Myths

[soundchaser59]

Southside is right, I've used that "this is HOME recording" argument to cover my butt a few times in the past. His point is well taken.

And I also agree that the human brain is the best "crap detector" there is, but like any machine it only works best if you keep it clean and use it according to the manual.

Yeah, I have a couple of Behringer pieces in my rack. But I aint buyin no more! I swear! LOL! Actually, I have a lot of fun with my Edison. But I aint buying that guitar amp!

And I listened to some of Chessrocks samples and I thought they were well made. Better than anything I've ever done. I've heard some better, I've heard A LOT worse!

As for jillchaw, I obviously dont have access to the same statistician who works for you. I can, however, tell you beyond any shadow of a doubt that no matter how much truth there may or may not be in your comments, your tone and your attitude and your "delivery" says a lot more about you than it says about any of us. If you really want to drive your point home, why dont you do it with some posts of your music instead of spewing a bunch of childish hostility and shock-value language? There is no more certain way to guarantee that people dismiss your "comments" as worthless drivel than by cussing and calling total strangers insulting names.

Yeah, I play and record at home, but.......I DO also know something about music theory (try writing a top 10 hit based on tritones and super structure triads using only a lydian mode! bet you cant!) and I CAN play my guitar and my piano waaaay better than the average Joe on the street and I DO know what every knob and button and jack and cord and synth and sequencer feature in my studio and in my rack does. I'm no McLaughlin or Evans, but I have noticed that not all great engineers are also great players, and not a lot of great players also are great engineers. It does take some small measure of effort, fortitude, and talent to develop respectable skills on both sides of the glass! I also realize that there are thousands, perhaps millions, of gifted theorists, players, composers and technical experts who will never have a top 10 hit, while there are thousands of famous wonders who cant read one lick of music or tell you what chord they are playing.

The most gifted "writer" with whom I am personal friends is not a great engineer or a great recordist, but his songs never cease to amaze me. Put aside your prejudice for a few minutes and go listen to Mike Hartman at

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=363380

Not great engineering or great recording, even for a home basement guy. But after you listen to his writing and his playing think about the fact that he did all of those songs by himself and the guy knows nothing about theory and cant read one note of music. Does knowing that ruin your "feelings" about the songs? If you answer Yes, then you need professional counseling! At least Mike was brave enough to post his songs on the web, and he isn't out there bashing the other people who do. So I'll ask you again, where is your "music" posted?? Put your music where your anonymous mouth is. We are not even interested in the quality of the recording, we just want to hear how you have put your "music theory theory" to good use writing heartfelt goosebump songs.

Sorry, I forgot which myth I was busting in this post......

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

And I also agree that the human brain is the best "crap detector" there is, but like any machine it only works best if you keep it clean and use it according to the manual.

Well said!

And, might I add, if one keeps it in shape. The brain is a lot like a muscle; use it or lose it.

G.

 

[mshilarious]

Yeah, I play and record at home, but.......I DO also know something about music theory (try writing a top 10 hit based on tritones and super structure triads using only a lydian mode! bet you cant!)

Chaw had some good observations that were combined into an inconsistent argument: first, that popular musicians are somewhat ignorant of theory; second, that most pop tunes are built on relatively simple chord progressions, using secondary dominants and relative minor keys for tension/resolution.

I'm a big fan of learning music theory, but pointing out that pop songs all drink from the same trough is not the best argument for needing to learn it.

Popular or not, players should check out more harmonically complex tunes. I always enjoyed "What a Wonderful World", that tune has very cool changes and is a great pop tune at the same time

 

[fraserhutch]

I'd like to split this sentence in two for a minute. And since this is my post , I'd like to take the second part first...

"Not all recording engineers know music theory."

The good ones do. Hell, most recording musicians do not know music theory. But the good ones do. I'm not talking your basic delta blues son of a sharecropper who wouldn't know what "inverted seventh" means and doesn't need to, I'm talking a "recording musician" whose focused goal is to lay music on disc.

However, having an at least passable aquaintenance with or understanding of music theory is just one more ingredient that seperates the signal from the noise on both sides of the signal chain.

I don't necessarily agree with this in its entirety.
I am specifically referring to the engineer types, not the "recording musicians".
Should they undertand music to a certain degree? Absolutely. Should they have an intuitive knowledge of what makes something sound good? Yes. Need they understand music theory? Not necessarily, unless you consider somewriting, arranging, and coaching skills as a requisite to the job. I don't see it that way. Not everone wants the engineer to act as producer.

Is is an added plus? Absolutely.

"This is home recording."

This statement keeps being used on this board as cover for someone not being an expert, because it's only a hooby for many. While that may often be true, to be honest, I have a couple of problems with this.

I used the term "home recording" only because that what this bbs is about. I am in agreement with you here. I should have probably just said "recording forum".

 

[mshilarious]

The modifier "home" simply means one thing: a presumption that the recordist is working under one or many constraints that should not be experienced in a professional studio. These may include (again, relative to a professional studio):

- Time
- Experience
- Equipment
- Environment

and, yes:

- Talent

Those do not serve as excuses, merely as limitations to be overcome. I hope every member is here to improve their recordings.

At the same time, posters should be free of the expectation that their work must be up to a pro level to participate. To the extent that I can help other members improve their recordings, and be helped myself, the board is a success irrespective of the absolute quality of the recordings.

Of course, posters should not misrepresent their qualifications or deny the value of professional advice.

Most of the threads I've seen deteriorate violate one of those principles.

 

[TuoKaerf]

I don't know if this qualifies as a myth, but it will qualify as a rant.

Nobody really wants John Bonhams drum sound. They want the feel. That is 98% the drummer.

The drums sounded different on every Zepplin album, sometimes they sounded different from song to song.

It doesn't matter how many room mics you set up in which castle/stairwell/whatever, if you don't play like Bonham, it won't have that 'sound'.

If the engineer had nothing but $99 condensers and SM57s plugged into a Roland VS-2480, it still would have had that 'Bonham sound'.

If you want Bonhams "sound", get a shovel. Then get on a plane to England. Dig him up. Set him in a room with some drums and a mic.

 

[whjr15]

I'm a big fan of learning music theory, but pointing out that pop songs all drink from the same trough is not the best argument for needing to learn it.

Popular or not, players should check out more harmonically complex tunes.

I agree, but its almost as if youre implying that if the song is relatively simple, (chord wise) you wont like it.

....if thats not what youre saying, then disreguard this... but its still something to think about....

Personally I could care less about a songs "backing theory." If it sounds good to me, I like it -- even if the band only uses 3 chords throughout.... or even 2!! (molly's lips for instance) Like some of you had said before, its all about the artists emotion/conviction for the song. If their whole heart is in it, chances are, yours will be too.

Or..... it could be a "setting" or a "mood" situation that gets someone hooked on a song....

example:High school dance. (a bit cliche, but bear with me)

Lets say that the last song at your senior prom is being played.... Some song youve never heard before... You and your "crush" are dancing, and in the middle of the song, you guys have your first kiss... Now, chances are that everytime you hear that song, you'll remember the events of that night... Or, you may even WANT to listen to that song so you can "replay" that moment in your head---But I can bet you wont be listening for flaws or shortcomings in the songs musical theory.

All I'm saying is that I dont believe the song has to be musically complex to be good. I'm NOT saying that i PROMOTE the ignorance towards theory. Dont get me wrong, I would LOVE to know a lot more than i do now (im no novice to theory, but by NO means a pro.. But I am compared to your average Joe who knows nothing lol ) If the song is lacking in the theory dept., make up for it through emotion-- Because after all, thats REALLY all music is, right??? Emotion

 

[fraserhutch]

It NEVER fails. I checked out your website and some of your sample productions and you make my point for me. It's a shame with 16 years experience and with what I'm guessing is some quality gear (due to your gear snob attitude) you aren't producing better recordings. You could use some advice on recording acoustic guitar for one as well as mixing. I'm too busy producing demos on my trusty ole Tascam TSR-8 (along with some lowly Behringer gear ) that seriously outclasses your "work" to help you out right now.

At least he's not an anonymous coward like you, hiding behind an internet alias.

You have zero credibility with me.

 

[leester]

At least he's not an anonymous coward like you, hiding behind an internet alias.

You have zero credibility with me.

I bet you've never read Behind the Glass NOR do you have a Behringer Composer like David Bowie's.

Feh!

 

[LeeRosario]

The only Myth I know of is precisely this:




I got into engineering for the girls. Man was that the biggest mistake known to man.



So my new motto is:


"I love music for the girls. All five of them".

 

[famous beagle]

98 percent of musicians suck. I know everyone will riot about that one. But its true. No one really knows about how rhythm, melody or harmony work. Any time you try to teach someone about how music really works on the mind all you get is denial and excuses. Like if you say, try writing a few tunes using only the harmonic scale chords people fucking RAGE. Because they hear that as a RULE. And since they dont understand what the rule is they just fight it in their mind and say "rules were meant to be broken, its ROCK AND ROLL!" and keep on regurgitating the same old shit, imitating their heros which are 95 percent of the time just the musicians they idolize or the musicians that were popular during a good time of their life.

Who will deny this?

I will say that no amount of theory (not guitar scales theory, SONGWRITING THEORY) will replace inspiration and emotion. NO AMOUNT. But for all of you badasses out there who shun logic try this information out just one lousy time and see if i make sense:

If you only know how to make a handful of emotional effects on your listeners minds, how will it ever move them beyond the emotional effects of genre associations or "guitar tone"? It wont. Thats why everyone fails. You are only going into one or two rooms of the house. Learn how to use emotion. Its a lifetime of learning and improving. So forget about getting laid next week because you wrote a cheezy ripoff of a jimmy page "lick".

Basically you want to know the short shit of it all? All the best music that survives genre and time were written using beats that are real beats to start. Not just loud or hard hitting or alot of fills. Ive heard your shitting drummers, dont try to deny that you all do this. Next is melody. Melody is CRUCIAL. Every note matters. The order of the notes matter. Why? Because of the emotional effects of intervals on the human brain. Dont even try to say its a matter of taste. Its biologically built into all human beings. The brain senses direction and departing/arriving sensations from intervals. The chords must follow the melody in order to make the harmony interesting. Harmony is the invisible weight behind all good tunes. Not tunes you think are great because the guitar sound is ripping. Fuck guitar. Sell your guitar right now and buy a piano and spent 10 years learning how great songs in history are SIMILAR to each other. You laugh but this is better than trying to TUBE yourself into great songwriting abilities. 90 percent of great songs use interesting manipulation of the relationships between the relative minor/major chords. But no one ever even tries that these days. Its a dead art. Those who do are hugely famous and stand way out from all other current "artists".

These days being an artist means you have a cool haircut, or youre all "tortured" and you sepnd half your music video acting like youre all complex and cool.

Fuck you all im so sick of your dumbass fucking debates about recording equipment when you dont even know about how subdominant chords are used in songwriting or any of the other devices that ARE THERE TO HELP YOU NOT SUCK. Yet you still would rather just spin in circles on your guitar center credit cards like morons.

No one can deny even one of these statements, but im sure youll ALL be pissed as shit.

Your recordings suck because you suck as a musician. Im sorry. Either realize or suffer.

This has got to be the biggest load of crap I've read in a while. If you think that learning some music theory is going to teach you how to write better music, you're an idiot, plain and simple. I can tell you from experience, this is not true. I know more music theory than I know what to do with, and it's no easier to write. It may make it easier to know what I want and therefore make it a slightly faster process in that regard, but if someone has talent, it will find a way regardless.

Here are just a few great writers than don't (or didn't) know what a subdominant (or a IV) chord is (lol, that was such a stupid thing to say):

Paul McCartney
John Lennon
Kurt Cobain
Eddie Van Halen
Rich Robinson (of the Black Crowes)

All of these people make (or made) use of relatively advanced theoretical concepts such as modal mixture, secondary dominants (both resolving and non-resolving), and the like, but none of them can tell you they're doing it.

Are you going to tell me that Stevie Ray couldn't play the blues because he doesn't know what the Mixolydian mode is?

Ridiculous.

 

[leester]

The biggest general myth IMO is

"You can do it yourself just as good for a lot less!"

BS.

That is, unless you truly believe your time is worth nothing.

So many are lead to believe that it's as easy as pluggin' stuff in and hittin' record, smashin' it with a limiter... "It'z deee-jittall dooood! U can't go wrong!"

10 years later and likely spent enough $$ to have done 5 albums FINISHED in a studio... they MIGHT have the experience to pull it off... kinda, except now they've traded some of the musical talent (read: focus) for some engineering talent, based on 'trial and error' and makin' big mistakes along the way... all the while, not likely actually producing anything of merit.

People forget, or are blinded by the Marketing Machine, but you just can't buy some of the most important ingredients of a great recording.

Talent - Inspiration - Motivation - Conviction

Ever see that stuff for sale at GC? Nope.

Mashin' buttons and settin' mics up gets mastered by the OPPOSITE side of the brain you use to be creative with. Can it be done? Sure. Can it be done WELL? Sure!

But ya gotta wonder... which is likely going to produce a better product more efficiently... The musician stickin' to what he/she does best, excelling at that, while utilizing the skills of experienced professionals with an arsenal of gear not available on the average musician's budget, all in nifty rooms... or the "Jack of All Trades... Master Of None" compromised musician? Heck, some of the best songwriters don't even bother singing, and vice versa. YES, you can get THAT DEEP into any one thing you want to excell with.

Look, there's just a TON of stuff that don't come in the BOX the salesdude is pushing on the MUSICIAN.

How many of you know (or are) musicians who have wasted a LOT of time chasing the pot-o-gold at the end of the Building-My-Own-Studio Rainbow?

NOTE: This excludes the self-indulgant hobbiest, which is likely half the population here... but think about it... even for you (me?) is that how you started out? Headin' to be an engineer, or were you more likely a musician just wanting to get some songs recorded?

Gotta run. I'll edit for typos and changed mind later.
me

 

[LeeRosario]

Hey Fletcher, I have an idea.....

Why don't we all put our minds together to develope myth busting software?



That way, everytime somebody types up some bullshit on here, the hypothetical "myth blocker" software will take effect.

 

[LeeRosario]

Hey Fletcher, I have an idea.....

Why don't we all put our minds together to develope myth busting software?



That way, everytime somebody types up some bullshit on here, the hypothetical "myth blocker" software will take effect.

But on second thought, maybe that's not such a hot idea. I myself would be banned.


Plus, homerecording.com/bbs would be in a state of total and complete chaos.


So let's not call them myths, but "theories". Theories that are simply sprinkled in bullshit.

 

[mshilarious]

I agree, but its almost as if youre implying that if the song is relatively simple, (chord wise) you wont like it.

....if thats not what youre saying, then disreguard this... but its still something to think about....

Sorry I wasn't clear. Sure, three chord songs are great. Hey, I don't discriminate, wasn't "What I Got" two chords? Great tune.

Chaw seemed to be saying three chords songs were too simple, musicians needed to learn theory so they could learn to use six or seven chords--which are already used by everyone Wasn't consistent.

I don't care how many chords a song uses. Three chords are fine. However, I do firmly believe that if you're jammin', and the singer says "hey guys, let's try this tune, it's a I-IV-V in F with a walking bass, GO!" the guitarist and bassist should know what he's talking about. Then when the singer says "Hey that's a bit high for me, let's try Eb", they should be able to follow that too.

Not that singers know any theory

 

[mshilarious]

NOTE: This excludes the self-indulgant hobbiest, which is likely half the population here... but think about it... even for you (me?) is that how you started out? Headin' to be an engineer, or were you more likely a musician just wanting to get some songs recorded?

That's an interesting question. I started out in HS bands that, while definitely not sucking technically, had no originality and no desire to write. I personally could not write a song back then. In college I pretty much quit music entirely.

About five years after school, I got interested in recording again, I had always been interested, but it was too expensive and difficult in the '80s. So I bought the 4 track, with no intention of ever joining a band. It was just me and my idiot best bud writing and recording stupid tunes. It was fun

Then I got a PC setup, but shortly thereafter I ended up joining what was basically a novelty band. We did six shows to pretty good sized crowds (for me, anyway) in two years, not that much but with two jobs, rehearsals, kids, etc. it kept me from recording.

As a result of that, I started working with a band that has actual talent, doing their live sound and recording their concerts, I think they've done 10 or 12 shows now. Their first CD which I engineered start to finish is in the can, I'm just waiting for them to pull the trigger on replication before I become rich and famous OK, not. But they should be able to move a couple thousand copies.

So I haven't recorded much of my own stuff in the last five years because I've been involved with bands. Sort of the opposite of what you might think would happen

That's my self-indulgent journey, man, I'm just along for the ride.

 

[Creamyapples1]

Personally, being a Musician (if you can call it that) comes first. Being a lone musician is a bit more tough. I come up with far better things if I can listen to my ideas with bass, drums, etc. Spending time in a "big boy" studio isn't really an option here because it'd cost me an arm and a leg to lay down every single idea I have, and hash them out as I go, while paying hourly. Atleast with my own setup, all-be-it modest and noobish, I can structure as I see fit in regards to all insruments involved. Can I produce a product that is redbook quality? I wouldn't even dream of it. Does it work for what I want to do? Hell yes. And I even get semi-decent recordings to play with when I'm done, just a bonus imo. If I had any want to mass produce a recording, my first step would be setting up studio time at a reputable establishment.

 

[whjr15]

Sorry I wasn't clear. Sure, three chord songs are great. Hey, I don't discriminate, wasn't "What I Got" two chords? Great tune.

Chaw seemed to be saying three chords songs were too simple, musicians needed to learn theory so they could learn to use six or seven chords--which are already used by everyone Wasn't consistent.

I don't care how many chords a song uses. Three chords are fine. However, I do firmly believe that if you're jammin', and the singer says "hey guys, let's try this tune, it's a I-IV-V in F with a walking bass, GO!" the guitarist and bassist should know what he's talking about. Then when the singer says "Hey that's a bit high for me, let's try Eb", they should be able to follow that too.

Not that singers know any theory

oh ok, I getcha... I totally agree. sorry about the confusion!

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Need they understand music theory? Not necessarily, unless you consider somewriting, arranging, and coaching skills as a requisite to the job.

OK, I probably should dial back a bit on that one. Perhaps the term "music theory" was a bit strong for me to use without qualifying it a bit (though I'll still say that the best engineers do have music theory in their blood.)

What I meant was that they should know enough about the basics of music to be able to properly control the music and to be able to communicate with the musician. They not only need to recognize when an instrument is out of tune, but when a musician is playing out of tune or a vocalist is singing out of tune, and they need to be able to communicate this accurately to the performer. They also need to communicate procedure in proper technical musical languiage that requires some level of knowledge of basic music theory. "Your guitar sounds wrong" just doesn't cut it compared to "your E string sounds a few cents flat." "I want to re-record that awsome part in the middle of the song" has no meaning compared to "lets try the line where rhythm guitars come out of the bridge and modulate to a C over again." "Dude, your timing was off" offers no solution the way that "you forgot to come back to the one" does.

Not exactly "advanced music theory" by a long shot. But a knowledge of basic music and sound that a suprising number of both would-be engineers and musicians mistakenly lack.

The modifier "home" simply means one thing: a presumption that the recordist is working under one or many constraints that should not be experienced in a professional studio.

This is true, and I agree with your explanation and analysis that followed.

However, the way you phrased the above triggered something else altogether that I believe is actually perhaps the biggest and most insideous unspoken myth permeating this board: that there is a huge difference between "home recording" and "pro recording."

The only major differences these days betwen the "home studio" and the "pro studio" is that a) in the home studio the user has shelled out anywhere from $1G to $20G for his own gear up front instead of paying $65 -$650 an hour for the use of someone else's gear, and b) in the "home studio" one has to be their own engineer and technician instead of having a "course pro" there to hold their hand and guide them.

(Yes, there is also often a difference in the intrinsic quality of the gear, but as we have discovered in other threads and posts, "pro sounding" recordings are regularly made on "home studio" gear, and lousy sounding productions are regularly pumped out of "pro studios", demonstrating that the technique is often more important than the gear. The line here is so blurry as to render this difference in gear quality to be a relatively minor distinction...at least in the terms of this discussion.)

Technology has rendered any other distinctions almost academic. Any regular reader of the forums on this board is daily inpinged with "hobbyists/rookies/amateurs" (I don't mean that in the derrogatory sense) who are using more signal processing devices and plugs (compressors, EQs, limiters, reverbs, MBCs, exciters, finalizers and curve-shapers) in their signal chain than the average "pro studio" had in their working inventory 10 or 15 years ago. "Hobbyists" in this forum are regularly using 6-8 microphones on their drum kits alone, ducking and sidechaining and bottom miking along the way. "Rookies" are regularly treating their rooms with bass traps and diffusers - both pro and homemade - and wanting to build vocal booths and gobos. As was seen in a poll here a few months ago, "home recordists" average between 15 and 30 tracks per song in their editor or on their HDR (as compared to the average 16 or 24 track tape machine that was the core of the average "pro studio" not that long ago.)

If this were an automobile forum, this would be the equivalent of your average commuter now having a Formula One race car in their garage. Except with no experienced race car driver at the wheel and no experienced pit crew to maintain it.

The fact that this capability is in someone's house instead of a seperate building is irrelevant. The gear is the same, the required knowledge to use it and to maintian it is the same, and the techniques - both successful and unsuccessful - are the same. The bummer for many (and the cause of much of the displeasure on this board) is that the burdern of knowing and taking care of and using this stuff is now entirely on the "client". It doesn't matter if one is a "hobbyist" or a "pro" or anywhere in-between; recording a drum kit is still recording a drum kit. Treating room acoustics is still treating room acoustics. Mixing together 5 or 30 tracks into a coherant song is still mixing together 5 or 30 tracks into a coherant song. The rules, ideas, techniques or gear don't change just because one is doing it "just to scratch an itch" instead of as a way to pay the bills.

"Home Recording" ain't what it used to be. It's now pro recording in the home instead of at the office, like it or not.

You want the 5-second "BS seperator" proof? Every time a "hobbyist" wants to know how to get his song to sound like a pro recording, he is asking how to do pro recording in the home.

You want to do home recording the old-fashoned way and not have to deal with all this "pro" bullshit? Hey, that's great! Nothing wrong with that at all. All you gotta do is dump all your pro gear and go back to your grandpa's old Revox open reel recorder in the garage.

G.

 

[lpdeluxe]

Technology has rendered any other distinctions almost academic.

Ain't it the truth. I am lucky that I managed to last long enough for the computer revolution. I LOVE digital recording, and to hell with all the "analog is better" crap from all the wannabees who couldn't align a tape deck if you held a gun on 'em.

This is the golden age for home recording, which means that it's now up to you and me. No more "We didn't have the really cool compressors" or "a power surge melted all the tubes." I personally think I'm getting pretty good results. Other people may be doing better, and God bless 'em. It comes down to individual commitment, not what budget Warner Bros gives you, and that's a good thing.

My favorite thing is NOT seeing some new piece of trick gear, but having real live talented musicians in my studio and in my capturing what they are doing (and, of course, contributing my own performing talents, such as they are). This week I recorded a lady who performed a song solo, just her and her Celtic drum, another just her and her guitar, and then one with me on tambourine and (Lord love us) backup vocals. We got decent results, thanks partly to a ribbon mic, a couple of condensors, a digital mixer and a computer, (and a number of years of recording experience) but mostly due to US. Take away all the gear, and that's where the music lives.

Which naturally leads to the biggest myth of all:

"If I only had the gear I could make great recordings!"

Sorry, you don't ride there on your checkbook.