Having an Objective View of Your Abilities

[Folkcafe]

I will add a question here, how does one know they have a well treated room? I see the old clapping trick, listening for echoes and such but are there any tried and true methods. Identifying a real bad room seems fairly easy?

Model and measure. There are a number of spreadsheets such as John Brandt's that work if your room is proportioned as a rectangle. Mine isn't and required additional calculations. For a normal rectangular room, you enter the dimensions and it will calculate room modes at various frequencies. Bottom end is the greatest challenge so it is interesting to read your comment about muddy bass.

After modeling, as someone famous once said, trust but verify. REW is a free software that you use with a measuring microphone. Doesn't have to be particularly expensive. I use a Behringer ECM8000 which is $42 on Amazon. It is useful for finding more ideal mix and monitor position. It is again, another rabbit hole one can go down. Once you know how bad your space actually is, one can obsess about it. Figuring out what all the graphs and data means is another big learning curve.

I took about 6 months for my studio upgrade working out the treatment design with measuring and mocking up various absorbers. My next house when I retire won't have a studio but will have a listening room. Having a room where I can really hear every detail in the music I love is one my life's greatest pleasures.

 

[dogooder]

My gear is now in a basement. I would say the room is about 500-600 sqft, rectagular, cinder block walls. The walls are now completely lined with movable plastic shelving that I have bought, full of boxes of fabric, clothes and just all kinds of stuff so at this moment it isn't full of echos and is fairly dead. Concrete floor which I have covered with rugs. Most of my recording goes directly in so the room is not an issue I guess until mixdown. With vocals or whenever I want to use an amp or whatever it will be an issue.

 

[grimtraveller]

as someone famous once said, trust but verify

Horatio Caine in "CSI Miami."

 

[grimtraveller]

The difference between the engineering between lets say, Stones, Beatles and the Moody Blues is striking. The Moodies mixes are really muddy and not very good comparatively speaking

I've long felt that the Rolling Stones' recordings from the 60s are pretty poor. I love the songs and can listen to them all day and night, but as actual recordings, they suck and they blow, sonically.
The Beatles' were much better and clearer as recordings. The Who and the Kinks were sometime ~ ish. The Byrds were a mixed bag. Dylan's were fairly good.

I have heard better mixes from the 50s

I think 50s recordings and mixes are better because they were simpler. The songs by comparison with the latter part of the 60s and beyond, weren't as adventurous.

 

[dogooder]

I've long felt that the Rolling Stones' recordings from the 60s are pretty poor. I love the songs and can listen to them all day and night, but as actual recordings, they suck and they blow, sonically.
The Beatles' were much better and clearer as recordings. The Who and the Kinks were sometime ~ ish. The Byrds were a mixed bag. Dylan's were fairly good.

I think 50s recordings and mixes are better because they were simpler. The songs by comparison with the latter part of the 60s and beyond, weren't as adventurous.

The Stones recordings aren't that great but they aren't bad and they are certainly better than the Moody Blues. I am was a big Moodies fan but I wish their recordings were better. Even remastered they suck. I was lucky to see Clarence White with the Byrds three times, what a killer guitar player.

 

[pip2012!]

You could use room eq software and a microphone to identify how bad it is? That said i have just put a set of speakers i know in the room and listen to see if they sound terrible compared to what i’m used too. The thing with acoustic is there’s so many variables: room shape, speaker position, the furniture, materials / fabrics, flooring all make a huge difference to sound waves good and bad. Acoustic panels help absorb sound waves and egg crate boxes breakup the waves so i’m sure you could make most rooms into a good treated room. I should add i’ve not used room eq myself but believe it’s what professional audiophiles use to fine tune hi end speakers

Neal

 

[pip2012!]

Thing is nice equipment can make things easier but you still need a fine ear and sound talent. It’s the same with photography. If you have the eye for composition you can take an amazing picture with a phone or cheap camera. giving say my wife my dslr camera wouldn’t improve the picture and likely make it worse as she has no eye for it. Same with any nice professional studio kit or software, if anything like my camera analogy probably worse as all the extras, buttons would complicate matters.
Use what you can afford and learn first, you may find you don’t have the ear or eye for it and just spent s lot of money for nothing.

Neal

 

[dogooder]

I think 50s recordings and mixes are better because they were simpler. The songs by comparison with the latter part of the 60s and beyond, weren't as adventurous.

Simpler? Some of the strangest chord progressions ever, some with full orchestration, all having to be done in one take, no overdubbing or "fixing it."
I highly doubt it was simpler.

 

[TAE]

Wow this is an old revived thread a lot peeps I haven't seen here in many years..

I was talking to the wife the other day about seeing the original Lynard Skynard band a few times back in the day and how incredible it was..Mind blowing good...

I can't think of ever feeling the energy or vibes I felt and some of the best concerts I have seen...from any recording of same said band...Mind you I have seen waaay to many concerts that had suck sound or were just at a bad venue. But when the planets and stars are aligned properly a live music experience just can't be beat, warts, clams and all. Some crazy memorable concerts...I've been to 100's of concerts but the big venues normally just don't have the same magic as the smaller intimate ones do...that's where the magic happens...

The job of recording is to try and capture that magic experience and put it in a bottle to duplicate and share. For sure on a kick ass sound system when the AIR IS MOVING from the speakers and the room is pulsing you can get close....but in the sterile environment of a set of headphones..you can enjoy the music, pick it apart, hear nuances that you might miss in a live performance. You can manipulate and add extra tracks and side effects but that magic of a LIVE performance is hard to capture.... That's why those 50's recordings sound so damn good but those players had to be on their game...

I love the idea of multitrack and plan on using it more...but after 15 years of analysis paralysis and GAS I finally just started pushing the record button with the full intention of what I capture is what I get ....It's pretty easy when it's just me playing the piano and me singing.... I might go through and remove the air from the mic when I am not singing, throw a little compression and level the signals.. remove a bad clam but that's it for me... I have done a few multitracks and they came out ok but the time it takes sure throws a wet blanket on inspiration and musical creativity.

Doing live videos and getting a good sound is even trickier cause for sure you have to get it right in one shot or you're pissing in the wind "fixing it"...

 

[dogooder]

Agreed. Almost every live performance by the A circuit bands I have seen sound far better than any recording they have made, clams, squeaks, broken strings, whatever.
I once saw the Moody Blues do "The Story in Your Eyes". They started it off about three times the tempo on the album. The verse lines are long. The singer is trying to spit them out like the end of a car commercial. The band members are wildly swinging over centertime trying to keep up. I'm thinking, this is the first time I am going to see a pro band have to stop on the middle of a song. Somehow they pulled it off!

 

[TAE]

But getting back to having an objective view of your abilities...That's an interesting but challenging thing to accomplish... SWOT analysis Strengths, Weakness's, Opportunities and Threats.... Based upon that sincere analysis you can set the bar to an attainable level and go for it. I set mine for being in a world class, world touring rock band 40 years ago. Came close but no cigar, Not that it was unrealistic it just didn't happen. 40 years later it's a different game and if I can put a smile on a few folks faces I'm happy. Anything beyond that is all gravy.

 

[LazerBeakShiek]

Almost every live performance by the A circuit bands I have seen sound far better than any recording they have made

Exercise caution. Don't invest yourself into someone elses dream. That is your light. Your attention. Its hard for me to even listen to anything new, knowing I could cut them all..Yes, they are young. ...But this is NOW. I do need to think about the future. Like starwars ..

Anakin kills the young lings before they can become a future threat, after he is denied the rank of Master by the Council.

You are the best. Always. Dont need no glitter. No Hollywood. Just lay it down, and lay it down good.

 

[LazerBeakShiek]

Simply, you are the best you can be. Now. Not then. No other version of yourself has made it further. Like Moody blues, they had more experience at that point than when they recorded it. That experience has the potential to improve their sound.

Same with listening. You are a better listener now, than then.

 

[dogooder]

Simply, you are the best you can be. Now. Not then. No other version of yourself has made it further. Like Moody blues, they had more experience at that point than when they recorded it. That experience has the potential to improve their sound.

Same with listening. You are a better listener now, than then.

I lost all respect for the Moody Blues when they ripped off Patrik Morantz