What's it all about, Jean Paul?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LI Slim
  • Start date Start date
LI Slim

LI Slim

New member
This seems as appropriate a forum as any to discuss this; it seems to come up often in various ways --

WHAT IS POSSIBLE IN HOMERECORDING, AND WHAT GOALS CAN WE REALISTICALLY SET? (I'd hate to think we're all wasting our time.)

The question of whether we can get "professional" results in a home studio always comes up, such as when some of our esteemed recording engineers say that we can't. Well, if "professional" means "sounding like CD's produced by major labels", that's certainly true. But if it means "of high enough quality so that people who like your music will enjoy it without being distracted by the shitty recording quality", then it's not true.

Although unusual, there are examples of essentially homerecorded stuff achieving commercial success, even in the past ten years. And it seems to me that a really good musician with good ears who writes a good song and records it at home in an acoustically-good space can produce music that might lack the sheen, sparkle and depth of the zillion dollar stuff but can nevertheless stand up to it. For example, I've heard MP3's here from Ray Johnson and Aaron Cheney that I think are just excellent.

In addition, given that so many people listen to music through crappy computer speakers, portable stereos and the like, there is a question as to what that zillion dollar sheen in really worth at any level below the competing-for-major-market-airplay level.

Part of Dragon's mission statement is: "You might want to do it yourself to save money, have more artistic control, or to learn the music business." Exactly. If you don't have a recording contract to begin with, your choice is either to do it yourself or go to a not-zillion-dollar-professional studio and pay by the hour. I have found that the recordings I've made a home with my little $2000 (plus computer) set up are better than the (admittedly, rushed) recordings I made at a kind-of-professional studio with a, say, $40,000 set up. I'm making demos (that can be tailored to the venue) that I'm relatively happy with (just got a gig in the Village, man), and getting heard a little.

After all, it's not about the technology, it's about the music. Most of us don't expect to be or even aspire to be famous or able to quit our day jobs. But we are, I think, "serious" about developing and expressing ourselves musically. And it's a real possibility that some of us can find at least an audience.

I think that it's possible to make pretty darn good recordings with a fairly modest home studio. I think you can produce recordings that are good enough to reflect what you sound like live, and to get gigs, sell cd's locally, enter songwriting contests........be heard.
 
I think the main problem with the homerecordist is that the musician is the Engineer as well.
It's true that expensive gear and well designed rooms will get a better sound. And that many pro's wont compromise on that. But some of todays Home equipment sounds damm good.
The problem starts when it's put into the hands of a uncapable (even amazing guitarist) . It leaves you with results that many people would not except. Some dont care and cant tell the difference but many can and dont fool yourself into thinking other wise.
I once went to a perfomance that was amazing. This guy played the most amazing funky clavinet and blew me away. Afer the show I went to buy he's Cd he was selling that he recorded at home. I put it into my car Stereo on the way home and was so dissapointed by the quality that I dumped the CD. It was a true let down after such a perfomance (were the sound was done by a pro).

How would you like for a pro engineer who stank as a singer, sing on your album ? why not? Yet many HRist insist on engineering and to reach results alike pro engineer's.....not to mention they play the drums - guitar- bass -keyboards -lead vox and Back vox - master all by them selfs. Then they listen and wonder why dont I sound like _____. Ed's mp3's from his club prove the point. Short time, hard conditions, not very expensive gear yet the sound is quality. But have you ever heard Ed sing ?!?!??!? Hide your daughters !!!!
Do you think Ed will now make a CD of his singing becuase he can engineer it into something usable?.
Pleaseeeeeee Ed tell me your not thinking of it.......

To claim you got better results at home then in a pro studio only means in many cases that you fell on a bad recording enviorment. True time is a factor and to punch in at home 1000 times can lead to a better performance but I highly doubt it can result in better SOUNDING music.

Of course if your goals are to just make some people happy and express yourself in the process then this is a great thing and it's great that people can do this at home for a small cost.
I respect anybody who has a passion and goes all the way for it. But the line "Hey the Beatles did it on a 4 track" "It's all about the music and nothing else" is real nice for the living room conversations with other friends nodding their heads. Today it doesn't work.
The engineering process (tracking and even more the mix ) is part OF the music. Some engineers are no different then arrangers and mold the music into a art form.
 
Last edited:
It sounds like Shailat knows what he's talking about. He's got engineer ears. Enginears.

It comes down to what level of recording you want and what standards you set - demo or pro. I've heard *really* good demos here from ray johnson, emeric and others. From where I'm sitting, Ed's stuff sounds pro, although he's said recently he doesn't consider it to be full-on pro - this should tell you that Ed's standards are higher than mine (and surely that's one reason he gets killer sound on his stuff). So what you can achieve with home recording depends a lot on what you consider good sound.

Another point is who you're doing it for, who's going to listen. I think what Shailat said about homerecording not sounding pro enough really applies here. You want your girlfriend to flog your homemade CDs out of a suitcase beside the stage during breaks in your live gig? People are gonna buy 'em, but they're gonna know they're homemade too I bet. A lot of people won't care, some might not notice, and some might even be charmed. But it won't sound pro.

Final point - I'm lining up a real pro studio here, just to see what can be done compared to what I can do at home. And when I go into that studio, two things will be very nice. First, the guy behind the glass has the job of dealing with the sound, not me, and I can concentrate on the song. Second, because I've tracked a million times at home, I know what the process of singing and playing when recording is about. In other words, home recording can train you up for pro studio work, and train your ear for the mix later on too.
 
I think that it's possible to make pretty darn good recordings with a fairly modest home studio. I think you can produce recordings that are good enough to reflect what you sound like live, and to get gigs, sell CD’s locally, enter songwriting contests........be heard.




I for once agree!

STUDER, OTARI, MCI,… who needs it. All that research those companies made in order to PROFECT THE ACCURATE TRASFER OF SOUND TO TAPE… useless!


I’m selling everything.

I’ll record my vox in the toilet to PC, & mix down to VCR.

NOBODY will care & if some fool in front of his cpu gets upset because wood speakers & receivers are no more… FUCK HIM!
 
I think you raise important issues.

Shaillat, is the engineering process "part of the music"? Is the medium the message? Certainly, the engineering controls how good the music sounds. Is the engineer like the conductor of the orchestra -- in effect, the lead musician -- or is he more like, say, a basketball referee: the best ones make the game go smoothly and aspire to be unnoticed. For most music -- electronic and other overtly processed stuff aside -- I think the engineer's job is to put the musicians in a place where they can sound their best and most powerful, as opposed to imposing his vision on them.

I think that learning how to write and play and perform music is better training for engineering it than learning how to engineer is training for, to use your example, singing. Weren't most engineers musicians first? On the other hand, I think learning a little how to engineer is making me a better musician.

Although it doesn't fully address the question of what level of quality is possible in a home studio, I agree with your point that having objective, experienced, professional ears is invaluable and that we DIYers are losing something by overlooking that. To put it more broadly, like many endeavors in the digital age, we run the risk of isolation and self-involvement by taking too much on ourselves and not collaborating enough with others. (That's the opposite of what music is about.) This is one reason why this BBS is so important to us (and is also a reason why I wish more people, including the pros, spent more time and effort on the MP3 mixing clinic forum).

Dobro, that is a great point, that having done this at home will be incredibly helpful in working with an engineer. Also, sometimes I do wonder if the time I spend engineering is worth the time I lose playing. Have fun. I also suggest that you not be overly deferential (like I was; you might not be like this at all) just because he's a "pro". Like every profession, there's good pros and there's shitty pros and everything in-between.
 
LI Slim said:
I think you raise important issues.

Shaillat, is the engineering process "part of the music"? Is the medium the message? Certainly, the engineering controls how good the music sounds. Is the engineer like the conductor of the orchestra -- in effect, the lead musician -- or is he more like, say, a basketball referee: the best ones make the game go smoothly and aspire to be unnoticed. For most music -- electronic and other overtly processed stuff aside -- I think the engineer's job is to put the musicians in a place where they can sound their best and most powerful, as opposed to imposing his vision on them.

The engineer is for sure part of the team. When I'm on the other side as a nusician and the Engineer says to me "you know that conga part is not really adding anything and I think the guitar coming in after the vocals really gives it more of a push"... I listen and many times take their advice. The song can transform from a nice soggy rock song to an exciting hard pushing groove rock song due to an excellent mix. I have seen this done many a times. It's not writing the song but the enjoyment has been multiplied.


I think that learning how to write and play and perform music is better training for engineering it than learning how to engineer is training for, to use your example, singing. Weren't most engineers musicians first? On the other hand, I think learning a little how to engineer is making me a better musician.


The musician-engineers are the best type. Even those that dont play that well but UNDERSTAND music. Those can make the world of a difference.


Although it doesn't fully address the question of what level of quality is possible in a home studio, I agree with your point that having objective, experienced, professional ears is invaluable and that we DIYers are losing something by overlooking that.


I dont want to drag this disscussion to " If it's the song
that matters and nothing else....The beatles did it all on a 4 track....A good song and not recording quality is all that matters..."
Most of that is true however... The point should be - Why not aspire to get the best possible for my art ?
So what if most of you use HR equipment ?
If you care dearly for your art then make the outmost effort to bring it to the highest possible level. Maybe you should master by sending it off to a pro? Perhaps you should record your vocals in a good room with a good mic?. You cant beat drums recorded in a good studio. Why not take your drummer to the studio and have them do the tracks there ?!? Take them home and then do the rest at home. I promise you that your song will be transfered into a different world.
And today the recording process is part of the astetics
we enjoy. Can you not hear the difference between a tape and a cd ?!?! Is that not part of the enjoyment?
Watching a DVD action movie or a old 1970's action movie.... Listening in mono as opposed to Stereo...
Etc..etc..
I personaly beleive that anybody who claims that the song is it (of course we all know that!!!!) and the recording medium is less important is lying to himself.
That person knows that the real reason he is saying it is becuase he cant afford or is afraid of the studio.
Those are legit reasons but don't use them as excuses.



To put it more broadly, like many endeavors in the digital age, we run the risk of isolation and self-involvement by taking too much on ourselves and not collaborating enough with others. (That's the opposite of what music is about.) This is one reason why this BBS is so important to us (and is also a reason why I wish more people, including the pros, spent more time and effort on the MP3 mixing clinic forum).

As for the clinic...Some people (like me) have a slowwwww modem. But I do from time to time take with me some stuff to the studio and have emailed some people with some remarks....


Dobro, that is a great point, that having done this at home will be incredibly helpful in working with an engineer. Also, sometimes I do wonder if the time I spend engineering is worth the time I lose playing. Have fun. I also suggest that you not be overly deferential (like I was; you might not be like this at all) just because he's a "pro". Like every profession, there's good pros and there's shitty pros and everything in-between.

Dobro..
Go to the studio before... see how they treat you...are they respectable to your music? Can you relate to the engineer? Are they going to dump on you the assistant
<WARNING> <WARNING>...
Are you really prepared like you should be?...
Have you heard other projects from the same studio ?
Talk with them - tell them what you need before - Expect to pay 20% more then you budgeted...
Try to cut a deal like at night when it might be cheaper or... have them call you upon cancelattion of somebody else for a discount...Dont buy any media from them, buy it yourself before -CD's -Tape -DATS -ADATS ( formated).
If your doing drums, try to make sure they have set up the mics BEFORE you arrive.
Make sure you dont over book and they charge you for the full time.
Perhaps I should write a book about how to survive the pro studio ...:)
Click to expand...
 
Hey Shailat, thanks for the advice. I went round to the studio about a month ago. It's kinda old and seedy, but I like that. Mostly I was interested in whether I could work with the guy, and I can - he's okay - he's been doing it a long time, he knows how to communicate, and he doesn't score points. I got him to agree to be the engineer. But all that other stuff you mentioned about different rates is useful - I hadn't thought of that. I haven't heard any stuff from that studio, no, but I figure that since it's just me and an acoustic guitar, it ought to be a no-brainer for them. I decided to go with CD rather than 2" because I want to compare what a studio can do with what I can do, and I use CDs.

About the book you're going to write... :) I bought a book called "Studio Basics - What You Should Know Before Entering the Recording Studio" by Richard Mansfield, and it's useful, but it's written by a performer, not an engineer. Something similar written from the point of view of an engineer might have something of offer.
 
Damm. So the book was written already.....
Perhaps I should write a book on "How to survive the amature client- for the pro engineer".

Make sure you hear warning bells when you hear this line from the recording Amature.

"Ahhh Dude... the check is in the mail...."

"Ahhh dude... Do you mind if I bring a few friends?"

"Ahhh dude.... (looking over your shoulder as you concentrate on the mix) What is that red light all about,
and why is it flashing"

Why do they always throw the head phones on the floor when they are finished?

Why do they insist to dring beer untill they cant play ( they couldn't play before as well.....)

When are they going to stop trying to talk to me through the glass as if I can hear them in the control room.

NONONO... more of that banjo,,,, no even more..louder...there you go...(there goes the mix...)

Can a band ever get along with OUT throwing things in the room.....

What do you mean it's $45 per hour....at Joe's it's only $25 ?!? (joe has a studio during the night and during the day he uses it as a PA system for the local school)

Dont you love this guitar..it looks great.....it sounds great...(he's holding a Dender pratocastor in the shape of a star)

It CANT be me making that hum...not with this guitar it's great....it cost me $600 !! ( they cheated him out of $500)

and more and more and more....
 
Just getting back to the 'engineer/artist/equipment/song' thing again,
Moby recorded his 'Play' album in his home studio using an old version of Cubase on an ageing Mac II SI computer! With a few guitars, a couple of old keyboards including a 'Casio' (prob'ly a couple of new ones too ) a 'handfull' of Akai samplers and SM57 & 58 mic's.
You can hear him shuffling lyric sheets, you can actually hear a smpte time code generator on one track ('The sky is broken' , I think.)
Sure, it was prob'ly mastered in a pro facility, but in Moby's own words, "next to Madonna's Ray of Light, my album sounds home-made, but I like that."
Sonically it's not going to win any engineer of the year award, but I don't think the hoards of punters who bought it really care. The music is the thing,(within reason). Yes?

Macca
 
Well... everybody knows that. It's the music and not the tech. But nothing in life is that simple.....

Of course no enginner in this world can turn a bad song into a good one although they have saved to many asses to count............
 
The thing is ...
getting back to the original question, "What is possible in home rec'ing and what goals can we realistically set?".

I dunno, is the sky a realistic goal?
Modest equipment mixed with TALENT is the recipe, surely. Talent to play/sing, talent to track, talent to mix, talent to master? (at home?. Maybe, maybe not.)
Goals need to be just that, goals. Something that CAN be aimed at. It's hard to 'aim' at misty ideals or half baked fantasy. Each person who buys recording equipment of any kind must know what they are buying it for. What do they want to do with it. Where do they want to go with it. That's a big thing to ask a 'newbie' who in most cases has prob'ly been playing music for a while, but now wants to record sum'thin' and knows nothing about it, or has a skewed ideal of what they might like to do. I was just such a newbie. I been a player for ever. Now, with a wife and a young family, I got out of the 'band thing' and do all my playing at home. The thing is, the passion wont go away, so I record. I didn't want to start a studio. I didn't even particularly want to write a 'hit'. I just want to record for me. And maybe some of my friends. I got a all-in-one hard disc 8 track, and I'm happy, mostly. (Just a better mic, and a good pre-amp, and a CD recorder to mixdown/back up to, etc, etc!)
The thing is, have realistic goals.
Whenever I've responded to newbies questions here or elsewhere, on the few areas I know anything about, that is the one point I keep making. "What do you want to do with it?" If people have a realistic look at why they want to record, I believe there will be less chance of them becoming disenchanted later on.
Just my 2 bob's worth.

Macca
 
what is possible in homerecording?

My recording handbook says that you can make commercial sounding music with $5410. I think this book was written in 1989 or so, so those are old prices.

I think its mostly in the music. If you write great music, then you will be less concerned with quality.

My friend and I were playing around , and he got a song we recorded on the radio. We waited for two hours, listening to greats like creed and the dave matthews band, and etc etc. When the song finally came up, it sounded GOOD. Sure, the vocals needed some mids, and small touches, but nobody who heard it would have known that it was done in a bedroom, with a $200 guitar etc.

And while I respect smellyfuzz's audiophile views, I think you need to give us a break about quality. It does not have to be tape to sound good. Some analog recorded cds have so much of that freaking tape compression that its not even funny.


peace
 
another friend of mine did this at his home with a roland pma5, an onboard computer soundcard and microsoft sound recorder.

No eq no nothing and mixed with headphones. THe recording quality might lacksomewhat, but I would be happy to hear this song on a cd. just because of the quality of the music

http://www.mp3.com/paulbryson

"space dance"
 
Good thread! Good questions and very good answers.

For what its worth, I totally believe that it is possible to make a good record on what you call "home recording" gear, with reasonably inexpensive equipment.

I recently mixed an album by Pete Bardens (ex Them, Van Morrison, Camel) and Mick Fleetwood. The tracks were recorded (including Mick's drum tracks) in Pete's bedroom in Malibu. No acoustic treatment, just a bed, wardrobes, a table with a PC, Cubase, a couple of ADATS, one effect processor, one good pre and a little Mackie.
I mixed the whole lot on 4 ADATS and a Mackie D8B.
OK, it took me a bit longer to mix than "usual". I also re-did Pete's vocals and re-did the bass tracks.
Nobody believed it was done on ADATS and a D8B, it simply sounds good.

Another, old, example - In the early '70's I had a call from a band which was recording in the UK. They were very unhappy, they couldn't get the sound they wanted in the studio. I went there with the bands FoH console and the mic's they used for their live gigs. Ran bass and drums through the FoH console, 2 lines back direct to the 2" machine. Tracked the whole albums bass and drums live on 2 tracks. One of the songs on this album is regarded as a "R & R classic". Why? 'coz of the killer bass and drum sounds apparently.

Equipment is tools. There are ordinairy tools, good tools and superdeluxe tools. Same as cars. You can go from a to b in a Saturn, and you'll get there. You can go in a Jaguar, and you'll get there a bit faster and more comfortable. You can also get there in a Formula 1 car, and you'll get there very fast.
But....... unless you are a professional racing driver, you will more likely then not kill yourself in the F1 car.
Shailat said it very well - don't expect the engineer to sing, don't expect to turn out top quality recordings just because you have equipment.

I think its all a question of expectations. Record on whatever you can get your hands on. If your not happy with it, do it again, and again. Learn, learn, learn.
And don't think that, if you suddenly had a lot of money and bought the best stuff available, everything would suddenly sound so much more professional, it wouldn't.
You'd still have to learn.

At the moment I'm building my new studio. But I have a CD and a movie soundtrack to produce and record. So we've started doing pre-production at the artist's apartment, with a cheap DAW, and 2 cheap Yamaha keyboards. No MIDI gear, samplers, sequencers, anything. Do you think I'm going to re-record everything when the studio is done? Hell No!! Will you be able to hear what has been recorded in the studio on expensive gear and what has been recorded in the apartment? Hell No!!

Everything is possible if you work at it hard enough, and if you want it enough.
I hope that answers the original question.
 
MISSED MY POINT... DUDE

HEY EVERYONE,

To be perfectly honest I do not hate digital, I sync my CPU to my 8 track all the time.
I also have a tremendous CD collection.

Home recording... it is all about budget, I understand completely about that.

It is just that in my 20 years of being a musician I have noticed a few things.

Most musicians do not care or do not know what good quality sound is.

Many ROCK musicians I have met are burn outs, losers, never drive, smoke way too
much pot & say " it's about the music man! Not the sound on the tape."

Fools!

The purpose of recording is yes to get your song down but to also have it represented correctly.

Bill Corgon, John & Paul, Roger Waters, Neil Young all mastered the studio quality process
so they could show the world their interpretation of the few chords available to us.

So at home, with our limited funds, why not be as passionate about the sound
of the recording, as you are about the song writing, or playing, or gigging?
 
well smelly ..........thats one thing I agree with 100% and more
 
what defines GOOD from mediocre then? specialy you smellyfuzz, as you are so (no offense) full of good sound quality... what defines good for you? isn't good personal? sure there are some standards too which each musical piece must be measured too, but your average loser burn out never drive (what do you mean by that?) pothead rock lover might not like the sound you love.
Isn't time the only REAL constraint to get some decent (mind you ; not PRO) recordings?

guhlenn
 
hi sjoko2,

thanks for that expose. It put into words everything I've been trying to describe to my senses about homerecording.

When I first went into a "studio", I spent $90 to record two songs over midi files. vocals were a rode nt1 into vs1680, and it sounded bad.

Instead of going there again, I decided to put my stuff together. Even though I am still critical of my quality, my quality is better than what I got in that studio, and to me that is what home recording is about.

It might be a little bit harder with prosumer gear, but we can get it to where its pleasing to our ears, and the fact that we did not spend a boatload of money makes it even better.

And thanks homerecording.com I bought most of my gear through recommendations on this board, and that is why my quality is so good and was still affordable.

hi smellyfuzz. Respect. I was going to ask you too . WHat are the first and second things that jump out at you from your homesystem to alert you to the fact that stuff was homerecorded.

peace
 
Guhleen,

I'm not discussing preference here.

In the would of Audiophile land, many of us are amazed that a speaker like bose sells so well.
Bose speakers are usually bright, boomy on the bass (no detail), & have no midrange to speak of.

Now my favorite speaker in the world is a Theil. I like the way the high's sparkle.
Others do not. They like perhaps Vandersteens, Which I find to be to soft on top.
Both, however, when connected to a proper CD player & power source & cables,
will reproduce an & all instruments some what ACCURATELY.

In other words, what a Strat though an ampeg amp sounds like in the same room as you are in,
should be reproduced as close as possible over your speakers.

By the way, you do not have to spend a small fortune to get some what accurate sound.
Paradigm, Pinnacle, Denon, Rotel, Adcom & others do a great job at a cost about the same as everyone else.

Cyanjaguar,

"what are the first and second things that jump out at you from your home system to alert you to the fact that stuff was home recorded."

So many it could be endless.
As I have found on this sight, many have posted the need to learn how to listen.

Due to my own ignorance of good sounding recording, in the past I have had songs sound
muddy, lifeless, too bright, not bright enough, too much bass, not enough bass, harsh highs,
harsh upper mids, & other really big problems I have learned to some what conquer, lack of space, sound stage, depth & realism.

Nothing is learned over night. I'm far better at recording & mixing then years ago.
Equipment & knowledge has made it easier.
Any Engineer will tell you it takes practice. Any Audiophile will tell you it take practice to pick out a home system.

Attitude is most important though.
If you never cared how your home system sounds, if you say it's just about the music, if you just turn on the amp & hit record & live with what you get, well, you will never get good.

A great song.... Sounds bad.... Turn it off.


Ps. With all loving respect to my fellow rock musicians... I'm a pot head & a loser who doesn't always drive either.
 
CyanJaguar said:

When I first went into a "studio", I spent $90 to record two songs over midi files. vocals were a rode nt1 into vs1680, and it sounded bad.

Instead of going there again, I decided to put my stuff together. Even though I am still critical of my quality, my quality is better than what I got in that studio, and to me that is what home recording is about.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to try to convince people that pro gear makes a difference. Take it or leave it.
From my expereinces the people that moan most about
How they can do with out pro gear yet acheive pro standards are those that dont have access to it or dont know how to use it or cant tell the difference.
I'm not talking about the guys who sit in lab condiions and argue yes 96 - 44.1 or not.
I'm telling you all - if you compress a final mix with a compressor that you have pay mega bucks to rent/buy
or your simple software compressor the difference can be heard by ANYBODY with a good set of ears.

Now of course I'm going to get a ton of babble "but most people cant hear it"....."They play it through a boom box"........"It's the song so who cares"....
Well for one I care and it's only becuase I care about
my art and others art as well.
You will all try to buy a better mic yet if somebody tells you that a Rode NT1 doesn't cut it then you get red in the face and blow up. If it doesn't matter then get a radio shack mic - save your money and just mantra
"It's only about the song....It's only about the song...
It's only about the song" Say it 150 times and you might convince yourselfs.....
If some of you dont care how it sounds but only care for the song (home recording or not) I think those people have no understanding on what I call "sound astheics".
Everybody knows it's all about the song......
yet some of us ( and it has nothing to do with pro or not pro) care about the sound Asthetics AS WELL !!!.
We find huge enjoyment in hearing the brilliant sound desicions and you will find musicians and engineers litening to music and grinning not at the great solo guitar but at the amazing sound and the brilliant placement in the stereo spectrum and the crystal clear
vocals with an effect that makes you jaw drop.....etc...etc...


No pro serious studio. And I mean NO! pro studio is going to charge $90 for 2 hours of recording using a NT1
into a VS1680.
I'm not surprised you get better quality at home.
Not becuase I'm knocking the NT1 or Roland gear.
But Nobody and I mean Nobody! is going to tell me that is pro standard gear. Were I come from nobody would dare advertise such equipment as pro.

Any thing I wrote here has NOTHING to do with home V.S. pro recording enviorments.....Let nobody twist my words. You cant afford it then that is a excellent reason not to record with it. But dont rationalize it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top