Gear Shaming

[Pinky]

This response got me thinking it might be a topic worthy of discussing at greater length...

https://homerecording.com/bbs/gener...res-make-difference-you-390518/4/#post4411492

There seems to be a degree of gear shaming, or at least perception of this, with some members on this forum. "Oh you don't have/use that? Then there's no way you can get a professional or even decent sound."

What about the other side of this? I'd like to hear from the members, like myself, who use a relatively minimalist setup and achieve good results from it.

When I joined the forum many years ago, I came here as a complete newb to the digital age and like so many others accumulated a tremendous amount of experience and knowledge since then. But fundamentally my gear, to this day, leans toward the budget and cost/benefit side. [Fwiw - I've strategically spent most of my money on software in the past 3 years]

The proof is in the product you create. If it sounds good, who cares how it was achieved. I would even go as far as to say someone should be praised for achieving a good recording on budget equipment. There was a member on here years ago (Erland) that wrote and recorded acoustic folk songs on his portable digital recorder. While not studio quality, they were great recordings none-the-less. He knew the basics and more importantly had great material. He didn't need much more than fundamentals and $1000 in total gear to create great stuff. [as an example of what I'm thinking]

Yes?

No?

Thoughts?

 

[dudernut]

A lot of musicians in general tend to be brand-snobs. Recording engineers can definitely be the same way. An ex-bandmate would give me shit for using a Tascam interface because of the conversion quality. He really didn't know anything about the science or technology behind it...he just knows that Apogee has a huge price tag, so it must be tons better! I mean, I get some of it! In fact, I have presonus interfaces now, and I do find the conversion to be a bit smoother, though I wouldn't be surprised if it was more of a placebo effect than anything. He was also staunchly against Behringer gear...a lot of folks are. Then one day, we had just played the greatest sounding (in terms of audio quality) set that we had ever experienced. Everything was mixed perfectly, on-stage sound was impeccable. I then pointed him to the huge rack of Behringer power amps. I think it may have changed his perspective a little...but only a little

 

[Tadpui]

I can't say that I recall any instances of members "shaming" others for their gear. I don't read every post, but I read a lot of 'em. And I can't say that I've seen this even once in recent memory.

 

[Greg_L]

I can't say that I recall any instances of members "shaming" others for their gear. I don't read every post, but I read a lot of 'em. And I can't say that I've seen this even once in recent memory.

You're not wrong or missing anything. There's no gear shaming here. Just mentioning the virtues of good gear is not "shaming" those that don't have it.

And can we stop with calling everything "shaming"? Jesus F Christ. That's childish teenie social media lingo. We're grown men here. Act like it.

On the flip side, there is a very real push to discount and discredit what good gear and/or techniques can actually do. This is usually done by people that have no experience or knowledge.

For me personally, I put gear in two different camps. There's the gear that makes the sound, which to me is the most important, so that gear matters. And then there's the gear that captures the sound, which to me, matters less. A shitty amp recorded with $10,000 of preamps and mics still sounds shitty. You'll have a great recording of a terrible sound. A great amp recorded with a $100 SM57 will still sound very good.

 

[miroslav]

Gear Shaming

Gear shaming...?

Dude...you're now getting way too defensive about gear talk.

You made at least two posts trying to thumb your nose at the discussion about better gear and about using better mics and pres to get the sound during the tracking stage...so it seems like you're trying to shame anyone that does that or that isn't in the same situation you are with your home recording.

I was very clear in my posts that you can do a lot with low budget gear these days...and that you don't need to drop thousands on one piece of gear just to do record some tracks at home.
The point I was making is that people have to try a lot of gear, and work with it over time before they can hear the differences and dismiss it as needed or not needed...and most home rec guys never get to that stage, They only know what they know...yet they, like you, are very dismissive about anything they haven't experienced or things not in their budget.

Sure...there are guys doing home rec who never want to do anything but record some stuff and be happy with what they get out of it...
...but there are also a lot of home rec guys who shoot for more than that.
No one here is talking brand names or thumbing their nose at good low budget solutions.
You just seem bothered by what ever it is that exists or not in your home recording world...or something...?
Look...if you are happy with what yo have...if you feel that you are hitting the highest marks you wanted to achieve...good for you.
Congrats.

Let other people do the same...and don't reverse-shame them just because you don't want to go that route.

 

[miroslav]

For me personally, I put gear in two different camps. There's the gear that makes the sound, which to me is the most important, so that gear matters. And then there's the gear that captures the sound, which to me, matters less. A shitty amp recorded with $10,000 of preamps and mics still sounds shitty. You'll have a great recording of a terrible sound. A great amp recorded with a $100 SM57 will still sound very good.

Right.
This is what I was getting at in the other thread about mic preamps when BSG and I were saying that it's important to capture the good sound...and that's how we prefer to work, rather than just capturing any sound, and then bombarding it with processing after the fact to make it sound good.
I don't know if both processes get you to the same place in the end...as I tend to use the first approach most times....
...but IMO/YMMV...I find that getting the sound up front, is more rewarding for me, and certainly requires less mucking about with processing later on.
So yeah...I too would rather stick a 57 or a cheap $150 Fat Head in front of a great amp sound...than try and put a $2000 mic in front of a shitting sounding amp, and hope I can tweak it later....but like I said in the other thread early on...people work differently.

 

[Greg_L]

Right.
This is what I was getting at in the other thread about mic preamps when BSG and I were saying that it's important to capture the good sound...and that's how we prefer to work, rather than just capturing any sound, and then bombarding it with processing after the fact to make it sound good.
I don't know if both processes get you to the same place in the end...as I tend to use the first approach most times....
...but IMO/YMMV...I find that getting the sound up front, is more rewarding for me, and certainly requires less mucking about with processing later on.

Yes, this exactly. I think it's probably universally accepted that getting the source right is more important than trying to polish a turd. My goal is to always use as little shit after the fact as possible. Some people just like to fuck with plug-ins and obsess over settings though, and they still end up with shit. Hey, whatever. I don't have to listen to it.

 

[Pinky]

Now that you guys have established your little echo chamber, how about some silence so other people can chime in(?).

 

[Greg_L]

Now that you guys have established your little echo chamber, how about some silence so other people can chime in(?).

We're not stopping anyone from chiming in. This is a public forum. You asked for thoughts and opinions, don't get upset when you get them....even when they aren't what you were probably hoping to hear.

 

[Pinky]

Moved this from the other thread...

Home studio is a meaningless term nowadays.
Every one who has an interest in making music today has a 'home studio'.
From multi-platinum selling artists to kids with an Ipad loaded with garage band.

This is really my point, just because you sleep in the next room doesn't mean you don't essentially have a "commercial" studio in your home. As I said, this line is gray but has always existed. The only real measure would be how much money and how elaborate ('commercial') the studio is.

I think the effort spent making suggestions that are out of context for most members is time/effort wasted. Most people here pause when even minor investment in sound proofing is suggested. We're talking a few hundred dollars. That's how tight budgets are for many (most) here. I guess the high end gear talk comes across as a bit elitist (?). Perhaps I'm just not explaining myself well. I doubt we're attracting many members with those discussions, or offering anything useful to the majority who can't afford the gear anyway. Kinda like Mercedes Benz running ads on a Hyundai owner forum. Kinda the wrong target demographic.

Earlier I watched a youtube video with a professional mastering engineer explaining his mastering chain. It was essentially a $1500 macbook for monitoring and $20,000+ in outboard, mostly analog equipment. And it looked like a large room in his home. Is he a home recorder too?

 

[Pinky]

You asked for thoughts and opinions, don't get upset when you get them....even when they aren't what you were probably hoping to hear.

Oh I expected them. I don't want to censor you guys, but there's already a hundred of your posts on the subject on the forum. Was hoping to hear from the less vocal members (like Tadpui - thank you! ), perhaps those a bit intimidated by the 'shoot-the-messenger' and wolf pack mentality that happens on many internet forums.

 

[miroslav]

(From the other thread)

Neither, all online. I do zero work locally.

What does that mean you have a studio "online"...?
If you have a DAW set up in your bedroom, garage, basement, attic...etc...that's still what many here will call a studio.
In your studio, you are also doing it for the $$ ...which then (by your perspectives of what "home recording" means) would put your "studio" in a non-home recording category...though I certainly wouldn't see it like that. You're still basiclaly doing home recording.

Again...I'm just not seeing the lines you keep trying to draw about gear and home recording etc.
It's wide open these days...which is why I said, to me, home recording simply means I'm doing it at home...regardless of the gear I have or the space I'm using at my house...etc.
You can even do recording for $$ out of your home studio setup...and it would still be generally a home recording studio.

I think you only truly depart from "home recording" when you build a formal studio from the ground up, with all the serious acoustic treatments and trimmings, and use it primarily for commercial recording purposes....but even then, the discussions about gear aren't only limited to $100k SSL consoles and $50k Pro Tools rigs with nose-bleed priced converters and such.
I mean...even the big studios use 57s and Fat Heads and other low budget stuff when it does the job...likewise, a basic "home studio" could have a real console or some higher-end press or mics...etc...and still onluy be a home recording studio.

I would rather talk about EVERYTHING that's out there, that's possible...instead of dumbing it down because it's "home recording".

Again....I don't see a reason to draw any lines with this stuff....
If people's budgets are the real rub...then those people will limit their gear purchases accordingly....but I would say to them, a $2k mic is no different than a $200 mic. That would be BS. They should know that they ARE in fact , working in the low budget end of the pool, and that's is *OK*...just let's not make it seem like there's no reason to look at the deep end just because they are "recording at home".

 

[Greg_L]

Most people here pause when even minor investment in sound proofing is suggested. We're talking a few hundred dollars. That's how tight budgets are for many (most) here. I guess the high end gear talk comes across as a bit elitist (?).

Of course it may seem "elitist" if simple basic procedures like installing some room treatment sends them into fits.

You're wanting to dumb things down even further than they already are. Why?

 

[Greg_L]

Oh shit, I said "dumb things down" right after miro did. Must be that echo chamber thing again....or we're just seeing this the same way.

 

[miroslav]

Oh shit, I said "dumb things down" right after miro did. Must be that echo chamber thing again....or we're just seeing this the same way.

Was it a plate or a hall..and next time, set your pre-delay shorter...maybe you and I can get a slap-back echo going.

 

[Greg_L]

Was it a plate or a hall..and next time, set your pre-delay shorter...maybe you and I can get a slap-back echo going.

Hey, you're talking about details and techniques that go way way beyond home recording. You better stop.

 

[Robus]

I see more protests about "gear shaming" on musical forums than actual instances of it. The world is full of people more than happy to tell you you're using the wrong gear. If they have recorded output, you can always give a listen. If they are getting impressive results and you are not, they might be on to something. Otherwise, smile and move on.

 

[miroslav]

Hey, you're talking about details and techniques that go way way beyond home recording. You better stop.

You're saying I need to dumb it down?

OK...then just use whatever preset came with the damn thing.
If they need numbers...I can put some numbers up.
Numbers are a big deal on home recording forums.

 

[RFR]

Really???? Gear shaming deserves a thread?
This is the internet. People talk meaningless shit.

 

[miroslav]

Gear shaming deserves a thread?

Yeah...you can wipe down your guitars with it...that's gear shaming.