S
swarfrat
New member
Bob Dylan sure comes across with "authenticity" on "Everybody must get stoned". That's more what I would associate with it.
MrUserNameIV
SenselessActsOfCreation
I ban drugs from my studio for that reason. A beer or two is okay, but if people are getting totally smashed in the studio they run the risk of wasting massive amounts of time at the least or damaging my equipment at the worst.
famous beagle
Well-known member
So do a lot of you guys run studios for profit? Out of your home?
I tried to ask this question a while back in its own thread (I can't remember which forum I posted in), but I didn't get many responses. I don't know why; I think it's a really interesting question, and I'd love to hear about people's experiences.
I tried to ask this question a while back in its own thread (I can't remember which forum I posted in), but I didn't get many responses. I don't know why; I think it's a really interesting question, and I'd love to hear about people's experiences.
G
Greg_L
Banned
There is no profit.
Steenamaroo
...
Heh. A firm stance, but that really depends what your doing and what your goals are.
I make profit. Not much profit, but profit none the less.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
I think what Greg means is that until you recoup your investment of time, money & effort....you're not really making a profit....and few small studios do.
Steenamaroo
...
I suppose it's true for most. I'm confident that I've made back what I spent, but then I have been particularly careful to find bargains and DIY my way through a lot of stuff.
Of course I can't claim to have made $x for every hour I've invested, but you have to learn your craft...
VomitHatSteve
Hat STYLE. Not contents.
Having spent a bunch of time with people who abuse aderall and other prescription meds, those guys are really annoying.
I suppose if you're recording professionally, it's a matter of either establishing rules for your studio or charging them more (depending on if they're paying per-project or per hour).
If you're recording for a friend, just talk to them about it I suppose. ("Dude, if you show up to my studio high again, I'm just gonna cancel the session and send you home.")
I suppose if you're recording professionally, it's a matter of either establishing rules for your studio or charging them more (depending on if they're paying per-project or per hour).
If you're recording for a friend, just talk to them about it I suppose. ("Dude, if you show up to my studio high again, I'm just gonna cancel the session and send you home.")
E
ecc83
Well-known member
I would not entertain such people at any time. Apart from the time wasting there is the studio's "reputation" to consider. Some probably have a rather fragile relationship with the locals as it is! Then, good work is unlikely to result and that is a blot on the escutcheon.
Finally I would suspect that having someone ratarsed on the premises would strain, maybe invalidate the third party insurance?
Dave.
bouldersoundguy
Well-known member
I don't care about a person's internal chemistry, it's their behavior that matters. There are enough clean and sober wack jobs and functional addicts out there that you can't judge by whether someone is "high" or not.
YanKleber
Retired
MrUserNameIV
SenselessActsOfCreation
Depends on what someone is high on. If someone is a ganja smoker or some such that they aren't totally wacked out, that's fine, but someone who thinks its a frat flop house party runs the risk of breaking gear. I've had that happen before, and it was a real bitch trying to get them to replace the gear they busted when they were thrashing around wacked out of their mind.
Plus, I can notice a direct inverse relationship between work ethic and amount of substances ingested. A session usually devolves as the person gets less and less alert.
ibleedburgundy
The Anti-Lambo
Just mult the hell out of his takes. What else can you do?
XploZiveToyz
All American Un-American
I recall from what I've read that everyone from musicians, to producers, to engineers, were all smashed on heroin during the making of Exile On Main Street. Seems like that record turned out pretty well! LOL! 
JimmyS1969
MOODerator
I'll jump in here.
It really depends on the level of what anyone feels comfortable with. Put a casual drinker on stage or studio without their comfort level of medication, and prepare for less than acceptable performance. If they are beyond their limits, then it goes to shit.
I have had one experience personally where I learned that taking the bottle from the baby was the worst thing I could have done.
Short story:
Finished album. Booked 3000 seat venue for CD release. 4 extra musicians to make the live show almost exactly as we recorded it (slide steel player, hot chick playing cello, a second guitar player and piano player who had a wife in labor that night).
I pulled favors from my 25 years of contacts from my local scene. Remote video recording truck from cable network. 4 camera video shoot with qualified cameramen. 24 track live recording of the show directly from inputs to DA 78's. All for free. The place was packed.
I made the mistake of telling my singer in that band 'do not drink and fuck this up or I will kill you'!
He didn't... He also did not remember most of his lyrics during the show.
Almost all of the video was useless as 'yabba dabba do' does not work for anyone. The band broke up immediately after hearing the tracks. I still mixed them in hope of adding vocals later, but it was just so pathetic that I had to move on.
Whatever a performer is comfortable with is what you should give them. Taking someone out of there comfort zone is seemingly unproductive. At least in my experience..
It really depends on the level of what anyone feels comfortable with. Put a casual drinker on stage or studio without their comfort level of medication, and prepare for less than acceptable performance. If they are beyond their limits, then it goes to shit.
I have had one experience personally where I learned that taking the bottle from the baby was the worst thing I could have done.
Short story:
Finished album. Booked 3000 seat venue for CD release. 4 extra musicians to make the live show almost exactly as we recorded it (slide steel player, hot chick playing cello, a second guitar player and piano player who had a wife in labor that night).
I pulled favors from my 25 years of contacts from my local scene. Remote video recording truck from cable network. 4 camera video shoot with qualified cameramen. 24 track live recording of the show directly from inputs to DA 78's. All for free. The place was packed.
I made the mistake of telling my singer in that band 'do not drink and fuck this up or I will kill you'!
He didn't... He also did not remember most of his lyrics during the show.
Almost all of the video was useless as 'yabba dabba do' does not work for anyone. The band broke up immediately after hearing the tracks. I still mixed them in hope of adding vocals later, but it was just so pathetic that I had to move on.
Whatever a performer is comfortable with is what you should give them. Taking someone out of there comfort zone is seemingly unproductive. At least in my experience..
MrUserNameIV
SenselessActsOfCreation
A casual drinker, or someone who likes to smoke herb or something of that nature is an entirely different thing than people taking hardcore drugs in the studio that make them act in ways that they can't function normally. The OP is talking about someone who's hopped up on speed to the point that they can't even perform or sit still. They may think, in their stupor, that it makes them perform better, but it doesn't. All of the time trying to make up for someone's chemical intake is time that could be spent getting better takes, or doing other creative stuff that will make the music better.
That's only true to a point. A little bit of moderate drinking in performance or recording is no big deal. I routinely share a beer or three, or a little bit of whiskey with people I have into my studio if it makes them comfortable. Sometimes it actually helps to make them feel more at ease (when it's a moderate amount). It's when you're talking about drugs (heroin, meth, coke, PCP, Bath Salts, Krokodil, Huffing paint or feces (kinda kidding with the last few) that it gets out of control. I also realize that some people perform better with a little bit of weed in their system. If that's their style and they retain work ethic I've got no problem with it. You don't have to ban any fun at all, even if you bar drugs from your studio. Again, people who are totally gone on chemicals tend to believe they are performing a lot better than they really are. If someone were hopped up on something the OP was talking about while we were supposed to be working, I would respectfully ask them to leave.
J
Johnny Don't!
New member
I think the situation involving musicians & drug use should be judged on a person-to-person basis, meaning that some guys can handle their shit, and other guys can't.
Having worked in studios on a number of different levels for the past 20 years with extremely variant levels of artists, engineers, & producers, I have PLENTY of stories which support both sides of the argument. For example, I spent about 4 weeks in Hoboken at WaterMusic in January 1999, playing keys and arranging & performing backup vox for a Chicago band who hired a well-known (and awesome) producer to work their album. (I shan't name him here as it would be bad form.) He told me a story about working with Kim Deal (Pixies & The Breeders), who at the time was severely addicted to heroin. She'd be nodding out during takes, and then go into the bathroom for a few minutes and come out all awake and ready to play. It really impacted the workflow and consequently, the label pulled funding after only 3 weeks of recording, as the project was already two weeks behind schedule.
However, it's a well-known fact that Keith Richards was also a severe heroin addict for well over 35 years, and he used the drug to fuel his performances & inspiration in-studio. On tour, well, that was an entirely different situation, and there are countless verified stories of Richards causing the band to go on very late, because he was nodded out and no one could wake him up.
Then there are the stories about a lot of the buttrock/hair metal bands in the mid-80's doing tons of cocaine in-studio, and in many cases, the producers & engineers were blowing lines right along with them. If you know anything about the effects of cocaine on the human body, you know that it affects the hearing such that higher frequencies are harder to hear; hence many of the albums from that era produced by Mutt Lange (most notably Def Leppard) have ridiculously out-of-balance top ends.
Overall, I think you should judge a musician's drug use in-studio based on his/her behavior. For example, with many of the bands I work with (including my own new project, The Nothing Company), I use substances to aid performances, but only when absolutely necessary. For example, if a bass player can't seems to stop playing on top of the beat, I'll give him a beer or a shot or a toke off a pipe, but only that. No more. And ten minutes after Dr. Johnny has administered the medicine, the bassist is a bit loose and not rushing everything. However, there have been times when this method has completely back-fired in my face and the drinking/drug use becomes more of a focus than creating music and ruins the session.
So, like I said: use yer judgement on a player-by-player basis.
Having worked in studios on a number of different levels for the past 20 years with extremely variant levels of artists, engineers, & producers, I have PLENTY of stories which support both sides of the argument. For example, I spent about 4 weeks in Hoboken at WaterMusic in January 1999, playing keys and arranging & performing backup vox for a Chicago band who hired a well-known (and awesome) producer to work their album. (I shan't name him here as it would be bad form.) He told me a story about working with Kim Deal (Pixies & The Breeders), who at the time was severely addicted to heroin. She'd be nodding out during takes, and then go into the bathroom for a few minutes and come out all awake and ready to play. It really impacted the workflow and consequently, the label pulled funding after only 3 weeks of recording, as the project was already two weeks behind schedule.
However, it's a well-known fact that Keith Richards was also a severe heroin addict for well over 35 years, and he used the drug to fuel his performances & inspiration in-studio. On tour, well, that was an entirely different situation, and there are countless verified stories of Richards causing the band to go on very late, because he was nodded out and no one could wake him up.
Then there are the stories about a lot of the buttrock/hair metal bands in the mid-80's doing tons of cocaine in-studio, and in many cases, the producers & engineers were blowing lines right along with them. If you know anything about the effects of cocaine on the human body, you know that it affects the hearing such that higher frequencies are harder to hear; hence many of the albums from that era produced by Mutt Lange (most notably Def Leppard) have ridiculously out-of-balance top ends.
Overall, I think you should judge a musician's drug use in-studio based on his/her behavior. For example, with many of the bands I work with (including my own new project, The Nothing Company), I use substances to aid performances, but only when absolutely necessary. For example, if a bass player can't seems to stop playing on top of the beat, I'll give him a beer or a shot or a toke off a pipe, but only that. No more. And ten minutes after Dr. Johnny has administered the medicine, the bassist is a bit loose and not rushing everything. However, there have been times when this method has completely back-fired in my face and the drinking/drug use becomes more of a focus than creating music and ruins the session.
So, like I said: use yer judgement on a player-by-player basis.
dainbramage
Well-known member
I never heard of anyone doing drug overdoses for fun. Who are those people?
Last edited:
dainbramage
Well-known member
Z
ZiM_XG27
New member
I actually recorded a band last weekend and all of us were shit faced drunk. Per their request. Wanted me to be on the same mindset. Went against everything I've ever thought about how to act in a recording environment. What the hell though right? One of the best live recordings I've ever done. Lol. I have to admit some people just can't play sober. Granted there is a point where you physicaly can't play your parts from motor depression, but it took us awhile to get there. I also noticed zero degradation in my ability to mix down the music. In fact sounds were clearer. Heard frequencies I've never heard before. Set up for the recording the night before so everything was already perfectly positioned and the band could just come in and play. Now, all that being said, I've recorded some absolutely terrible drunks. So case by case judgement from now on I guess.