Home Recording's Dirty Little Secret

[danny.guitar]

I thought Titanic was one of the most boring, ridiculous, lamest movies ever made.

The story is true, of course, and it's sad that all those people died, but the movie just flat out sucked. I'm glad that guy died in the end.

 

[dobrocop]

your right dannyguitar,...

exactly danny,...when todays gear can give hiss and noise free quality,and varied selection of effects + pretty good mastering at a very reasonable price,even if bought second hand,.then the only problems are good songs/tunes + musical ears+ a thinking brain,..and if you cant play the music yourself then get people that can,...there are thousands of young n old frustrated muso`s who would love the chance to play and record in a semi pro or private studio,..we cant be expected to be great at everything,..just find what you love to do and work on improving it,...also try to ignore the urge to overdo [i have a new toy, im gonna use it]reverbs+comp+echos,etc,etc,try the less is more thinking,..but mainly just enjoy,............good forum,cheers,dobrocop,

 

[Beck]

I thought Titanic was one of the most boring, ridiculous, lamest movies ever made.

The story is true, of course, and it's sad that all those people died, but the movie just flat out sucked. I'm glad that guy died in the end.

One redeeming value of the movie was that the score was recorded in analog with Ampex 456.

But yea… about the guy dying, that was a relief until I realized he was the same guy that didn’t really die and gave an equally lame performance in “The Quick and the Dead” (1995). He played the same hot-for-teacher fantasy with Sharon Stone… she was sort of a lover/mother/baby sitter figure to him in that one. I swear Gene Hackman killed him in that flick, so you can imagine my surprise when I saw him on the Titanic chasing older women again.

 

[CoolCat]

Basically, I think the music bigwigs are panicking a bit because they're so used to very easy money, from a completely controlled market, where they basically told people..this is what you'll be buying, the only thing you'll be buying.

I think there is definately an impact of HR selling, its marketshare or whatever. I bought 2 CD's from a HR here on the forum that said they couldn't keep up with the orders because they were gigging and trying to do it all themself.

again its off topic some, but still kind of referring to the quality has come up or kept up with being good enough people like the tunes.

I was listening to HR stuff in the car yesterday, a co-worker hippie was really digging it and he had no clue it was HR. It was that good....an superb CD and well recorded.

I've never seen the pie-chart, but I'd imagine HR-IndieNet is growing and growing. I don't really see it as an end to the Big Companies, the big-big music machine will alwys do the billion dollar work I'd imagine....ASH and BRITNEY and the SONY-Mikel Jackson level, or Starbucks and McCartney and Creedence Clearwater....

you never know, maybe McCartney will start doing HR and selling his own because Starbucks doesn't work hard enough at it either!
frkn dewd is a workaholic I tink.

 

[robin watson]

I thought Titanic was one of the most boring, ridiculous, lamest movies ever made.

The story is true, of course, and it's sad that all those people died, but the movie just flat out sucked. I'm glad that guy died in the end.

So you aren't a big fan of that particular movie then?

 

[TerraMortim]

Yeah, Prepubescent little boy meets woman… gets woman (what to do with her now he does not know because he’s 12 years old). It should have been twenty minutes and she should have gotten 20 years.

What a miscast. DiCaprio should be doing Peter Pan and Lord of Flies remakes… stuff like that. At least until he’s shaving.

Dicaprio is in his 40s now, I believe. Check him out in What's Eating Gilbert Grape. He can actually act.

 

[TerraMortim]

I don't know why Titanic gets so much flak. Sure, it's a sappy story, but what a production job, and the concept of coming face-to-face with something set deep in your past is a mind boggling one. But then again, the final scene of City Lights gets me almost every time, too.

Am I getting old, or trying to stay young? Both, I guess!

The only scene I liked what when the ship is sinking and people are falling off the boat and breaking their necks and shit..that was pretty cool hahaha

 

[TerraMortim]

One redeeming value of the movie was that the score was recorded in analog with Ampex 456.

But yea… about the guy dying, that was a relief until I realized he was the same guy that didn’t really die and gave an equally lame performance in “The Quick and the Dead” (1995). He played the same hot-for-teacher fantasy with Sharon Stone… she was sort of a lover/mother/baby sitter figure to him in that one. I swear Gene Hackman killed him in that flick, so you can imagine my surprise when I saw him on the Titanic chasing older women again.

I got a huge bunch of unused Ampex 456 at a thrift store once (about 30 some odd reels)... I guess a guy owned a studio and he must have died or something..They thought it was useless. One of these days, I'll get a tape machine to use them on

Guess how much I paid for them? . . . . 99 cents a piece! I was walking out of that place with a smile on my face wider than the front doors.

 

[Soundmind??]

Getting back to the original theme....When I started 4 years ago with MXL mics and Behri gear, I knew it would never happen. Now, with 15 grand worth of mics, 10 grand in pres, 4 grand in clocking and A/D-D/A, and a couple grand in room treatment and design, I'm getting close!!! Not a typical home studio though.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Getting back to the original theme....When I started 4 years ago with MXL mics and Behri gear, I knew it would never happen. Now, with 15 grand worth of mics, 10 grand in pres, 4 grand in clocking and A/D-D/A, and a couple grand in room treatment and design, I'm getting close!!! Not a typical home studio though.

And don't forget the 4 extra years of experience you have now too. If you had the same gear as you have now 4 years ago when you started, would your recording be as good when you started as they are now?

G.

 

[TerraMortim]

yep...That's probably more what gave you better results... the nice gear couldn't hurt, either, but experience is much better than the most high end gear out there.

 

[Beck]

I got a huge bunch of unused Ampex 456 at a thrift store once (about 30 some odd reels)... I guess a guy owned a studio and he must have died or something..They thought it was useless. One of these days, I'll get a tape machine to use them on

Guess how much I paid for them? . . . . 99 cents a piece! I was walking out of that place with a smile on my face wider than the front doors.

Nice deal! Even if you never get around to using them yourself, you may make a small fortune with them since that particular tape is no longer made. Check the post below to see if they are the older or newer formula. You can tell by the box design.

https://homerecording.com/bbs/showpost.php?p=2864227&postcount=68

And back on topic, I agree, experience is the most important factor.

I might have said it in this thread already (I say it now and then)… take someone that thinks their problem is equipment, let them run loose at Abbey Road for two weeks and we'll find they still can’t make a decent recording.

 

[BadBrainz]

It's a poor craftsman that blames his tools.

I got into home recording for two reasons: getting my ideas down for presentation to bandmates/other artists, and to learn the art. I've found that if you keep things simple and invest your time and money wisely, you can turn out some really great stuff. it takes just that, though: TIME and MONEY. How much is up to you.

W.

 

[32-20-Blues]

Depends who the 'favourite artists' that you're trying to emulate are. I can get pretty close to late career Tom Waits. Obviously, with my limited experience and comparatively cheap gear, I can't come close to the sound of a slick, pristine Phil Collins album.

(Which is a great thing, believe me. )

 

[MCI2424]

It's a poor craftsman that blames his tools.

I got into home recording for two reasons: getting my ideas down for presentation to bandmates/other artists, and to learn the art. I've found that if you keep things simple and invest your time and money wisely, you can turn out some really great stuff. it takes just that, though: TIME and MONEY. How much is up to you.

W.

Its a poorer craftsman who uses substandard tools.

Just thought I would throw that in.

 

[DavidK]

Its a poorer craftsman who uses substandard tools.

100% true, but only if the word poorer is strictly used as a fiinancial term.

 

[Obi-Wan zenabI]

Its a poorer craftsman who uses substandard tools.

Just thought I would throw that in.

Woodworking comes to mind when anyone says this. A set of fine woodworking tools for small scale projects can be had for what most recording hobbyists spend, right? You don't need "the yankee workshop" to make nice cabinetry and furniture if you have skills, I think.

When recording, I'm making a product for me and my community, not to compete in a global market. Demos to market my band, and ways to archive and augment things that I do musically. Perhaps also to educate myself about sound and electronics to better my live sound skills. That's it.

Like the woodworker, it's relative. The guy who owned my house before me used the space that is now my studio to build cabinetry. My whole house is done in beautifully matching hand made maple built-ins-- Kitchen, Baths, and Family room. Could he have run a worldwide factory out of there? No. Can I produce international hits in that same space? Only if something went viral by pure chance.

But if I ...erm... 'hone' my skills, I can produce something as beautiful and worthwhile as that cabinetry someday.

 

[isfahani]

um, yeaaaaah.

I think that I have, in fact, made some very well regarded commercial recordings (that is to say, for sale in stores, festivals, and online) in people's living rooms, artists' lofts (or wherever) using a lot of things that would be considered 'home recording' gear in the past 7 years.

But then their expectations, and aesthetics, weren't ever to be to sound like the latest Hannah Montana or Shakira CD. And I probably wouldn't take those jobs, anyways.

Experience wins over gear IMO

 

[happymatty]

i cant equal abby road and never will but i can beat all the cheap studios that are built onto rehersal rooms. and they are like 50 pound an hour, so considering i got my home studio forever its a money saver and gives me a chance to learn new skills. homw studios are brilliant lol.

 

[zazz]

i think that with the new technology available now at resonable prices versus what the beatles had in abbey road in 1963 that technically its feasable to get to the point they were at.

the only thing that gets in the way ...and its a big thing is the range of mikes ..the space and that great hardware ....but it was 1963 !!!

surely didgital technolgy can close the gap.

in the end what it boils down to is that the beatles and george martin are much more in the zone at that point when it all came together ...and they were inspired driven by the expectation from the audience.

that ...digital technology cannot recreate.

but limitation which is what the beatles had can inspire great things....today they might just get lost in the digital soup of just messing around with whats on offer rather than creating something worthwhile.