Gear Quality vs. Technical Expertise

  • Thread starter Thread starter crawdad
  • Start date Start date
crawdad

crawdad

Dammit, Jim, Shut Up!
Let's get this settled once and for all. Can professional quality be achived with decent but inexpensive gear? In that category I include things like Chinese mics (take your pick), Mackie mixers, $200 preamps, etc. Let us assume for the sake of argument that the room, instruments and voices we are using as sources are top notch.

Does cheap gear forever doom me to second rate results--even if I have learned the craft of engineering and have trained ears? Or does knowledge applied offer an escape from ok but never great recordings?

in other words, do I have to record at 24 bit, use $2000 pres' and out board gear, as well as Neuman mics, expensive reference monitors, and a host of other high dollar items in the signal chain to get to the next level?--what I would call professional. To put it simply, are we settling for second rate with all this talk about best mic or pre for under $300?

My reason for asking is this: I want to improve my end results. If it takes more training, I'll do that. If it takes biting the bullet and investing in the best stuff, I'll work toward that. I have read so many conflicting opinions that I'd love to hear from people who have done both and see what answers arise. Thanks in advance. I'm sure I'll be back with questions!
 
I've heard a lot of music here by folks with modest setups like mine doing pro level sounding work. These things are tools. I just read somewhere "The Beatles don't live in those boxes".
 
Track Rat--You're one of the people who's opinion I respect here, so let me indulge you a minute. Could you point me to a few examples that are posted somewhere? Not commercial studio owners, but homewreckers. I've listened to a lot of stuff here recently and much is decent. Yet I hear a difference when I listen to radio--and I go from country to oldies to classic rock to blues, jazz, folk and other electronica on PBS. I most definitely include myself in the not yet there category. I did think your live recording was excellent by the way.

You see, I'm starting to impose ridiculous standards on myself lately and I am not meeting them. I want to grow. I'm learning, I think. Just not to the degree I would like to. So, its me or my gear--or both! I've been doing this too long and I am just not satisfied with what I am doing now. So all ideas are appreciated.
 
Crawdad,

> Can professional quality be achived with decent but inexpensive gear? <

Absolutely!

> Does cheap gear forever doom me to second rate results--even if I have learned the craft of engineering and have trained ears? <

Therein lies the rub. Most of the home-made recordings you hear are made by amateurs. Put a pro in a good home studio with a Mackie mixer, a few audiotechnica microphones and Sonar, and the result will then be limited mostly by the acoustics of the room.

Another big difference between home-made and pro is the mastering. Not that you couldn't learn how to do that kind of final EQ tweaking yourself. But even pro mixers benefit from a little tweaking by someone who is an expert at just that aspect.

It's very easy to prove this to yourself: Take a CD you think sounds amazing, and play it through whatever mixer you have now. Assuming you have a decent mixer, you should hear no degradation. Which proves the mixer can pass good sounding audio and keep the quality high.

--Ethan
 
Thanks guys. That's really the same opinion I have been leaning to, but I sometimes delude myself and lose confidence. Recording can be a complex set of tasks. On top of that, everybody has an opinion on which mixer, which mics, which pres, format, effects....etc. While all that has its importance, I think your answers really tell the truth. Getting professional results is about having the skills and understanding how to get great sounding tracks, mixes and even masters.

What I don't have certainty on is knowing what's right and what I'm doing wrong. How can I get this kind of training? You know, like having somebody say--that vocal is too bright right now--its gonna be a problem for you later. I know that a big part of it is experience, but if you can direct me to any sources that will help me to train my ears, I'd appreciate it. I don't want to settle for second rate anymore.
 
Crawdad....one thing being left out of the equation is the musician, and the quality sound they can get out of their equipment. Of course, like anything, there are exceptions (like where lousy musicians have been made to sound half decent...and also the complete opposite). But consider this, I'm sure you've seen some players live, in an informal setting, where you go..."that guy just smokes"...or "what a sound they are getting"..."how do they do that?" In contrast, most home reccors have lousy sounding drum sets, can't get a decent guitar tone, the bass is overwhelming...the singing is average, not national caliber..., the playing is simplistic, with musical passages any two year player can duplicate, and on and on.... Start at the source...that's where the sound really begins...But...we all know that..right??:) You gather great musicians, whos fingers know how to milk the sound out of their axe...the recording becomes much easier. And remember...the ears are an instrument too...

I feel like I just said the obvious...but to me, that's the major player. Equipment is great and inexpensive nowadays....no doubt about it. 30 grand will buy you a killer home studio, easily capable to do wonders...and you may not even to spend close to that either.. I like the CD thru the mixer idea....good example.

oh...and the training you ask for...you learn by trial and error, your mistakes, your fantastic achievements, and by having done something before, reading BBS, watching other sessions, listening to everything, asking questions like are now.......etc...etc...etc...etc...etc...etc...etc...etc....
 
crawdad said:
Could you point me to a few examples that are posted somewhere?
Click to expand...

I would hop on Bear Share and see if you can get a hold of "Your Woman" by "White Town."

I believe that's the name. Former #1 hit in the U.K. and very popular in the states. Recorded on a 4-track cassette multitracker by a dude in his bedroom.
 
mixmkr said:
Crawdad....one thing being left out of the equation is the musician, and the quality sound they can get out of their equipment. )

You gather great musicians, whos fingers know how to milk the sound out of their axe...the recording becomes much easier. And remember...the ears are an instrument too...

I feel like I just said the obvious...but to me, that's the major player. Equipment is great and inexpensive nowadays....no doubt about it. 30 grand will buy you a killer home studio, easily capable to do wonders...and you may not even to spend close to that either.. I like the CD thru the mixer idea....good example.

oh...and the training you ask for...you learn by trial and error, your mistakes, your fantastic achievements, and by having done something before, reading BBS, watching other sessions, listening to everything, asking questions like are now.......etc...etc...etc...etc...etc...etc...etc...etc....
Click to expand...

I agree with all you say, basically. For one, great musicians know and pack good tone, not to mention feel and creativity backed by years of experience. Also, nothing turns me off more than a crappy vocalist--no matter how good the tune is.

I feel like I have the gear to make pro recordings. I may be a bit shy in the mic department, but thats just a situation of spending more money. I'm actually getting tired of talking about equipment, i.e., "whats the best mic for $100? or "best pre for $200" etc. Not so much that, but the fact that the attention is always on the gear and rarely on how to use the gear. Also, beyond that, how to use your ear to get the best and most correct results with the gear!

As for the training comments, I've been doing all those things you mentioned for longer than I'd like to admit. I still don't feel like I have the certainty I'd like. However, I will keep asking questions and studying all the information that's out there, experimenting and trying to get my ear trained better. In the end, I think the ears are the most important instrument. Beyond that, experience. I don't work five days a week in a studio. I imagine that if I did, after a few months, I'd have a good handle on getting a good vocal, bass, drum, piano sound. I guess what I need is somebody to stand over my shoulder and say "Dude, that electric guitar sounds really edgy...that vocal is too sibilant...that bass is weak in the lower midrange...your mic placement is wrong." I'm gonna keep working on it all until maybe one day I can post something I am really pround of from an engineering standpoint.
 
crawdad, there's a new book you may want to look at.
It's called "Project Studios: A More Practical Approach" by
Philip Newell. Haven't seen it myself yet though-saw the review at
Sound On Sound though, it's supposed to be quite sobering.

Chris
 
Chessrock--What is Bear Share? I'm not familiar with it. 4-track cassette, eh? Cool! Wasn't Springsteens Nebraska recorded on a Portastudio too?

Chessparov--Thanks for the tip on the book. I'll try and find a copy of it.
 
crawdad, Nebraska was recorded on the first portastudio,
the Tascam 144 (I have a 244 BTW). It had to be mastered many times,
however, before the recording quality was deemed to be of commercial level.
The highly regarded album, The Latin Playboys, produced by Mitchell Froom was also
done on cassette 4 track. Another famous producer, Tony Visconti, has used cassette
multi-tracks for commercial level releases a while ago. Of course these guys are REAL good!

Chris
 
mixmkr said:
Crawdad....one thing being left out of the equation is the musician, and the quality sound they can get out of their equipment. Of course, like anything, there are exceptions (like where lousy musicians have been made to sound half decent...and also the complete opposite). But consider this, I'm sure you've seen some players live, in an informal setting, where you go..."that guy just smokes"...or "what a sound they are getting"..."how do they do that?" In contrast, most home reccors have lousy sounding drum sets, can't get a decent guitar tone, the bass is overwhelming...the singing is average, not national caliber..., the playing is simplistic, with musical passages any two year player can duplicate, and on and on.... Start at the source...that's where the sound really begins...But...we all know that..right??:) You gather great musicians, whos fingers know how to milk the sound out of their axe...the recording becomes much easier. And remember...the ears are an instrument too...

I feel like I just said the obvious...but to me, that's the major player. Equipment is great and inexpensive nowadays....no doubt about it. 30 grand will buy you a killer home studio, easily capable to do wonders...and you may not even to spend close to that either.. I like the CD thru the mixer idea....good example.

oh...and the training you ask for...you learn by trial and error, your mistakes, your fantastic achievements, and by having done something before, reading BBS, watching other sessions, listening to everything, asking questions like are now.......etc...etc...etc...etc...etc...etc...etc...etc....
Click to expand...



Uhuh.


Also, a good understanding of vocal expression. Generally, the weakest part of homerec demos are the vocals. Knowing which take is the *~*~ONE~*~* is largely innate. Its that aesthetic sense thats either there or not.
 
crawdad said:
Can professional quality be achived with decent but inexpensive gear?
Click to expand...

What exactly is professional quality?


crawdad said:

My reason for asking is this: I want to improve my end results. If it takes more training, I'll do that. If it takes biting the bullet and investing in the best stuff, I'll work toward that. I have read so many conflicting opinions that I'd love to hear from people who have done both and see what answers arise. Thanks in advance. I'm sure I'll be back with questions!
Click to expand...

Im might be fogging things up somewhat, but here it goes.

I think that what has to happen, is you need to decide whether or not you want to go on a journey. Its a journey that alot of audio engineers make if they truely want to improve.
The journey is starts with desire, it includes talent, knowledge, experimentation, money and time. Alot of time the usage of lesser gear and environments helps you learn, so that when you get nice, expensive and quality gear, everything comes together. Professional just means you get paid... I would rather say experienced sounding, verses the opposite.

Ive picked a path...and thats all that matters, because as I become more experienced, obviously the equipment list will grow with me...Sooner or later Ill be "professional" sounding...
 
Crawdad,

It really does matter what one sees as professional. Its much harder to make a Creed record at home than a Spoon album, I think. Of course a guy like me really only wants to make the latter!

Some (extreme) examples: Look em up on cd now or amazon.com

Heres a good example......(IMHO)
Listen to Beulah's When Your Heartstings Break. That record was done with nothing but a 16 track 1/2 inch tascam MSR recorder through the pres of a Fostex 450 16 channel board. 1 DBX 166 compressor, 1CAD E100, 1 4033, and some 57s and 58s are all they had, recorded at their jam spot. One of my all time favorite records.

Look up Jack Drag...album: Aviating

One DA38 recorder, one sampler, various junk and toys, a 4 track (to run some loops through), lo budget mics...the best of being an Oktava 219. May not be your cup of tea but its very much a real album.

heylow
 
Heylow--I think I know where you are coming from and I have no quarrel with that. There have been a lot of what I'd call "loose and trashy records" made over the years that just have a great vibe to them. When they are right, I love 'em! Since I am not up on the most current stuff, I'll cite two older examples. "Tonights The Night" by Neil Young and "Exile On Main Street" by the Stones. Not exactly Steely Dan sonically :D but emotionally they communicate their subject matter well.

My definition of professional is simply this: to be able to achieve any degree of perfection or lack of perfection required to make a great record. To have the skill to manipulate sound to create the desired effect.

I want to be able to deliver the goods, whether its blues, heavy metal, jazz, a pop diva, a country artist, a techno group, a current rock act, a folk singer or a bluegrass group. To me, thats knowing your shit. I don't want any limitations, though I must admit I have many right now.

Whether its possible to know all this in one lifetime is another can of worms. I'd rather be known as a guy who can get any job done than a guy who is only good at lo-fi or something. Thats not a judgement against anything. I do think, however, that if you want to master the medium, you ought to be able to deal with whatever is thrown at you and make it sound right. being able to deal with whatever comes your way and being able to turn it into something magic, for me, would be the highest pinnacle of professionalism.
 
What is a Pro Sounding album? To me, it depends a lot! Lately I´ve been loading a few records into my DAW and listening to them trhu my monitors and beign able to swtich btw albuns with a mouse click and I can say that a Pro Sounding Album varies a lot! I´m mostly into heavy music and I´ll mentioned a few examples. Staind - Break the cycle: to me is one of the top quality albums out (remember, it´s all about the source :)), Fear Factory - Digimortal: very good musicians but it sounds just thin compared to Staind. Ill Niño - Revolution revolucion: that´s a mess... it´s dirty, and not clear at all, you gotta pay attention to hear what each one is playing (humm, what about the source?), System of a Down - Organic, not as clear as Staind, but much superior than FearFactory and Ill Niño...
What I´m trying to say is, even major major major releases, can be very different... to me Staind´s and SOAD´s are not reachable (soundwise) by a home studio, but the other two examples, are very homestudio sounding...
 
OK, for the sake of this discussion, where do you draw the line between "Professional sounding" and "Homestudio sounding"...........obviously there will be variations depending on what defines a homestudio,........... I mean is it a guy in his room with a cheap mic and an old four track or a guy who has a reasonable desk, a decent mic and an ADAT.

:cool:
 
Here is my definition of a Home Studio

This isn't fair, but its basically the kind of Studio Id like to have, its occupies 1400 sq/ft of his upstairs. He since has added a PT set up... But by definition...Its a home studio :)

http://www.vai.com/Machines/studios.html


Check it out....Its ok to dream a little right ;)

Peace
 
I have heard some good stuff from some of us here using moderate gear.

If you want to see a cool home studio, you should see Billy Bob thorntons, He bought Slashes old house and Inherited the Snake Pit.
 
wasnt one of the Pixies albums done on a 4track and later mastered? Its the one with Wave of Mutilation on it. I think it was called Doolittle


One of the best recorded drum kits Ive ever heard lately (in extreme music) was done on an amateur 8 track tape machine in a basement. The album is Pig Destroyer - "Prowler in the Yard". Later they moved the tracks over to an adat system to record the guitars and vocals
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top