Home Recording's Dirty Little Secret

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob's Mods
  • Start date Start date

What were your home recording expectations vs commercial high end studio recordings?


  • Total voters
    1,318
I began thinking I could make pro sounding recordings. I have a very basic set up. Korg Karma work station, pre amp, in mixer, out mixer, condenser mic, Cubase LE and 24/ 96 sound card. I've listened to different types of music over a long period of time. Up until the mid 90's or so, pro records weren't that high of quality. The quality of recording has to do with what you're trying to record and how much time you want to put into it. It also has to do with the signal before it hits the DAW or whatever you're recording with. While it may not be possible to completely get that sparkling studio sound, I'm finding if you put enough patience and care into mixing and experimenting, you can get decently close. If I can do it with my little ghetto rig, I'm sure with some higher quality mics and pre amps, I could come even closer. I'd say the most important thing to good recording is having the ear for music. I'm no expert though. I'm just a beginner.

While I don't have a very nice set up, the actual instruments I use are pretty nice. Aside from the Korg, I record with an Ibanez RG 7 string, ESP (not LTD) Viper, Yamaha 5 string Bass, Rogue acoustic (hey it sounds nice), and old Boogie head with a JCM 800 cab.

I agree. Yes I find home recorded stuff lacks the sparkle of the best commercial recordings no matter how hard I try to recreate that, it is spending some time tweaking your mix that gets you close to some really good commercial recordings. I find that working with the bass track and vocals takes the most time and care to get them to fit right in the pocket. Bass is especially time consuming.
The quality of your gear, the quality of your plugs and your ability to use them along with your ears and mixing ability plus a dash of patience and going over your work mulitple times are key. There are no shortcuts. Unlike a well decked out studio with very experienced techs who have learned to work fast with the best gear, we, at home have to take a longer amount of time and fuss with our mixes more to get them to fit in the pocket. This formula seems to work for me.
 
Well, going back to when I was still a teen, that would be dumping my two top-loading Akai cassette decks with simulated wood panels and my Radio Shack mixer for my first multitrack, TEAC 144. :D

Mic technique and Tracking came pretty easy in the beginning, but I had apprenticed in a TV studio, so I had learned the ins and outs of AV by age 18.

The biggest early technical breakthroughs that I would say gave me “That sound” came a couple years later working in a commercial recording studio. Those had to do with the composite mix; learning to use EQ, compression, and reverb/delay to create a sense of space that would convince the listener they were somewhere else. At that point I was starting to grasp how to give instruments their own space with panning and EQ, while at the same time creating a blend with reverb/delay and compression.

I was obsessed with the stereo image, particularly blending everything to sound that it was in the same time and place (same room).

My fevered brain began viewing everything around me in terms of mixing and blending. I can remember one day standing at the kitchen sink washing my hands and the hot and cold handles suddenly became level controls for two different signals… one hot and one cold, with the spout being the output (ta-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa). I stood there for a long time (much too long really for someone that didn’t do drugs). I kept mixing the two temperatures, thinking, “That’s a bit too warm” or “that’s a bit cold.”

Then… eureka! Probably the biggest “Hello!” moment was when I extended this line of thinking to draw from our other senses to understand what makes music pleasing to the listener. I thought about all the ingredients in a recipe as being individual tracks blending into a delicious dinner. I looked at individual flowers in a vase and thought of each as a track or instrument and how they blended into one bouquet, taking note of how the arrangement resembled the panorama of the stereo spectrum. And of course, I thought about the female form most of all… how it wasn’t just one thing, but a combination of the hair, the eyes, the lips, and the curves that blended into one walking, talking hit record for the eyes. :cool:

I know this is all abstract and won’t help sell any products, but my greatest leaps in creating professional recordings were conceptual… changes in the way I thought about what I was doing and how each of our senses has a similar way of interpreting beauty and pleasure. I was only about 20 or 21, yet nothing since has come close to these “revelations” in impacting my approach to the recording and reproduction of music.

:)

<Neo>.Wow.</Neo>
 
Thank you

Wow, this thread is amazing. Simply amazing. I recently just joined HR but with just this one thread I think I've learned more than I have in a long time. The way it progressed from the analog debate ALL THEY WAY to The Beatles discussion. Thank you. Way to go Bob! great thread.

I picked answer 3, but now after spending time in a room trying to record exactly what I hear, it seems a lot harder than it sounds. But I'll find the right sound! I will. I think every possible answer you might have on how to make your sound better might be able to be answered in this one thread alone. at least the tracking part of it (mixing is a whole different ball game). I know I have inferior gear compared to the pros but one thing I can say makes an engineer a good engineer is he always uses every tool he has at his disposal to make the best possible recording. I think sometimes we just have to think outside the box (literally) to realize that. we get so caught up in this material world. Ditch the advertisement, lets worry about mic placement or the room instead. Then maybe, just maybe, we can multitrack 7 different guitars and find out How High the Moon really is!!! And all 7 of those guitars would sound amazing! thats right! All 7!

I read a lot of post stating that we have surpassed the quality that is needed to record something better sounding than Sgt. Pepper. I know there is the artistic and production side of it but I'm strictly talking recording wise. I mean just realizing that we, the home wreckers, have access to that is inspirational! i'll hunt up and down from coast to coast and record anyone with the talent and heart that wants to put out a record. I know there's so much talent out there that just has not been discovered or at least don't have the money to pay for recordings. I know we all have to put food on the table, but I think we all know we can make a difference with the knowledge we have on recording if we just lend a hand to the striving artist. I guess what i'm trying to say is there's strength in numbers, and as home wreckers we can show people that WE can sound just as good or even better than whats getting airplay this days. Whether were all here to expand our hobby or our career the possibilities are endless when it comes to reaching a 'commercial' sound. Yea there's different genres, but lets look past that, this is art not civil engineering. We have the tools to express everything we want to say at a commercial level. so lets dish it out like there's no tomorrow!!
Hip-Hip, Horray!!!

With just a little help from our friends...
 
a lot of bands i listen to have recorded their own material in their home studios. i dig the "indie" and "low-fi" sound, so i am actually happy with the quality of recordings i have achieved with my own set up.

it doesn't sound like the latest, million-dollar cd from metallica or w/e, but i can live with that.

in fact, i encourage bands to set their own little studios up and record their own music because it makes them better musicians, allows them the freedom to take the time to experiment with recordings (which is great for creativity), and they can save a lot of money.

plus, i hate to say it, but the "presets" on mastering suites do really spice up your tracks nicely lol
 
my "low-fi" home studio album sounds better, IMO, than Death Magnetic, but that's for reasons already understood by the audio community.
 
I think weve all dreamed about copying our favourite artists, but then realised how far we were from them ( in every aspect) May I sound a little negative. Maybe if u keep it digital.. but recording acoustics and live... that requires great skills, and practice both sides of the desk

its not how it sounds, its what you record. Start obsessing at how wonderful would sound if I only had... ( please fill in here any pre, interface or toy u want ) and u ll lose main subject , which is music, feeling, and still mistery to me

Recording has teached me how focused u have to be to make a good ( not great ) session and how often I suck

Its kind of tragic, then u have to mix it!

My 5cents, put time on it (playing, recording it again ) and dont spend too much money if u dont have an acoustics treated room.

Then u allways have that friend who plays better and without a lot of your gear, the guy makes it.
 
bass thing

I agree. Yes I find home recorded stuff lacks the sparkle of the best commercial recordings no matter how hard I try to recreate that, it is spending some time tweaking your mix that gets you close to some really good commercial recordings. I find that working with the bass track and vocals takes the most time and care to get them to fit right in the pocket. Bass is especially time consuming.
The quality of your gear, the quality of your plugs and your ability to use them along with your ears and mixing ability plus a dash of patience and going over your work mulitple times are key. There are no shortcuts. Unlike a well decked out studio with very experienced techs who have learned to work fast with the best gear, we, at home have to take a longer amount of time and fuss with our mixes more to get them to fit in the pocket. This formula seems to work for me.


I use to spend time with bass..couldnt get the sound, but try passing the bass signal via a comp before it reaches DAW, everything works better , low frequencies are hard to manage. and with the voice, u only need a good singer
 
Frankly, Some of the finest recordings i have heard are "non-professional". I hate that overcompressed hammered sound that much of the industry has turned to.

With time and patience and individual can turn out top notch recordings that to me sound better than most of the commercial stuff hitting the market.
 
Much depends on what the end goal is. Im not going to pay 2 grand a day for a studio and engineer to do demos, or even initial EP releases.

For demos and Eps work I use a korg 16 track, Using an Audio Technica at3060 condenser. backing master tracks off on cd, or onto a sony Dat machine for archival. We have an assorted group of Shure Dynamic mics, monster cable, Samson Headphones and M-Audio monitors. I bring in the compressor for vocals, but thats about it. the A-T condenser isnt a Neumann, but demos arent Sgt Peppers either. Actually an Audio Technica 30 series is quite a fine condenser, my only wish is that it would have a multiple pattern.

Anyway, thats my portable rig. I use it to get about 6 songs from a possible band, give it a listen, pass it around, then look for club dates if it flies. In that event, I work with my producer to make a nice mixdown for the bands to have Cds for their shows.

Anxious for critique or comments. -Doc
 
i picked option 2 because i dont really know what Im doing...

I inherited sonar studio 2004 a few years back on a mates old desktop, stuck a couple of pre-recorded loops on it then that was it......never thought much of it


fast forward to a few months ago, met the talent scout who introduced vanilla ice, amongst others, to the world (I kid you not lol!) and after a few beers i let him hear some of my "early" attempts...he said it was good, i could construct a song...that was enough for me..

sold some motorbike stuff...bought a keystation,a bass, a guitar, a mic, and the latest and greatest sonar, and decided as im not working to do something constructive..

will it ever sound as polished as the professionals? I couldnt care...if it was that good or i had that much confidence in it id take it to professionals to get made...until then Im close to finishing my first track, have written a few songs to record next, i practise one or other of the disciplines for a few hours every day and read as much as i can on websites like this...

and its all thoroughly enjoyable...:D
 
I always felt that the music would take life from the sound of the recordings. I've always loved listening to demos, so I kinda saw everything I did as a demo, and I knew I'd be happy if my demo's sounded better than most others. I've seen bands go into a local "pro" studio, pay $5,000 and come out with something that doesn't sound as good as what I do at home.
 
The big lesson here seems to me to be that a ton of gear and software is promoted as sounding as good as the greatest studio stuff that ever was and yet it still takes some work and time and skill to make it sound reasonably like those top tier bands that were recorded in decked out studios. The impression I get from the advertising is that all home studio priced goodies will get you there. In reality, it ain't so easy. For instance, I'd love to sound just like some of those early Foreigner recordings done in the 70's. They were top notch recordings at the time. It just ain't so easy sounding THAT good at my level. I do sound good however. Just not like that. I'm happy where I'm at however. The cost of taking it up to the next level is not worth it.
 
Are we not comparing two different leagues here? The success of home recording should not always be measured by commercial recordings.

I mean, just because I buy pots and pans for my kitchen doesn't mean that my cooking should be compared to the world's top most restaurants and chefs. Just because I buy tools to fix my car doesn't mean that my mechanic skills should be compared to NASCAR pit crews.

It only means that I want to try it out for myself or perhaps save some money. The oceans of cheap gear has indeed enabled us to take on a new (somewhat) affordable hobby. Sure, good "pro sound" is a goal that we can work toward if we wish. But I wouldn't go away frustrated just because your homemade recordings don't rank among the best on the planet.

It's only a hobby.
 
I started very slowly. Beginning with plugging a guitar into my computer and recording in Goldwave around 8 years ago; and now I have a decent setup where my only limitation is my own skills.

So I never had any preconceived idea of how I my recordings would compare to commercial records because I spent my time dabbling with what I had.
 
I never really thought about any of it. I am 56 and been a musician since I was 16, but never got into recording until about a year ago just for the fun of it. But now, I want to make the best recordings I can. I now with I would have started this years ago as I have found out there is sooooooooooo much to learn and thx to a lot of folks here have helped me tremendously.
 
I picked option 2

I picked option 2..........because in my opinion you dont need AMAZING QAULITY to make a badass song. Just listen to some of the unsigned home artists or bands on myspace that have learned the ropes of recording. There sound quality to even a trained ear is really good. Also if people that are recording to achieve a pro sound quality and absolutley nothing else aka its gonna be absolutley perfect no matter what...................personnally just my opinion again........THEY ARE WAY TO PICKY. I believe you should Spend more time creating music/making it sound as good as you can with what you got within your abilities as a songwriter...........if you start to over achieve then who knows hell maybe a month or so will pass by and all you will have to show is ONE song that is ABSOLUTELY PERFECT versus A FEW SONGS THAT SOUND VERY VERY GOOD/ perfect to the other 95% of people who dont record muic. In all reality the other 95% of people would probably barely noticed a difference between the two.


cheers
 
Everyone's reply is spot on. They are all correct. It is true I am fussy. It has been a hinderance to song writing but good for the technical side of things. I set my sights high in the beginning only because I thought it was possible not knowing any better. I found I was greatly challanged and slugged it out to where song writing has suffered. After years of wrestling with the challange of trying to squeeze the last drop of quality out of my home recordings and understand the technical side of the equation I am finally satisfied and have started putting the time into song writing now.
 
Great Thread

...no, I never thought a guest room soundproofed with quilts would equal a professional recording studio.

But I have a great time recording at home...so much fun, and so good for the mind and spirit.

For me, I've tried to minimize reflections and intrusive sounds...tried to use good gear and mics that are within my budget...try to use new(er) strings on my guitars...and try to arrange time that fits in with my family.

I know it's not pro. But it's mine! And I still get that excited feeling when I hit the 'record' button.
 
I read a lot of post stating that we have surpassed the quality that is needed to record something better sounding than Sgt. Pepper. I know there is the artistic and production side of it but I'm strictly talking recording wise. I mean just realizing that we, the home wreckers, have access to that is inspirational!
It's been a while since I first gave my response to this thread and haven't kept up with the multitude of replies that came long after, but that's what happens with threads that refuse to die. So I apologize if I am regurgitating something that has already been said. BUT...

I have to take issue with the opinion that home recording has surpassed the quality of gear used at Abbey Road in the late 60s. Sure, this can be true if we want to spend almost as much as they spent on the gear for Abbey Road, but the idea that the average - or even most above average - home recording setups are superior in *quality* is baloney.

Modern digital technology has given us better *capacity* in the form of number of tracks, automation capability, processing options (in the form of plugs) and so forth. And the global economy and mass production techniques have given us LDC mics one-tenth the cost of what were commonplace back in the 60s. And that's all mostly good.

But if anyone thinks that any ol' entry-level MXL or AT condenser plugged into a basic mAudio or Presonus interface or Mackie mixer and processed via Izotope Ozone or even a Waves bundle is going to be anywhere near the *quality* of the mics, preamps, mixer channels and processors typically used back then is sadly mistaken.

The number of bells and whistles we have available doesn't increase the quality of audio gear or it's potential performance any more than standard power windows, cruise control and built-in DVD player make a Kia minivan the quality of a vintage Volvo.

G.
 
Back
Top