does being consistently decent make you better?

  • Thread starter Thread starter wes480
  • Start date Start date
wes480

wes480

New member
Everytime I record stuff....I get a decent result...

And I just keep thinking "yeah....this is ok...but, I couldn't release it....it's not good enough...yet.."

And keep thinking always "man, if I keep it up...in 5 years...I will be able to get a great sound and then I can really focus more on the music and production and just let the engineering speak for me..."

Heh, just kind of depressed tonight with some tracks that didn't go so well...

Is what I am doing going to make me better? Just, setting up the mics, and getting down there and recording stuff...even though it isn't neccessarily better than last time?

I guess the answer is well...how else would anyone get better. but, I dunno - success stories?
 
Always try to do stuff you can't pull off.

Consistenly playing "well", in public, is an absolute must. but when it's you and your music and you're "growing" and writing and practicing, you have to always work at the very edge of your threshold, or else you'll just settle into complacency. I'm not saying never take the time to really learn something. That's the point obviously... but make sure that all the time you're adding stuff that is just at the edge of what you can handle.

It keeps you sharp.

That, of course, is just one technique of "stretching yourself". But don't let it supercede the most important rule of music... there are three vital ingredients to being a "good" musician....







Practice, practice, practice.


:p


WATYF
 
heh, well seeing how this is the recording techniques forum, i thought it was understood I meant in terms of engineering and mixing...

i already know i suck at guitar...i'm cool with that ;)

just mean as far as....making consistently "decent" recordings...will you eventually creep towards "good"
 
If you keep trying to learn and better yourself; trying new things all the time, reading books, magazines and asking as many dumb questions as you can in the name of bettering yourself, then absolutely you will get better.

But it won't be a slow, gradual thing. One day, you'll record something and say to yourself: "Man, that sounded brilliant." And if you can remember the things that you did differently that made it sound that way, then you're on your way to recording brilliance.

But you could just bypass all this nonsense and get a bunch of tubes. Something like an ART Tube MP or a Bellari. Tubes are kewl and warm and they make your recordings ooze and melt like butta.
 
If you can figure out what to do better next time than every recording experience is worth something.

If you're just winging it everytime then all you can hope for is that occasionally you will get lucky.
 
I'm not saying this in a "look at me - I'm great" kinda way, but I've recorded a lot of stuff which has been released over the years, and a lot which hasn't. I've never been 100% happy with any of it. The people I've recorded always seem very pleased, my friends (who I generally consider as being better at recording/production/arrangement than I am) are forever complimenting me, but I still think I'm not good enough. It's taken me years to realise that I'll always be this way.

Basically, what I'm saying is "don't beat yourself up about this". If it evcer gets comfortable, then it won't be as interesting. if it stops being interesting, it stops being fun.

Also, go back to some of your old stuff occasionally. It's amazing how stuff which once seemed lame can stand the test of time!
 
fabulous microphones don't hurt, either.
 

Attachments

  • dlv.webp
    dlv.webp
    2 KB · Views: 65
Being that I am very new at all this, but energetically learning, I think picking a professional recording that you want your project to sound like and find ways to make your stuff sort of sound like that. Reciently for me it was my third band that I was recording (for free still. . . well. . . use of their music on a comp CD) and I wanted the audience to not have to turn the volume up when they stuck this CD in. I didn't know anything about "normalize" (which I still haven't had the oppoutunity to try) and I didn't want to compress the crap out of it because I had some problems controlling the snare. Then while messing around I noticed in my timeworks compressor that I could crank the output to where SONAR's meter was peaking almost constantly but it wouldn't distort unless the compressors meter peaked. Being a hardcore band I ran the entire mix through a tape simulator with "warmth" up about half way and used the input and output gain to crank the level and watched the compresser to see when it was at 0. I didn't really know what I was doing but I was happy with the result. it gave the entire mix a slightly overdriven feel. The band, who I knew fairly well thought I was an absolute genious and I got some decient reviews from some local DJ's. Still need to work on controlling bass freq's though :)

I think it sad that I'm able to say that I am better with my PC, Aardvark Q10, and a few common mics (SM 57's B52, & AKG D112) and SONAR 2.0 XL than many studios in the area with $500,000 in equipment. But I care about the success of the bands and don't try to just get through the day.

find an envelope that you want to push and go for it. wether it is loundness, dynamic response, clarity, warmth, etc

next for me is clarity :)

peace
sam
zekthedeadcow@hotmail.com
http://www.track100.com
 
I have these friends that I do alot of projects with...and they are totally against doing anything that even remotely sounds like anyone else.
Example...My guitarist friend who writes his own stuff...HATES when I mention that we try and go for a more "pop" sound.
But when I am saying that we should go for a more "pop" sound I really mean that his stuff is so abstract that I dont know anyone who could relate to the musical idea he is trying to convey.
Most of his songs lean towards a mix of classical guitar and regular "alternative." But he gets going on these tangents where his latest song has atleast 12-13 different main parts.

As I said up above...when I am saying that we should go for a more "pop" sound I DONT mean Brittany Spears or "IN PINK"(Nsync) or "The Backdoor Boys" (the Backstreet Boys) I mean just something that is more listenable...but even when I say that...he gives me a look like I am the dude that signed "PORNSTAR" Brittany spears to a recording contract...
 
Good point.

I read something, I believe it was an interview with Butch Vig . . .

Where he said that during the making of one of his many illustriously successful albumbs, they posted a big list of things on the studio walls of "Things you're supposed to do" when recording. Among them was "close-micing guitar amps with a '57," and many others.

Next, they made a hard rule NOT to do ANY of things on that list while recording the album. He said it was a constant challenge to think of ways of getting around their normal "tried and true methods" and still get a good sound. The whole idea was to keep looking for different ways of doing things. It was a pretty good read.

I mysel plan on experimenting a lot more with some quasi-binaural micing on my next venture. I'll be having a rather organic-sounding band come in shortly. They mentioned they are looking for a very "natural and real" kind of sound. So I figure now might be the time to pull out the dummy head and try it out on drums, at least, and see where that leads me. At the very least, I'm sure it will make a good room mic.
 
zekthedeadcow said:
Being that I am very new at all this, but energetically learning, I think picking a professional recording that you want your project to sound like and find ways to make your stuff sort of sound like that. ...

I didn't know anything about "normalize" (which I still haven't had the oppoutunity to try) and I didn't want to compress the crap out of it because I had some problems controlling the snare.

... I didn't really know what I was doing but I was happy with the result. .

I think it sad that I'm able to say that I am better with my PC, Aardvark Q10, and a few common mics (SM 57's B52, & AKG D112) and SONAR 2.0 XL than many studios in the area with $500,000 in equipment.
Click to expand...

I am very impressed! By your own admission you don't know very much but you already sound better than many of the $500,000 studios! Maybe you should tell us which ones, so we'll know to stay away from them! :rolleyes:
 
Deadcow, I feel the same way, i recorded my first demo at Runaway Studios on Long Island, a $500,000 pro-tools studio, and then recorded a demo of a friend's band and kicked the shit out of runaway. Now all of the local "runaway" bands want to record with me. At first I thought the guy that owns Runaway Studios was gonna hunt me down, but now i just feel bad.

Eric
 
The singer from the band I first got into writing and recording with told me, "It's okay if this song doesn't come out perfect. It might be one of the "stepping stones" to something great. You can't get to the great song if you don't get through this one first".

Albeit quoted a bit less elegantly, it's good advice that's kept me from getting depressed at times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top