The cold, hard, facts

[Nameless]

One thing that bugs me about this board is some people seem to post before even reading the thread (Don't be lazy! ).

You raise a good point Jack, The Fact that most home studios have crap acoustics severly limits there potential;; What say we go in fifty fifty on this place???http://www.4smp.com/

And to that, I respond, I also see a lot of home studios with Avalon/Great River pres, high-end mics, Genelec monitors, and no room treatment.

If you can afford room treatment, get it now. If you can't, find a way, or ask for a way to work without it.

 

[flatfinger]

Would you mind repeating that?????

If you can afford room treatment, get it now. If you can't, find a way, or ask for a way to work without it.

Go see Ethan!!!!

 

[flatfinger]

THAT is why some of those who have been around the engineering block a few times and understand all that stuff come here, to try to explain:


G.

Appreciate it , That's why the forum exist. That and smack with CR

 

[flatfinger]

Go figure;
Just got back from the mail box w/ the june issue of EQ mag. on the front cover in big, neon lime green letters, "TWEAK YOUR ROOM" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[omtayslick]

Go figure;
Just got back from the mail box w/ the june issue of EQ mag. on the front cover in big, neon lime green letters, "TWEAK YOUR ROOM" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Me too. Room treatment is all the rage right now. But is it just another fad?

 

[RAMI]

Me too. Room treatment is all the rage right now. But is it just another fad?

Yeah...It's a fad that's been going on for about 60 years.

 

[junplugged]

glad nameless is here

i'm fine with reading repeats of stuff that's important - especially from different points of view and different people and using different descriptions b/c it might get in my brain in a different way and stick...this time...

this is art and it is subtle and there's always something new and interesting to learn, relearn apply, apply differently for hugely different results, or subtle but important results.

even if some gear is low-end or cheap or horrible, you are allowed to play with it and perhaps make some use out of it in some way that is good for your recording, wasn't distortion bad once? then we guitarists liked it.

judging from the level-headed responses and flame baiting posts, this guy is making a contribution without letting the unique 'flavor' of this place get to him, good. hey, maybe this guy can stick around for a while to help us...this time? ()

enuf opinons about the thread...

Q. can any decent recording be done in a room that's a rectangle, jammed full of stuff, low celing, and is by chance, tuned to somewhere around A-flat?

Q. can close mic'ing on everything solve room problems?

Q. Motown's original studio was in a home, but the snake pit was larger and had treatment, does that mean it was no longer a 'home' studio? and didn't they use a lot of the same kind of mic's?

Q. aren't there 2 kinds of mastering? one focusing on an individual song's sound, and the other considering the entire group of songs, as headed for a CD?

Q. all of this talk of 'quality' does it still matter as much as it once did considering people are compressing the file down to mp3 and listening in cars and ear buds?

Q. how can i sit in and listen and learn on a pro session? i'm sure there's a lot more attention to detail and a lot more time spent on the project than I take, although, i did spend possibly too much time on one of my recordings only to find later, that i spent all the time on the instrumental recording and mixing and my vocal track was just not good enough b/c i didn't comp it or really develop the performance and I kind of screwed the final result b/c of that. (it's on my myspace page)

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

What is the point of this question?

Well, the point of this question was obviously to get you to say exactly what you ended up saying so thank you for the response. You may take your methodology for granted since you do it all the time, but I suspect many here just flail away.

The other part of my question was about overall mix bus processing. What do you use, if any, and when do you introduce it? IOW, do you mix through compression/eq or add it later?

I probably can't consider myself amongst the expert ranks, but I've been around a little so I'll take a crack at some of these questions:

Q. can any decent recording be done in a room that's a rectangle, jammed full of stuff, low celing, and is by chance, tuned to somewhere around A-flat?

Well, it kind of depends on how big the rectangle is. If you have a low ceiling, make sure to treat it well especially over something like a drum kit.

Q. can close mic'ing on everything solve room problems?

I'd say that 'solve' is too strong a word. You can possibly get by with vocals and guitars but drums will be a problem if you have room problems. Overheads/rooms are a critical part of drum sounds and if they sound bad then you will have a bad overall drum sound.

Q. Motown's original studio was in a home, but the snake pit was larger and had treatment, does that mean it was no longer a 'home' studio? and didn't they use a lot of the same kind of mic's?

Ummm, no idea. sorry.

Q. aren't there 2 kinds of mastering? one focusing on an individual song's sound, and the other considering the entire group of songs, as headed for a CD?

If you use a mastering engineer you are hiring him to do one job - master your CD - that has many facets. This service should include both providing overall processing to each track individually so that each sounds as good as possible and that consistency is maintained between all tracks. They will also provide the tracks and data in a format suitable for mass duplication. Perhaps the professional mastering houses can comment further.

Q. all of this talk of 'quality' does it still matter as much as it once did considering people are compressing the file down to mp3 and listening in cars and ear buds?

Well, maybe not as much as it did previously but I don't think that it should affect your methods or be an excuse to get lazy. A well produced song will still sound good as an mp3. All IMO.

Q. how can i sit in and listen and learn on a pro session? i'm sure there's a lot more attention to detail and a lot more time spent on the project than I take, although, i did spend possibly too much time on one of my recordings only to find later, that i spent all the time on the instrumental recording and mixing and my vocal track was just not good enough b/c i didn't comp it or really develop the performance and I kind of screwed the final result b/c of that. (it's on my myspace page)

You can pay for various workshops that allow you to sit in on sessions. Maybe you could find someone that would let you hang out for free, but as many studios are now responding well to cash, I'd bet that you could make a decent offer to hang out in a session in a local studio. I know that www.michaelwagener.com has some such workshops. I'm sure there are many more.

WRT tracking, I strongly recommend being as selective and meticulous as you can when tracking. You will regret it otherwise. I don't shy away from digital editing when necessary, but I find that one of the negative side effects of its availability is that musicians get lazy. Back in the tape days we'd rehearse ad nauseum until we could play everything in our sleep to a click. Many of the better bands today still do this. But many people loop, quantize, autotune, and sound replace the life out of tracks and wonder where the groove went. Your life will be easier with good tracks. Everyone - artist, engineer, listener - will be happy if the source tracks are top quality.

 

[masteringhouse]

Q. aren't there 2 kinds of mastering? one focusing on an individual song's sound, and the other considering the entire group of songs, as headed for a CD?

IMHO mastering should bring about the full potential of any song within the context of the entire CD. It's holistic, I wouldn't really call it two separate kinds of mastering. One of the more challenging mastering jobs is a compilation CD of different bands/styles, recorded at different studios with different engineers.

 

[NRS]

Coming from more a newbie perspective I actally appriciated Nameless's original post and find it exactly the type of no-nonsense advice guys like me who are still learning the ropes and making crucual purchasing descions need to hear. Although I see the offense some of you bigger guns and regulars may have taken with his approach, I dont nessisarily think he's so far off the mark to assume other newbies like his intern arent also out absorbing misinformation here as well. In that respect I'd consider his post more a genuine effort to counterbalance some of that misinformation rather than a harsh assault on the forum itself and its credible members. He just didnt dig deep enough yet to realize there actually is a lot of good information here to be had already, but I dont think his intentions were bad.

That being said I would much rather see another seemingly knowlagable person like him welcomed to the community and ecouraged to participate more than ripped apart by the end of this thread for an initial first impression that wasnt completely inaccurate or unfounded. While it may be obvious to most of you who to trust, what the correct information is, and whats already been discussed here before, keep in mind new people are stumbling upon this forum for the first time every day who have yet to make heads or tails of it all. For those people I think a blunt first reading like Nonames is a good start.

 

[Nameless]

Q. can any decent recording be done in a room that's a rectangle, jammed full of stuff, low celing, and is by chance, tuned to somewhere around A-flat?

If you can, find a different room to record in. If that's not possible, close mic with a more directional microphone like a cardioid. (It really depends on what you're recording).

Do you have a closet in that room? Pack it full of stuff, clothes, everything you can. Put the mic right inside of that stuff so just the tip is pointing out far enough for you to record into. Take the doors off your closet if you can.

Buy/make some 4" absorber panels and deaden about 80% of the closet with it. Lay plywood on the floor over the carpet if you have any (assuming you're miking an acoustic instrument).

If recording an amp, point it facing the stuffed closet at the mic.

Q. can close mic'ing on everything solve room problems?

With an omni mic, not completely. Actually, never 'compeletly' but close. I've been stuck in a situation that left me with a cheap (Behringer) omni SDC mic, in a small, boxy room, with no treatment, recording a (beautiful sounding) acoustic guitar. I close miked it from literally about 4" away from the neckjoint. The results were not as good as I liked, but it was a great sounding guitar played by a great musician. The room was not very noticeable in the recording except in the higher frequencies. Applying a nice, natural studio reverb to the end result made me happier, and the artist much happier (find a good reverb!).

Q. Motown's original studio was in a home, but the snake pit was larger and had treatment, does that mean it was no longer a 'home' studio? and didn't they use a lot of the same kind of mic's?

I don't have a lot of direct knowledge on this. A treated room doesn't necessarily = a pro studio. I would say, a pro studio is one that has actual "pro's" working behind the desk, and that make a living off what they do.

Q. aren't there 2 kinds of mastering? one focusing on an individual song's sound, and the other considering the entire group of songs, as headed for a CD?

Are you releasing a single or a full album? Mastering is preparing something for duplication. At least that's what one definition is. It seems to have gained a new definition awhile back.

I will first say I am NOT a mastering engineer. I do have a mastering service but I tell my clients up-front there are better (and more expensive) people for the job.

Mastering an album is usually about getting all songs to sound good on the same CD, and choosing the order that they go in. Controlling fade-ins/fade-outs between tracks, overall volume, EQ, etc. Making the album sound cohesive and 'as a whole'.

Q. all of this talk of 'quality' does it still matter as much as it once did considering people are compressing the file down to mp3 and listening in cars and ear buds?

That's subjective. To me, it does (especially on acoustic music). I've had recordings that when converted down to even 64KBPS sounded better than most other internet MP3s at 128. Most of the shittyness is due to high frequency reflections in rooms among other things. Some pro recordings can be converted down real far and still keep their good sound.

Q. how can i sit in and listen and learn on a pro session? i'm sure there's a lot more attention to detail and a lot more time spent on the project than I take, although, i did spend possibly too much time on one of my recordings only to find later, that i spent all the time on the instrumental recording and mixing and my vocal track was just not good enough b/c i didn't comp it or really develop the performance and I kind of screwed the final result b/c of that. (it's on my myspace page)

I will take a listen when I get a chance. There are some videos on www.youtube.com of in-studio sessions, but usually not that helpful. And they usually leave out all of the over-dubs, and the actual planning that takes place on big budget recordings.

It's very important to take your time and don't be lazy on your recordings. If you would have spent the same amount of time on the vocals as you did the instrumental, would it have not come out a lot better?

 

[mshilarious]

That's subjective. To me, it does (especially on acoustic music). I've had recordings that when converted down to even 64KBPS sounded better than most other internet MP3s at 128. Most of the shittyness is due to high frequency reflections in rooms among other things. Some pro recordings can be converted down real far and still keep their good sound.

That's very true. Did anybody say in the '60s, hey this is just destined for AM radio, so let's make the mix suck real bad?

I like to use a multiband just for a quick translation check: leaving all the compression controls off, I turn off the high and low bands so it's just midrange. Then I turn off the high mids. Then I turn those back on, and turn off the low mids. Basically it's a really quick way to audition various bandpass filters, to simulate listening on a less-than-good system. If a mix sounds good on all those, it should sound good anywhere.

Provided, of course, that it sounds good with all the bands on

 

[Jack Russell]

- that, like it or not, "home recording" is the future of "pro recording". As such, not only are there more pros working from home (which means they belong here as much as anyone else), but they have a vested interest in making sure that the pro techniqes learned over the years do not die along with the pro studios in which they were first discovered or developed.

The real name change that should happen to this forum is the word "home" should be dropped. Home recording died with the cassette tape. Its just recording now.

Bingo! Now it all makes sense.

I think what's going on here, if I can diverge from the technical, and go into the social side of things: There is some definite resentment by the pros (such as Nameless, who has been in the biz for "30 years" as he states (and yes I did read his entire opening post)) or even jealousy, when they come on this form and ridicule those of us who've done very well with a fraction of the investment. Like you said, the technological advancements have made recording so much easier than in George Martin's day.

This trend repeats itself frequently on this forum. Not that it is a big deal, since I just learn to ignore the attitude and pick up what knowledge there is.

Anyway, you can go flame away in the Cave if you want to.

 

[DavidK]

With an omni mic, not completely. Actually, never 'compeletly' but close. I've been stuck in a situation that left me with a cheap (Behringer) omni SDC mic, in a small, boxy room, with no treatment,

Sorry but I am mighty curious about this. How is it that you get stuck in a situation using a Behringer mic in a closet? It seems to contradict everything you have said in this thread.

I'm a pro too, and have a megabucks violin. I have never been in a position where someone said "Hey Dave, use this $50 piece of crap fiddle for the concert" I wouldnt do it, not in a zillion years. I need the right tools for my work. Without them, I cant do the job and will not put my reputation on the line by working with garbage. That said:

4. Don't bother 'upgrading' preamps from entry level if you don't have at least a $500 budget. And that will only get you to the next level of "entry-level". You need to dump at least a grand on a good, solid preamp that is capable of yielding professional results (remember #2 and #3 though).

And yet you are in a position to be using a Behri mic in a closet? I dont get it.

Violin students ( and their parents) ask me all the time if they need a new axe for the kid. 95% of the time I say no. Why? Because they havent earned it. They cant "outplay" the one they have, so there is no point in jumping to the megabucks level.

Jumping from an entry level pre to a less than $500 one WILL make a difference. It will give the owner experience with new gear, sound somewhat better, etc. If your conclusion is that it is all or nothing, you are mistaken for THESE PEOPLE, maybe not yourself. You just proved that with the Behri story by acknowledging that the recording came out pretty good.

You CAN get a decent recording with cheap gear, I hear it all the time in the mp3 clinic. Maybe not a GREAT one, but a good one. When one has reached the limit of their gear and it becomes a hinderance, its time to move on to the big toys. Most people cannot do that, myself included. A bump from some sort of audio buddy to a $400 pre may be just the ticket for many, it will keep their interest and not break the bank. A bump from an audio buddy to an Avalon doesnt make a whole lot of sense unless you are in the extreme minority of people who need that. If you, a pro, used a cheap Behri mic in a closet, there is plenty of hope for the home recordist and $400 pres.

 

[gummblefish]

One simple reason, Jack.

If I had two bucks for every time a rookie/amateur/newbie/home recorder came on this and other similar boards, in person, or by PM, e-mail or telephone, and and asked, "how can I make my stuff sound like the pros", I WOULD be able to pay a house morgage.

"This is home recording" is no longer an excuse. The average gear in the average home studio is more powerful and more capable than your average Big Boy studio was back when "Thriller" came out, and is like a human compared to an insect compared to what George Martin had to work with at Abbey Road.

Like it or not, big studios are going the way of the paneled station wagon and being replaced by the XUV hybrids of the home studio. More and more music is being recorded "in the home" by everybody from the big named artists to people like you and me.

What's missing far more than anything else is not gear or environment; it's technique. A Shoeps mic into GML pre is not going to do your average rookie home wrecker any good whatsoever if they don't know proper miking technique and gain staging. All the bass trapping and bounce diffusion in the world isn't going to help make a great mix if the person running the dials can't tell the difference between 400Hz and 4khz. And all the drums in the world and all the recording gear in the world will not make someone who can't hit a snare drum with any consistancy whatsoever sound like John Bonham.

THAT is why some of those who have been around the engineering block a few times and understand all that stuff come here, to try to explain:

- that doesn't matter if this is home recording or not. If you are asking how to make somthing sound pro, you are asking how to make a pro recording. Period. And, yes, you can get there from here if you're willing to actually learn HOW.

- that, like it or not, "home recording" is the future of "pro recording". As such, not only are there more pros working from home (which means they belong here as much as anyone else), but they have a vested interest in making sure that the pro techniqes learned over the years do not die along with the pro studios in which they were first discovered or developed.

The real name change that should happen to this forum is the word "home" should be dropped. Home recording died with the cassette tape. Its just recording now.

G.

That Post should win an award or something. Probably the single most possitive message in the world ...well after Jesus. Seriously though!

 

[Crumbles]

I think Phil makes some good points, and I think you all should lay off him a bit. He's obviously stressed from the trial.

 

[gummblefish]

I think Phil makes some good points, and I think you all should lay off him a bit. He's obviously stressed from the trial.

Watermelon you come back with me to the cave this instance or im give you something cold, hard and er... factual

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

That's very true. Did anybody say in the '60s, hey this is just destined for AM radio, so let's make the mix suck real bad?

Well, yeah, unfortunately many did. They may not have used the term "suck real bad" , but there indeed was a lot of the "concentrate on the midrange and don't worry about th extremes" attitude in producing back then with the express intent of wanting the song to shine bright on AM without losing otherwise good hooks that AM just couldn't reproduce.

I seem to remember there was even a subset of some producers in the late 60s and early 70s who had an eye towards 8-track cartrige usage in cars and budding FM radio that wanted their stereo mixes with the balance shifted slightly offset to the right of center. The idea there was to try and make the mix sound more balanced to the driver on the left by making the farther-away speaker on the right a little louder . Of course that would leave those in England out of luck....

Not that I'm advocating either of these ideas, as they are more the realm of marketing than of engineering. Just saying that one should not be suprised at the extent that any given producer might or might not want to play with the mix - or even the arrangement - in order to try and anticipate the medium.

Like you said, the technological advancements have made recording so much easier than in George Martin's day.

Welllllll, what I meant to say - and maybe didn't do that great of a job saying - was that the gear is more powerful and sophisticated than in GM's day, but this sophistication and power has not really made the job itself any easier.

It may have made some tasks easier and more efficient (e.g. no more manual tape splices), but in many ways it has just shifted and steepened the learning curve in other directions. Most engineers did not even have to worry about MBCs, frequency analysis, automation setup, 38 tracks to mix, 50 non-destructive takes to choose from, etc. back then.

Throwing all this gear into an amateur setting may make some menial tasks easier and may open up some more possibilities, but the basics of good audio recording and engineering remain the same, and the level of complexity piled upon the basics have greatly increased.

G.

 

[Nameless]

Sorry but I am mighty curious about this. How is it that you get stuck in a situation using a Behringer mic in a closet? It seems to contradict everything you have said in this thread.

I went to the musician's home and recorded him. He is a friend of mine. I was visiting him in Florida. I wasn't anywhere near my studio and he had his own little home studio going on. No money to go to a real studio.

I'm a pro too, and have a megabucks violin. I have never been in a position where someone said "Hey Dave, use this $50 piece of crap fiddle for the concert" I wouldnt do it, not in a zillion years. I need the right tools for my work. Without them, I cant do the job and will not put my reputation on the line by working with garbage. That said:

You are failing to see the point. There is a HUGE difference between a $50 fiddle and a $50 microphone on a $2,000 instrument!

Anyway, I've tried to be helpful here and I guess people would rather just try and "prove me wrong" or something. Maybe to make themselves look smarter? Or just for the sake of arguing? I don't know.

I was hoping I could give some answers to specific questions people had that they couldn't get answers to, but I guess not.

Anyway, it was fun. Good luck to everyone. I don't feel like trying to 'defend' myself anymore.

 

[masteringhouse]

While taken away at a brief life of only 18 posts, I have to say in the short time that I've known nameless he has imparted a good deal of wisdom. He was a good man always willing to lend a helping hand to the unfortunate. It will be some time before his memory fades. As always, "the good die young".

Just like the tomb of the unknown soldier I salute you nameless!!!

The one thing that was reinforced for me from this thread is that forums by their very nature are a mass of confused disorganized information. Just like the Internet, the only way to make sense of them is to use the search button. Also as I've said in the past, it would be really nice (essential?) to have a FAQ for questions that pop-up all too frequently. If nothing else it would help to reduce the noise factor and make the information that's here more readily accessable and useful.