G
ggunn
Crystal Flavolian
acorec said:
Well, of course, but that isn't home recording.
Well, of course, but that isn't home recording.
R
robgb
New member
acorec said:
Another generalization. SOME of it sounds like that, some of it doesn't. I'd say that in SKILLED hands (both musically and technically), SOME of the low end stuff can compete with SOME of the high end stuff.
But to say it all sounds like basement recordings is ridiculous.
D
DJL
Self Banned
Yes and no... talent can compete, but the high end stuff is still better equipment.robgb said:
Dracon
New member
I agree! Too many bands either trying to be grunge or trying to be rappers. There are a few out there that I kinda like, but not necessarily because they are rare or innovative. Like I love that song from Darkness "I believe in a thing called love". It's just classic 80's hair band music and it's an awsome song, with funny undertones (especially the video). Also Jet with Do you want to be my girl, great great beat. Then again I really got into SKA when No Doubt came into the scene (although Gwen didn't hurt the eyes either). Now, there are a couple of songs that I still enjoy but I over played No Doubt and I'm tired of it.noisedude said:
However, White Zombie (Now Rob Zombie) has some cool music like a remake of Brick House, and "I'm your Boogie Man" as well as Dragula, Superbeast, and Never Gonna Stop.
As far as unique Enya has some really cool effects where she literally puts down several tracks of her signing the same song on different scales.
Bottom line it would be nice to have new bands be themselves and not try to be Green Day, the Red Hot Chilli peppers or Snoop Dog or whatever.
S
Smurf
New member
This thread.........
has had some good points made, but I think that it has missed the mark. I use the "crap, un-pro" stuff because thats all I can afford. And the more I use it the better I get at finding the limits of it. And when I hit the limits, I start considering whats the "next step" up. I use this, and other, forums to learn about the "next step" items so I know what to go look for when I am ready to invest again.
I understand that "pro" means a hard working, 24/7/365 piece of equipment. I also understand "pro" is someone who is use to working with this type of stuff. But, as was pointed out before, this is a home recording forum, and I come here to learn from all the pros AND semi-pros.
How about this......all of you who have used the "crap" items and think there garbage tell us WHY you think that, besides "cheap componets", made with slave labor, etc. Like this.....
I have just got a MXL990 and a Behringer UB802. With this combo + my voice I have a low - low mid hump that I cant get out just using the mixer. But I can remove it inside my daw using a software EQ. What would you suggest to do to get it out BEFORE it hits the HDD? I have tried moving the mic and myself around in the room, etc.Would you say live with it, or get a external EQ? This kind of info would be a great help to me.
You folks are a great help for us nOOb's in this part of the music world, recording. I have been a live player (as compaired to dead ;-) for over 30 years, but have just now sat down and started taking recording seriously.
Thanks you in advance for any and all help.
has had some good points made, but I think that it has missed the mark. I use the "crap, un-pro" stuff because thats all I can afford. And the more I use it the better I get at finding the limits of it. And when I hit the limits, I start considering whats the "next step" up. I use this, and other, forums to learn about the "next step" items so I know what to go look for when I am ready to invest again.
I understand that "pro" means a hard working, 24/7/365 piece of equipment. I also understand "pro" is someone who is use to working with this type of stuff. But, as was pointed out before, this is a home recording forum, and I come here to learn from all the pros AND semi-pros.
How about this......all of you who have used the "crap" items and think there garbage tell us WHY you think that, besides "cheap componets", made with slave labor, etc. Like this.....
I have just got a MXL990 and a Behringer UB802. With this combo + my voice I have a low - low mid hump that I cant get out just using the mixer. But I can remove it inside my daw using a software EQ. What would you suggest to do to get it out BEFORE it hits the HDD? I have tried moving the mic and myself around in the room, etc.Would you say live with it, or get a external EQ? This kind of info would be a great help to me.
You folks are a great help for us nOOb's in this part of the music world, recording. I have been a live player (as compaired to dead ;-) for over 30 years, but have just now sat down and started taking recording seriously.
Thanks you in advance for any and all help.
R
robgb
New member
DJL said:
Sigh. Is anyone disputing that simple fact? I don't think so.
W
wilkee
New member
Dracon said:
In the last two years I have worked with approx 30 bands and in that time perhaps two have shown any real talent with regards the songwriting talents, most of the others have just done basic covers.
One of the major problems is the venues, they will not book ant bands that do NOT do covers. The venue that I do most of my work in has a policy of booking 3 or 4 original bands a year!!
I have tried to change things by arranging a showcase night every month to allow new bands to get some exposure but so far the standard of has not been too good, as Dracon put it they all want to be Green Day or Mettalica.
It is looking as though the golden years of the 60's and 70's are gone forever,
but maybe i'm just showing my age.
Tony
R
robgb
New member
My wife likes watching videos on Fuel, an MTV like music station that shows mostly "alternative" music. I sit there with her and I swear to god every band, every song sounds basically the same. Clone after clone after clone.
Now, some of these clones are actually good. Some of them have a spark of originality, or songwriting ability or musicianship that sets them apart. BUT --
This world is SCREAMING for something new. Even if it's a reinvention -- as most "original" acts are -- of the tried and true. We need a Nirvana or an Elvis or a Beatles.
We're way overdue.
Now, some of these clones are actually good. Some of them have a spark of originality, or songwriting ability or musicianship that sets them apart. BUT --
This world is SCREAMING for something new. Even if it's a reinvention -- as most "original" acts are -- of the tried and true. We need a Nirvana or an Elvis or a Beatles.
We're way overdue.
B
boardman
New member
Been a while since I posted here or even checked this forum. After reading this thread it reminded me of why I've been gone for so long (not that anyone cares). Lets see, where to start. Well, lets start with the Behringer bashing. As has been stated in this thread many times, this is HOME RECORDING.COM forum not some pro recording.com forum. People have budgets and still want to record. There is nothing wrong with behringer gear. It does a fine job for the money and will serve most home recording peeps just fine as will a lot of other less expensive brands of equipment. While the pro's or semi pros (I don't recall seeing any of the engineers here with their names or their studio's on the cover of any big time recordings of famous artist) sometimes have good advise when it come to the art of engineering, they also want to make sure you know they are using brand x that cost way more money than most peeps can afford that are just trying to learn. My suggestion would be to have another forum for pro's only. That way they can talk amoung each other about all their fanncy gear and how much money they spent on equipment that they may or may not ever make their money back on.
The bashing of equipment brands here reminds me of the same thing over at Acoustic Guitar Forum. If you own a Martin, Taylor, or some other boutique made guitar then your safe, but if you mention Gibson (one of the best and most used brands around and made in the USA) it's like mentioning behringer here. The flaming begins. Gibson sucks, they make crap, etc.
Well I own behringer gear and own 2 gibson acoustic. I'm very happy with both and I don't give a damn if Sir George Martin himself told me my stuff sucked, I'd tell him to shove it. I say, each to his/her own. If it works for you, then use it. If you come here and ask about a specific brand (i.e. behringer) be ready to hear all the crap about how bad it is.
There are a lot of talented people here when asked about how to do a certain thing in the recording process, but those same people are also the ones that want to bash whatever it is that your using or thinking of using that they don't. You people with all this knowledge should be trying to help the people who ask these questions and keep in mind that they don't have the budgets that you all apparently do have. Instead, tell them how to use there gear to the best it can be used. And don't tell me that behringer is so bad that it can't be used. You might get some newbie to bite on that one, but I've been doing this for 30 years and I know better.
Just my 2 cents worth.
peace
boardman
The bashing of equipment brands here reminds me of the same thing over at Acoustic Guitar Forum. If you own a Martin, Taylor, or some other boutique made guitar then your safe, but if you mention Gibson (one of the best and most used brands around and made in the USA) it's like mentioning behringer here. The flaming begins. Gibson sucks, they make crap, etc.
Well I own behringer gear and own 2 gibson acoustic. I'm very happy with both and I don't give a damn if Sir George Martin himself told me my stuff sucked, I'd tell him to shove it. I say, each to his/her own. If it works for you, then use it. If you come here and ask about a specific brand (i.e. behringer) be ready to hear all the crap about how bad it is.
There are a lot of talented people here when asked about how to do a certain thing in the recording process, but those same people are also the ones that want to bash whatever it is that your using or thinking of using that they don't. You people with all this knowledge should be trying to help the people who ask these questions and keep in mind that they don't have the budgets that you all apparently do have. Instead, tell them how to use there gear to the best it can be used. And don't tell me that behringer is so bad that it can't be used. You might get some newbie to bite on that one, but I've been doing this for 30 years and I know better.
Just my 2 cents worth.
peace
boardman
R
robgb
New member
Thank you.
Sloan
New member
robgb said:
There's plenty of awesome music around you, it just takes some effort to find.
A
acorec
Banned
I agree to a point.boardman said:
Here is the problem:
Yes, you can get decent results with behringer or any of the budget equipment if you know what you are doing. I don't bash anyone for what they can afford. The problem IS that these people who buy the budget mic that sounds just like a U87 really belive the marketing rubbish that they read. So, they buy the super 87 deluxe pro mic. Then, they post that the mic sounds great (usually within 15 mins after trying it on a single source), post some quotes from magazine articles *proving* how their mic is really better than a U87. Now, however, they need a better pre-amp.
You guessedit, a Presonus Blue Tube has just been tested and sounds exactly like a Neve, only better. So the guy gets the presonus.
Then he comes on and posts complaints about the sound of the mic, the pre, or both. Now he needs a new mixer 'cause the mixer is certainly the problem. Since the mic is like a U87, the pre is like a Neve, the mixer is the culprit.
In the end, the guy finds out the mic sucks 'cause he brought it to a pro studio and really heard the difference between his beauty and a real U87.
See? Budget equipment is fine if you *accept* and *understand* the real limitations. To completely believe that a budget mic will ever sound as good as a U87 is foolin' yourself. This is where the trouble in these threads happens. Then we get labelled as gear snobs etc.
If people would use common sense all these bashing threads would not happen. No one would argue that a Toyota and a Mercedes-Benze were comparable at all, let alone the Toyota was the same or better. Why do it with recording equipment, guitars etc.? It is absolute reality that a $2000 mic is better in every way than a $100 mic. Don't you agree?
B
boardman
New member
I see what you are saying and I agree that a person should know the difference between a mxl and a u87, but again, this is home recording and a lot of these people don't even know what a neumann is. They are just getting started and have a pretty big learning curve in front of them. There are all kinds of things for them to learn. Most just want to start recording something so they use what ever it is they can afford or get their hands on. I'm not making excuses for this, just saying that just because they don't know, they can still get a good recording for them with lesser gear. If they go into a big studio and hear the difference and want to spend the money to have that sound, then so be it. They are know longer in the home recording budget and they will find that out when they go price check say a u87. But bashing what they have and telling them that that's the problem is not only not true in most cases, but does them a disservice by not just answering their question. For example, say they have an alesis 3630 compressor. They ask a question about it's operation, whatever they are trying to do, lets say ducking, instead for telling them the problem is the 3630 because it sucks, tell them how to set-up side chain and be done with it. They will find out on their own at some point that there is better gear out there or they already know there is better gear but a 3630 is all they can afford. It will do the job. But first they need to know the basics and they can learn that on a 3630. Forget about sound quality. You see what I mean.
peace
boardman
peace
boardman
A
acorec
Banned
boardman said:
I see what you mean. But, let's take the 3630 for a great example, the problem with these compressors is that they don't *act* like a decent compressor. I don't mean soundwise, I mean the settings don't act upon a signal like a "real" compressor, so trying to learn what these settings do is almost impossible as you cannot hear what each setting does. The controls are not sensative enough to understand them until you go way overboard. The 3630 does not perform like a decent compressor. That is the problem with some budget equipment. Most people who have been there are so aggrivated by the non-preformance of their 3630 that they dismiss it as a crappy unit without explaining why they feel that way. They get a better compressor and all of a sudden can hear what a compressor does!
Like I said before, you can record decent recordings with the *right* budget equipment. The trick is to find out what the acceptable stuff really is. That can be done with learning how the stuff works first.
B
boardman
New member
I get what your saying, I guess I should have used another brand to use as example, but my point still stands. Just put in some other brand in instead of the 3630. I use a behringer mdx2600. I bought it to replace my 3630 for just the reason you stated and it works great. As a matter of fact go to this link http://www.verdigrisband.com/studio.htm and you can see my whole studio. Just remember, it is a home studio and does everything I need and the end result is fantastic. However, it isn't the Hit Factory or even close, but I do get a quality finished product.
R
robgb
New member
Sloan said:
Agreed. If you look for it, you'll find it. I've discovered a lot of great independent artists and even big label artists who are more obscure because of poor marketing.
BUT, what I'm talking about it something groundbreaking. It's been awhile since we've seen that.
R
robgb
New member
As for all the complaints that you can't produce pro records with budget gear, I point to the many great independents out there that are doing just that. A lot of it sounds fantastic. And they often LIST their gear -- and it usually ain't high end. Just the opposite.
fraserhutch
Flypaper for freaks
robgb said:
This is true to a point, but there is budget gear and then there is crap gear. There is high-end, middle-end, and low-end. I think most people here believe that Behringer is low-end. I am not saying that Behringer gear is crap as I do not have direct experience with much of it, but what I do have experience with has proven to be less than decent gear.
The thing is, one or two pieces of low-end gear is not going to significantly hurt your setup. However, the more pieces of low-end gear in your setup, especially in critical places like your signal chain, the weaker your setup. I am willing to go out on a limb here and state that I don't think a studio of all Behringer-level gear is going to be able to produce great-sounding recordings. The *music* mnay be great, but not the actual sonics of it.
So, most of us here actively strive for the best setup we can afford. Of course, economics dictates what we can afford. I doubt anyone would knowingly and willingly choose Behringer gear over higher-end gear if money was not an object. And I seriously doubt that these independents you speak of are any different. I would imagine that they get the best gear they can afford.
R
robgb
New member
fraserhutch said:
While I don't agree with your assessment of Behringer, I agree that an all Behringer studio would be problematic. But then an all-ANYTHING studio would be a problem.
fraserhutch
Flypaper for freaks
robgb said:
I did state that I don't have a world of experience with Behringer gear, but just enough to make me leery of using it in the future.
Also, I did not talk about an all Behringer studio - I talked about an all-Behringer level studio:
I would suspect that there is a reason Behringer is regarded so poorly (you get enough lemons from a tree, you start calling it a lemon tree). In those cases where the unit may have less of an effect on the signal itself, the differences may not be noticable in isolation (i.e, for a single track). However, add them up in a mix, and you can see the difference.Fraserhutch said:
Now, I'm not a world class pro, but I am talking from experience. I started off with budget gear as that was all I could afford, and I did the best I could with what I had. At every step of the way where I upgraded gear, I could tell the difference, and learned very quickly how budget gear may sound fine in isolation at the store, but end up sucking when trying to get real work done. What I learned is to buy the best I can afford, since recording quality does matter to me.
[/RANT]
Now, yes it is true that this is a home recording board. However, people come in and ask for gear reviews, and when a Behringer unit gets panned they argue that it is a budget unit, and should be judged as such. To me, that's absurd. I would imagine that everyone would choose to get the best sounding unit they can afford at the price point they are willing to pay. If you don't think it's worth the money for that unit, then get what you think it's worth spending the money on. However, I believe it's ridiculous to argue that using a budget unit as opposed to a higher-end (and presumably better) unit will not have an effect on the recording. In my (humble) experience it will. Whether it matters to you or the music is another thing. After all, the quality and performance of the music itself is arguably more important than the recording of it; however, the is a RECORDING board, so we are discussing the recording aspect of it.
[/RANT]
My $0.02, FWIW.