X
XLR
______
Insightful and practical advice, well said.
X
XLR
______
Miroslav, if you want to engage me in an argument you'll have to keep any post you make shorter than the post of mine you're replying to.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Stop trying to stir up arguments/attitudes with your sophomoric jabs and insights.
Short enough?
Short enough?
ez_willis
.
ez_willis
.
not quite. little shorter, please.
W
wendellkdotcom
New member
thanks, everyone
Folks,
Thanks so much for all these suggestions. I want to generally respond to grim traveller's questions and simultaneously tell you what I'm tentatively thinking as I try to aggregate the chorus of conversation here.
My gut is telling me that I want time and space at home to do my voice, guitar, and piano tracks. I think I can get great performances on all 3 of those if working on my own time, no pressure of a clock in a studio. I may need to invest in a good large-diaphragm mic for my vocals, but I think I can do the guitar and piano with my NT5s.
However, think I want to record the drums/bass and horns in a big studio room. I can't engineer that at home without significant investment in equipment and doing a lot of reading/studying/learning as an engineer. And I'd hate to "waste" great performances by crappy engineering.
So my question, if you'll permit me another: will it sound weird to have the drums/bass/horns recorded in a big room and then do my guitar, vocals, and pianos in a small space at my house? Can a good mix engineer bring it all together to sit well in the mix?
As a general response to the questions about growing as an audio engineer vs. making a great record, I'd like to do both ultimately, but my priority now is making the best record. Also, I appreciated the comment about how working with a professional engineer in a studio will give me a benchmark against which to measure my own recordings in the future, as well as insight into how to engineer things and what equipment makes a difference.
So maybe I will:
1) use a studio and pro engineer for drums/bass/horns; 2) add my guitar, piano, layers at home; 3) put money into a good large-diaphragm for vocals at home;4) hire a great engineer to mix the whole project.
That leaves out the recording of cello, violin, accordion and other bells and whistles; but couldn't I get away with doing those at home with small-diaphragm mics?
Okay. That's my thought process at this point. What do you think? Again, thanks everyone for the insights. I really appreciate it.
Wendell
------------------------------
http://www.wendellk.com/
Folks,
Thanks so much for all these suggestions. I want to generally respond to grim traveller's questions and simultaneously tell you what I'm tentatively thinking as I try to aggregate the chorus of conversation here.
My gut is telling me that I want time and space at home to do my voice, guitar, and piano tracks. I think I can get great performances on all 3 of those if working on my own time, no pressure of a clock in a studio. I may need to invest in a good large-diaphragm mic for my vocals, but I think I can do the guitar and piano with my NT5s.
However, think I want to record the drums/bass and horns in a big studio room. I can't engineer that at home without significant investment in equipment and doing a lot of reading/studying/learning as an engineer. And I'd hate to "waste" great performances by crappy engineering.
So my question, if you'll permit me another: will it sound weird to have the drums/bass/horns recorded in a big room and then do my guitar, vocals, and pianos in a small space at my house? Can a good mix engineer bring it all together to sit well in the mix?
As a general response to the questions about growing as an audio engineer vs. making a great record, I'd like to do both ultimately, but my priority now is making the best record. Also, I appreciated the comment about how working with a professional engineer in a studio will give me a benchmark against which to measure my own recordings in the future, as well as insight into how to engineer things and what equipment makes a difference.
So maybe I will:
1) use a studio and pro engineer for drums/bass/horns; 2) add my guitar, piano, layers at home; 3) put money into a good large-diaphragm for vocals at home;4) hire a great engineer to mix the whole project.
That leaves out the recording of cello, violin, accordion and other bells and whistles; but couldn't I get away with doing those at home with small-diaphragm mics?
Okay. That's my thought process at this point. What do you think? Again, thanks everyone for the insights. I really appreciate it.
Wendell
------------------------------
http://www.wendellk.com/
kcearl
I see deaf people
just remember, if you want a pizza, NY state has the best 
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Should not be a problem at all for artificial ambience to be added to your tracks, and then blended in with whatever natural room sounds you get at an outside facility.
You may want to keep your home tracks as dry as possible then...though not necessarily any *rule*.
You might want to first find a studio for your outside work and discuss your goals and also ask that engineer about any recommendations for your home studio tracks...
...but even if you just go ahead lay down some decent/clean home tracks...if the engineer is good, it should not be any problem making it all work together.
(You won't be the first to split up your recording sessions between home and outside.)
Actually...you may want to first do the drum/rhythm tracks and then let everything follow them...so you might end up in the outside studio first....?
X
XLR
______
Good 2nd post Wendell. I think the general approach you're describing is a smart one, if you acoustically treat your home recording space adequately and if you stay flexible about which things you record at home and which you get outside help with.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
I originally had it down to two words......
just remember, if you want a pizza, NY state has the best
You probably like it with extra, EXTRA cheese!
Eh?
kcearl
I see deaf people
[video=youtube;<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/EL2Nlpsw0qQ&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/EL2Nlpsw0qQ&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>]video[/video]
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
That's great!
Hey...if it gets you through the night!
D
dintymoore
Guest
Buy some Neumann mics, at least a U87 and a pair of KM84's. There's probably nothing you could do that would have as big an impact on your total outcome (gear wise) that would compare to that. The majority of the songs you've heard from pro's were recorded with Neumann mics.
In all my gear buying, nothing made as big a difference as buying my Neumanns.
I'd buy everything used unless it's unavailable used.
I could sell my Neumanns for many times what I paid for them and make several thousand. Everything I bought from Yamaha, Behringer, etc was a loss, it all went down in value, so in a way Neumanns are the cheapest mics to use.
X
XLR
______
Unless of course the U87 doesn't turn out to be as good on his voice as, say, an SM7. Or an SM57. Or...
Won't argue about the KM84s.
Won't argue about the KM84s.
N
newcomputeruser
New member
what was the limit the first time around
I would say you need to get more experience first.
Some in music production, but also in music business.
What held you back last time ? Why would spending a lot of money fix that this time? That would be where you need to put it. I doubt that money was the real problem. The people part of the biz is just as important as being able to sing or play an instrument.
I would spend about the same amount again and get the best demo you can. Then try to get signed with a label (unlikely) or else find a way to market it and yourself to make a profit.
Guy in the washpost was quite successful and gave his method. The key is marketing and relationships. You have to have them and you need time to build them. google their archives.
You might hve the next "thriller" but if your name isn't mikey jack then nobody is going to sign you or buy the cd.
spend the money on an education in the music biz, and in learning any other musical skills including recording that you may need. books are cheap. community college courses are cost effective. it is way too easy to just dump money into somebody elses wallet and get no real value for it.
I would say you need to get more experience first.
Some in music production, but also in music business.
What held you back last time ? Why would spending a lot of money fix that this time? That would be where you need to put it. I doubt that money was the real problem. The people part of the biz is just as important as being able to sing or play an instrument.
I would spend about the same amount again and get the best demo you can. Then try to get signed with a label (unlikely) or else find a way to market it and yourself to make a profit.
Guy in the washpost was quite successful and gave his method. The key is marketing and relationships. You have to have them and you need time to build them. google their archives.
You might hve the next "thriller" but if your name isn't mikey jack then nobody is going to sign you or buy the cd.
spend the money on an education in the music biz, and in learning any other musical skills including recording that you may need. books are cheap. community college courses are cost effective. it is way too easy to just dump money into somebody elses wallet and get no real value for it.
N
newcomputeruser
New member
I dunno...$2k for a week's worth of tracking...???...maybe in a smaller studio, but that might only be a slight cut above what he's able to already do on his own?
Sounded to me like he was considering a high-end facility...and that's going to be more than $2k for a week, not to mention the session players, not to mention the mixing and finally the mastering, plus any promo/marketing costs.
Yup...that will chew up his budget.
But the key to the right answer has to do with what the OP has in mind for the long-term, and will he have more $$$ to spend down the road if he wants/needs to do another project, or is this going to be a single, all-or-nothing shot...???
He hasn't really stated any of that yet.
Me...I just don't see good odds in the all-or-nothing approach unless you are already a well established local/regional artist and all you need is a kick-ass album to present to a record co and they'll take it from there.
So…I kinda like the “investment” approach…which means build up your studio and you can play/record for a long time at minimal cost later on.
Also…you really don’t need to track in a million dollar room to get good results…that’s been proven over and over…but it doesn’t hurt.
+1
best advice on this thread
as to studios:
many churches income are down. they have space and some even have good recording equipment. make a deal to rent it cheap when not in use or maybe even trade musical performance for space use.
there are many ways to make good recordings without burning money. todays "home" gear blows away the analog "pro" stuff i used to use. especially the mikes , but everythign else too.
N
newcomputeruser
New member
+ 1/2
its everything. the room is the start
and if its bad you got nothing.
there are other venues you can get cheaper than studios.
churches may rent unused (in time dimension during the week) space and some have good equipment too.
N
newcomputeruser
New member
top photogs can use a 3MPxl point and shoot and get better pix than any amateur with a full kit of the top end "pro" gear.
Pro has more to do with how you use it than what you used.
Give a pro better gear and he will get slightly better results faster.
N
newcomputeruser
New member
look at the pros
the music mags are frequently showing some stars home studio. expensive gear but a lot of the rooms are no better than where i live.
The OP did ask...
"Could I get away with doing a lot of it at home and hiring a really great mix engineer to make it sound good at the end of the process?"
...so I don't see that it's so obvious that the only answer is "No, go to an outside studio".
And I disagree that million dollar rooms are always a necessity for good results, not to mention that just because you are IN a million dollar room doesn't mean you always want the sound of that room in every track/recording. That's why a lot of the big-name arti$t$ sometimes bounce from studio to studio, so they can get different flavors for different things...but that gets very expensive.
If your space is decent, you can get great recordings...if it is "so-so" or not perfect for some things...you simply take the room out of the equation and then add your room ambience during the mix process.
Also, "fun" and "good results" certainly CAN and SHOULD go hand-in-hand, and I think the OP has already proven that with his current album project which he tracked in his own studio space.
There are MANY guys (even here on these forums
Some even run successful commercial studios out of their less-than-million-dollar spaces.
The home project studio certianly CAN be a great place to record....with the right gear.
the music mags are frequently showing some stars home studio. expensive gear but a lot of the rooms are no better than where i live.