Home Recording's Dirty Little Secret

What were your home recording expectations vs commercial high end studio recordings?

  • I was not expecting from the get go I could make high end commercial studio recordings.

    Votes: 529 40.1%

  • I had not considered the question of home recording quality vs commercial quality when I started.

    Votes: 287 21.8%

  • I expected I could reasonably equal the quality of commercial recordings.

    Votes: 502 38.1%
  • Total voters
    1,318
Bob's Mods said:
Lets have a show of hands....how many of you got interested in home recording thinking you'd be able to make home recordings that would sound similar to the recordings of your favorite commercial artists....and were sadly dissapointed after spending much money, time and effort in an attempt to do so? This is directed at the average home recordist of moderate means....not the guys who have decked out home studios.
Click to expand...
Who, me? Never!:rolleyes::D
 
This is a really good thread. I voted that I did not expect to match commerical recordings. At the time, in the late 1970's there were not a lot of "home recording studios" most home recording was simply bouncing tracks from one 1'4" reel to reel to another (using whatever crap dynamic mics we could find). The "real studios" had 2" tape, dedicated reverd chambers and very expensive mics - with 16 tracks being the standard for a high end studio.

Having gone from bouncing tracks on 1/4" machines - to a 4 track cassette - to an 8 track 1/4" reel to reel - to ADAT - and finally to computers - I did not originally hope to compare to commercial studios. However, each step of the way I kept trying to achieve better.

Now after about 28 years (and waaay more money than I even want to admit) I can come close to a very good product - but there are still so many major label commercial recordings that I know I will never be able to compare to.
 
hmmmm....

this is interesting. i've recorded 4 albums this year on my vs-880 8 track that i (and other like minded people) have thought were pretty good. and i would like to say that it is not cheaply made microphones, pres, and interfaces that are ruining music. it's people without vision that are ruining music. i mean please, if someone's got some really great songs, as long as the fidelity of the recording is not overtly distracting in any way who gives a shit how it was recorded? this is kinda turning into the same old analog vs. digital argument that is NEVER gonna get resolved because why would you begrudge a great songwriter the ability to create his or her art cheaply? and besides, it's all gonna end up on someone's ipod at 128 kbps anyway :rolleyes:
 
mikeyhasnobones said:
hmmmm....

i mean please, if someone's got some really great songs, as long as the fidelity of the recording is not overtly distracting in any way who gives a shit how it was recorded?
Click to expand...

I want the whole package.:cool: I want to hear the great opera singer in a great hall, not a high school gym.

Another thing we are doing: Most of us (me included) are doing 8 or 9 jobs. We are multi-instrumentalists,midi programmers, composers, producers, engineers, gophers, secretaries and caterers.:D With all that going on, somethings gotta give. One thing I would like to do in the future is having a hybrid approach like Sonic Albert, where he sends out vocal work to outside studios.
 
DavidK has a very good point about wearing multiple hats. There have been times that me, the vocalist laid down a good vocal track, but me the engineer, wasn't paying attention to the faders. Or me the guitarist did not get as good a sound as me the producer would like (that's what I get for using a crappy guitar player). Or me the bass player was not in the pocket, but after 20 takes, me the studio manager wanted to close shop for the night.

Each time I record, I compromise something either because I can only play each instrument to a certain level, or the room does not sound like a quality opera house, or because I did not hear a plosive on the vocal until too late, etc. Those are the reasons my recordings never compare as well as I would like.

I do notice that when I'm only engineering (and someone else is wearing all the other hats) - that is when the final product does compare on a much higher level. I also notice when I simply play drums (my main axe) on someones recording - the drum tracks always seem to have more energy. I think me the drummer does not actually like working with me the guitar player:D
 
Pro Recording at Home

Just a comment to those people who are still strugling with getting a great home recording.

The first thing to remember is that recording has two distinct parts.... Tracking and Mixing. The most important of the two is tracking.

the goal of tracking is to get a decent signal from a microphone or instrument to your recorder with hopefully a high signal to noise ratio. To do this the chain usually goes as follows..... Talented musicians, Quality microphones or instruments, A quality recorder.

To break each of these down the talented musicians can make a big difference right up front.... Quality microphones do not mean $2,000. Good results on instruments can sometimes be done with a dynamic mic such as a Shure SM57. Many condensor mics around $100 or so may also work for you but a better choice might be the Shure SM81 which is available on ebay for around $250. The SM81 is great for accoustic instruments and does a good job with vocal when used with a pop-screen..... The signal to noise level just means in plain language to crank your input level as high as possible without distorting. If you have access to a "limiter" it can help get the level up without going past the distortion point.... Any quality recorder (expecially multi-track) should work for you. I started out using a pair of Tascam DA-88 multit-rack tape recorders that set me back $10,000. They are now available on ebay for $100 to $200. I now use a desktop computer (that I built from scratch) and a Motu 896 (from ebay). My total investment in this was under $1,000.

My Results.... Ten years ago I did some professional level recording with Nationally famous Recording artists with excellent results. However, the recordings that I have done in the last year in my home studio surpasses the quality that I had with the "pro" studio.... However some of this can be attributed to experience.

Mixing is a whole different ballgame so I will not go into depth on it except to say that I use Sony Vegas 8 for my video/audio work and Sonar 4.0 for audio tracking and mixing. I also use "Waves" for my effects package. With a little practice and experience these or similar packages can work for you.... Also don't short yourself on a good playback amp and montor.

Finally..... In my opinion "Tracking" is perhaps the most important part. Do that right and your mixing job becomes a lot easier.

Thanks.... Don (avtreky)
 
mikeh said:
DavidK has a very good point about wearing multiple hats. There have been times that me, the vocalist laid down a good vocal track, but me the engineer, wasn't paying attention to the faders. Or me the guitarist did not get as good a sound as me the producer would like (that's what I get for using a crappy guitar player). Or me the bass player was not in the pocket, but after 20 takes, me the studio manager wanted to close shop for the night.

Each time I record, I compromise something either because I can only play each instrument to a certain level, or the room does not sound like a quality opera house, or because I did not hear a plosive on the vocal until too late, etc. Those are the reasons my recordings never compare as well as I would like.

I do notice that when I'm only engineering (and someone else is wearing all the other hats) - that is when the final product does compare on a much higher level. I also notice when I simply play drums (my main axe) on someones recording - the drum tracks always seem to have more energy. I think me the drummer does not actually like working with me the guitar player:D
Click to expand...

I bet your company christmas party is a riot.
 
There is of course another side: one keeps quality control very high when doing it alone.

Then there is the problem of working in a "pro" studio where the engineer is completely incompetent. Just because one owns fancy toys, it doesnt make them talented. I have run across this many times, the worst was last summer when I basically hired a total jackass to mix an album. My fault 100%, I was impressed by the gear list.:rolleyes: Recordingwise, the guy was a novice and a big talker with no talent to back it up. He had all the hi-end toys, but I found out the hard way how inconsequential that is without the skill.
 
Well I choose number two due to the fact that when I started recording I was useing a boom box and hand held tape recorder.
Had to keep re-tuning my GTR to match the playback.
Now that I have gone digital I have gotten "Very " close to commercila sound.
 
My take on whether you can get close to commercial quality recordings or not out of your bedroom/garage studio depends on the type of music you're recording. I feel that it's much easier to do it for strictly electronic music than rock where the room acoustics, mics, preamps, and even more importantly the skill of the performers come into play.
 
Beck said:
Ah, I don’t expect many here to agree with me, but I can help those that are unaware of some very critical issues in music recording that may be stifling their potential. That might be you or it might not, or it might be you one or two years from now finally getting it after further research, but nothing will happen to change people’s minds all of a sudden on a public web forum. In fact it makes people mad initially, but this is natural and actually the first step in the learning process.

Sear does not use Pro Tools or any other hard disk based system in his studio, but because we have to port analog over to digital at some stage he has an Alesis MasterLink. When he has reluctantly used digital multitrack for a special project, it’s been open-reel digital, but he doesn’t own one. It appears you have some misconception about the artists in Walter’s client list. When artists seek out Sear they record at his studio using his preferred methods and equipment. That’s what makes him Sear and why people go there.

However, some analog proponents like myself do integrate digital into the studio at some level. The point to remember is that we won't “Go digital” because our analog multitracks can do things digital still can’t. As much power and control one has at the helm of a nice Pro Tools rig, it just doesn’t cut it sonically speaking compared to my analog system. Ubuntu Studio is a lot of fun as well, but since excellence is my point of reference, it only has so much utility.

From your last three posts I see you are at a very early stages in discussing these things on a technical level… like someone just told you your house is on fire. It’s a shock to the system; I know… it is for most. Maybe you better sit down because there is a mountain of information concerning the endless promises and continual failure of digital to deliver as a professional recording medium. And I’m not talking about some ancient early digital dinosaur; I’m talking about this years hottest new digital wonders.

But relax, take your time and don’t get in a huff because it will be a very long time in the research phase before you will begin to question this pretend recording world manufacturers have built for you… how nice of them… and on sale too. How can one resist?

:)
Click to expand...

then he didn't record those artists...because, those artists use entirely digital recording...esp Tricky..it's his entire writing process, in fact...it would be impossible for him to work the way he does on a tape based machine, and bjork, is digital as well. ALso these two artists tend to do things in their own particular way, so it kind of makes me doubtful that this Sear guy was anything more than the coffee boy or something (I've seen so many people, even people who ended up making it big put clients on their list that they did nothing more than clean the studio after, or put up a mic at the engineers instructions because he was too stoned to get up). bjork does a lot of stuff her self and brings it in partially done...tricky works in the strangest way, often not even writing out parts and just recording random stuff made up on the spot to be assembled later.

multitracks have some advantages, sure, but very small ones these days, especially for the cost of running and maintaining a tape machine. Really, though, if you know how to harness a digital system, I'd be willing to bet you can get about the same results, with a bit more tinkering. The thing is, there is a usefulness for most things..and tape is absolutely useful in it's proper place (albiet, it's starting to become more of an effect box than anything these days)

hmm...you have be pegged very wrong. I've been into recording on a serious level for about 13 years now. It's nothing I haven't heard before a million times, just always amazes me when people repeat it as if it's the holy word. I dislike conventional "truths" about pretty much anything, because they're pretty much always wrong, and based on psychological reasons more than anything. Hey, the brain is a powerful thing (mind over matter). About the only problem I've ever had with a digital system is that of running out of processing power at some point, however, that point is reached far beyond that of how much I could do in an all outboard analog studio (more tracks, more processing). I've read no such serious thing by anyone who is a working engineer/producer about modern digital systems. Why do you think there's only one company making 2" tape that keeps going in and out of business every 10 minutes, because hardly anyone uses it anymore...It's too expensive to record on, and the differences have become fairly minute with the way digital recording has improved lately. Are you talking about these cheap all in one units or something? Because I don't know anyone on a professional level who does use that. Maybe your problem is you're using Linux for audio, which in my opinion is very bad choice for pro audio (nothing wrong with the OS, just not a good audio OS, as there is practically nothing out there for it).

Pro tools always sounds a bit shit. They're using outdated technology, because they got so used to being on top that they forgot to keep growing with it. The audio engine in PT is harsh, unforgiving, and very unmusical...try something like Logic or Sonar, and there will be a lovely difference.

If you knew me, you would feel very silly assuming that I am one to fall under the spell for propa...uhh advertising. In fact, I think that a lot of these vintage wet dreams everyone has is more a product of that, than everything. Let's put a tube in everything, even a tuner, call it the vintage tube british pinkfloydcobaber 1963-mark 2, we can even hire an ex pro wrestler to throw it against a concrete surface for a few hours, just to give that warm vintage look..uhh I mean sound, and watch as thousands of nostalgic engineers drool over it...it's old, so it MUST be amazing...I mean that's what they said in the ad over there. I bet the beatles used it to get that really low-fi sound that is suddenly considered hi-fi just because the beatles did it. Does it come for a George Martin moulded cock for me to suck while I'm twirling the 20 ft wide vintage knobs?

The thing is dude, it's pretty obvious that you aren't in the recording game any more..and don't take that in an insulting fashion, because I'm not intending it in that way... the arguments you bring up are not the sort of thing you have anyone bringing up any more...even some of these "god" engineers that were cursing in the face of digital recording... guess what.. now use mostly digital systems.. There's always a place for tape, and it's still used, but the gap is closing rapidly between the two, and tape is starting to become more of an effects box than something that you would do an entire recording with (for most people). Bounce it over to the tape machine to saturate it a bit, or record it to tape to get a certain sound before sending it to software...or as you mentioned mastering to tape (very nice).. but this silly attitude that there is somehow some huge outcry of audio folks holding on to their tape machine with white knuckles, refusing to use digital gear is VERY aging, and to be honest, one doesn't come across it much any more.

when I was your age. . . . . =D
 
noisewreck said:
My take on whether you can get close to commercial quality recordings or not out of your bedroom/garage studio depends on the type of music you're recording. I feel that it's much easier to do it for strictly electronic music than rock where the room acoustics, mics, preamps, and even more importantly the skill of the performers come into play.
Click to expand...

Well, that depends if one is actually "playing" the electronic instrument. Even midi programming takes considerable skill. Sure, turning knobs on a softsynth doesnt take much skill, but there are many types of electronic music. Good arrangements take considerable skill.

I agree, its very difficult recording "a band". A lot of music out there is a hybrid. Even using something like drumagog is a hybrid. I try to do a combo of real and fake on most tracks. Drums especially, I could never get the sound or the player that I can with samples unless I spent a small fortune.
 
Terramortim makes some good points. I especially like the comments about the fact that in many studios, if tape is used, it is almost an effect - record to tape and then immediately import to a computer, or master down to one.

I think the only artist I've seen in the last 10 years that I recall uses all analog is Lindsey Buckingham - but that's because he owns his own equipment, space, and has a big ole' pile of money sitting around to do what he wants. If you watch the making of the newest Fleetwood Mac album you'll see what I'm talking about. I do want to go back and see if a computer monitor was poked into that setup anywhere, now, though :D
 
TerraMortim said:
(I've seen so many people, even people who ended up making it big put clients on their list that they did nothing more than clean the studio after, or put up a mic at the engineers instructions because he was too stoned to get up)

...

If you knew me, you would feel very silly assuming that I am one to fall under the spell for propa...uhh advertising. In fact, I think that a lot of these vintage wet dreams everyone has is more a product of that, than everything. Let's put a tube in everything, even a tuner, call it the vintage tube british pinkfloydcobaber 1963-mark 2, we can even hire an ex pro wrestler to throw it against a concrete surface for a few hours, just to give that warm vintage look..uhh I mean sound, and watch as thousands of nostalgic engineers drool over it...it's old, so it MUST be amazing...I mean that's what they said in the ad over there. I bet the beatles used it to get that really low-fi sound that is suddenly considered hi-fi just because the beatles did it. Does it come for a George Martin moulded cock for me to suck while I'm twirling the 20 ft wide vintage knobs?
Click to expand...

LOL. Nice way with words. :D:D

I don't have the experience to really chime in on this, but I'm happy for the digital age. If it wasn't for digital, I'd have spent as much on a shitty four track (and gotten lots of hiss and mud) as I've spent on my PC and assorted recording gadgets. My results are MUCH better today than they were, err, "many" years ago.

Maybe not as good as Mr. Sear could do with his analog stuff, but f**k him and his pretentious title "What have They Done to MY Art?" I don't care how good he is, I hardly think he OWNS the right to the entire idea. Elitist horse's ass.

:D
 
TerraMortim said:
If you knew me, you would feel very silly assuming that I am one to fall under the spell for propa...uhh advertising.
Click to expand...

I only have to read your posts, and only those on this thread. It didn't take long at all. ;)

TerraMortim said:
The thing is dude, it's pretty obvious that you aren't in the recording game any more..and don't take that in an insulting fashion, because I'm not intending it in that way... the arguments you bring up are not the sort of thing you have anyone bringing up any more...
Click to expand...

Ha ha... :) I almost spit my Coca-Cola all over the monitor when I read that... warn me next time that something silly is comming, will ya? :D

I'm more involved in recording than ever and understand the inner workings of digital and analog technologies to the fullest. That’s why I can make informed choices and offer informed input… something kinda rare on anonymous web forums. Music and recording are two of the most important things in my life, as they have been my entire adult life.

And I can tell you, many people with less patience than I have don’t even bother engaging in these forums anymore, unless they have services or products to sell. So if it always comes down to a vote or the prevailing groupthink you're missing an entire demogrphic. The participants are always going to be cheated out of helpful information because it happens to go against the conventional "wisdom" of that particular forum community.

Perhaps these topics don’t come up often on amateur forums, but the issue not being on your radar is very telling of how out of the loop you are, not how out of touch I am. You have it backwards.

Despite your insistence that you’re experienced and have heard it all, your comments betray you. You’re clearly quite isolated from broader music recording circles… a culture I’ve been part of for nearly 30 years, and one in which this topic is alive and well.

As I stated before, you have no idea… there’s an entire world out there that you and many others that have grown up on these forums have no idea exists.

These forums create a strict organizational culture that ultimately limits what you will learn because you are encouraged to reject anything that isn’t already widely known in the forum community.

Kinda makes a forum that was intended to foster learning from many perspectives dysfunctional, doesn’t it? :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top