busy, we paid about £100 per hour. I know video post is different from a music recording studio but I only mention this to give you an idea of what typical London rates were 8 or 10 years ago. I have no idea what they are now.
 
For that price, it was pretty cheap. But it does sound like you got a guy who wasn't interested in you, so he just slapped it together. It also sounds like he was used to doing a different type of production than what your music calls for.

I accidentally did the same thing to a band a long time ago. Unfortunately, that album keeps getting brought up in magazine articles every so often, so it never just goes away. I feel awful about how that album sounds, and it was almost 20 years ago...
 
Farview said:
I accidentally did the same thing to a band a long time ago. Unfortunately, that album keeps getting brought up in magazine articles every so often, so it never just goes away. I feel awful about how that album sounds, and it was almost 20 years ago...
Click to expand...

MAN! That was you?






:D
 
Wait, I thought you were joking. Is this the album you were actually talking about? If it is, I can't stand the music. But it didn't sound that bad to me for the few seconds I listened. As a drummer, I could definitely hear the drums. Are those all triggered samples?
 
No triggers. All I had at the time were tape decks and an analog mixer. Samples would have sounded better and been more appropriate.

The guitar sound should have been a more processed, distortion box-type sound. But I had them plug into my Laney for something more "real"...
 
Don't forget that 20 years ago you probably had more limitations on what you could do gear wise as well. Some of the stuff I recorded 20 years ago would have benefited by the gear and technology I have now, and the knowledge.

But thats part of history.

Back to the original post, I get bands all the time that want to record 9 or 10 songs for not very much money (£900 is not much for 9 tracks) and we always have to race through everything and make it sound the best we can in the time. If you were serious you would spend a couple hours nailing the drum sounds before you even recorded a take. I love it when there is a budget (does not happen often) and I can get the drummer to play the song through a few times, record a test take and then have a listen with the drummer to see there are any problems with the sound before we track. If he nails a take and loves the sound drums done LOL.

Alan.
 
witzendoz said:
Some of the stuff I recorded 20 years ago would have benefited by the gear and technology I have now, and the knowledge.
Click to expand...
I feel like that's a pretty important part of things. 20 years is half of a career. If you're not a better producer now than you were 20 years ago, what were you even doing for 2 decades? :D

Fairview, you should have hired FoulPhil to help!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top