Pro Studio vs. Home Studio

  • Thread starter Thread starter marpstar
  • Start date Start date
M

marpstar

New member
Alright, My band wants to put out a CD. We can get 12 hours of Pro studio time for $350 (i dont think this includes mixing/mastering), or we can spend $1000 on a home studio. I have been looking at these components:

Delta 1010LT soundcard
BehringerUB2442FX-Pro Mixer
Edirol Monitors
Some Shure Mics
random cables and shit...

would we be able to use this stuff to make a decent recording? I have done some recording on my computer before, in Cool Edit Pro 2, but it was with a radio shack mixer, karoke mics, and a Sound Blaster Live! Value card, and it sounded decent (in my eyes...or ears)

anyone care to shed some light, try to help me decide.
 
It takes a long time to develop recording skills...... so unless you're not planning on investing a lot of time strictly on learning about recording, in addition to being the performer on the CD, then I suggest you go the studio route....

It isn't as simple as throwing up a couple of mics and hitting record.

Besides, $1000 worth of recording gear is only going to scratch the surface when you think about the other necessities that you'll need .... monitors, cables, mics, di boxes and other assorted accessories....
 
A pro studio will do a much better job unless your well educated in do it yourself techniques. It will take some time to learn the new software, plug-ins, mixing, etc..
But, in the long run, if you become familiar with your gear you wont have to fork out another few thou to go into the studio again for future recordings.

Its a tuff choice
 
the only thing that is really holding me back from going into the studio is...i have heard recordings from other bands that recorded there, and i think our stuff sounded just as good...who knows
 
their are some really bad engineers out there that still make alot of money off it in the professional world. I know a few even.

Well if you have done your own recording that sounds just as good or better then maybe you do have a knack for it. And if you have done that then it sounds you have experience with recording.

But dont just look at local studios either. Sometimes you can find really good studios out of town, even out of state that would cost just the same to go to and sound better with travelling expenses included.

How many songs you planning on doing? And what is the instrumentation?

Danny
 
If you guys want to record RIGHT NOW... and you think that a year long trip to "Home Recording School" would weaken the band, and eventually lead to restlessness or breaking up then hop on into a studio. I would be VERY afraid of any "Professional Studio" that says they can record a full record for $350.

If you live close to a University you could post a note there for a budding young engineer that would probably give you as good a product but probably better and he might even do it for beer money.

But "going into the studio" for the sake of being able to say you went into a studio is not a wise decission. If I were to open a studio tomorrow there is NO WAY that I would do a FULL record for $350. That would be INSANE!!! It would take a full 10 hour day just to propperly track a full band doing one song. Multiply that by 12 songs... that is 12 days. Then mixing starts so you can double that to 24 days. 24 Ten hour days.... that is 2,400 hours of work for $350. That is 15 cents an hour. A CRACK HEAD would turn down that gig.

Now if you are talking about just throwing together a live demo type, one take per song just to get gigs type deal, then $350 comes more into focus.

Just let me share my personal story. I had written about three records worth of songs myself. I wanted to go into a studio SO FUCKING BAD!!! But I was broke. So I thought... hmmm maybe an analog 4 track could get it done. (This was like 4 years ago). Then some guy I met was like... Nahhh man go digital. Get yourself a digital multi-tracker. This was the week after Yamaha released that fancy AW4416 thing. Then some other guy was like... Nahhh man, you have a PC, get yourself some software and a sound card. My eyes were rolling in my head. But I buckled down. I asked every person I could about this stuff. I have ended up spending to day at least $7,000 on recording gear alone.

Now, four YEARS later... I have still only been able to get some basic sketches down on CD. NOTHING that I would actually sell as a finished record. One problem leads into another. If it isn't sound card problems, then it is software problems. If it isn't computer problems then it is acoustic environment problems. Then you need another $400 in acoustic wall treatments. If it isn't that then it is near field monitor problems giving you a bad image of what it sounds like so when you burn it to CD, your masterpiece sounds like muddled shit in your car CD player.

I am not meaning to sound pesamistic. I fucking say GO FOR IT!!! Jump in with both feet. There is no sad morel to the story. I have loved EVERY MINUTE of recording at home. It is SO satisfying to do this. You will make yourself float on air when you hear yourself and YOU did it. But I am FOUR YEARS into this and if you take a look at some of my posts... you will see I am still JUST BEGINNING!

So, just be aware that the largest investment isn't in your wallet... but in your time. Make sure you band can wait a year or so before you can get a semi-descent product close to being ready for someone else to master.
 
pisces7378 said:
24 Ten hour days.... that is 2,400 hours of work for $350. That is 15 cents an hour. A CRACK HEAD would turn down that gig.
Click to expand...



uh....

24 x 10 = 240 hours.

it is NOT going to take that long, anyway, unless the engineer is REALLY FUCKING SLOW. most engineers who charge any sort of money are way faster than that. they are much faster at working than the average beginning home recordist.

i can generally do rock bands at about 6-9 hours per song, tracking AND mixing. if they're recording a full album, bring that number down to 4-6 hours a song if they come in really knowing their shit, because you can do all the drums (and guitar, and bass, etc) for the album at once. a few months ago i was charging $10/hour. that averages at about $50/song. $600 for a 12-song album. If they're doing a whole album though, I'll probably cut them some sort of deal so it'll be cheaper than that.

I agree that $350 is certainly too cheap for a whole album, but it's not the abysmal 15 cents and hour you stated. for a studio that's just started up and really needs to get their name out there badly, i could see these sorts of deals as useful and making sense.
 
um, scratch all that anyway... he said twelve HOURS, not twelve SONGS.

That's $30/hour.

Pretty damn average rate.
 
Ok... kids this is what you get when you post on HomeRecording.com after having 3 or 4 beers!

Jesus guys. I know I am no math wizz but I must have been sniffing gas miscalculate such an easy math equasion. 240 hrs. is a lot more realistic than my fabelistic 2,400 hours for a CD. Sorry about that. :)

Still though. 240 hours for $350 is $1.46 per hour.

Even if you drop it down to 6 hours per song. That is approx. 72 hours to record a full album. (6hrs. x 12 songs). That pops out to be a whopping $4.86/hr.
First of all I don't buy that. I am almost certain that it will take A LOT longer than 6 hrs. per song INCLUDING MIXING! Anything less than 10 hours per song, and no matter how quick the engineer is, and how well the band knows their songs... the quality of the recording will suffer. I mean unless you are in one of these Nashville studios where the engineer/owner/producer has been in the same studio for 50 years and knows it like the back of his hand and can get a band in, throw up the mics and capture that PERFECT take the first time through.
But that kind of esoteric engineering performance can NOT be expected for $350.

Like I said... I was/am not trying to be pessamistic. Just realistic. I do not want to give the guy the impression that he can learn enough about Home Recording to just buy some gizzmos and put out a descent record in two weeks. And I also wanted to give the guy the advantage of my experience when it comes to getting your money basically STOLEN by some guy with a "$350/record recording studio."
 
i'm all for DIY.......BUT......

<<um, scratch all that anyway... he said twelve HOURS, not twelve SONGS.>>

right, and even so, you're not gonna record and mix an entire album's worth worth of songs in 12 hours. maybe if your album was 2 or 3 songs long and you took no breaks in that 12 hours.......or maybe if you wanted it to sound like a rush-job. ;-P

what i don't quite get is the $350 for studio time or $1000 for gear. where's that other $650 coming from? and why can't IT be used for the studio time as well? that'd be a far better investment of your $1000, if you're serious about getting a good product out.

you said you don't think this studio does a very good job.....then go to another one. maybe there's a reason you're getting such a good deal on the time. or maybe you should look to spend a little more and go to one that HAS turned out a recording you like. you're the one who has to be happy here.

believe me, i'm all for "do it yourself". but if you're in a position where you need to sell discs at gigs in order to put bread on the table, you really oughta go to a studio. a large portion of the cash you're paying in a studio goes for the engineer's experience and the fact that he's done this time and again, whereas you're still a newbie at it. that's a harsh reality, but would you want a newbie playing bass on your cd? didn't think so.


another problem you'll run into was mentioned by pisces7378:
<<Now, four YEARS later... I have still only been able to get some basic sketches down on CD>>

when you run your own bedroom/basement studio, you'll find this to be the case far too often. you've got a TON of hard drive space, plenty of cdrs, and all the time you want. when you've got no deadlines, there's no urge or hurry to lay down the tracks as well as you can and be done with it. you can keep saying "this one's just a tad better than that one" and that can go on and on and on. when you're paying for studio time, there comes a point when you run out of cash and you've gotta be DONE. i've got 40GB worth of stuff currently on the computer at home, and due to my perfectionist nature (and constant gear upgrading), i keep laying down better and better sounding tracks, and still don't have anything anywhere close to "ready to go to press". the stuff i thought sounded really good 6 months ago now sounds like ass compared to what i'm laying down now. and i know that in 6 months it'll sound even better. i won't have anything "ready" for a few years at least.

reason #3: $1000 worth of gear is a decent start, but in all honesty, it'll buy you an 8-track recording interface for the computer and maybe a few sm57's and stands/cables, and that's about it. you still need a mixer, mic preamps, recording software, monitors, DI's, etc., etc. and while that $1000 might buy you some "ok" level gear, it certainly won't buy you enough "studio caliber" gear to allow you to record a full album. there are lots of folks around here who've invested a ton more than that and still don't consider themselves to have "pro studio caliber gear". and let's not even start to talk about the space in which you're recording.


for those reasons alone, i'd recommend going to a professional studio. take some time and learn to engineer if you're really into it.....but do understand it takes quite a while to learn to do things right, and i can't imagine you want to be making mistakes while the rest of your band is saying "we invested a grand for this?" been there, done that. ;-P


ymwv,
wade
 
Ahhh I just went back and read his original post. Again... that is what you get for posting on HR.com first thing in the morning.

I guess that $350 for 12 hours of is about $30/hour. That is about par for the course. I don't know where I got the idea that it was a $350 for the whole record kind of thing.

Well dude I would be prepared to spend at least two times as much as $350 then. Because you will need a little bit longer than 12 hours for any kind of real record. Unless, like I said, you are just going for a one take per song demo type deal.

So I advise you to take you $1,000 for the home studio (which would yield very little as you will quickly find that $1,000 is not very much money for gear) and sink that money into the studio. Just learn the songs like they are your best friends. Be able to play them in your sleep. Get in and out of the studio with NASCAR pit crew type speed. And you will probably be much happier and with much less headaches.

Home Recording (in my opinion) is an interest, hobby, obsession, way of life, thing that keeps us up at night type thing. It should never been seen as a quick fix substitute for a "real studio".

Again... all this is just my opinion!

Good Luck
 
I boils down to what you want and what you're willing to spend.

A band CD will usually contain 10-15 songs. I think there is little chance you're going to get a good result with 12 hours of studio time for that. Then there are the costs for mixdown and production. I suspect the end studio result will be much higher than $350.

Doing it yourself also has some pros/cons. You need gear, good PCs for mixing (if you go that route), and experience. It you have not done this before, expect some learning time measures in weeks/months.

The real advantage of the DIY approach is that once you buy the gear and learn how to use it, you can do it again a year later for very little cost.

A 16 track digital recorder will probably cost around $1000. Assuming you already have mixs and mixers, you might not need much more.

Ed
 
I COMPLETELY agree with mrface2112!!!

The gear upgrading... the perfectionistic obsession.

Hell look at Guns N Roses. Axl Rose has the main suite booked 24 hours a day at one of L.A.s top studios JUST IN CASE he feels like recording that day. He pays like $2,500/day for this luxury. He has been recording his new record "Chinese Democracy" for like 7 years. He has unlimited resources, unlimited time (at least he thinks he does) and he can't even put out a record. Where as Appetite for Destruction (his first real record) was recorded in a week on a shoe string budet for a major label record.

I started out on a cheap PC with Logic Audio 4 and a Delta-66/OMNI studio. I had a set of headphones for monitoring AND tracking. A $75 midi keyboard controller and a Roland JV 1010 sound module and a POD Line 6 guitar box. Grand toatal = approx. $3,150

Now I have upgraded to a much niceer PC, I bought an NTK vocal mic. I have two AKG (matched pair) small diaphram instrument mics). A MOTU 828mkII interfance. Mackie near fields, a new pair of SONY MDR-7509 headphones, Upgraded to Logic 5.5.1, Got a new weighted key Studio Logic keyboard controller, got the EXS24mkII and 4 sample libraries at $100 ea., and treated my "mixing suite's" walls with Auralex foam.

Grand total for upgrades: approx. $5,720

And how many CDs have I produced to show for it? None. And I am not some loser that is a bad example. I do this EVERY day. The above totals do not even include the hundreds of dollars I have spent in buying pretty much EVERY single book there is on the subject. I have a subscription to Soun On Sound Magazine from England (because it is THE best mag on the subject). And I can expect grew hairs by the time I am 30. (I.m 25 now).

Who knows... you might be the one. The ONE that can spend $1,000 and just get a small little set up. Then you can be happy with just having it. Make your recordings, sell them at shows and make your investment back. That is what we ALL thought.
 
Im a $350 a day, for a 10hrs, I do block of 20 with a overnight penalty for $750(I discourage 20 hours straight) Im assuming if the band is well rehearsed and there is no setup charges and extra for mixing that, even start up studios might be better. I feel for band in that twilight zone where because of the lack of money, your either stuck with doing it yourself or having a budget studio doing it, with questionable results in both directions. When I built my garage studio It was for me to play, write and work...so its more of a project studio. But for some reason word travels and I have recorded about a band a month now since February, I don't advertise. I recently got a call from a local popular metal band that got ahold of my 4 song vocal free work cd. Its a cd thats all instrumental for the vocalist Im working with on my stuff to rehearse to. Now the band wants me to do their demo. They gave me a copy of their previous demo done at a "big studio", 24 track 2" with some analog console. They complained it was too bassie. I loaded it up in the studio and it was really heavy... Is it my monitors? Nope.. I loaded in some Statix-X and Mudvayne and these poor guys had 8db to 12db of 20hz to 120hz just pounding...it looked like a bow wave of a tanker. Anyway, these poor dude are having to redo where a careless pro studio dropped the ball.

My advice is that if your a band, let the studio do its job, if you don't like the mix...tell what you don't like. He will maybe complain, but in the long run he learns more, your cd gets done right and everyone wins. If you do it yourself your band will probably argue for days on a 3ds cut at 350hz. Alot of places are struggling because of the economy...$350 for 12hrs might be whats need to keep the rent paid...this month.


SoMm
 
Well, I've taken almost 2 years, and spent about $15,000 in gear to get the basic tracks of a solo album with a bunch of overdubs. Really good mixing will take 4-6 hours for each of 13 songs. That isn't just mixing, but all the FX, EQ, compression, re-amping, judicious pitch correction, noise reduction, creative editing, normalization, the whole 9 yards. Mastering will be another grand or so. then production. But then there's copyrights, mechanical royalties, residuals, artist contracts for project staff, the staff photographer, cover art and layout/desktop publishing, right down to catering for the release party!
Basically, there's a world of difference between a studio album and a demo. I have no doubt that if I had spent all the money in a studio instead of building one, my CD would be slicker and more commercial. On the other hand, I wouldn't own anything, and I wouldn't have learned anything either. As it is, 3 project studios and 2 albums in progress have been spawned by the creative fun we're having in my playroom. Knowing eveything then that I know now, I might have selected the gear slightly differently, but I'd do it again, in a heartbeat. We'll have to sell 3000 copies or so to break even and own all the toys, and we're looking at about 800 advance orders 3 months prior to the release party, which I think is damn good, considering.- Richie
 
Yeah dude... but you just said you have spent over $15,000 and you aren't even close to slowing down.
 
I say go to the studio. I'm guessing that you have at least three people in your band, so that's only a little over $116 if you've got four people that's under $100 per person, I'd say that's not much to at least see if the studio's any good, make sure you've got your songs down, and do one, maybe two songs, factor in a few hours for him to mix it and see what it sounds like, then go from there.
 
I hear you, Pisces. I'm not trying to rain on your parade, just throwing out some reality check. To bring a real studio album to the production phase starting by building the tracking studio and buying a couple of kickass guitars will total out at about $30,000.
That's all right- I didn't want a new Infinity anyway.-Richie
 
Track Rat said:
marpstar, where you at in Illinois?
Click to expand...
I'm in East Dubuque...the very northwestern tip of IL


anyways...

I want to go into the studio...but I want to do all the stuff myself too. I want to be a recording enginner when I come to a career dicision point in my life... My band does not need the CD money to put food on the table, we're a bunch of 16 year olds looking to have a good time. I don't know if i'm ready to drop $1000 to go into a studio, and I have a problem about trusting people with duties....its just a thing I have. I love the idea of me and the band being able to sit around, and just chill while making a cd...thats what we did with our demo...

Keep on posting some more pros and cons...hopefully i can decide soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top