Home Recording's Dirty Little Secret

[Obi-Wan zenabI]

Interesting. My wife has a beautiful coloratura voice and could have gone far in that field, but she chose a career in sacred music (church music ministry).

My wife's still in the opera business, in artist management ada-artists.com , and section leading at a church outside NYC. (I sing in my church choir for free!)

 

[TerraMortim]

In my experience most “Real” audio professionals are unknown at a national or international level.

sure, I can agree with that.

church sound ministries.

what's that? Evangelizing to mixing consoles?

 

[TerraMortim]

there are plenty of doctors that are killing perfectly healthy patients,

SHHH!

 

[CoolCat]

Paul McCartney is one of the patron Saints of HR. The album McCartney II should be a must-own for everyone interested in home recording, even if you don't particularly like it. It's Paul at home with a 16 track and some synths doing New Wave music. Most people hate it, I love it.

probably a few posts out of whack here...
isn't that first solo McCartney for the most part HR too? i think. it got mastered and some tracks added at Abbey..but was supposedly HR too. It has a folk, acoustic guitar down home feel I like. a mic and a reel to reel or something basic.

Buddy Holly and the Crickets, Les Paul...kind of pioneers...I mean Elvis wasn't recording at home or Chuck Berry or Little Richard.. Buddy Holly was a HR dewd kind of.

on the gear Pro vs HR gear... I think Sonic said it best a long time ago... that most people here at HR, myself for sure, have never even heard hi-end equipment for hours upon hours. So when a HR says, "hey that frkn RNC is the best one!!"
"Best one" means I like it better than the $79 compressor at GC....if that makes sense. Its interesting when exp. pops in and says I think the RNC is as good as <pro unit> or the SM7 is on the platinum selling CD...credibility I guess, is what I'm spewing about.

but what excels HR to improving is the knowledge, like a forum etc.. HR is no longer imprisoned to only getting inputs on gear from a 18yr old Guitar Sales dewd who has been recording 3 weeks and recommends the Ultra-Pro unit for $79 because he bought it 3 days ago and it "rocks"..

the internet power of knowledge transfer..
many of us didn't have mentors or internet starting out..."the caveman" method I call it....and its a waste of time and energy and a very very inefficient way to learn by trial and error and ignorance, I can attest to that!

American Idol versus American Bandstand?

 

[MCI2424]

I dunno. But I have been in dozens of studios and know this:

it doesnt mean squat. There are pros that suck the big one. What they are good at is money, getting the cash to buy the toys and open the biz. Product-wise, they might not be as good as the kid with the cracked copy of Fruity Loops. This happens all the time.

Renting a studio means squat. Head to the mp3 clinic: people often post their song that was done at a "pro" studio, and it doesnt sound as good as the version they did in their bedroom. It takes a geniune GIFT, in addition to hard work. I can practice basketball all day and it won't matter, I dont have the skill.

Satisfying clients can mean having the gift of the gab. If one talks a good game, they can get somewhere too. "Clients" are often suits who literally wont know the difference between a great product and a crappy one. I wouldnt know the difference between a great diamond ring and a cubic zirconia.



Agreed, You just hire yourself. No need to hire anybody if I can do their jobs as good or better than they can. As I said earlier in this thread, I hired a completely incompetent idiot this summer. I mixed the album instead. Its not that I am a wunderkind engineer, I am not. Its that he was tone deaf. He talked a big game, had MAJOR gear, and put out some of the worst crap I have ever imagined. "Pro" literally doesnt mean anything, its a financial term and not a musical one.

I cah see that this thread is just going down a wormhole. All I can say is that I know of a bunch of studios, the owner's names are well known in the industry and put out consitantly great work. If anyone wants to know if they will get a professional recording, evry studio I have known has credits to albums they have done as examples. These guys are well known and used by virtually everyone who is anyone in the music industry. The Steve Albinis of the world are very busy, and very popular for a good reason.

You are right, anyone who owns a billion dollar studio, and has no idea as to what he/she is doing is a hack and non-professional, but actually all major bands have their own engineers and producers. They just rent the studios that they can work in and get a decent product. If a band goes into any studio, even Abbey Road, without their engineer and producer, they get what they get good or bad.

Now, I can also say that all the studios around Boston that really sucked are now out of buisiness (at least all the ones I knew) and there are more popping up everyday, but no studio putting out bad recordings will last very long except to bands just starting out with no $$$. To these bands, a hack studio is better than nothing I guess.

Oh well, At least all the ones I still keep in contact are great engineers and still at it! (like over 25 years)

 

[DavidK]

I cah see that this thread is just going down a wormhole. All I can say is that I know of a bunch of studios, the owner's names are well known in the industry and put out consitantly great work. If anyone wants to know if they will get a professional recording, evry studio I have known has credits to albums they have done as examples. These guys are well known and used by virtually everyone who is anyone in the music industry. The Steve Albinis of the world are very busy, and very popular for a good reason.

Sure. The top are at the top for a reason. There are plenty of good people in every profession, recording is no different. There are also plenty of hacks, recording is no different. My point was that JUST because it is a "pro" studio doesnt mean squat. A GOOD studio is a good one.

You are right, anyone who owns a billion dollar studio, and has no idea as to what he/she is doing is a hack and non-professional, but actually all major bands have their own engineers and producers. They just rent the studios that they can work in and get a decent product. If a band goes into any studio, even Abbey Road, without their engineer and producer, they get what they get good or bad.

Correct. However, for those not in major bands, there is a lot of disinformation out there about what to expect. People think they will go to a $$ studio and come back with a Steely Dan album, when they will actually come back with their own crap with better reverb.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

It's inverse profiling again. Just because most of the good pro stuff comes out of leased commercial space studios doesn't mean that all leased commercial space studios automatically put out good pro stuff. Any hack can get a loan for a hundred grand these days, rent some cheap loft space in a pre-gentrification neighborhood, and put out his shingle as a studio with a big live space, analog board and a decent mic locker. So what? That it is a brick and mortar studio for hire cannot in and of itself be used as a reliable definition of "pro".

"Professional" has nothing to do with who does it, where it's done or how long it takes. It is related to reputation, but reputation alone guarantees nothing on any given project. "Professional" does not even necessarily mean quality result (though that is such a subjective scale that it's hard to be scientific about that.) There are legions of big name, big label productions done by "professionals" that sound awful fo no real good reason.

Professional, IMHO, means only one thing; the work ethic put into the project. Professional is what professional does.

When a rookie comes on this board and asks "How can I get my recordings to compete with a professional record", the answer is, by understanding that what you are really asking is "how do I make a professional recording?" Once you know that, then you know that the only way to make a professional recording is to make a professional recording. How do you do that? Either by acting like a professional and taking the time to learn the profession, or, if that is just not logistically plausable for you, giving it to someone who has already traveled that path. If neither of those are an option for you, then you just might have to lower your expectations a little.

That's called making a professional decision.

G.

 

[DavidK]

Since this thread has gone many ways, I will introduce yet another subject:

What tips have you learned that have really brought you closer to the "pro" sound?


The newest one for me is eq. It is making a huge difference in my latest stuff. I didnt use much on my first album because I really didnt know how to effectively. If I had a time machine, I could make it 100% better if I knew what I do now. It really is an art and I am hardly an expert, but the difference is amazing. A lot of stuff I was actually doing backwards: stuff like bells and bell trees I would brighten, when actually I needed to do a high cut instead. It's starting to add the "warmth" to my recordings.

How bout you?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

What tips have you learned that have really brought you closer to the "pro" sound?

I'm going to interpret that as meaning what tips have done the most to increase the quality of my sound .

That's a tough call. I think perhaps the biggest "A-HA" moment in my early experience was the day (and I still remember it) I first learned about the "parametric sweep" technique for notching out honker frequencies. I still think that is the most valuable and most often used technique in my quivver, and it yields immediate and immediately noticable results. Hardly a track goes by where I don't give it at least a cursory sweep just to see what's up.

The other one that may not be quite the "a-ha" and may not have the instant gratification, but I think seperates the men's tracks form the boy's tracks - so to speak - is understanding the full concept and importance of purposeful gain structure throughout the recording chain.

G.

 

[MCI2424]

Since this thread has gone many ways, I will introduce yet another subject:

What tips have you learned that have really brought you closer to the "pro" sound?


The newest one for me is eq. It is making a huge difference in my latest stuff. I didnt use much on my first album because I really didnt know how to effectively. If I had a time machine, I could make it 100% better if I knew what I do now. It really is an art and I am hardly an expert, but the difference is amazing. A lot of stuff I was actually doing backwards: stuff like bells and bell trees I would brighten, when actually I needed to do a high cut instead. It's starting to add the "warmth" to my recordings.

How bout you?

I learned to insert a pro CD into my player, turn up the volume and sit down to drink a few beers. Instant gratification!

 

[Beck]

what's that? Evangelizing to mixing consoles?

You're close... Evangelizing through mixing consoles.

Church sound is a whole 'nother country.
http://www.churchsoundcheck.com/
http://churchsound.prosoundweb.com/

SHHH!

That's too funny.

 

[TerraMortim]

Sure. The top are at the top for a reason. There are plenty of good people in every profession, recording is no different. There are also plenty of hacks, recording is no different. My point was that JUST because it is a "pro" studio doesnt mean squat. A GOOD studio is a good one.

yup! When I was leasing a suite at a studio in town, it was nauseating what some of these people that were supposed to be impressive, actually could do. Some of them as you said had the gift of gab, and the ability to get lots of money, and when it came for the work, they had the house engineer do almost everything and they'd walk in and twiddle a knob every now and then that the house engineer would put back to where it was before. Let me tell you, the house engineer wasn't too bad, but... not that amazing either. If I ever sat in on a session, I was constantly driving him nuts with... hey that doesn't sound right aren't you going to change that? (I guess that's why I didn't sit in on that many lol)

A lot of these celebrity audio guys are just lucky to have been in the right place at the right time, and have talents with building a buzz around them and their name. The argument I've seen a few times on here, that your level of talent is directly proportional to how much money you make from it is just silly.

 

[TerraMortim]

"Professional" does not even necessarily mean quality result

well put! I don't know if you were going in this way at all with that, but more on that concept.

There are some genres of music that will suffer in a very very hi-fi sound. Punk, Black Metal, Dub, Industrial, stuff like that. So it's kind of a mindfuck, but it's actually more professional to retain a bit of roughness to the recording and mixing than to polish it to the standard of the latest pop hit.

And to all those people who absolutely disagree.. two points.

1. What's the point of recording music? For us to be able to brag about how expensive the gear is, and how "great" it sounds? Or, for the music to come alive, and aide in the emotionality/power of what the songs embody?

2. There is actually quite a different challenge all-together with recording something low-fi in the right way that suits the song. It's almost easier for a lot of people to make something sound really "good" than to make it low-fi. So then, what defines good audio. Wouldn't it be more of a hack that would record an angry crust punk band with the most expensive gear he could and mix it as if it were a multi million dollar project? (I'm not talking commercial mall punk, people...so please don't try to give me examples in that sort of way)

One thing, I think HR has done for music, is remind the establishment recording industry what they had long forgotten. Your job is to serve the song, and some songs don't want quality...some songs want things to be downright ugly. This has allowed for the low-fi to meet somewhere in the middle, instead of being so low-fi that it couldn't convey the emotions of the music properly (the old "demo tape" of recording with one mic into a cassette at band practice, for all the bands who didn't have enough money to go into a big studio)

Right is wrong. Black is white. Everything you know is wrong, and right. Reality doesn't exist, and your mother wears army boots.

 

[TerraMortim]

Since this thread has gone many ways, I will introduce yet another subject:

What tips have you learned that have really brought you closer to the "pro" sound?


The newest one for me is eq. It is making a huge difference in my latest stuff. I didnt use much on my first album because I really didnt know how to effectively. If I had a time machine, I could make it 100% better if I knew what I do now. It really is an art and I am hardly an expert, but the difference is amazing. A lot of stuff I was actually doing backwards: stuff like bells and bell trees I would brighten, when actually I needed to do a high cut instead. It's starting to add the "warmth" to my recordings.

How bout you?

The biggest one for me..

Hear with your ears, not your eyes, or your brain. - not getting caught up in what's correct technically, because nothing is actually...correct. It either sounds great or it doesn't. If it sounds great leave it, if it sucks, fix it, regardless of what an electronic meter is telling you.

And..

At some point... just stop, or it will suck. - With computer based recording it's so easy to have the tendency to want to tweak it forever just because you can. Sometimes, you can lose the original charm if there is too much tweaking. Sometimes, to force myself to do that, I'll actually export sessions as multiple wave files, and make a new session, burn the old session to a dvd, so that it makes it very inconvenient to tweak it.. then I'm stuck with what I have.. and I find, it often makes the result much better than tweaking it forever and ever, without anything stopping you from changing the entire thing at any moment.

And..

Distortion is your friend - (hey, that's even what people enjoy about the sound of nice analog gear, the pleasant distortions it introduces) Sometimes throwing on small bits of distortion can get you closer that some "vintage tube wigawahootzit.vst" (I must say, PSP Vintage Warmer is quite nice however)

And the actual biggest one (I lied):

Musicality. - So this means, the arrangement, the particular instruments chosen for the song, the ability to use someone's playing abilities and style x 10, a comfortable, relaxed, working environment for anyone who is involved. Willingness to experiment, even if it seems insane (that's how techniques are born), willingness to listen, but also to filter suggestions.

No matter how good of gear you have, or even musicians...the parts should partially mix themselves before you even touch a fader or effect. How to make a mix full? Just ensure that it's written to sound full. If the players are playing something that doesn't help in that dept. it will never sound quite right if you try to make it sound full... or whatever.

So yeah, you look at pretty much anyone who churns out really good stuff and there is always someone involved, or the person themselves who are not afraid to talk to the band about the arrangements. I won't bat an eyelash if I'm working with a band, even if I'm not technically producing it, before going up to them and saying, okay you want it to sound this way? Let's talk about the arrangement and how we can achieve it that way, as that will sound the most "pro".


oh.. but yeah...all the other normal stuff helped too.

 

[TerraMortim]

You're close... Evangelizing through mixing consoles.

Church sound is a whole 'nother country.
http://www.churchsoundcheck.com/
http://churchsound.prosoundweb.com/



That's too funny.

It's a funny image though, don't you think? Some guy preaching, pounding a bible and praying over some audio gear.

A particularly religious old friend of mine signed up at this christian college for "christian recording arts" Doesn't that just sound a bit funny? So what is a christian recording art? Praying that it'll sound good?

Lesson 101 - Jesus is my assistant engineer? My studio manager is a jewish carpenter? In case of rapture, the big chair will be empty? Jesus loves the little PZMs? What compression setting would jesus do? Amazing gear, how sweet the sound? Spareth the talent, spoileth the track? Jesus saves, so he doesn't lose his work in case of a power failure?

Or, is this implying that the gear has been baptized? Is the tape machine saved? Does the Avalon over there have a personal relationship with the lord?

I suppose recording christians must be a completely different set of techniques than the rest of us, eh?

hehehe

I wanted to get a picture of that british guy who killed over 100 patients, but I couldn't remember his name for the life of me, so ole' faithful (Kevorkian) had to do.

 

[Bob's Mods]

For me learning the sweet spot on my mics was a revelation. Also learning to use my para eq to hi pass and notch....using my ears.

Bob

 

[Beck]

Since this thread has gone many ways, I will introduce yet another subject:

What tips have you learned that have really brought you closer to the "pro" sound?

Well, going back to when I was still a teen, that would be dumping my two top-loading Akai cassette decks with simulated wood panels and my Radio Shack mixer for my first multitrack, TEAC 144.

Mic technique and Tracking came pretty easy in the beginning, but I had apprenticed in a TV studio, so I had learned the ins and outs of AV by age 18.

The biggest early technical breakthroughs that I would say gave me “That sound” came a couple years later working in a commercial recording studio. Those had to do with the composite mix; learning to use EQ, compression, and reverb/delay to create a sense of space that would convince the listener they were somewhere else. At that point I was starting to grasp how to give instruments their own space with panning and EQ, while at the same time creating a blend with reverb/delay and compression.

I was obsessed with the stereo image, particularly blending everything to sound that it was in the same time and place (same room).

My fevered brain began viewing everything around me in terms of mixing and blending. I can remember one day standing at the kitchen sink washing my hands and the hot and cold handles suddenly became level controls for two different signals… one hot and one cold, with the spout being the output (ta-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa). I stood there for a long time (much too long really for someone that didn’t do drugs). I kept mixing the two temperatures, thinking, “That’s a bit too warm” or “that’s a bit cold.”

Then… eureka! Probably the biggest “Hello!” moment was when I extended this line of thinking to draw from our other senses to understand what makes music pleasing to the listener. I thought about all the ingredients in a recipe as being individual tracks blending into a delicious dinner. I looked at individual flowers in a vase and thought of each as a track or instrument and how they blended into one bouquet, taking note of how the arrangement resembled the panorama of the stereo spectrum. And of course, I thought about the female form most of all… how it wasn’t just one thing, but a combination of the hair, the eyes, the lips, and the curves that blended into one walking, talking hit record for the eyes.

I know this is all abstract and won’t help sell any products, but my greatest leaps in creating professional recordings were conceptual… changes in the way I thought about what I was doing and how each of our senses has a similar way of interpreting beauty and pleasure. I was only about 20 or 21, yet nothing since has come close to these “revelations” in impacting my approach to the recording and reproduction of music.

 

[Beck]

Lesson 101 - Jesus is my assistant engineer? My studio manager is a jewish carpenter? In case of rapture, the big chair will be empty? Jesus loves the little PZMs? What compression setting would jesus do? Amazing gear, how sweet the sound? Spareth the talent, spoileth the track? Jesus saves, so he doesn't lose his work in case of a power failure?

Or, is this implying that the gear has been baptized? Is the tape machine saved? Does the Avalon over there have a personal relationship with the lord?

I suppose recording christians must be a completely different set of techniques than the rest of us, eh?

Heh, heh

I think the main thing with church sound is learning not to yell, "Shit!" during the sermon when things go wrong... like uncontrollable feedback or somethin'.

 

[TerraMortim]

Heh, heh

I think the main thing with church sound is learning not to yell, "Shit!" during the sermon when things go wrong... like uncontrollable feedback or somethin'.

BAHAHAHAHA! I'd pay to see that. Yeah, how does that work... after all audio people and musicians have the worst language of any living organism.. I'd imagine it's enough to make one's mouth start to swell up and turn purple with all of the curses, blasphemy, and twisted humour being held in there.

 

[CoolCat]

What tips have you learned that have really brought you closer to the "pro" sound?

the "golden strip" thing, so I concentrated on some gear and currently got to a SM7 in a old JoeMeek VC1Q and it was like a nice sound finally.

before it was slapping various mics and instruments into a cheap crap mixer, which is ok to get an idea on tape.

thats a main thing too, some are talking Recording Studio Engineer perspective here...a lot of us the HR was a scratch pad for writing tunes...so it was never expected to get "pro" results. although this changed and all of a sudden everyone I know who did the "scratch pad" wanted this awesome sounding product to slap in the cardeck or sell on the internet.