How do high-end studios work?

BillC15

BillC15

New member
This is sort of a general question, in that as much information as possible is appreciated. Now I've come to learn how much different home recording is from professional recording. I'm quite sure it's much more than some simple usb interface into a laptop that most home studios use these days. So more out of curiosity than of a problem in need of solving, I've been wondering how the actual audio signals in high-end studios that record bands with major labels are actually recorded. Is it just a huge multitrack recorder? If so how is it mixed if mixing is done with a DAW such as pro tools in a computer? Or is it digital at all? In other words, in a standard professional recording studio, through what piece(s) of equipment does the audio signal travel to be actually recorded? Then, where and how is this recorded audio then transferred to be mixed? Also, how is this final mix sent to tape if this is usually the end result? I appreciate any "input" you have, pun intended. ;)
 
First step is the engineer and mixing talent and their ears and experience. Add the producer and their goals. Add the musical talent or artist, and quality instruments.

Next, high end microphones and mic preamps, desks, monitoring.

Quality A-D converters. These usually work at the highest possible bit rates and kHz rates to ensure the digital signal is as high quality as possible.

Digital recording device.

Quality effects.

Then the track passes to the mastering talent (and through more effects and monitors) to make it fit for radio.

It's not always like this. But it often is.
 
These usually work at the highest possible bit rates and kHz rates to ensure the digital signal is as high quality as possible.
Click to expand...
Sidenote: Around 70-80% of full-time professionals work at the target rate -- The highest possible sample rates are rarely used (and rarely the 'best sounding').
 
It's not the gear - that helps a some but that's not at all the weakest link in home studios. Most gear these days is at least competent. The days of "If only I could afford a..." are gone - there are no more excuses.

The biggest differences between amateur and professional recordings are (starting with the most important)...

Great songs.
Great arrangements.
Great performances.
Great performers.
Great sounds.
Great producers and engineers.

With the producers and engineers it's almost all in the ears. The producers know what a professional recording should sound like and the engineers know mic technique, mic selection, preamp selection, EQ etc. and it's all about what sounds right.

The technology that makes the most difference for home recordists is the room treatment, bass trapping, and monitor speakers. The monitor speakers don't have to be really high-end but you should invest at least a thousand dollars. Have a pair of limited bandwidth comparison speakers too (I use cheap computer speakers).

The habit that makes the most difference is selecting reference CDs and doing frequent comparisons with the mix (with the CD volume brought DOWN to match a reasonable mix volume). Don't aim to replicate the other mix, just make it so that your mix would sound correct alongside these other mixes on a compilation album. When you've trained your ears, you won't need to do this so much but when you're starting it helps avoid the normal traps of excessive bass or excessive brightness and helps you hear the difference between the EQ and mic selection on your tracks compared to the professionals.
 
In addition to what has been already said, workflow is often very different.

For a lot of rock bands the band will be set up to play live, but with amps in iso booths so the only sources making noise into the drum mics are drums and vocals (although the singer could be in a booth as well)

A good take (or more) will then have all other parts than drums removed, and these will be edited lightly or very heavily (depending on drummers ability and desire result) by an assistant in another smaller (ie cheaper) room. The band will continue to do the same for all the songs.
Then other instruments will be tracked over the cleaned up drum takes. Lastly vocals will be recorded, often working phrase by phrase until a "perfect" take can be comped.
For a major label project these tracks may then be mixed by a different engineer in a another studio.


Other things that i have noticed are standardisation and documentation. Assistants will document which mics were used through which equipment, their positioning, so that any take created again (to an extent). Also as processes are standardised any in house staff will understand whats going on.

IMO and my 2 pence and all that :D
 
cool information, i just love watching a studio session on video for these kind of things. But from what I gathered form all this, there really is no standard for equipment (and I don't mean brand, I mean type). in high end studios. Would that be correct?
 
Also, I guess what the meat of my question pertains to is when the signal is actually recorded with some sort of expensive digital multitrack device, how is this recorded audio then visualized so that it may be edited and mixed with pro tools, for example, if a computer is not doing the actual recording? Can they hook up a monitor to the digital multitrack? Is the multitrack a computer in itself that will run pro tools?
 
BillC15 said:
Also, I guess what the meat of my question pertains to is when the signal is actually recorded with some sort of expensive digital multitrack device, how is this recorded audio then visualized so that it may be edited and mixed with pro tools, for example, if a computer is not doing the actual recording? Can they hook up a monitor to the digital multitrack? Is the multitrack a computer in itself that will run pro tools?
Click to expand...

If the studio uses digital recording, yes mostly is a computer running protools HD or simiar, if not an analog tape recorder(s), or both. Its like a home studio, with more money, better sounding rooms, and nicer coffee :)
 
where I work we have two monitors - one from the computer which is used for final editing and then a monitor from an hd3 board which is mostly used for tweaking pre recording and playback.
 
Your initial recording device will either be a computer (running PT or other DAW software) or standalone recorder (like Radar or Alesis HD-24XR) if recording digitally, or a multitrack tape deck if recording analog. In some cases a combination of these devices are used.
 
Most studios these day record to either Protools, Nuendo,Radar or some type od digital devise.Really, rare to go to tape unless you have a great amount of cash to spend and time and are blindly going for "that sound". I believe you would find in most cases the signal chain as follows( or close to this). Mic,preamp(other than console or DAW preamp, in a lot of cases a rack of nice mic pre's/vintage/custom ones. Then into nice ad/ converter like an Apogee, then into computer. Yes, of course engineers with tallent,great rooms, all the stuff most know and dont need to hear.
 
jmorris said:
Most studios these day record to either Protools, Nuendo,Radar or some type od digital devise.Really, rare to go to tape unless you have a great amount of cash to spend and time and are blindly going for "that sound".
Click to expand...

I, and many others around here, use tape in my home studio. It's much cheaper than a supercomputer, two wide-screen LCD monitors, three interfaces and a control surface, and a lot more fun. Not to mention "that sound."
 
avieth said:
I, and many others around here, use tape in my home studio.
Click to expand...
Please... no one bite. Off topic...

...and I don't think I could take yet another analog vs. digital thread so soon... I'm still pretty sore from the last one.
 
pohaku said:
Your initial recording device will either be a computer (running PT or other DAW software) or standalone recorder (like Radar or Alesis HD-24XR) if recording digitally, or a multitrack tape deck if recording analog. In some cases a combination of these devices are used.
Click to expand...

If a standalone recorder is used like the examples you've given, how is it possible to mix properly with a decent DAW like pro tools? I know it must involve some way of transferring audio data into a visual format on an lcd monitor so using pro tools is possible, but how can this be done with audio that's only been recorded on a standalone multitrack console?
 
The stand alone recorders record digitally to hard disk. You can then dump the digital files into your computer via AES, SPDIF, FW or DVD to edit and mix.
 
lol wow no one really answered this kids question. So I will.

Well some studios record artist to 24 track 2 inch tape machines that they used before computers. With these machines you get a sound that gives you a much different quality then digital recording. Anyway with that all studios do is hook up a big analog mixer to the tape machine and use it to mix the tracks almost like a control surface.

Now when studios record right to protools they usually (not always) use again a big analog desk into an I/O that every track on the desk is outputted to so you can mix the audio signal from the desk and also record using the desks and other features. preamps

Some studios even record to tape first to get the signature tape sound and then send it back into pro tools for mixing.

I hope that answers your question a little better then these bozos.

(sorry for the grammar I am not in school so I thought I would let it slide but ive been criticized before so heres the disclaimer)
 
BillC15 said:
If a standalone recorder is used like the examples you've given, how is it possible to mix properly with a decent DAW like pro tools? I know it must involve some way of transferring audio data into a visual format on an lcd monitor so using pro tools is possible, but how can this be done with audio that's only been recorded on a standalone multitrack console?
Click to expand...

If an analog recorder is used, it is used for "bed" tracks and dumped into Pro-Tools. Pro studios equipment choices depend on the industry they are serving. Almost all big time producers use the same recording studios, demand equipment that they know and also portability/compatibility. The film industry has different requirements than the music industry. The major difference between home recording and pro recording is the ability to record any project, big or small, and deliver a product that satifies the client, is delivered on time and in budget. That is the only end goal. In order to satify these requirements, the recording environment is professionaly built, equipment spec'ed and constantly added to ,and the engineers picked by the producer. A pro studio is generally a rent-all utility and is indepenent of the engineer. If you don't have a competent producer with his favorite staff of well known perfomers, you could rent Abbey Road with your engineer and get a lousy recording. The pro studio could care less if your performance sucks or your engineer sucks. They make $$$ renting a turnkey operation.

Then there are some that are owned and run by an engineer who takes pride in his/her work and it is up to you whether you like their work.

Then there are Pretengineers who are hacks, have a ton of $$$ and just like to think they are great engineers.

In the end, it is all up to how the project is handled and by who. There are hundreds of stories of bands that go to a big studio and get a crappy recording BUT they are always "on their own" with no real producer and trust that the house engineer is great. That is why there are so many stories.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top