Home Recording's Dirty Little Secret

[mgjr73]

I'm in it because I love music, I like to make my own and want to produce my music as clearly as I possibly can within the limits of my acquired knowledge and skill (and still learning), using whatever I have and whatever I can afford. I don't see myself spending tons of money on gear. Everything I own are budget stuff but with technology closing the gap, I might "accidentally" turn out something that will rival the big dogs. Who knows. What's important to me is that I'm doing what I love to do... on my own time, of course (I have to wait until after I tuck my daughter to bed).

John's photographer analogy says it best. It's about passion, it's about knowing how to use whatever you have and knowing its limitations and using them to your advantage. And I wholeheartedly, 1000% agree that it's about mastering your craft. So practice, trial and error, and the ability to take criticisms and learning from them are essential.

 

[mgjr73]

One more thing... I do believe in the saying "less is more". It applies to almost everything, including gear. The more gear,software, plugins, whatever you have in your arsenal the more confusing and/or overwhelming it gets. I think creativity works best when you have the least equipment to work with... in other words, you'll do everything to milk every piece of gear you have.

 

[thunderstation]

I never expected "studio quality" from my recordings. it was the only way I could get my songs recorded at my leisure & somewhat inexpensively (that last part wasn't as inexpensive as I thought). Plus I always wanted to try my hand at it...to see if i could figure out how it was done and learn somethings....i'm still figuring out how it's done, but i have learned that more i learn the more I don't know. but i'm really enjoying myself..

 

[villaininwhite]

considering i listen to crappy metal/punk/hardcore on underground labels with no money for production, i'd say my recording ar on par if not exceed the norm for the genre.

I will also say when i record an awesome band with good equipment with well constructed/written songs the recording sound awesome and it is pretty effortless. when a band sucks and is noisey or has crap for gear and poor songs those recordings usually sound like they were done in a garage.

 

[rio452001]

I started recording acoustic guitars etc on a stereo tape deck in the '70s & 80s, then got into 4-track cassette recording in the 1990s, usually just doing demos for myself with a drum machine, although occasionally trying to record live bands. The technique & equipment was pretty crude, and I never equated what I was doing to any sort of "professional" recording-- I could get some ok sounding demos, but that's all they were, and that's all they were intended to be.

Occasionally, we would get the chance to get into a "real" studio and do actual multi-track EP recordings to 2" tape; in one case, we actually went ahead and did a proper master, although we never got around to releasing it. The cost was enormous, I think it added up to $5 to $10k between studio time, engineers, etc (in the early 1990s, I remember it cost $60 just to get a CD burned-- something we now take for granted on any home computer).

I got into recording with a PC using Cubase VST in about 2000, but I had very limited gear and skills, or mastering software or knowledge. I started recording my bands, with real drummers etc, in about 2002, and it was an improvement over 4-track cassette in terms of overall quality, but recording was still a mystery in many ways and it was all I could do, by trial and error, to make demos that were listenable enough to get the idea of what the band was about. But again, there was never any real thought of producing anything "studio quality".

I upgraded my hardware & software substantially starting around 2007, took over a bigger chunk of my basement, and I also began to do more reading and research, as well as trial and error, and I'm finally getting around to a point where I'm just as happy recording on my own gear, as I would to be to go to a "professional" studio. While it probably competes in some respects with professional recordings, in other respects, it's still lacking. But I still don't really think that way-- I tend to think in terms of the overall convenience and cost of the process, balanced against the quality of the finished product, and I am more than happy to live with what I am capable of doing, for present purposes.

 

[buzzard bass]

Gotta agree with what's being said, it's the person behind the console/keyboard that makes or breaks the deal. I mean put Frank Peterson in my little studio for a day and put me in his studio for the same period. His product will be better than mine with no doubt.

 

[HownDawg]

Expectations

I started playing guitar at 14. Over the years I've had so many people tell me that I should be doing something in entertainment. Many years later, I began to slowly purchase gear to perform with as I could afford it (I now had a job, family, etc...). Nothing big or fancy, mics and a p.a. to start with. Somewhere along the way I got the idea in my head that it would be nice to record myself for posterity, you know, something for my kids/grandkids etc... to remember me by. I had no illusions of grandeur, no stars in my eyes. My music is very clean and simple and mostly accoustic. Boy! Did I get the recording bug bad! It has manifested into a second musical hobby. But that's another story Lol!!! When I first started (based on what I'd read) I thought it was entirely possible (and still do) to record demo quality material. As technology progresses I certainly feel it is "possible" (certainly if you have the budget and knowledge) to produce commercial quality recordings. So to answer the question, I chose option 1. No, I did not, at that time, think I would turn myself into an overnight commercial success. For myself it was purely for personal reasons. The fact that I have learned soooo much since then now allows me to occasionally surprise myself (as well as others) with how well some of these projects have turned out. There has however, been a very steep learning curve as well as a tremendous amount of trial and error between then and now.

 

[diggy_dude]

I believe my modest home equipment can be used to produce a record that sounds as good as a commercial record made in a high-end studio.

I do not believe I have the skills to achieve those results with the equipment I have (nor any other equipment) yet.

 

[stainlessbrown]

I interned on tape in the 70's- no real claims to fame (as I've always had a 'day'job)

but it was enough to make me follow the early days of digital, and today it's protrolls and tape- I like the automation capabilities of digital (beats 3 - 4 people manning faders on a 16 track)

and for digital keyboards, DI'd instrumentst, digital works fine- I still prefer tape for vocals, acoustic instruments, and sometimes kick and snare (for the additional headroom)

The 'secret' to home studios (IMHO) is having an acoustically treated room, proper mic technique...etc

and while I don't believe you need to spend 4 figures on gear to get an acceptable sound, there is the reality that cheap/entry gear is just that and low noise/transparent gear costs... so you get what you INVEST... and in some cases it runs into 4 figures

so, yes, I think I can get recordings that are reasonably close to commercial quality (caveat: I send everything out for mastering- a new set of ears? priceless)

 

[Saltine]

I paid for 2 trips into the studio and ran out of money both times and was pretty disappointed with the results. I recorded in my brothers son's home studio and the sound was way better. He has moved so now I am on my own. I amprtty happy with we we are and our music is pretty close but just seems to be missing that last little umph.

 

[shoggoth80]

Well, I figured I would vote. I am a n00b generally to actually recording with a "home studio." I've done some crummy live recordings on tape, through a boombox with a integral mic on it. Sounded garage of course, but it certainly could have sounded worse.

I listen to a lot of old punk rock, aggressive metal, some electronic/industrial, but also a fair grip of oldies, psychobilly... I listen to almost everything really. Different styles of music call for different degrees of production.

I subscribe to the theory that you do not have to have the most expensive gear, or the most polished finish on a track to make good music. But I also take the viewpoint that there is more to music than just the technical ability of those who are performing. That being said, I don't have overly high expectations of how polished an end result should be, or how it will compare to commercial recordings. I just don't care about matching that sort of thing. I care about making it good, but there is a point where something can be "overproduced," ya know? Some of the funnest stuff I have listened to didn't have the highest production values, so to speak. So, at the end of the day, it will be what it will be.

 

[Twinhit]

A really good player, really good instrument, great sounding amp with a 57 mic anywhere near it, you cannot screw it up.

Same for any singer or musician. Big Talent = Big Sound

You can put a dress on a pig , but it is still a pig.

Same goes for turd polishing.

What kind of turd polish do you recommend?

 

[Twinhit]

I made a couple of recordings back in the seventies on a cassette player with an accompanying microphone.
In 2005, I picked up Magix Music Studio 2005 Deluxe - made first album and became a superstar.
I'd like to thank all the little people:

 

[Twinhit]

Msh...that was done in my little bedroom. The drums were GigaStudio. I played all guitars. The bass was mic'd from a cheap little bass amp. Normally I go direct with the bass guitar. More and more, I've been working on trying to do credible direct in recording. Why? Because the setup is fast and the volume level is within reason. Its easier. Most anytime you can do it no matter whats happening in the rest of the house. Even with headphones. Mic'ing a cab is still important however and must be done. For those who record acoustic guitars, me included, get a Taylor with the ES system. The ES system records direct and sounds natural. It doesn't have to be a top end Taylor either, even a used one will do. The ES system has two great sounding dynamic mics built in. The less you have to set up and track, the more you can go direct, the easier your life will be. For instance, I've sold off my tube mic. It was just more to set up. I'm trying to keep this recording thing as simple as I can yet make it sound great at the same time. Lets face it, we're not a paid studio. We have limited time and money. Its not always easy to set up an screw with mics if the kids are screaming. My whole mantra is to help the little guy who lives in a small apartment in the Bronx, with limited space, time, money and ability to use volume, to get super tracks and mixes. This guy in the Bronx really can't treat his room, maybe hang some moving company blankets around the room but that is all. The only way I know of to band-aid untreated room resonance is use a decent software parametric EQ and notch it out. SG has mentioned this technique before. Another advantage to going direct is room resonance is no longer a factor. Its about doing more with less.

Many home reckers want to sound as good as they can, with quick and simple techniques, without breaking the bank. Thats where I'm at. There is all this stuff out there about mic, mic, mic, this and that. I recommend a small group of general purpose non tube mics for simplicity. Not a crazy selection. Again, this is an area where home recording can get out of control from all the hype in forums and advertising. Newbies think they have to have a ton of low end mics based all they read on forums like these. Most of the time you'll end up using your "go to" mics. The trick is finding these "go to" mics early on and use the balance of your cash to get a better something else.

Bob

Seems to me a lot of research is the best medicine for choosing this or that.

On the subject of microphones:
I think I will ultimately agree with the "General Non-Tube selection" which includes dynamic and condenser types in omni, cardioid, supercardioid and hypercardioid and figure 8 polar patterns.

Tube and Ribbon mics should be pretty carefully chosen.

At this point I don't know exactly how to go about choosing a mic.
As near as I can tell, there are bright, dark, warm and cold variants.
Then comes the question of pre-amps Solid State or Tube and when to
use which?
Then comes compressors, limiters and gates (if in the signal chain).

the more that's added to the signal, the better the chances are for getting a good or bad sound.

It seems an equipment selection chart would sure help give a lot of people a general idea of what this mic sound like with that pre-amp through this compressor and that EQ for that particular voice.
For sure it would cost a NASA size budget and manpower to develop a comprehensive chart like that.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

What kind of turd polish do you recommend?

Colace works for me.

G.

 

[moresound]

What kind of turd polish do you recommend?

You can use what SSG recommends but if you wait till the turd dries just plain old soap/water and elbow grease works just fine.

 

[Sky Blue Lou]

...a pot party.

I probably won't read this whole thread but that made me lol.

lou

 

[Sky Blue Lou]

I believe Frank Zappa and Todd Rundgren recorded "at home" but you wouldnt think of it that way because they had a lot of the same gear available as most commercial studios.

The biggest difference is that they knew how to use it.


lou

 

[Twinhit]

You can use what SSG recommends but if you wait till the turd dries just plain old soap/water and elbow grease works just fine.

Seems kinda strange.... SSG recommended turd softener when we are talking turd polish.

That's kinda like asking what's the best car wax and some wise guy comes along and suggests fabric softener.

I think we'll just skip it. No tellin' what'll happen when the Colace'd turd hits the buffer.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Seems kinda strange.... SSG recommended turd softener when we are talking turd polish.

Well, that's technically true, but I look at it this way. The Colace "greases the skids", so to speak, allowing things to pass more smoothly. In that way, it works like a polish.

[TMI]And trust me, when you're taking the Colace in order to counteract other pills which tend to turn turds into cinderblocks as hard as a mix smashed to a 0dB crest factor, even with the Colace, there's nothing "soft" about them.[/TMI]

G.