Gear??

A

Ace2000

New member
Basicly, record a shitty band or player with million dollar equipment, and all you get is shitty music by shitty players capured on million dollar equipment.-

Most of you gear heads would snear at what The Beatles used, but the bottom line i, Ill take anything the Beatles did with that crap gera over anything you've ever done.
period.
 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.Ill take anything the Beatles did with that crap gera over anything you've ever done.
period.



dude you obviously have a lot of displaced anger bro, The beatles would sneer at your attitude ;) it's ok, let it out....AAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!feel better now???? It's good, life is good, we all can't be the beatles but life is still good...we all can't have the best gear but heck it's still good. ;)
 
Most of us would eat troll shit to use what the beatles used. There's a big difference between "primative" and "crappy."

The 1" Studer J37's used to record Sgt Pepper weren't exactly down on the level of your plastic Fostex just because they're 4-track machines. Cripes man.

I'd trade all of my cheap ass mic's in for just one 60's Neumann used by the Beatles...and I'd still be a grand short. I'd trade my house for an authentic echo chamber used by the Beatles...and I'd still be a house short. The Beatles had access to and used enough gear to fill a dozen studios.

Being creative with gear doesn't have anything to do with a lack of gear....so why don't you just plug into your POD and practice your douchebag steve vai licks.

Slackmaster 2000
 
Most gear heads would sell their mothers to get their hands on the type of gear the Beatles used. Those microphones pre-amps and compressors (not to mention the large-format tape machines) are highly sought after and command ridiculous prices in today's market.
 
Well, for starters, I commend those of you who appreciate the gear the Beatles used, but the fact remains that some people here have put the stuff down and pretend that if you aint using a Neve console, your music will suck.

I know my gear aint the best, but so what. My point was directed more at those who have a snobbish high priced gear attitude.
Anything below some 300,000 dollar set up isnt good enough fo some.

I have literally heard people say that the gear The Bealtes used was crap. I have heard that in studios before by gear snobs.
If thats not you, please dont be offended by my rather harsh comments, but c'mon now, Im sure that even you have encountered somebody who thinks there way is the only way.......

I'll admit it - I dont know everything about recording, but niether did Chas Chandler. Jimi knew even less. But who cares?

My point is that gear snobbery is alive and well. You can even see sdome of it displayed int he harsh reposnses some made to my opinion.

Havent you encountered somebody like this, or am I the only unfortunate one who has?
 
My gear ain't the best either. But it's the best I can afford.

I have only one piece (a pair really) of gear that is actually and truely Pro. That doesn't stop me from making good recordings. And I don't look down my nose at people using an entry level four-track and a spring reverb out of a guitar amp.

And no, I'm not a gear snob. A gun snob maybe, but not a gear snob.

Whoever told you what the Beatles used to record with was less than great was full of shit. A one inch four track at 30ips? Do you have any idea the headroom and dynamics that can be recorded on that kind of track width?

Makes digital sound like shit.

And yes I have encountered individuals with a "gear snobbery attitude" screw 'em. I like what I record. Yeah it could always be better, and in time it will be.

You came off sounding like a real shithead in your initial post. What did you expect for a reply with that attitude?
 
I'm an admitted gear slut but not a snob by any stretch of the imagination. I hear folks say don't sweat the specs, just record a great tune. That's only half true though. At the level a lot of us are trying to attain, great attention to ALL the details such as mic/preamp choice, mic placement and room acoustics start to become things to obsess over and discuss with a peer group.
And the Beatles recorded on some of the finest gear produced and it still ranks in the pro audio world. Listen to their ecordings. They hold up VERY well in terms of fidelity (and the tunes have NEVER been equiled, but that's just my humble opinion).
 
ROTFLMAO! I wish Sir George Martin and Geoff Emerick would go slumming and see this stuff. The gear used by the Beatles is considered super hi end esoterica by today's standards. I am still overwhelmed by the quality and complexity of those recordings, especially considering that they used 2 4-tracks locked together, and some of the controls on the early boards looked more like doorknobs than anything else.

As for snobbery: get over it...every category of the music business suffers from it. Guitar players are the worst, followed closely by recording engineers (try walking into a country gig with a MIM Telecaster and solid state amp - you'll be out on the street in no time flat.)...

Of course, no amount of esoteric or hi end gear can make up for a lack of talent. And remember - just because someone SAYS they have a Neve console, Neumann mics, etc, doesn't mean they actually HAVE them...remember the internet is a place where anyone can be whatever they want to be, and if someone's fantasy is to pretend to be THE #1 gear guy in the universe, no one can stop them - eventually they will go away, and most folks can read through the bullshit, anyway.

Point is: take every review, opinion, and advice posted here and other pages with a 1/2 grain of salt - find a couple of posters who seem to support your way of thinking a follow their ideas, and to hell with everyone else...including me, if you think its right for you.
 
Ace, I appologize for becoming so irate about your post. I thought you were trolling, but perhaps you're just venting.

Yeah there are gear snobs out there, but I think they are often times people who a) don't have much gear or understanding or b) studio owners who are forced to buy gear just to attract people who fit in "a". :)

I don't see gear snobbery being too much of a problem around here because most of us have crappy gear. The problem is actually flipped, in that most people around here get all pissed off when you recommend that they upgrade their gear. I would say that reverse-gear-snobbery is ten times more common around these parts.

How many times have we heard people feverishly defending Soundblaster Lives, just because the live doesn't totally suck. It's irritating as all hell. People who come around complaining that there is no difference between any two pieces of gear and that everything is in our heads. You can't hear the difference between an API pre and an ART pre because there is no difference...you're just imagining it. You can't hear the difference between an SB Live and a MOTU because there is no difference. Then they always come up with some lame ass reference like, "well, steely dan recorded lots of great material in 16bit" as if that somehow makes all digital devices equal.

Actually, these kind of reverse-gear-snobs sound a lot like you sounded in these posts....so I might have jumped the gun a bit.

I agree that people should try to make the most of their gear. People should try to be creative. People should understand that buying expensive gear isn't the only thing that's going to help their mixes.

However, having good gear helps...even having moderate gear helps. Tracking becomes so much easier and less of a fight when you bump up to a good soundcard (or some kind of recording device). Mixing becomes so much more productive when you've got some reference monitors. Playing the guitar is so much more enjoyable when you've actually got one of the amps that the POD tries to immitate.

Slackmaster 2000
 
Slackmaster2K said:


How many times have we heard people feverishly defending Soundblaster Lives, just because the live doesn't totally suck. It's irritating as all hell. People who come around complaining that there is no difference between any two pieces of gear and that everything is in our heads. You can't hear the difference between an API pre and an ART pre because there is no difference...you're just imagining it. You can't hear the difference between an SB Live and a MOTU because there is no difference. Then they always come up with some lame ass reference like, "well, steely dan recorded lots of great material in 16bit" as if that somehow makes all digital devices equal.
Click to expand...


Good post Slackmaster, you made a good summary of it all!! There IS a difference in material, but the bottom line is to be creative with what you have got. We also try to give advice to eachother on this board keeping in mind what material that you have.

The kind of other way snobism slackmaster explains does really exists. It's kind of a knife that cuts on both sides, and it isn't always easy though to keep your head straight.

Take Behringer for example: When you mention anything by that company you have two kind of reactions

a) first you got the ppl that immediately start to shout that Behringer sucks and that you imediately should get something else
b) the kinda guys, less in numbers, that tell you that Behringer has lots of qualities but that those are overlooked by gear snobs because Behringer is a cheapo product.

Getting all this reactions, it is often difficult to stay objective. For this example I have different experiences: bad ones with Behringer mixers but pretty good ones with their condensor Mikes. But I feel kinda strange defending that point of view, 'cause both groups will have remarks on that.



Also let us not forget the emotional part: who didn't fall in love with a peice of equipment once. Call me an idiot, but some material really can have some attraction value. And when it is more expensieve like another peice that does exactely the same, it is possible you don't care. And is that such a bad thing?
 
Ace2000 said:
Most of you gear heads would snear at what The Beatles used,
Click to expand...

If somebody told you that they are an idiot. Few here could even afford the same equipment the Beatles used. Maybe you are new to this but 50 - 70's studio gear costs big bucks and is still considered to be of very high quality.
 
DigitMus said:
Most gear heads would sell their mothers to get their hands on the type of gear the Beatles used. Those microphones pre-amps and compressors (not to mention the large-format tape machines) are highly sought after and command ridiculous prices in today's market.
Click to expand...

I agree wit' cha'!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Re: Re: Gear??

TexRoadkill said:


If somebody told you that they are an idiot. Few here could even afford the same equipment the Beatles used. Maybe you are new to this but 50 - 70's studio gear costs big bucks and is still considered to be of very high quality.
Click to expand...

I agree with TexRoadkill, as well................
 
Slackmaster - it's okay that you got a little irate, no need to apologize, I guess my initial post was a litttle vague and destined to cause a little bit of a heated reaction.

I agree that those who said the gear The Beatles recorded with was crap, are in fact idiots....but I actually have heard people say that before.....I didnt mean to imply that those of you who have amassed a lot of gear are all the same as those blinded morons who put down even the gear the Beatles used.

Sorry if I cause a little confusion with my post i didnt mean to imply that anyone who has gear is moron. I wasnt trying to cause trouble but rather just let off a little steam from those who think you cant do anythign with a modest home recording set up.

I apologoze.......
 
It's kind of interesting really. Most of the time when I've seen people put down home studios is when somebody asks questions like:

"Which mic should I buy to get professional vocals?"

"What do I need to buy to get a sound like some huge band?"

The standard answers to these questions are:

"A very expensive mic running into a very expensive preamp into a very expensive console onto 2" tape."

"You need to buy a professional studio. It will cost approximately 2.5 million dollars."

And what's funny is that while those answers sound snobby, they're both TRUE most of the time. The "professional" sounds that most people go for are on such a high level that a guy sitting in his spare bedroom with a fancy new PC will never get there!

I think a lot of newbies get into recording making this HUGE mistake of wanting to make a record that sounds like somebody else's record...and it's so often some huge larger than life sound they end up going for. Well it's just not going to happen, and during the process of realization is when all the fighting and nitpicking occurs.

People need to just find their own groove. They need to work with what they've got to make sounds that they like, and that's all there is to it. Set realistic goals and never underestimate your lack of skills!

You know, one of my favorite sounding albums is the Pixie's Surfur Rosa. Recorded by Steve Albini in what sounds like an abandoned warehouse, I bet that entire album was recorded with gear that is obtainable by the average home recorder. It's not just the music that makes the album sound great either....the sound itself is raw and live and makes me feel very excited every single time I hear it. But that's not what people mean when they ask questions about getting a "professional" sound. Well, maybe it SHOULD be!

Damn, I think I had a point for a minute but completely lost it. Whatever :)

Slackmaster 2000
 
The best way to get a recording good with ANY gear, is to have GOOD musicians who know what they're doing, and have amps and drums that sound awesome and are in tune...

A good engineer could make a killer recording with 57's and a Mackie with such guys...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top