Low End Equipment vs High End Experience

  • Thread starter Thread starter jaynm26
  • Start date Start date
J

jaynm26

New member
Its cool hearing the experiences of engineers that have faced a situation they had not so good or even terrible equipment and how they adapted to still produce a great recording/mix. or faced with a challenges to where good equipment was absent and all they had was a pile of crap and made it gold.

(if you have any audio files of these events please load)
 
Geez, I ran a series on this type of stuff some years ago. I'll see if I can dig some of it up (most of it was on a computer that no longer computes and is no longer part of this world).

Long story short -- Source, source, source.
 
My favorite and oft repeated example of genius vs. less than stellar equipment. Boston’s debut album, including this song, which has gone 20 times platinum at this writing and was one of the biggest selling rock debut albums in history. Most tracks were done in a basement home studio owned by bandleader and engineer, Tom Scholz, on a Scully 12-track 1-inch analog machine. But the list of all the common inexpensive gear used is just too long to write out here.

Sooo… here’s an audio file of this event. You all know it… sing along! :)

 
The song "I'm Not There" by Bob Dylan is my all time favorite song, yet the production and sound quality are both horrible. It's one of those rare songs that would sound good no matter how badly it was recorded.
 
Sound quality is very subjective. You can certainly get a great vibe from bad equipment as long as the part fits into the production. Of course, a great song will transcend the recording as long as you can hear all the parts necessary to make the song work.

Back when I was recording band rehearsals on a boom box with a radio shack stereo mic, there were actually times that we would go into the studio and try to get the same impact of the rehearsal with "better" equipment. We couldn't do it. The magic wasn't in the recording equipment, it was in the performance.
 
In a recording situation, the talent of the performer, the acoustics of the space and the technique of the engineer all tend to have more influence than the quality of the gear. Oh, you have to pass a certain quality threshold--my $5.99 Skype mic or even a good mic plugged into a noisy built in sound card aren't going to cut it. However, once you get into specialist gear, so long as you're not introducing noise or distortion (or anything else unchangeable) you're likely okay. The good stuff may make your job easier is all.

However, I think that where a difference CAN be made is when you're doing live stuff. There, besides absolute sound quality, you're also fighting for gain before feedback and the rejection of unwanted stage wash. For that sort of thing, better gear can make a huge difference to your results.
 
That's kind of the basis of my home studio. I pick my gear battles. obviously #1 is speakers. #2 is a good mic, in my opinion. but the rest i try to be the best reviewed/one i like best cheap option and use my lifetime of ear training to make it sound like the pros. It's kind of an experimental studio in that respect. use the minimum amount to produce the greatest sounding track you can. I can record on it like a beast. never had any problems with the recordings i get...just gotta get more pro at the mixing, right now.

But totally a smart idea, as long as you read LOTS of reviews about an item and of course test it yourself if at all possible first.
 
it is always easier to get the job done faster and cheaper with less headaches, with quality gear over budget gear.


your end result is only going to be as good as your weakest link.

that includes the room.
 
Beck said:
My favorite and oft repeated example of genius vs. less than stellar equipment. Boston’s debut album, including this song, which has gone 20 times platinum at this writing and was one of the biggest selling rock debut albums in history. Most tracks were done in a basement home studio owned by bandleader and engineer, Tom Scholz, on a Scully 12-track 1-inch analog machine. But the list of all the common inexpensive gear used is just too long to write out here.

Sooo… here’s an audio file of this event. You all know it… sing along! :)

Click to expand...


For what its worth...Scully machines had a really good sound and the Flickinger console was no slouch either. Put those things in the hands of someone with serious engineering chops, a great vision for their sound, and enough time and money to get the job done and this is what you might get.

Of course a million monkeys let go in Abbey Road MIGHT come up with Sgt.Peppers...........or not......
 
ryleestrange said:
I can record on it like a beast. never had any problems with the recordings i get...just gotta get more pro at the mixing, right now.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't wanna be impolite or so, but how do you know? Most of my mixing Problems were in fact recording Problems... (well... almost :D )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top