Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: olddude
Date: 03 Sep 08 - 11:27 PM

If home-recorded music is good enough for your target audience, that's all right. But if you want to make a PROFESSIONAL QUALITY recording then use PROFESSIONALS instead of DIY


My point and I am no expert at all just the opposite. I know software that is about all I know. I also know that the University where I taught had a master degree program in sound recording so it is a science. But, and here is the but. I watched my friends create a CD that IMO (such as it is) as good as any I have heard anywhere. They sold nearly 10,000 copies and still going so others think the same about it. Yet it was done at home. So it seems that it comes down to the absolute skill of the technical person and adequate equipment from what I gather here and not the studio per se

am I wrong? I submit to those in the know, I am only asking

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 03 Sep 08 - 11:44 PM

Skill and the right equipment are certainly critical. If you have a background that is too "live" such as described above, the best sound guy and the best equipment will not overcome the environment. Even a live recording for publication will use the best sound equipment and engineer the artist or sponsoring organization can afford.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: olddude
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 12:29 AM

Got ya, I get it now ... a whole complete science for sure

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: john f weldon
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 08:24 AM

Two points...
Finding a legitimate excuse to hang out in a real recording studio can help a lot in developing expertise. I was lucky, but there are surely lots of ways... ...I find a lot of engineers talk to themselves as they work. No harm in listening in! And some are friendly enough to answer questions. (And there are a few crabby ones too!) I will repeat the word, legitimate. Too much kibitzing will not be popular.

Although it's nice to have recording and mixing in the same spot, these functions can be separated. One could have a quiet spot in the basement fixed up for recording, and just carry the tracks (hard drive, flash card, tape) to the less stringent mixing environment, probably your computer.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Will Fly
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 08:45 AM

If you play in a band, do you prefer to record the band in a "studio" setting, or in a "live" setting? I'll define my terms:

By "studio", I mean a typical setup where instruments are either DI'd directly in, or at least separated acoustically from each other. And where some inputs such as vocals or lead breaks are dubbed in later.

By "live", I mean a setup where the band might be mic'ed up individually and perhaps channelled through a mixer, but where the essential sound of the band is captured as a live, stereo performance with little subsequent fiddling around.

I think there are pros and cons to each approach. The studio setting allows individual areas of the recording to be done, re-done, tweaked, etc., until the final mix is as you want it. The possible downside to this (IMHO) can be a dullness which doesn't actually reflect the excitement of the live performance.

The live setting might capture the nature of the live band to a greater extent, but the initial mic setup/balance has to be got right, and the musician may have to do several takes - perhaps allowing for fluffs - to get the final result.

I've been in both situations and, to be honest, I prefer the live situation - the music seems to have a greater bounce to it. I do remember several studio sessions where, after a huge amount of time on quite sophisticated equipment, the resultant CD was OK but did just not reflect the excitement of the band at its best.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: dwditty
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 08:55 AM

In my mind, the quality of the music always takes precedent over the quality of the recording. SOmeone recently gave me an unreleased version of Blood on the Tracks...it is noisy, not quite balanced, and absolutely wonderful. There is no doubt in my mind that a good studio, and even more importantly a good enginner, can make a technically better recording than one done in a living room.   In my opinion, though, the music itself comes first. There are plenty of examples of good and bad in either case.

dw

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: treewind
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 09:21 AM

the quality of the music always takes precedent over the quality of the recording

With a doubt!
Of course the reason why some non-studio recordings are so good (musically) is precisely because they are live performance recordings.

Personally I think that with digital editing being so easy, a performer can afford to take risks in the studio that they might not dare in a public situation, with the attendant potential for an exciting performance.

Certainly given the choice of a musically good take with fluffs and a boring but technically perfect take, the sensible engineer goes for the more exciting version and fixes the mistakes (possibly with material from the other take)

Anahata

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: bankley
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 09:35 AM

I remember a band called "Harmonium" from Quebec.... for their 3rd LP, they rented a mobile studio, had it come to their farmhouse and worked on the project for weeks.... even had some of the Montreal Symphony on a lot of it.... okay, they had a big budget from CBS but went on to sell 10s of thousands of the record.... still a classic,called "Heptade"

also the 1st 'Cowboy Junkies' record... same idea.... set up in Trinity Church in Toronto... brought in gear... had to schedule around other church events..... it cost under $5000, and went on to sell well over a million copies.... 'The Trinity Sessions'

so here's to the 'have studio will travel' people like Danny Greenspoon and The Audio Truck,         just another tangent...

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 09:49 AM

One thing that struck me, while this conversation certainly points out the advantages of using a professional recording studio - I hope this does not discourage anyone from running down to Radio Shack and purchase some mic's, cables and software on the cheap. If you have any interest in taking your music "to the next step" - which could be an attempt at pursuing a career either as a performer or a songwriter, or if you just want to critique yourself - it is a worthwhile effort to do it at home.

As I've said previously, I would encourage the use of studios and the professional attention, experience and quality you can receive. However, not everyone is ready for primetime and you can waste an incredible amount of money that could be spent in better areas - pay for some lessons or attending workshops, instrument upgrades, etc.

As I said earlier, I have received a number of CD's that sonically sound awful - home recording gone bad.   At the same time, I have received CD's that are beautifully polished and obviously were expensive to make - by the artist sings off key, the instrumentation and arrangements are weak, and the songs have little redeeming value.   They spent the money before they were ready.

Get some criticism - and not from family or friends.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Mooh
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 09:58 AM

I like isolation booths, and lots of space to roam, level entry and exit, decent kitchen and washroom, a place to put instruments and cases out of the way, lots of headphones for everybody, decent cords, good mics, comfortable seating, good stands, good lighting, no smoking, sober everybody...engineer with ears and an open mind, a budget that doesn't set a deadline but rather a goal, an additional pair of hands to run errands & string cords & run from booth to booth...

I don't like having producers wandering around getting in the artistic way unless the project is self-produced by a musician on the session. I get tired of reminding folks to tune, or pointing out that a take was good if the whatever was actually in tune (had to do this again recently with both guitars and flute...drove me nuts).

Recording studios are good for those who don't want to strip everything down and set it back up for every session, and for continuity. They are good for acoustic reasons as has been pointed out...virtually every amateur home session I've been involved with has had many errant rattles, squeaks, hums, hisses, and interuptions (doorbells, phones, animals, pissy family members, and the usual assortment of ambient noises...planes, trains, automobiles, chainsaws, thunder, from the outside world). I'm usually being paid so it's all on the clock, but it's all a distraction which isn't good for creative stuff.

In a real studio folks don't jerk around near as much.

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Mooh
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 09:59 AM

Venting is such good therapy...

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Will Fly
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 10:00 AM

"Venting is such good therapy..."

Vent! Vent! Enjoy!

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Timo_Tuokkola
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 06:14 PM

Personally I like to record as much "live off the floor" as possible, I agree that the energy is usually far better than recording it piece by piece. I have a mobile setup (pro-sumer level, the gear is good but I mostly record hobby musicians). I find that the mobile setup allows me to work much more cheaply because I don't need to invest a great deal of money in a room that will be perfect for whatever I want to record in it. There are plenty of live rooms around that sound great without any special engineering having been done. I'm sure many of the musicians here have experience that feeling of playing in a room and just loving the way you sound in it. Studios certainly have their uses, but I will echo the thoughts of many on this thread and say that the skill of the engineer far outweighs both the gear and the environment.

P.S. when I mentioned the difficulties of recording myself I was referring to adjusting the pre-amps. I hate playing through a great take of a song and then finding that half the track is clipped because I started playing louder halfway through.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Peace
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 06:24 PM

Get a computer plugged into the sound board.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Big Mick
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 08:28 PM

If all you are going to the studio for is the equipment, don't bother. You can buy great software, mic's, etc today at bargain basement prices.

But the facts are that if you want top quality, and well produced product, you want a pro on that board who is just as accomplished (if not more so) as you are. You want an ear that gets what you are trying to accomplish and that has the savvy to tell you "that was an excellent practice run, let's do it again....". Anyone can press a button, but it takes a pro to understand the effect of compression on acoustic instruments, and to listen dispassionately to the "voices" of the instruments and the singers and get the appropriate mix.

Save the home stuff for reference cuts. IMHO.

All the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: bankley
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 09:49 PM

when I was working on my last CD... I was in the habit of recording some acoustic guitar tracks at home (KorgPXR4) , then bringing them to the 'Studio' and transferring to the other set-up, flat, no FX.... for future use... In the beginning the engineer was skeptical, kinda a techno chauvinism, also bit nervous about the fact that I could do a lot in my own way and in my own time... so he wasn't too crazy about the process.... but after working on the project on and off for around 5 months.... when we came to mix... he was asking me if this guitar was recorded here or at home... I got him good !.... plus I knew from day one what I was up to, where the strengths and limitations were of each environment.... not the 1st engineer that I've had fun with in this way.... sometimes, if it's someone that I haven't worked with before, I just say that I bought a cool tuner and a studio came with it.... so it's mix and match and have fun with it.... oh no, where did I leave the studio ???? hope you're not sitting on it, man....

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: john f weldon
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 10:02 PM

Har! I used to bring in tracks recorded in the worst (truly worst) possible way. The mixers would never have allowed them into the mix, but for my convincing prevarication! A few digital tweaks, and they sounded fine!

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: GUEST,Bob Ryszkiewicz
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 10:19 PM

Hi Kids: Personally. I have left the dirt, sibilence, rough edit, and a bit of white noise in my recording(The Ghost of Elvis) as the character in the song was not supposed to have access to the best equipment. For me, the weirdness accented the storyline. My goal was to create unique content, both lyrically and sonically. Fnerk 'em if they can't take a joke...

It seems to me we have several camps going on in this thread...Those that want to be recorded in a more traditional sense...And those that kinda like to throw out the rule book...

In the end, I suppose it's what comes out of the speakers, and a truly GOOD song & performance that makes it or breaks it...

Ya pays yer money and takes yer chances...

bob

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: JedMarum
Date: 04 Sep 08 - 11:44 PM

If you can't capture the good feel of live performance in a studio you're doing it wrong.

The point is that the studio (ie space, gear, engineer and producer) are on set of tools or instruments that must be mastered. The performance of the music is the other - and that is what we (the performer) brings to the studio.

The "studio" should allow the performer/s to do their best job of performance. That is why we use studios and pros with studio skills. Of course some people can do both (not many do both well, yet) and of course some people will produce great recordings in their living room. Most won't. I don't want to be known for my recording skills - I want to produce the best albums I can.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Jim Lad
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 02:23 AM

I can't think of a better environment to suck the creativity out of my veins than a recording studio.
I've made four albums in recording studios and just finished doing my first at home.
I'll be sending it off to CD Baby in the morning and have absolutely no doubt that it will sell as well as any of the others.
Probably better.
It isn't perfect by any means and the next one will be better but it is good enough.
Good enough to listen to.
Good enough to sell.
And good enough for Folk.

Why pay $55 per hour for a studio when two hours of studio time will buy you a very good microphone which will give to you, a lifetime of recording.

The software is here.
The equipment is here and if you are interested you will learn.
If you're not, you won't but to suggest that no-one or only a few can, is going a bit too far.
You know, I've switched off a heck of a lot of crap that was recorded in studios. (and rolled in glitter)

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 03:11 AM

Jim Lad said:
It isn't perfect by any means and the next one will be better but it is good enough.
good enough to listen to.
good enough to sell.
And good enough for Folk.

'Nuff said.

Mick

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Jim Lad
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 03:23 AM

You be the judge, Large Michael.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Jim Lad
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 03:54 AM

"AND good enough for Folk." is what I said.
I have never given a sub par performance in my life.
No matter what Saint Peter thinks, to some of us "Good enough for folk" means just what it says.

To answer the question posed by this thread "Why do we need recording studios?"
We don't but neither do we need to lose them nor exclude those who have chosen another way.

Maybe it's time I heard some of your Studio Recordings, Mick.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: mattkeen
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 04:41 AM

Having a good microphone (good ones often cost over £1000) doesn't mean you have a good sounding room, or any idea where to put it>

Some of the comments on here really make me laugh.
What do you think the really good engineers have been learning through their apprenticeships?

There are some things that you can record at home, and thats what I do but I also spent years working in recording studios to learn how to do it.

I have heard plenty of CDs recorded by someone who has bought a mic and has a PC, and their mates declare that its as good as anything recorded in a "real" studio - well I can tell the difference and if you can't then you don't know what to listen for>
Perhaps it doesn't matter that there is phase cancellation all over it , and that it will sound unlistenable in mono played by your local radio station, or that there is muddy sub bass all over the place that you can't hear on you poxy speakers - but that someone who pays hard earned money for it will hear. You have a duty to them to.

Maybe you will get lucky or you are just very naturally gifted, but don't go making out that it doesn't take skill, knowledge and training to do it well and profesionally.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Jim Lad
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 04:57 AM

It's not luck any more.
The software is designed for the novice and most Studio Software suppliers offer all sorts of support.
For the first time in history, the playing field is actually tilted in favour of the independent artist.
The music industry is suffering at the hands of consumers and artists alike.
Support studios all you want.
They have their place but there seems to be no shortage of consumers who either don't know or care that it's a home studio or actually enjoy that fact.
You know, if you worked as a studio engineer you are rarely (if ever) going to be pleased with a product.
That's the price you pay.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: mattkeen
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 06:05 AM

Not really trying to support studios Jim

I actually think that domestic setting is often the best setting for recording folk music in particular - I am just making the point that just coz you got the equipment doesn't mean you know how to use it.
I still often go back to pro studios for certain parts of the process (mastering is a good example because I need to know that what I am hearing is actually what was recorded and the pro studios I use have accurate sounding control rooms)

I agree, there has never been a better time to be an independent artist.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: oggie
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 07:29 AM

Some years ago Sound on Sound did a series where people submitted there own recordings to a mastering studio to be worked on by a professional. From memory most if not all of the artists said how much better the final results were than they had achieved.

The same mag also had a series where home studios were given a makeover again by experts. It showed two things, how little most of us know about damping, reverb, mike placement, noise control etc and what the benefits of expert advice and help really are.

I'm currently listening to a self recorded and produced CD. The music's fine BUT the track balances, bass levels and a host of stuff is all over the place. I ripped it down to MP3 and most of it became bearable (because of the amount of lost information) but the original CD is not a pleasant experience played through a decent amplifier and speakers

Steve

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 09:53 AM

"good enough for Folk"

The words "good" and "enough" should never be used in the same sentence.

I'm sorry Jim, but that statement is one of the reasons why "folk music" has such a reputation among the masses.   While we may appreciate the "do it yourself" and "home made" quality, the rules change as soon as you step in front of a microphone or perform for an audience.

Folk music SHOULD be made in homes, schools, churches, work, etc. The soul of this music is meant to encourage participation, not exhibition.   Over time, perhaps putting the blame on the "folk revival", the music ALSO found a home on the stage.   

Too often, people decide for themselves that their music deserves to be heard by others - whether others want to hear it or not. I'm sure all of us have sat through "performances" by people who sing off-key with instruments out of tune and singing songs that have little connection or feeling.   In their own mind, they are the next Pete Seeger. To the audience that sits through the performance, that singer becomes the image of "folk music" and the reason why they won't return.

Jim, I listened to your samples - and you are very good. The recordings, coming off a compressed MP3 through a crappy computer speaker still sounds promising.   However, what works for you is not necessarily going to work for others.

You also said "The software is designed for the novice and most Studio Software suppliers offer all sorts of support.
For the first time in history, the playing field is actually tilted in favour of the independent artist"    I have to strongly disagree.

You can buy software at your local Staples, but it is NOT the same softward that is used in reputable studios. Sure, you will get a fairly good sound, but you are not going to replicate the powerful software unless you spend the big bucks.

It is because of this software and cheap equipment that independent artists struggle. The cream does not always rise to the top because they are mired in a sea of mediocre.   You can give a painter a cheap brush that is missing bristles and paint that is difficult to spread, and while they might create something interesting - they are not going to work to their full potential because of limitations placed on them.

Your creativity might be sapped in a studio, but for others their creativity begins to flow once they realize the potential.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 09:58 AM

"there seems to be no shortage of consumers who either don't know or care that it's a home studio or actually enjoy that fact."

Sorry, but that is another statement that gets me upset. The MP3 revolution has a huge downside. Consumers are force-fed the latest toys and are settling for lower quality. Ipods and other devices tout the amount of storage available, but it often comes by accepting files that are compressed and lower quality than what you can get off a CD. Sorry, but there is a difference and it can be heard - except when ears become desensitized to what is acceptable.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Mooh
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 10:28 AM

This summer I had the pleasure of doing a couple of sessions in a studio which was the best of both worlds. It was essentially a pro equiped studio in a converted village home. It was a newer well constructed home with no issues or ailments, largish rooms (a basement rec room and main floor living room), a couple of isolation boths with room to swing a cat, and a decent sized control room, all reasonably soundtight, and all wired! I would have liked a window(s) between some of the rooms, but there was good communication otherwise. All the necessary wiring was hidden in walls and everything was very clean and organized. It was furnished like a home (I think the owners lived there) and had a very comfortable vibe. It looked like they decorated and moved furniture about for acoustic purposes, for the rooms sounded good. Compared to some of the converted churches, basement and rec-room studios, mobile rigs, and laptop studios I've seen, it was the best. The only thing I disliked was a flight of stairs, but they provided help moving stuff so it was okay.

I haven't heard the tracks we did there yet, so I can't attest to the product yet, but it sure felt nice.

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 11:16 AM

Just to clarify the above from Nick and Simon re my almost completed album The Whisper...

Yes, the bulk of the recording was done in my Alderney duvet tent (the rest has been done in Leeds, Burley-in-Wharfedale, Whitby and Norwich), but the mix down will take place at Rod Holt's studio in Otley, using his top grade speakers and kit, with Matt Nelson (who's a pro-tools ace) also assisting.

Rod had a CDr half way though the recording process, so he could comment on progress, plus I was using plug-in settings that he set up, and kit that he recommended - most notably the utterly stunning SE Reflexion filter, without which the whole thing would have been impossible.

In places I have even kept alternative takes, because you do need fresh ears to make some final choices.

So Rod and Matt are very much co-producers with me.

I have done more recording on my own this time round, but this was only because I'd already booked to be in Alderney when I realised I needed to do the CD now, rather than at Christmas as originally planned. I'd never consider putting out an entirely home-made effort.

No matter how much you know about recording and producing it's always best to have someone else to keep you on track, and the more skilled and better equipped they are, the better the end result will be.

Tom

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Jim Lad
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 12:13 PM

I'm extremely fortunate to have married a fiddler whose father also has an excellent ear but don't most of us have a circle of fellow musicians who can lend an ear?
Ron: I don't know if you're deliberately missing my point or just plain missing it so let me try again.
"Good enough for folk" is a joke that has been around for a long time but most often heard when some guitarist has just spent 5 minutes tuning his/her instrument to perfection.
When I said "And it's good good enough for Folk" I meant just that.
I wouldn't be putting it out there if it wasn't good enough for Folk.
I seriously doubt that I will ever produce anything in or out of the studio that I won't walk away from saying "The next one will be better". Haven't done it so far.
That's the way some of us are.
As for the mastering; I know you can spend $1000 on some engineer who will take your product into Wavelab 6 and tweak it within an inch of its life and you will come out with a perfectly polished album.
But you really don't have to.
Studios are great.
So are home studios.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 12:26 PM

"Ron: I don't know if you're deliberately missing my point or just plain missing it so let me try again.
"Good enough for folk" is a joke that has been around for a long time but most often heard when some guitarist has just spent 5 minutes tuning his/her instrument to perfection."

Jim, I'm not sure if I'm missing your point or if you are not understanding mine.

I realize it is a joke, but it has also become a reality that audiences and performers will accept ANYTHING because it is labeled "folk".   Not good enough.   No audience should endure someone spending 5 minutes tuning their guitar AND no audience should endure an out of tune guitar. "Good enough for folk" has become a sterotype cliche that the artist either doesn't know how to tune or will accept anything.   The audience is also sterotyped as excepting that behavior. I would not expect a symphony orchestra to say "it is good enough for classical" and they play out of tune and half-assed.

Jim, it sounds like you do care for your music and the quality you put out. If you can achieve your best in the home, then that is great.   Not everyone should walk away with the expectation that they can do the same.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Jim Lad
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 02:26 PM

I was referring to tuning backstage.
If you need to tune up onstage, get a better instrument or carry a spare.
Hate that!

mutter, mutter....

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 03:56 PM

Jim, as I told you in the PM, I like your music. I disagree with the position you took, and the language you used to describe it. I didn't misquote you, did I?

I think it is a mistake to approach song interpretation, and CD production, with a "good enough" attitude. But having said that, I also believe it is fairly easy for an artist to let the good be the enemy of the perfect. They are both just sides of the same coin, and they reinforce why it is so important to have that savvy set of ears, that talented mind, and that experienced hand, on the knobs. I have had the privilege of sitting in the studio with some pretty extraordinary producers, especially Paul Mills. I watched this man work with some of the finest talent out there and coax these wonderful and nuanced performances out of them and onto the disc. I observed him listen to what the vision was and then get that vision realized. And I watched him then use the technology to master it all into a final product.

As to my stuff, our CD's have been out there a while. We sell them at our gigs so stop by and pick one up. You could also visit www.myspace.com/conklinceiliband and have a listen to a couple of cuts. We are updating that site but I think we have some stuff there. We are also in the pre-production stages of a new CD. I will be sure to let you know about it.

Mick

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Timo_Tuokkola
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 04:14 PM

If your intention with your music is to achieve worldwide distribution via major record stores or major labels, I agree that your album should have the kind of polish that is only achievable by a professional engineer working in a great studio with top notch equipment. There are many artists however who simply wish to have a record to sell to people at their live shows. For these artists, the expense of recording in a studio will simply never be recovered through cd sales, which means that the home studio revolution has seriously tilted things in their favour.

And it is not "the mp3 revolution" which has caused everyone to settle for low quality recordings. For many people it is more about the content than the sound quality, which is why there is such a huge market for live bootlegs of Grateful Dead concerts. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't strive for the absolute best you can reasonably achieve, it simply means that total perfection is not nearly as critical as some people would have you believe.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 04:26 PM

"For many people it is more about the content than the sound quality, which is why there is such a huge market for live bootlegs of Grateful Dead concerts."

Very true, but it should be noted that tapers at Dead concerts strived for the best they could get. Soundboards were usually preferred over audience tapes. Deadheads in the taper section were using DAT tapes.

It is also important to consider that the tapes of Dead concerts were not intended for commercial distribution. The Dead allowed recording and trading, but they would go after bootleggers who tried to sell these inferior recordings.

Content is a key, just as we discussed earlier with Woody Guthrie. Total perfection is not critical, but the artists strived for the best they could get.

No offense to anyone here, but there are very few Woody Guthries or Grateful Deads out there.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 06:06 PM

As King Lear said, Reason not the need.........

some of us King Lears feel the need.

foolish, old, and absurd we may be.....

still that's the story.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Jim Lad
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 07:28 PM

Go back & read it, Mick.
You seriously misquoted me to the point of saying exactly the opposite to what I had said.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Maryrrf
Date: 05 Sep 08 - 08:18 PM

I think Timo Tuukkola had it right. For some people it just isn't economically feasible to record their CD in a studio. If, realisticaly, you are only going to sell a few hundred copies at your local gigs, you can't very well spend several grand on a studio unless you have spare cash sitting around. So for people in that situation, the inexpensive home recording setup is a boon. And I have heard some home recorded projects that were very good and that I enjoyed listening to very much. I'm in the process of working on a home recording right now. Would I like to do it in a studio? Yes for two reasons. I think it would sound better and it's a heck of a lot of work and effort for me to figure things out. But at this time I can't afford a studio so I'll do the best I can with what I have. I have recorded an album in a studio - I love it and I'm glad I did. But right now that isn't in the cards, and I want a fun CD of pub songs for pub gigs and St. Paddy's parties.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: GUEST,Johnmc
Date: 06 Sep 08 - 08:01 AM

From the listener's point of view, I think the content argument is misleading. You might listen once to find out what is in a bootleg, but they don't bear REPEATED listening (which is what we buy CDs for, surely).
    Also, famous artists want to be inspired by great musicians, and they can't always be gathered in front room.
   I have never heard a home produced CD nor a bugget studio one which can stand up against the expensive item when it comes to a group. One person playing acoustic is another matter, of course.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Jim Lad
Date: 06 Sep 08 - 12:18 PM

You know, about a year or so ago there was a thread about Home Produced/Burned CDs versus Factory Made and the same arguments came up then.
Some eejit and I don't remember who it was, said "I want my CDs shrink wrapped and free from the artists fingerprints" or words to that effect.
I've remembered ever since and thought it to be about one of the most arrogant, poorly conceived notions put forward outside of the BS threads.
As to the point about being able to tell the difference; I've only discovered in the past few days that a particular artist whom I had assumed was recording at home has actually been using a professional studio.
You don't always know.
You have been listening to home recordings and like me, have probably been tagging all of the poorer stuff as home made when they're not.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: meself
Date: 06 Sep 08 - 12:50 PM

There is no such thing as "the" listener. Listeners vary. I have many home-made and field recordings that I listen to over and over - and any number of studio recordings that I have listened to once and will never listen to again. For me, the content is far more important than 'production values'. Apparently, that is not the case for everybody. Fair enough. Despite some of the opinions expressed on this thread, there is no one 'right' answer ...

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Timo_Tuokkola
Date: 06 Sep 08 - 06:20 PM

With regards to cd's from expensive studio's with high production values being more worth listening to, I have just 3 things to say:

Backstreet Boys
'n Sync
98 Degrees

'nuff said.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Big Mick
Date: 07 Sep 08 - 07:47 PM

Jim, I didn't misquote you, I pasted your comments. The words were yours. Obviously you meant something other than what I and others took it to mean. A little clarity in your posts would help it not seem like such an imperious statement. I have no bone to pick with you, but the choice of words is what I responded to. Can I take from your subsequent post that what you meant was that you shoot for top quality?

Mick

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Jim Lad
Date: 07 Sep 08 - 11:48 PM

You chose to highlight some of the words in each sentence and by so doing inferred that I would give less than my best.
Very, very poor judgement on your part.
Go get your sugar checked.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 08 Sep 08 - 09:55 AM

"With regards to cd's from expensive studio's with high production values being more worth listening to"

Timo - I don't think anyone has said that, it is apples and oranges.

Quality of music contained is not a reflection of the quality of the recording. As "meself" suggested, there is no "right" answer to the quesiton posed by this thread - but some of us are sharing our views.

To dismiss the use of recording studios and saying you can get "just as good" at home IS misleading. As previously discussed, there are a number of good reasons to use a professional studio and utilize the skills of others.

At the same time, you can create some decent and worthy recordings in a home studio. I play many such recordings on my radio program.

The bottom line is quality. An artist should make every effort to produce a quality product and ultimately the consumer will do the grading.   I do feel that saying "good enough for folk" is highly insulting to the artists and the audience. Folk music is not some second tier music where garbage is acceptable. When we create such sterotypes, we live with the consequences.   A professional musician will know when a product is "good enough" for selling to the public.   (Jim Lad - my comments above are not directed at you. I've heard your samples and I can tell that you have given 150% to create a product that you are proud of and a consumer would be proud to own. My reaction to your statement, which was probably said without any malice, is because I've witnessed others who simply do not care and treat the music and audience as second class.)

I agree with Jim that someone who judges a CD based soley on "I want my CDs shrink wrapped and free from the artists fingerprints" is indeed an "eejit".   However, I think there is some reason behind that. If a CD is "free from the artists fingerprints" and shrink-wrapped, that would indicate the CD is a replicated disc and not a duplicated CD-R.   Replication is a professional manufacture where the information is molded into the disc utilizing a "clean room" environment.   A CD-R uses a ready-made disc where the information is burned into a dye layer.   CD-R's can have a shorter lifespan and are more likely to suffer from scratches. Unfortunately, to get a manufactured CD you are talking in quantities of 1000 or more, and that is beyond the means of most artists.    I have no problems with accepting or purchasing CD-R's, but I think the consumer should be made aware of the difference.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: Big Mick
Date: 08 Sep 08 - 10:05 AM

You know, I am getting tired of the uncalled for comments. I came on here based on your PM to see if I could help, but your smart ass comments have caused me to have a rethink. So here it is.

You wrote the post. They were not my words, they were your words. Your post seemed to pooh pooh the opinions different than yours. The fact is that you are the one that used the "good enough" term 4 times in as many sentences, and it caught me and several others as problematic, and emblematic of what we see with many performers in this genre. The real pro's would never view their work this way, and would have responded to that being pointed out by clarifying their intent in using them. You are the one who made a declarative pronouncement on a friggin' discussion forum and then whined when someone responded to your own words. Lesson for you, Jim Boy, words have meaning. You must be careful what you write, because context gets lost on a computer monitor at times. Oh, and I don't particularly like your smart assed use of the terms you have used on me. If you don't want your words and ideas critiqued, then don't lay them out there. And while you are at it, lose the attitude. The judgement error was yours, not mine.

In your first response post, Jim Boy, you asked me to judge for myself. Fair enough, here you go. I listened to most of the cuts, and it is a very good selection of songs, and they are well rendered. You seem to be basing your challenge on your talent as a singer. That is legitimate, because you have excellent vocal skills, know the material well and interpret it with a method that tells the story/message with effectiveness and style. Clearly your major influence is Tommy Makem, based on your style of singing, as well as the song selection. You seem to work every bit of what vocal range you have and the end result is good. Instrumentally, your style is very basic with few adornments, but you use it effectively and produce a nice background for your vocals. I do the same, as I am not the best instrumentalist. But the areas where your recordings fall short are the stuff that this thread is about. Clearly you are not using a very good mic, or if you are, you don't know how to balance it for maximum potential in the recording. The effect is that it sounds a bit like you are singing into a box or a tube. Additionally, your instrumental balance is not very good in some cuts, most especially where you are using more than one instrument. For example, in Boolavogue the balance between the squeeze box and the banjo are not done well, and the whole instrumental, IMO, is a bit more subdued that it should be. One doesn't want to overtake the vocal story, but it should not be underwhelmed either. There are some cuts that are fine, but there are plenty of examples where a producer in a studio would have asked you to do them over, and that same producer would have mixed them much better than you did. I make these comments because you asked me to judge for myself, and that is what I am doing. You say it is good enough. Maybe for you, but it wouldn't be for me. A very good effort to be sure, but not good enough for me. It is my opinion (which is what, after all, you asked for) that your "good enough" effort would have been well served with a professional ear put on it.

I would not have made these comments, but for the fact that you asked for them. In fact, I logged on to just praise your work and try to soothe your ire. But when I read your last comment, it became clear to me that I could not let your post stand.

I will say this a last time, then I am done with this inane, ego driven horseshit. I think Jim is a fine performer. I have enjoyed listening to the cuts he posts. My response was simply to HIS choice of words. They fly in the face of one of the most important lessons Rick Fielding taught me. Jim, if you want a friggin' dustup, then let's do it in PM's and let the thread get back to what it is about. I am only posting this because of your last post, and will not respond any further to any comments about anything other than the subject of the thread.

Mick

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe
Date: 08 Sep 08 - 10:19 AM

If you're looking to bring out a self released CD that will probably sell 500 copies and you want to stand a fighting chance of breaking even (or at least not losing too much), unless you already own a studio or have friends with a studio who can do you a favour, there is only a limited amount of time you can afford to spend there. You have to be creative and use the resources available to you wisely.

Isn't it ironic, too, that so much money is spent trying digitally recreate the sound of old four track analogue recordings?

Also, isn't it weird that these marvellous, expensive studios spend so much of their time putting out arid, soulless, overproduced, sterile, artificial-sounding crap?

And, now I'm on a roll, why do so many British guitar bands use so much compression on their recordings these days? It's not big or clever! They might all be using expensive studios and top engineers and producers, but it sounds horrible!

What about the eighties? How much of the stuff they churned out using the latest state of the art equipment and recording techniques is virtually unlistenable now, almost sounding as if it was designed to make the listener cringe - in a way that many earlier, more primitive recordings don't? Too much money being thrown at recording, too much cocaine being consumed, no doubt...

God preserve us from folkies who want to smother the music with polish...

Keep music raw, that's what I say. If I wanted polish I'd listen to Smooth FM instead of music I could give a shit about.

Finally, I have two CDs on a label that trumpets loudly on all its releases how revolutionary and wonderful and state of the art its recording facilties are. To my ears, they sound absolutely horrible. Despite the excellent music, I avoid playing them in a way that I never do my crackly old Harry Smith anthology or my Lomax field recordings or my first Velvet Underground album or my Kitchen Cynics bedroom recordings.

Sometimes, less is more.

Subject: RE: Tech: Why do we need Recording Studios?
From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe
Date: 08 Sep 08 - 10:27 AM

Which is not to say that spending what money you have on hiring a good pair of ears isn't a good idea.