what are the secrets to having a really proffesional sounding rock song

  • Thread starter Thread starter sureimshure
  • Start date Start date
Ok i guess i need to rephrase my question... Other than the basics what techniques do you guys use to give your recordings a step above the rest to make them shine above the sea of mass produced music this generation seems to have stumbled apon. I hope that i may have helped to show you more of what im looking for at this point.
 
Rock song? Genre is irrelevant.


The way professional recordings are made can be broken down into several different roles.

- Songwriting
- Performance
- Engineering
- Tracking
- Mixing
- Mastering

These things are the events and mechanical manipulation thereof to produce a product. The role of the producer is to effectively manage all of these elements and guide them to a cohesive whole.

There are many different types of producer.

The "Produca" for instance, is usually an individual with a TR 808 drum machine or similar, and a microphone of some sort. This self-proclaimed title relates to the manipulation of sound through the use of a music workstation with sampling technology in order to transform "something" (eg. "loopz", "beatz", The Winstons' "Amen Brother" etc...) into "something something something". What this amounts to is....


Ummm.....



Well, I'm not exactly sure.


The executive producer on the other hand is usually someone who may or may not have much creative input on a project other than a general desire to bring it into existence. This is the person that gives the "OK" to put the money in place to make it happen.

Some producer types from the major label days of yore have been kind of "hands off" in what they do, instructing the engineers and other people involved in a project to "make me look good", as these people have no real clue how to effectively guide a project themselves. This type of producer should be avoided if possible.

The "hands on" producer is more of an individual that will coordinate with the artist and everyone else on board with the project to take songs through the journey from vision to product. This type of producer has a great deal of control over the project and typically makes choices regarding arrangement, performance and voicing of individual song components. It's critical for the artist to trust, be comfortable and work with the producer.

Sometimes the artist and producer are the same person. Not often, but it has happened. The problem is that it's a very different mindset and skill set from writing. Maybe the "Amen Break" beat over the verse is too much. Let's try four on the floor. The song will tell you where it needs to go. The producer guides this.

Sometimes on a project studio scale, a studio owner/operator will take on a client that doesn't quite have it all together and will have to silently assume the role of producer in order to guide the session smoothly. This has also happened on larger scale projects where the actual producer is a hands off figurehead and the role gets left to the tracking engineer as the next most capable person.



"Bring this thing into existence what which makes the air vibrate thusly" is the role of the artist.

"Nail this performance" is the role of the musician.

"Mechanically capture the vibration of air molecules to a storage and playback medium" is the role of the tracking engineer.

"I don't know, what do you think?" is the role of the producer.



Consider Led Zeppelin's first album. It took them a week to make it. Basically they went in to the studio with the songs, the arrangements and the sounds already prepared. 90 percent of the work was already done, they just needed to capture it. All the musicians nailed their performances quickly. Maybe not a typical example, but it shows what's possible if you're ready.

Vision, performance, vibe, the necessary rooms, gear and skills for mechanical transduction. There aren't any secrets.


It's very rare for one person to be able to fill all the necessary roles and bring a project to its best possible end result.

If it ain't happening you could either change your goals or plug the Foo Fighters into a sampler.



Oh, and what Moresound said too.
 
sureimshure said:
Other than the basics what techniques do you guys use to give your recordings a step above the rest to make them shine above the sea of mass produced music this generation seems to have stumbled apon.
Click to expand...

While there certainly are a huge number of process and techniques engineers/producers use...they are not all found in any one song and not necessarily needed for every song.

I get what you are asking...basically, how do you polish a song to take it from home-rec to pro-rec commercial grade...?
Well, having spent plenty of time polishing (yes, even managed to put some nice sheen on a few turds)...it really has very little to do with that.

To cut through all the mass produced music....you need 1.) a great song 2.) marketing to push your song out in front of the others, 3.) a lucky break.

When I say "great song"...I mean a well written song with great arrangement. Yes, the quality of the recording, mixing needs to be decent...but it really is NOT the thing that will stick your song out in front of the masses. I mean...it certainly doesn't hurt to have that million dollar studio sound quality, but there are plenty of songs on the interwebs that have it, and many are done not in pro-rec studios, but home-rec studios by guys like you find here on HR...and they STILL don't easily cut through the sea of mass produced stuff that is out there.

Nothing has changed from the old days (pre-home-rec/interweb music)....you still need to kick down some doors and kiss some ass and who knows what else...and then you might get there. Promotion will get you a lot further than some technique or process you toss on the mix to make it shine a little more.
It sucks to say that, and I wish that all we had to do was put out our best mixes and someone would just come along and cherry-pick them out of the sea of "stuff" that is out there....but it just doesn't happen.

Now...all that aside...if you are still just looking for techniques and processes...then you need to get a bit more specific. There isn't a group of process that you do to make anything sound better. It is very much a per-song basis, and what works on one mix may not on another....that's what I mean about you needing to get more specific.
Someone could say...add "XYZ" to make your mix pop out louder...but it's not going to work on everything.


Here's the first "technical" tip that sets the stage for everything else....
Start with great sources...and then record them as best as you can.
 
miroslav said:
Now...all that aside...if you are still just looking for techniques and processes...then you need to get a bit more specific. There isn't a group of process that you do to make anything sound better. It is very much a per-song basis, and what works on one mix may not on another....that's what I mean about you needing to get more specific.
Someone could say...add "XYZ" to make your mix pop out louder...but it's not going to work on everything.
Click to expand...

This^

Your question is too broad - I can see where you're coming from, and don't mind all the joshing going on here - but if you want to ask a more specific question like "How do the Foo Fighters get the amazing sounding guitars on XXXX?" as a starting point, then these guys, for all their poking fun, will help you achieve that end. It's a "one step at a time" thing...

There are some essentials, however - the ability to play well, and to generate the required base sound (not bass sound..) in the first place, so your gear and recording equipment and your ability to use the two at the same time, will have to be up to a certain standard.

Good luck, and keep asking questions...
 
Thanks so much for the last couple of answers!!! I know that i have a lot to learn and you guys have shown me some questions that i should be asking myself. Hopefully ill be able to better ask questions to get better answers with this knew knowledge.
 
Snow Lizard and Miroslav, and others have pretty much covered the "reality check" end of things. But a lot also depends on your own ends. Are you making music, and recording it, for the pure joy of doing it, or are you looking to create a marketable product? I think many of us fall somewhere between those two poles. I do it because it's really good for me (I'm 80% less of an asshole after I finish a three hour studio session), and if at some point it makes some money; goodie! But others have chosen music as a career, and everything turn in the road becomes a career choice (no stress there).

If you're trying to create something that you can sell, you have to be in touch with the market in which you're trying to sell it. Which means knowing what sounds are popular (this week), and tailoring your work to fall generally into that idiom. Being very original will can draw a lot of attention -- being TOO original can put you way over the edge into the "niche" market (some of us like it there, by the way).

You also have to figure out how to expose yourself. . .maybe I can put that another way :facepalm: In order to enter the market, you need to make the connections that will put your product in the public eye. This includes agents, managers, publicists, etc. Bear in mind that it's possible to sell a lot of an inferior product, if you can persuade people that they like it and need it. If you have a working band, that's a start. But there are perils. I managed rock bands for a number of years, and I can tell you that band members are their own worst enemies. A few of my bands produced some killer demos, but then got way too full of themselves and the band starting ego-feeding on itself until everything came apart. Solo acts may not have the same problem, but unless you're a guitar and harmonica act, you'll still need a backup band.

Knowing where you're going with the project is very important, because you'll have to steer it yourself until you can find someone else who wants to do it (i.e. producer, engineer, ahhh. . ."angel").

This list is a goldmine. Figure out specific things that you need to know, and you can get specific answers from a lot of people that have already been in that place and know what works. Peruse the old threads (I've been doing that for months). It's time consuming, but you may find that you pick up a lot of information that you didn't even THINK about asking. I know I have. Remember, what you get here is personalized, frequently entertaining, and free (but way valuable)!

And get a lava lamp.
 
No offense to either of you but ill be using cubase on a pc. I just prefer those technologies. Also ive been think about marketing my band for a while and have even gotten intouch with a few names and faces so my next step would be to start pushing some demos. Hence the professional quality ive been trying to achieve.
 
If you're answering me and kidkage, we were just kidding around. ;)
 
If you're in an active band, sureimshure, much depends upon your timeline and where you want to spend your cash. I don't know what you have for a studio set-up. For best results, you'll probably have to do some work on the room itself, and then tally what equipment you have to work with and what you might need. So there's an investment of time and money ahead on that path. Depending on where you're starting with that, you might find that it's more expedient to seek out a good studio and get a couple of good demos to potentially create some interest in someone who might be willing to pay for more demos, if you see what I mean.

What recording gear do you have at your disposal at this point? (i.e. mics, fx, etc.) And where would you be recording?
 
@steenamaroo and @kidkage haha i know youre joking but i know some people become very particular to specifically pro tools on a mac to the point where they think that its impossible to use any other combonation haha. @paddedcell im probably going to start a new thread on the "setup i have/plan to get soon" just so that there arent too many topics on this one thread. Also im still in the process of finishing writing the songs/arrangements for my demo. My band is coming over tomorrow night and were going to rehearse the songs i have so far plus some covers. I should be done with the studio by january and I plan on finishing my demo by mid february if you care at all.
 
Another tip is to post of some clips of what youre doing, telling us where to trying to go, and we can probably help you get there.
 
sureimshure said:
@steenamaroo and @kidkage haha i know youre joking but i know some people become very particular to specifically pro tools on a mac to the point where they think that its impossible to use any other combonation haha.
Click to expand...

People specify using protools for a reason. Usually the reason is that they're professionals. As such, they don't always work in the same room. Or the same city. As far as I know Protools is the only DAW that can lock to SMPTE. This is an ancient form of time code that became a standard for locking different devices together, like if you want to lock two 2 inch tape machines together to increase the track count. Or if you want to lock a 2 inch tape machine to a video machine or something. Another reason to use it since it's widespread on the professional side is that you can take a session that was recorded in Los Angeles or wherever and open it in New York or something and all the settings are intact. The session data is intact. You don't need to muck around with file conversions, time is money etc...

If you're just doing straight audio in a project studio and don't need these features you can use pretty much anything you like. There isn't a big advantage in sound quality. Even studios that use protools will sometimes have other DAWs available because they like the way they can handle the workflow. Cubase is just fine if that's what you're comfortable with and it handles all your needs.
 
snow lizard said:
People specify using protools for a reason. Usually the reason is that they're professionals. As such, they don't always work in the same room. Or the same city. As far as I know Protools is the only DAW that can lock to SMPTE. This is an ancient form of time code that became a standard for locking different devices together, like if you want to lock two 2 inch tape machines together to increase the track count. Or if you want to lock a 2 inch tape machine to a video machine or something. Another reason to use it since it's widespread on the professional side is that you can take a session that was recorded in Los Angeles or wherever and open it in New York or something and all the settings are intact. The session data is intact. You don't need to muck around with file conversions, time is money etc...

If you're just doing straight audio in a project studio and don't need these features you can use pretty much anything you like. There isn't a big advantage in sound quality. Even studios that use protools will sometimes have other DAWs available because they like the way they can handle the workflow. Cubase is just fine if that's what you're comfortable with and it handles all your needs.
Click to expand...

SMPTE seems to be a bit more widespread than just PT. Logic and Reaper (the two I am most familiar with) both deal with SMPTE.

I agree that with PT, you can take a project from venue to venue and the session data remains intact. But this is actually the case with any other DAW. For example, I only recently finished a remote collaboration with both of us using Reaper. But having session data intact does not always guarantee the same results. For example, you also have to have the same suite of plugins.

But snow lizard's main point is important: any contemporary DAW is going to deliver comparable results in quality, and it really doesn't matter which you use. If you are familiar with Cubase, go with it. Quality issues are more like to be influenced by what's happened to the signal on the way in and how it's being monitored.
 
Research, experimentation, trial and error, fail till you succeed.
Learn about mic's and mic'n techniques, EQ, compression, and mixing styles.

know your monitoring environment

1st is great source, and the mic'n techniques to capture that source.
 
snow lizard said:
People specify using protools for a reason. Usually the reason is that they're professionals. As such, they don't always work in the same room. Or the same city. As far as I know Protools is the only DAW that can lock to SMPTE. This is an ancient form of time code that became a standard for locking different devices together, like if you want to lock two 2 inch tape machines together to increase the track count. Or if you want to lock a 2 inch tape machine to a video machine or something. Another reason to use it since it's widespread on the professional side is that you can take a session that was recorded in Los Angeles or wherever and open it in New York or something and all the settings are intact. The session data is intact. You don't need to muck around with file conversions, time is money etc...

If you're just doing straight audio in a project studio and don't need these features you can use pretty much anything you like. There isn't a big advantage in sound quality. Even studios that use protools will sometimes have other DAWs available because they like the way they can handle the workflow. Cubase is just fine if that's what you're comfortable with and it handles all your needs.
Click to expand...

I have an Atari 1040 ste locked to SMPTE. I am sick of pro tools bull, nobody needs poo tools, any of the major recording software out there can do the same job. Oh it's a joke!!!

Alan.
 
In my opinion I wouldn't say you need great gear, but my opinion is you need a great foundation to the song itself. Chord progression, melodies and arranngment etc...

In this digital world we seem to think we need all the glits and glamour equipment to make good songs.
Just take a look at what The Beatles produced on a four track recorder...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top