is expensive gear that important?

[noisedude]

Not at all. Some of the best recordings ever were done in a living room with behringer gear. Led Zeppelin, Steely Dan, Stones, Beatles, you name it. I can't think of one truly "classic" album that wasn't recorded with stuff that was purchased at Radio Shack.

If you have crap gear and you can't get pro-quality results, you're doing something wrong.

I don't agree with that. Top class pre-amps will have a smoother and more clear high and mid range, as with with top quality AD/DA converters. Most pro releases have this very defined smooth mid range and sparkling smooth high end.

Remember not all commercial releases are classed as pro releases (well in my opinion anyway)

Pro = cream of the crop.
Eck

Erm ..... he was being sarcastic.

 

[ecktronic]

Erm ..... he was being sarcastic.

Yeah I notice now!
I just glanced over the post quickly without really thinking of it in context!

Eck

 

[gcapel]

I think one of the differences are being in the production process and being excluded. Like others have said, try and work with the engineer and if he ain't hav;n it then go to someone else. Your demo proves you know what you want things to sound like. If it's a matter of pleasing someone with a "pro studio" I would find the right engineer. If it doesn't matter you should do the thing yoself. I tend to like bands that are apart of there production on an album, because you know the next album isn't going to be a let down just because of a new producer/engineer or what ever.

 

[ecktronic]

I tend to like bands that are apart of there production on an album, because you know the next album isn't going to be a let down just because of a new producer/engineer or what ever.

The band should be the musicians. The producer and engineer can put input into what parts to use not to use etc, but it should be up to the band in my opinion. Thats why we produce all our own albums.
Getting an assistant producer to lead us in the right direction might work well though.

Eck

 

[cavedog101]

Theres no doubt that the overall clarity and separation are best on the studio cut. Maybe you can hear the conflicted performance as opposed to your own, and maybe not. There's no doubt that Mr.Producer needed a serious enema and should have been whacked the minute he acted all up in his shorts.....This is a matter of the right person for the job and this wasnt it. Persumably this was done on someone elses' dime and there wasnt much you could say about it. Too bad. You guys are really close to a 'sound' and you need to have it done up right. The sound of your space doesnt seem to be a problem, so find yourselves an independant producer/engineer to come to your space and record you with his gear. Most have a traveling rig and can interface rather seamlessly.
One thing I might caution about, dont go into another arrangement with a chip on the block from the previous one. Start over fresh and let things flow. Just because you CAN record your own works to a basically 'good' standard, doesnt make you experts, BUT you do want to have your control and your say. Upfront is the best place for this to be put clear and no games.


Good luck.

 

[Middleman]

Disclaimer, I did not listen to your tracks, but there are a lot of guys opinions here I trust.

Record your tracks at home and do the best job you can. Get it as close as you can. From what others have said, you're already close. Keep the limiter off your final mixes and compression too unless these are integral to the sound.

Take it to a studio and mix it there. They usually have better summing and better compressors. Then take it to a good mastering engineer they usually will have better limiters.

I also like the idea of using a decent engineer but maybe renting better tracking gear if you are feeling insecure about yours. This approach keeps the cost down, and gives you the best of all worlds.

 

[Todzilla]

Top notch gear is really important.

Almost as important as:

1. Performance
2. Instrument tone
3. Acoustic environment
4. Production know-how
5. Luck

 

[thomaswomas]

thanks very much for all your comments. all your opinions have been very insightful.

i agree that the pro recording sounds a lot clearer and smoother. but the demo recording sounds more like we want to sound. it's captured the energy and the live, raw element of the band.

at the end of the day, i'm a total diy freak and love to hear when bands release albums that they've done themselves or at least co produced. these albums seem to have more character than the others and are more unique sounding.

at this point, the band are split in deciding which route we should take. our manager has almost definately secured some funding for the ep which would enable us to go into a good studio with a good producer to record 3 or 4 tracks. and i don't doubt we will come out with a quality sounding product. the thing is, i'm looking at life after the ep. i'd rather split the money between hiring a producer/engineer and invest in some quality gear. then at least we've got a way of carrying on doing better recordings if anything.

another point i should mention however is that the producer we've got on board is all for the pro studio route which means it's my opinion against his and the manager with the rest basically sitting on the fence

if you had money to record an ep, which route would you guys take?

ps. i must admit, i did go a bit overboard on the limiter on some of the tracks. i'm still trying to get my head round the whole subject of limiting/compressing the mix.

 

[travelin travis]

i agree that the pro recording sounds a lot clearer and smoother. but the demo recording sounds more like we want to sound. it's captured the energy and the live, raw element of the band.

at the end of the day, i'm a total diy freak and love to hear when bands release albums that they've done themselves or at least co produced. these albums seem to have more character than the others and are more unique sounding.

i'm with you on that. some of my favorite stuff was self produced/engineered/recorded. if it works for you, go with it.

 

[NL5]

i agree that the pro recording sounds a lot clearer and smoother. but the demo recording sounds more like we want to sound. it's captured the energy and the live, raw element of the band.

If it were me, I'd want BOTH.

Since it is unlikely that you will develop "pro" skills overnight, and your focus really should be on the musicianship anyway, I would say you need to find the right producer/engineer/studio to bring out your sound - only better. If your just trying to get local gigs, and just need a demo, your recordings are FANTASTIC. If you are trying to get noticed by a label, wouldn't you want EVERY advantage possible?

The singing is definetly better on the demo stuff, so whoever sings needs to really feels as comfortable in the studio as they did in the demo environment.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

if you had money to record an ep, which route would you guys take?

ps. i must admit, i did go a bit overboard on the limiter on some of the tracks. i'm still trying to get my head round the whole subject of limiting/compressing the mix.

By my reasoning, your P.S. pretty much answers your question.

I'm all for DIY myself, and I'm also perfer capturing a quality live performance over manufacturing a synthetic one in a digital laboratory. HOWEVER, there are two extra considerations that make that more than a black and white issue:

First, DIY is only worthwhile if one actually knows how to do it themselves. DIY by someone who hasn't yet learned how to do it themselves well is going to sound like crap. IMHO, if you are still at the stage where you're trying to pancake your mixes and going overboard doing so, that's a rookie double-mistake. No offense intended in that statement; you're not the first, nor the last, to have that problem. But until you get that figured out, you really don't know how to DIY yet on anything but a hobbiest level.

Second, going into a studio does NOT have to mean assembling a laboratory studio production. Some of the best engineers and producers in the world (e.g. George Massenberg, Chuck Ainley, etc.) *much* prefer documenting a raw live performance in the studio than assembling a FrankenMix from multiple tracks and takes.

My vote would be for getting the best of both worlds; put yourself in the hands of a good engineer in a good studio, but pick an engineer (and producer) who understands and knows how to capture and mix the raw organic performance well.

Oh, and make sure you and your band practice the shit out of your material before you step into the studio. The double-edged sword dangling over the idea of organic tracking like that is that it's all up to the performance. If you guys suck, there's nothing the studio or engineer can do to help you. If you guys are in the zone, there's almost nothing the engineer has to do to help you, you guys will be the recording.

G.

 

[noisedude]

If you're going to do it on your own with no outside engineering/production help, be prepared for a big workload! If it's only you who's pushing the DIY route, then it may fall on you to make the whole project happen!

 

[cello_pudding]

you should put a synth in the chorus. i was sitting there expecting it to really build the chorus, but it was sorta the same as the verse with less space between chord changes.

it doesn't have to be synth, just something extra to listen to.

and maybe try to make the last chorus add something special with it.

the leaves demo sounded fine. don't go to a big studio. you'll pay through the nose just for a slight difference most of your audience won't notice or care about

 

[ecktronic]

If you're going to do it on your own with no outside engineering/production help, be prepared for a big workload! If it's only you who's pushing the DIY route, then it may fall on you to make the whole project happen!

Yeah producing an album is a big big job and pretty dang stressfull. Also when you are like 4 months behind schedule it can get pretty hefty.

Eck

 

[SonicAlbert]

if you had money to record an ep, which route would you guys take?

I'd record in the commercial studio.

However, of paramount importance is that the studio and engineer be the right ones for your project. There's no point in spending the money if the engineer doesn't "get" what you guys are doing, or the studio doesn't have quite the right sound for your tunes.

Shop around. Visit some studios, Talk to the owners/managers/engineers. Listen to tracks and albums that were recorded and/or mixed in their spaces. I'm not sure you've done any of this, or how extensively you've researched commercial studios in your area. It seems like you are thinking about this in a sort of hypothetical and theoretical way, but in reality what you have to do is hit the streets and visit every studio that is even remotely a possibility to record your project.

Let's get real about the home studio thing: the world's top bands record and mix in the world's top studios , using the world's top engineers. Home brew four-track albums from top artists are the exception, not the rule.

Do you really think the people putting up the money are doing it so you can make a bedroom recording of your band, and so you can put money into gear for future projects they are not involved with? How well do you think a home recording will compare to the next band that will use a commercial studio with an appropriately chosen engineer?

You guys need to research studios in your area, and by research I don't mean google searches, I mean go into the studios--*all* of them. Look at the spaces, check out the gear, yak with the personnel.

Next, you guys need to figure out a game plan about how you want to record your music in those studios so that you get the drive and sound that you achieve when playing at home. In other words, you need to learn how to record in a pro studio under a deadline. All this will be very, very good for you collectively as a band, and as individuals too.

Good luck!

 

[JPXTom]

I like your versions more..sounds like its pro...like a real cd..nice music too, btw..and the pro studio version sounds like crap..the levels seem a bit high with the guitar on the demo, but it sounds very very good quality wise.

 

[chessrock]

..and the pro studio version sounds like crap....but it sounds very very good quality wise.

So you're saying it's crap ... but "very very good" crap?

.

 

[zoiks]

based on just a comparison between the leaves demo and studio version...spend your money elsewhere. the studio version is of better quality but not by a considerable degree, and i felt the demo had more energy, particularly the drumming performance.

in your case, i think you could probably find more long-term benefits by putting the money towards promotion.

good song, agree with the post above who said about adding something. maybe another guitar track towards the end to give a bit of oomph.

 

[CoolCat]

i've been recording my band for the last three years / and the demo's are sounding close to professional qaulity.

we're currently rehearsing in an old social club and the room is huge with plenty of space to set up a full live recording enviroment.

we don't have any real budget for recording.
we spent a fortune recording potential singles in a huge studio last year and the results were awafull.
we then recorded a demo of a new song in our rehearsal room and ended up releasing this as our first single.

i, along with the rest of the band, think that it's more about the performance than the sonic quality. alot of debut albums i hear sound poorly recorded but the energy and the songs stand out.

am i wrong in thinking that the general buying public don't care much for super quality sounding recordings and buy an album cos they love the songs. or is the (for want of a better word) recognition of good sound quality more a subcontious but important thing.

I agree that if the song ain't there, your throwing money in the toilet.
If you don't know a Producer, your gambling on another "shit pro" CD.

From editing your email...the way I read it is you should maybe hire a producer to use your equipment, record in your space (saving money and keeping the vibe)... and use your cash to hire a Producer to finsih the job and bring discipline to the business side of it...possibly why your manager is afraid of you guys doing everything yourself.

There's alot of CD's that never get finished because the musicians are too stretched to do it all....let alone do it well.

Producer, Engineer whatever you want to call them.... and the band needs to listen to them.

How you find a "known" good producer that will work off-site I haven't a clue.

Option B:
If you go to a studio, hopefully you'll do more homework than your first outing and hopefully you'll be prepared as you stated you don't really have any money.


just an idea?
good luck.

 

[TerraMortim]

Top notch gear is really important.

Almost as important as:

1. Performance
2. Instrument tone
3. Acoustic environment
4. Production know-how
5. Luck

not really... top notch gear surely is nice, but if you have enough know how, you can make even pro-sumer gear (digital) sound golden. Analog is a bit more difficult as the quality of the circutry can really make it harder... but some of the best stuff has been recorded on less than desirable gear. The tuning of the instruments, compentency of the players, the strength of the song, the instrumentation, even the way the songs is arranged, then the performance, instrument tone, acoustic environment, productionlknow how and luck...

The gear is only a tool, and top quality gear will only help, but isn't really crucial. I think the best skill to have in recording is to use a less than perfect situation and make something really great from it.