M
Milkfaj
New member
Blue Bear Sound said:
two grand worth of headphones!?!?
two grand worth of headphones!?!?
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Absolutely - for multiple uses, and multiple people in bands/choral groups, etc......Milkfaj said:
I've got 5 pairs of Fostex T20 - $500
A couple of Audio-Technicas - $300
AKG and Beyer - $400
4 pairs of wireless - $400
10 pairs of Harvey's MoreMe - $250
Yeah - $1850 - I wasn't far off - pretty much $2K!
Don't forget, I'm talking a COMMERICAL facility - not a hobby space.
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
He's talking about up to about 25 sets of cans.
Milkfaj, you seem to clearly know what you want, so just stick to your guns.
Everyone doesn't have to fit into the same "box".
Milkfaj, you seem to clearly know what you want, so just stick to your guns.
Everyone doesn't have to fit into the same "box".
X
xstatic
New member
More power to you if you can get everything you need for $8k. Especially going analog. Most of my clients would prefer analog until they start adding up tape expenses. In the end however, it's the quality of the product that matters and thats it. Bruces list is right on, and even underestimated. $2k won't even dent the price of high end AD/DA if you need even just 16 channels each way. Also, $12k is EXTREMELY low for a pro studio microphone budget. $7k isn't much for outboard either (just comps) if you are looking at pro grade stuff.
The availability of analog tape could turn into a HUGE issue since BASF filed chapter 11, but I would imagine that something will happen and tape will still be available somehow. As for right now though, until it is resolved, that alone is enough to keep me from purchasing a 2" machine
Don't forget to invest money in clean power too. All the greatest gear in the world will still be noisy and sometimes even unusable if there are grounding issues. A vintage soundcraft is a good place to start for a warm fat sounding console. However, get ready to invest some money in restoring some faders and pots, and changing some switches. You don't need the Neuman luckily. The TLM103 is a fairly decent mic, but there are much better mics in my opinion in that same price range.
I would imagine that even the great Steve Albini though would testify to the fact that analog tape does not make good recordings. Good engineers and musicians do. Also, producing an album does not mean squat if you don't know how to run the gear. If you have another engineer doing it while you are producing, then it will work
Remember, a producer makes the decisions, but the engineer has to interpret what the producer wants and make it happen. If you don't know how to do that, then there will be problems. $8k sounds like the bare minimum to me to get a decent 2 track professional set-up. Consider that a lot of albums are tracked to tape, but then dumped into a DAW and mixed using a combination of the DAW and a traditional setup. You may need to factor some digital gear in somewhere.
The availability of analog tape could turn into a HUGE issue since BASF filed chapter 11, but I would imagine that something will happen and tape will still be available somehow. As for right now though, until it is resolved, that alone is enough to keep me from purchasing a 2" machine
Don't forget to invest money in clean power too. All the greatest gear in the world will still be noisy and sometimes even unusable if there are grounding issues. A vintage soundcraft is a good place to start for a warm fat sounding console. However, get ready to invest some money in restoring some faders and pots, and changing some switches. You don't need the Neuman luckily. The TLM103 is a fairly decent mic, but there are much better mics in my opinion in that same price range. I would imagine that even the great Steve Albini though would testify to the fact that analog tape does not make good recordings. Good engineers and musicians do. Also, producing an album does not mean squat if you don't know how to run the gear. If you have another engineer doing it while you are producing, then it will work
Remember, a producer makes the decisions, but the engineer has to interpret what the producer wants and make it happen. If you don't know how to do that, then there will be problems. $8k sounds like the bare minimum to me to get a decent 2 track professional set-up. Consider that a lot of albums are tracked to tape, but then dumped into a DAW and mixed using a combination of the DAW and a traditional setup. You may need to factor some digital gear in somewhere.
A
Adam P
Well-known member
lpdeluxe said:
Hey, thanks. Like I said, I was only stating what I would do in that situation, more or less.
Milkfaj said:
Since you bring up Steve...I've spent the past couple hours looking for a post he made on a recording forum...I thought it was the recpit but I've been over that 3 or 4 times now and haven't seen it. In a nutshell, though, he tells about the beginnings of Electrical. As you probably know, its a two studio facility, with two control rooms, two dead rooms, and three live rooms. With mortgage and everything, Electrical wound up being around a $3 million investment, and took five years to construct.
It sounds to me like you want to emulate Mr. Albini in some ways, one of them being the use of analog recording. However, your argument for that seems to be, in a nutshell, "analog sounds better, and Steve Albini's diehard enthusiasm for analog confirms that". Really though, if you read some of his posts on his forum and on other recording forums, or if you watch his lecture to Middle Tennessee State U. (check electrical.com's forum for a link) you'll find that he prefers analog over digital for its standardized archival qualities. There's a nice thread where he has a lot to say on electrical's forum...try searching for RADAR and you'll find it.
Now I'm by no means saying that you're not capable of formulating an opinion on your own, because thats stupid. I'm just saying that if one of your goals is to be another Steve Albini, you should learn a bit more about what his points of view are.
C
Cloneboy Studio
.
Hah, Adam beat me to the punch!
Albini has gone on record saying *EXACTLY* that analog is superior for archiving music and that he doesn't trust digital equipment to preserve audio for decades upon decades.
He has said that good sounding albums have been made on digital, but he feels digital is more appropriate for commercial/disposable music recording.
I'll be honest here: I *DO* record disposable music. None of the bands I record are going to "make it" in any way thus the music doesn't have to stand the "test of time."
The important thing is to be recording in the medium you feel comfortable with. I had my analog days have been over for 10 years. I wouldn't want to work that way. It's too slow. Clients nowadays don't want analog unless they can AFFORD to do it (i.e. are paid professionals on a label).
If you look at the advantages/disadvantages of comparing digital to analog in the under 50K budget arena it is my belief digital wins every time. I would bet that using a 50k analog studio (no DAWs whatsoever) versus a 50k digital studio that the digital studio will work faster, work smarter, be more cost-effective (less money spent in cabling/patchbays), and produce better sounding audio because of the ability to easily edit, punch-in, use plugins, integrate software synthesizers, automate mixes and pan.
If you have a big budget or are 100% committed to analog and know what you are getting into... go for analog if you want.
And just because I like how a producer or band sounds doesn't mean I'm going to imitate them slavishly. I like about 50% of Albini's productions, but I liked his bands more.
Plus, if Steve Albini was at the early start of his career TODAY you can bet your sweet muffins he'd be recording bands on his PC using software and not on an analog... because he had to use what he could afford.
Albini has gone on record saying *EXACTLY* that analog is superior for archiving music and that he doesn't trust digital equipment to preserve audio for decades upon decades.
He has said that good sounding albums have been made on digital, but he feels digital is more appropriate for commercial/disposable music recording.
I'll be honest here: I *DO* record disposable music. None of the bands I record are going to "make it" in any way thus the music doesn't have to stand the "test of time."
The important thing is to be recording in the medium you feel comfortable with. I had my analog days have been over for 10 years. I wouldn't want to work that way. It's too slow. Clients nowadays don't want analog unless they can AFFORD to do it (i.e. are paid professionals on a label).
If you look at the advantages/disadvantages of comparing digital to analog in the under 50K budget arena it is my belief digital wins every time. I would bet that using a 50k analog studio (no DAWs whatsoever) versus a 50k digital studio that the digital studio will work faster, work smarter, be more cost-effective (less money spent in cabling/patchbays), and produce better sounding audio because of the ability to easily edit, punch-in, use plugins, integrate software synthesizers, automate mixes and pan.
If you have a big budget or are 100% committed to analog and know what you are getting into... go for analog if you want.
And just because I like how a producer or band sounds doesn't mean I'm going to imitate them slavishly. I like about 50% of Albini's productions, but I liked his bands more.
Plus, if Steve Albini was at the early start of his career TODAY you can bet your sweet muffins he'd be recording bands on his PC using software and not on an analog... because he had to use what he could afford.
M
Milkfaj
New member
Adam P said:
its not that i necissarilly (sp?) want to be the steve albini of the west coast (i wouldn't mind) but I just think that there are a lot of purists out there who would prefer to record in an analog studio. I was more using him as an example of someone who started small. (Ps. for anyone who hasnt read "our band could be your life", its a great read)
I should also mention that for now, I am a gigging musician first and I play guitar in a three peice experemental rock group. i wont be concentrating on learning to be an engineer until may, so ive got some time to think. I also know a pretty large network of bands in the bay area who i think would be willing to help me invest in the studio in exchange for some recording time. These are my hopes. if i flop, Ill just get a job at starbucks and have a kick ass home studio.
thanks again for all the advice- here is a quick rundown of my studio plan so far:
Mics- KSM44, SM81 (2), SM57(5), D112, AKG C1000, AKG C3000 ($2500)
MS-16 ($2000)
16-track soundcraft mixer ($1600)
2-channel compressor, Multi-FX, Joemeek preamp, 2-channel bluetube preamp, headphones & amp, DI box(2), monitors, 24-bit soundcard ($1500)
Foam, Baffles, Desk, Stands, Cables, Snake ($1200-1500)
that puts me at about $9000. i may have missed a few things- what do you think?
C
Cloneboy Studio
.
Milkfaj said:
How about some nearfield monitors? Or studio racks and a console? Those things don't come cheap and are vital to any studio no matter the size. Don't forget power conditioners.
Those Bluetube preamps suck. You can do better than those. Heck, an Aphex 207 dusts them.
Why get an AKG C1000 when you have 2 SM81's? The 81's are way nicer small diaphragm condensers for high hat (I'm assuming that's what the stray SDC was for).
You can get superior Soundcraft 24 channel 4 buss mixers used than what I'm assuming you're getting. Try 600 bucks for a Soundcraft 400b.
Cabling and snake alone may get to be 1200 bucks without a patchbay... unless you're going Hosa (not recommended).
Sadly... for all this money you can barely compete with a 3500 dollar digital based studio.
M
Milkfaj
New member
Cloneboy Studio said:
I was thinking of using the AKG C1000 for hi hat, I dont know if i can afford to put another SM81 in my budget, unless i ditch the C3000, which i suppose i could do. i dont know much about that mic anyway.
does the soundcraft mixer you are talking about have direct outs and good preamps? thats my main concern.
i'll admit that i dont know much about cables. i dont know exactly what Hosa is. Im not going to use a patchbay right away. Ive heard a lot of different things about cables and if someone could straiten me out id be very greatful. I know what XLR is and low and hi impetance (impotent?) but i dont know what TSR refers to, i just know its a 1/4" jack, right? What kind of cable would i use to wire my mixer to my recorder? Insturment, Speaker, Patch cable, XLR, TRS, none of the above? i know cables are going to be expensive, so if i run out of money, ill just ditch a few SM57s...
i also belive it was you that suggested an analog front with a DAW in the background? well, i wasn't planning on mixing down to analog, i should have made that clear. I want to get a better soundcard for my computer and use that for mastering.
i'll admit that when it comes to tape machines, outboard signal processors, preamps, etc. im pretty wet behind the ears, so sorry if my questions are annoying, but im friggin determined to learn. thats why im on this bulletin board.
PS.
Who has heard the album Rembrant Pussyhorse by the Butthole Surfers? I think thats a great sounding album and it was recorded with shit equiptment and from what i understand, very limited know-how. Ill admit my tastes are on the ugly-side...
I think that the creativity of the engineer is much more important that his budget, and i imagine that most of you would agree with me (to all of your credit) being that you are engineers. Its the person using the tool, not the tool itself. thats my philosophy at least.
HangDawg
bUnGhOlIo
I've got around $25k in my crappy home studio and I'm nowhere near done. I'll have another $10K in outboard gear before I could seriously mix, "Outside the box". Alot of the money was construction/treatment.
M
Milkfaj
New member
i should also mention that im really only interested (at first) at recording interesting bands that want an interesting sound, nothing over-compressed, effects soaked, etc...
i know a lot of people who cant stand to listen to music that was recorded pre-1985, that sounds even slightly raw, and who dont know what pitch correction is, but wont listen to anything without it. I understand that there are a lot of people out there like that, and i want them to hate everything i record. I cant wait for them to tell me my recordings are shit.
i know a lot of people who cant stand to listen to music that was recorded pre-1985, that sounds even slightly raw, and who dont know what pitch correction is, but wont listen to anything without it. I understand that there are a lot of people out there like that, and i want them to hate everything i record. I cant wait for them to tell me my recordings are shit.
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
You got some balls,... man!
Y'know, when you throw out a hypothetical question like this on a board like this, it's like throwing so much chum to the sharks.
Anyone remember Kenneth ... somethinorother... who threw out the classic question, "If I had a million dollars, and money was no object, what kind of studio equipment would you recommend?"... Man, oh man, these guys on this board just ate him alive!!!
With all due respect,... and mind you, I'm on your side,... but your question is a bit like that. You say, [para], "I wanna start a small pro studio on an 8K budget", and immediately you have the usual host of characters all piling on to tell you you're full of shit. Then, after about a dozen posts, the details get hashed out into something more realistic,... if you've survived that long. Some guys get chewed up and spit out, and run from this board like little whipped dogs with their tails between their legs. (Kenneth).
So, your dream setup is all "future/TBD", and that's fine. You have your outlined or proposed situation in your mind already, and that's the best thing. Most of this "you can't do that" advice has rolled off your back, as I've noticed, and that shows you have backbone.
When you start talking about outfitting a studio, pro or not-pro, everyone seems to want to chime in with what their favorite piece of gear or philosophy is. IMO, it turns into nothing more than a circle jerk, or "my dick (DAW) is bigger than your dick.
Just, MO. Stick to your guns, man. You'll do alright,... be it in a niche market or not,... you'll do alright with the proposed outline you've given. Having summed up the entirety of your proposition, I'd say you'll do fine. Of course, I'm not a "pro", and I don't pretend to be.
/DA
Y'know, when you throw out a hypothetical question like this on a board like this, it's like throwing so much chum to the sharks.
Anyone remember Kenneth ... somethinorother... who threw out the classic question, "If I had a million dollars, and money was no object, what kind of studio equipment would you recommend?"... Man, oh man, these guys on this board just ate him alive!!!
With all due respect,... and mind you, I'm on your side,... but your question is a bit like that. You say, [para], "I wanna start a small pro studio on an 8K budget", and immediately you have the usual host of characters all piling on to tell you you're full of shit. Then, after about a dozen posts, the details get hashed out into something more realistic,... if you've survived that long. Some guys get chewed up and spit out, and run from this board like little whipped dogs with their tails between their legs. (Kenneth).
So, your dream setup is all "future/TBD", and that's fine. You have your outlined or proposed situation in your mind already, and that's the best thing. Most of this "you can't do that" advice has rolled off your back, as I've noticed, and that shows you have backbone.
When you start talking about outfitting a studio, pro or not-pro, everyone seems to want to chime in with what their favorite piece of gear or philosophy is. IMO, it turns into nothing more than a circle jerk, or "my dick (DAW) is bigger than your dick.
Just, MO. Stick to your guns, man. You'll do alright,... be it in a niche market or not,... you'll do alright with the proposed outline you've given. Having summed up the entirety of your proposition, I'd say you'll do fine. Of course, I'm not a "pro", and I don't pretend to be.
/DA
C
Cloneboy Studio
.
Milkfaj said:
Cool, cool. Sorry if I missed that part (saw soundcard on list, but no software/computer etc).
You could record TO analog... bump into the DAW (you'll need 16 inputs unless you want to mess with track alignment) and add effects/mix and then go *BACK* to the RTR (you'll need 16 outputs for this) and mix down on the analog mixer to the analog RTR's track 15-16.
A major pain, but could be interesting.
Milkfaj said:
Ok, I understand your thinking now.
Lo-fi analog is cooler than digital lo-fi. In fact, digital lo-fi basically sucks... even I'll admit that.
Milkfaj said:
Creativity is nice, but it can't hold a candle to knowledge and experience.
The ARTISTS are the ones that should be creative. Engineers get paid to be fast and easy to work with to get the right sounds.
Farview
Well-known member
Hosa is a company that makes cheap cables. Normally, you would use balanced cables between the board and the recorders (depending on the inputs of the recorder) an 8 channel snake of any quality will run you at least $120. For 16 channels you will need 4 of them (2 in and 2 out of the deck) If you run everything to a patchbay you will need 8 (plus the patchbay)Milkfaj said:
Insert cables are about $15 each and you will need 16 ot them. Cabling adds up very quickly I've just told you about $720 worth and we haven't hooked up one compressor, effects box, headphone amp, monitors, patchbay, or microphone.
Outlaws
New member
Milkfaj said:
I am not going to bore myself with reading the all the replies that have been giving so far because I don't know if we ever got past Pro or Not Pro.
I will tell you first hand that all these guys are telling you that a $5000 preamp and compressor are important. Bullshit.
Fix your room that you will be recording in and make it acoustically sound. Then start adding gear.
Until then everything will sound like shit. Even their $5000 mic pres.
And if it is acoustically treated, even some shitty Chinese mics might sound a fuckload and half better.
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Maybe you should have read the posts - because acoustic design of the space was one of the FIRST things mentioned.............Outlaws said:
A
Adam P
Well-known member
I don't recall anyone saying to go out and buy a $5000 pre/comp, either.
Anyways, given what you outlined, and the limited budget, I would first skip the BlueTube pre. I'd probably skip the JoeMeek, too. If you plan on getting a Soundcraft board, you'l have enough usuable preamps. You won't have that one world-class pre right off the bat, but so what? I'm willing to bet that the Soundcraft's pres would be as good or better as either of those two units. there's a few more bucks you can put towards something else.
Also, I personally think that five SM57s is overkill. Seriously. They're inexpensive, and people talk about them being studio workhorses and whatnot, so the initial reaction is "get a bunch of them". Fight the urge, and go for a little variety. Sennheiser e609 Silvers cost the same as an SM57 (new) and sound as good or better (opinion, of course) than a 57 on a guitar cab. People also seem to like them on toms quite a bit. Maybe use some of the cash you saved from skipping the BlueTube and the JoeMeek and get a Beyer 201. Scour around on eBay for used dynamics from Beyer or EV. Maybe even a Sennheiser MD421, if you can swing the price tag. In a nutshell: go for variety. I own four SM57s (used to have five but I sold one and bought an e609) and I only go to them when I have nothing else to use.
Again, this is just what I'd do.
Anyways, given what you outlined, and the limited budget, I would first skip the BlueTube pre. I'd probably skip the JoeMeek, too. If you plan on getting a Soundcraft board, you'l have enough usuable preamps. You won't have that one world-class pre right off the bat, but so what? I'm willing to bet that the Soundcraft's pres would be as good or better as either of those two units. there's a few more bucks you can put towards something else.
Also, I personally think that five SM57s is overkill. Seriously. They're inexpensive, and people talk about them being studio workhorses and whatnot, so the initial reaction is "get a bunch of them". Fight the urge, and go for a little variety. Sennheiser e609 Silvers cost the same as an SM57 (new) and sound as good or better (opinion, of course) than a 57 on a guitar cab. People also seem to like them on toms quite a bit. Maybe use some of the cash you saved from skipping the BlueTube and the JoeMeek and get a Beyer 201. Scour around on eBay for used dynamics from Beyer or EV. Maybe even a Sennheiser MD421, if you can swing the price tag. In a nutshell: go for variety. I own four SM57s (used to have five but I sold one and bought an e609) and I only go to them when I have nothing else to use.
Again, this is just what I'd do.
Outlaws
New member
Blue Bear Sound said:Maybe you should have read the posts - because acoustic design of the space was one of the FIRST things mentioned.............after I shoved the talkback mic up my ass.
You are right. Post #11.
I see you also mentioned it. Ofcouse, you mentioned it after your ever so informative first post.
Too bad my scroll wheel is set to U turn after 5 full rotations to pass all the bullshit.
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Yes - it IS too bad -- otherwise you might actually learn something..........Outlaws said:
X
xstatic
New member
If it is an older SOundcraft (not a Spirit, M or E series, or a Ghost) skip all the other outboard pre's and sink that money into 1 nice 2 channel that has a good top end. The old Soundcraft pre's will definately smoke the meeks and the Presonus's in terms of warmth and beauty.
Similar threads
- astokesmusic
- Studio Building & Acoustic Treatment
