Recommendations on the right studio?

[Rimskidog]

[quote]buying there own equipment and being a big part of the production process when they reach the "top" anyway,[/quote]

Absolutely right, but they usually hire an engineer in and rarely take over producing until they have many years of watching someone who knows what they are doing.

Like I made clear in the first place. I wasn't slighting anyone on this board and didn't comment adversely or otherwise on anyone's work. I was just saying that you get what you pay for and young bands shouldn't be fooled into thinking otherwise... and this is especially so in respect of mixing. A mix engineer without a decent monitoring chain is about as good as a chocolate fireguard. You only have to flick through myspace to hear the results. It was very real to me at the point I posted because I was working with a young band who have a real talent for songwriting. They paid decent money to a local studio and got crap delivered back. They aren't the worlds best musicians but the studio made them sound even worse than they are (and they used one of the most 'popular' studios in town).

Here's a tip for you all. The most obvious way of spotting a recordist who has no idea what they are doing is to listen to the drums. Most obvious of all is the snare drum sound. Does it have a solid crack or a puny fft? Does it sound like it would if you were in the dront row listening to the band (snare drum is a LOUD instrument)? Kick drum: does it sound solid and can you distinguish it from the bass guitar? Drums generally: do they sound as 'present' as everything else or are they way back in the background. Do the cymbals add a gloss to the mix or is it painful to listen to them? Overall can you clearly hear all of the instruments in turn and do they balance well? If you can't hear all of these things then absolutely right, you shouldn't be paying any more than the bear minimum for a recording. But, as someone said above, don't expect the radio stations to play your stuff or a label to pay for it.

Anyway, better go get my flight.

Cheers all
T

[cheddatom]

Rimski, you seem to be saying that you NEED experience to get a good drum sound. Have a listen to my stuff, I get a good drum sound!

[Rimskidog]

[quote]Well, it's subjective. I think that a lot of the "benifits" of an expensive purpose built studio with expensive equipment are lost by the time a piece has been mixed, mastered, and burnt onto CD.[/quote]

Okay. Have been holding back but here we go. This is just more evidence that you need to invest in some decent monitors. Grab a commercial cd of a signed band that you think sounds like the Premature Ejaculators and a/b between them. If the difference doesn't blow you out of the water then... well let's just say that you seriously need a better listening environment.

[quote]I'll take my guitarist's martin down to my room on saturday and do some samples with my cheap sh*t mics and cheap sh*t pre-amps etc. I'd be interested to hear an honest opinion of the "quality" of the sound.[/quote]

Which slightly misses the point. The problem for home recordists generally is in stacking tracks and mixing the outcome but I tell you what, wouldn't it be more interesting if after you've done that you bring the same Martin down and I record the same thing and then we can put the tracks up for people to a/b. Better still let's get a band to volunteer to be guinea pigs and we'll both record and mix the same track. My diary is bloody awful fro the next several weeks but it should be doable by, say, Christmas.

Now I really gotta get moving!

[Rimskidog]

[quote]Rimski, you seem to be saying that you NEED experience to get a good drum sound. Have a listen to my stuff, I get a good drum sound![/quote]

Mate, this was never about you though you seem to be taking it very personally. In any case, I have listented to the Prem Ejacs and maybe we'll have to agree that it's all just subjective eh...!

Edited July 18, 2008 by Rimskidog

[cheddatom]

[quote name='Rimskidog' post='242442' date='Jul 18 2008, 10:09 AM']Okay. Have been holding back but here we go. This is just more evidence that you need to invest in some decent monitors. Grab a commercial cd of a signed band that you think sounds like the Premature Ejaculators and a/b between them. If the difference doesn't blow you out of the water then... well let's just say that you seriously need a better listening environment.



Which slightly misses the point. The problem for home recordists generally is in stacking tracks and mixing the outcome but I tell you what, wouldn't it be more interesting if after you've done that you bring the same Martin down and I record the same thing and then we can put the tracks up for people to a/b. Better still let's get a band to volunteer to be guinea pigs and we'll both record and mix the same track. My diary is bloody awful fro the next several weeks but it should be doable by, say, Christmas.

Now I really gotta get moving![/quote]

Heh, sorry mate, I wasn't talking about the premature ejaculators, I was talking about (no logo) www.no-logo.co.uk have a listen if you can be bothered.

Either way, I have A/Bd the PEs next to nirvana and the like. Some tracks come out well, some of them don't - it's not a serious project. I don't even know what songs you can listen to for free?

I'm not really the competetive type! I have a (no logo) song i'm working on at home. It has no vocals at the moment but the drum sound is pretty f*cking good. I'll upload it on this thread at some point.


EDIT: Sorry, if it seems i'm taking it personally it's because i'm sick of people who have an arrogant self beleif based upon their age. That's not necessarily true of you, but the amount of times I have been told I won't or I can't get a good sound, it really winds me up! And then there are loads of old blokes running studios, making money of sh*tty demos for bands who end up ripped off.

I am one of the people you are saying bands should steer clear of, and so in that respect I think that taking is a little personally is understandable.

Edited July 18, 2008 by cheddatom

[Rimskidog]

[quote]I am one of the people you are saying bands should steer clear of, and so in that respect I think that taking is a little personally is understandable.[/quote]

I never said bands should steer clear of anywhere. I'm saying they should listen (I even explained how they could listen critically so they could judge for themselves) and decide for themselves whether the studio they are looking at will give them the quality they need for their particular prject. There's a time and place for a demo and there's a time and place for a full production. If bands don't understand the difference then they are not likely to get what they want.

The OP said:

[quote]we need to record a professional debut album for official release[/quote]

but went on to make it clear that he didnt really understand the difference which was when I chimed in. (I think you said yourself at one point that a label wouldn't want an inexperienced producer.) All I'm saying is that there is a vast difference between hi-end and lo-end studios and band should know what they are getting themselves into or they may be disappointed later. That's it.

I apologise unreservedly if you think this was in any way aimed at you. It was not. I'd be happy for you to come along and say hello and chat about recording when I'm quiet sometime if you wanted to. If not, that's fine too.

I'm outta here.

[cheddatom]

[quote name='Rimskidog' post='242484' date='Jul 18 2008, 10:42 AM']I never said bands should steer clear of anywhere. I'm saying they should listen (I even explained how they could listen critically so they could judge for themselves) and decide for themselves whether the studio they are looking at will give them the quality they need for their particular prject. There's a time and place for a demo and there's a time and place for a full production. If bands don't understand the difference then they are not likely to get what they want.

The OP said:



but went on to make it clear that he didnt really understand the difference which was when I chimed in. (I think you said yourself at one point that a label wouldn't want an inexperienced producer.) All I'm saying is that there is a vast difference between hi-end and lo-end studios and band should know what they are getting themselves into or they may be disappointed later. That's it.

I apologise unreservedly if you think this was in any way aimed at you. It was not. I'd be happy for you to come along and say hello and chat about recording when I'm quiet sometime if you wanted to. If not, that's fine too.

I'm outta here.[/quote]

No, no need to apologise, it's just the way I type.

If you have thoughts on (no logo) mixes I would be very interested and listen with an open mind. I'm well aware that I am still learning every day, and have a lot to learn. It sounds like you're a pro in the industry, so your opinions would be valued.

After the OP made it clear that he was not after a demo, I made it clear that I was not appropriate (as i'm not fully set up).

My general point was that it is not true that you NEED an experienced producer OR an expensive studio set up to get a GREAT sound. I think that that's a fact. If you look up my "The Strokes" example, you will see that proves it. If an unproffesional inexperienced, cheap set up works for you, then you should go with it, no matter how many people tell you the opposite - you can still get a great sound.

[ironside1966]

I don’t know where I stand on this really because when I was a in my teens I was in a original band, I don’t think we were too bad but have no decent recordings because all we went to was crap cheap studios.
I know can do better recordings by miles on my home studio.
I have also remixed recordings from so called pro studios because my clients have not been happy with the recordings.

But I am also aware of the short comings of my equipment, ability and acoustic spaces.

In my view when you pay for a quality studio you pay for 3 things.
Good equipment
Good acoustics
And the experienced and ability of a engineer.

I think Rimskidog is right if you go on myspace it is ovious witch was done tracks are done in a pro studio and witch was not.

A decent set of monitors and acoustic treatment is the best investment any home studio will make.
As for experience look back in ten years and listen to the work you have done now and see if you feel the same about it.

[cheddatom]

I'm not saying my views wont change, or that I wont be able to improve, or that experience isn't a good thing.

I am saying that the potential of a cheap set up is just as great as the potential for an expensive set up in terms of the "feel" or the music. Loads of people have released self record/mixed/produced stuff that's done well. What about The Streets? Another example of a record that sounds great but was put together in a bedroom.

I think that in 10 years time I might be a bit embarassed about the PEs or the like. With (no logo) there are already things I would change, but then I think most bands get like that about their records, no matter how much they spend there's always something you didn't notice at the time. I still think that there is a good drum sound on the last (no logo) CD and I will upload this new song i've been working on at the weekend which I am convinced will prove I can get a good drum sound with crap equipment.

You may think that "if you go on myspace it is ovious witch was done tracks are done in a pro studio and witch was not" but how many enquiries have you made about where these bands recorded their stuff? I have heard some awful mixes come out of pro studios, and obviously you have too seeing as you've had to fix them.

[ironside1966]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='242839' date='Jul 18 2008, 04:03 PM']I'm not saying my views wont change, or that I wont be able to improve, or that experience isn't a good thing.

I am saying that the potential of a cheap set up is just as great as the potential for an expensive set up in terms of the "feel" or the music. Loads of people have released self record/mixed/produced stuff that's done well. What about The Streets? Another example of a record that sounds great but was put together in a bedroom.

I think that in 10 years time I might be a bit embarassed about the PEs or the like. With (no logo) there are already things I would change, but then I think most bands get like that about their records, no matter how much they spend there's always something you didn't notice at the time. I still think that there is a good drum sound on the last (no logo) CD and I will upload this new song i've been working on at the weekend which I am convinced will prove I can get a good drum sound with crap equipment.

You may think that "if you go on myspace it is ovious witch was done tracks are done in a pro studio and witch was not" but how many enquiries have you made about where these bands recorded their stuff? I have heard some awful mixes come out of pro studios, and obviously you have too seeing as you've had to fix them.[/quote]

I agree with all you say but I think there is a deference between good, great and top notch.

Not listened to Cheddatoms track s but I will do later.
I don’t want to get too personnel so I speak generally.

The sound is not all about drums, there is the detail. In the sound that doesn’t get lost in the mix.
How the sounds gel together.
If you need good monitors and mixing environment to hear this detail but it makes the world of difference.
A good drum sound is not rocket science but the backbone of a good drum sound is the room it recorded.
IMHO it is very easy to compress and Eq the life out of a drum kit but to get the sound of a great kit in a great room is much more of a challenge.
.

Saying that some bands like a low fi sound a lot don’t

[cheddatom]

Well, I think that's half my point. Some bands do like a low-fi sound, and that can still be a "top notch" sound.

I'm not necessarily talking about "fidelity", i'm talking about the impression the finished product gives the listener.

I went to record in "magic garden studios" which is a pretty high end studio - he has an amazing variety of very expensive gear and god knows how many custom built tube pre-amps, and to be honest, when you were in there it made all the difference. There were all these subtleties to the cymbals etc, his room sounded amazing with it's wooden stage for drums. As soon as he wacked 10 layers of guitar on there it just sounded like any old mix that I could have done in my bedroom - all of those details were lost in the quest for a "wall of sound".

Also, his monitors made ANYTHING sound amazing. When I played the mix he gave me in the car on the way home, I was gutted about how crap it sounded compared to how it had sounded in the studio.

Horses for courses, obviously, I just don't like this idea that "more expensive = better" is a fact, because I think you can do a lot with a lot less money.


If you do fancy listening to some tracks, I would most appreciate feedback from a pro. I need to learn from my mistakes, but I don't have anyone around to point them out!

[ironside1966]

I Know what you mean the same thing happened in my recordings in my teens, they sounded great in the studio but nowhere else.
And they had good gear also..

I think one of the problems with going in to a expensive studio is you need to be ready, and budget for enough time to do a proper mix down. On a different day then tracking if possible.

There is no good booking a day in the studio and doing the mix down in 10 minutes.
Who’s choice was it to stack 10 layers of guitar
I bet you think back now the time sent putting the tracks down would have been better spent mixing

This is why you can get better results in studios like ours because we can allow time to get the parts right and more time on mix down, even put in time for free.

Monitors are suppose to be accurate and not enhance the sound in any way.
A lot of studios use grot boxes so they can judge the sound on smaller systems, that’s Yamaha Ns10 are still popular because if the mix is good on them then will sound good on any thing

Edited July 18, 2008 by ironside1966

[cheddatom]

Yeh, time is deffinitely an important factor. I suppose that's the same in every studio not mater who or what is in it.

Don't get me wrong, Magic Garden sounded great - much better than the most popular, and quite expensive studio in Stoke. The (probably not 10) layers of guitar were the producer's decision, but then I don't think he was that bothered about time - our manager was talking about booking more days to mix but never did. The rough mix was worse than rough though IMO for a studio and producer of that caliber. Maybe he just knew that our manager wasn't going to follow through so he coulodn't be arsed.

You're spot on about monitors. To be fair, at magic garden he had a pair of NS10s, but they didn't sound like NS10s because he had some fiend modify them and they're running off some amazing custom amp.

It just seems silly sometimes - the amount of money spent on stuff that might sound a bit better in the studio, but you can't tell the difference over the radio or on CD.

Do you work at a studio then? Which/where?

I think i'm going to do a few sample tracks to try and showcase what I can do, and then ask people's opinions (like you!). I want to be sure i'm as good as I think I am before I start charging people money.

I'm busy with the girlfriend this weekend apparently so I probably wont get any samples uploaded.

[ironside1966]

No I don’t work in a studio, I only have a small home studio like you, with relatively cheap gear, I did work in live sound for a number of year though.
Now I mainly do custom baking tracks for singers or part track for bands.

I have few of the cheaper TFPro or Jomeek pre’s, and Art Dps Pre amps
For microphones it’s Red5 Audio or Se microphones+ 57’s mainly.
I am amazed at the quality of the gear condidering price.

All I say with is be honest with people, I am sure your recordings are more than adequate for a demo CD or to sell at gigs. But played alongside Metallica or Nickelback or even Nora Jones will it compete.

As for sound quality I think you can tell the difference if you listen to any well produced CD it has a sense of detail and space, front to back prospective.
INHO a lot of home recordings sound one dimensional a wall of sound, but nothing beyond that.
When we hear something louder or with more bass and top our ears tell us it sounds better, we have all seen the smile of a graphic Eq in the hands of a beginner.
But when you really listen you can tell it is at the expense of the so important mid range which carries a lot of detail.