Indie band has $6 Gs from theri label

[trodden]

The fact is, most people around here were at one time in the same boat as the guy who posted the Gearslutz thread. And, most people here were asking the same ignorant questions only a few short years ago. Sadly, it seems like some around here are starting to feel like the uppity, cocky, discouraging pricks at Gearslutz.

I couldn't agree more. Talk about stifling one's desire to learn.

At least people have stopped prefacing almost every post they make with what type of vintage console they own.

true dat.

[Moon Unit]

I don't know if we were all reading the same thread or not ...

... but I didn't find any of the comments in the least bit "discouraging."

How hyper-sensitive do you have to be to think that?


No one is telling this guy not to pursue his hobby of recording. No one is telling him he can't do a good job, or that he shouldn't continue to do his own recordings, etc. etc. etc.

The problem here is that ... they have been given money by the label to do this thing. I think they have an obligation to make sure that the money is spent wisely. With that in mind ... whether or not he could produce something acceptable ... the safer bet would be to go with a dedicated facilty and/or dedicated engineer.

If you're in their shoes, and you think you can do it yourself ... then by all means, give it whirl. Just not on the label's dime. Put together some demos using the stuff you already have, and shoot them over to the label in advance. Ask them if the quality is acceptable; Can you use this?

If the label says yes, then pocket the money, or go and buy more stuff. But if the label laughs and says "What's this crap?" ... then take that $6K and have someone else do it. At least this way, you haven't gone and taken a risk with money that technically shouldn't be yours to do that with.


[/b]

[chris harris]

the label is taking the risk of giving them $6000 to "do whatever we want with the recording". it would have been simple for the label to specify how they want the money spent. they're not doing that.

and, insinuating that they've got as much chance of recording a good sounding album themselves as they do of making the Knicks roster is pretty discouraging. This thread is obviously not as discouraging as the one at Gearslutz. But, ASSUMING that they can't do it, or ASSUMING that they think it will be easy, or ASSUMING that they haven't considered other options and the possibility that they will fail, is pretty discouraging.

[chris harris]

also, the notion that you can't make a decent sounding, releasable recording that you and the label will be proud of, with $6000 worth of gear is not only discouraging... it's also outright bullshit that's been disproven time and time again in the pages of TapeOp magazine.

Again, going to a well equipped studio and working with an experienced engineer is the most obvious option. But, the best results don't always come from the most obvious options.

[Jon Nolan]

i think it was kayagum who mentioned getting a performance.

I agree whole heartedly!

IMO, Good songs, and good performances (in that order) always win over good gear.

as much as I hope for bands like this to come and record with me for a couple of bucks, I always cheer for the band/songwriter who goes and gets some gear. The people who dig it, and can make it happen, drive on. the folks who hate it, sell their stuff. I personally know of a shit ton of bands/artists who have sold their stuff (including some who come to me!) because it drove them crazy.

Whether it was implied, or said outright (i cant remember for sure), the idea that an amazing album CAN'T be recorded for 6 grand by a band with little or no experience is wrong!

If they want to "step it up," then save $2500 of that for a mixer in a great room, and a good Mastering Engineer. That'll still leave $3500 for a few quality pieces. They don't all HAVE to track at once.

We all dig good sound, so that stuff matters more to us than the average music listener, or even musician, dont you think?

anyway, cool thread.

Good songs and good performances always win. I'll take tom waits on a four track over plenty of other songwriters in bang up studios anyday.

hugs and sloppy kisses,
J-No

[mikeyc]

Good songs and good performances always win.

A professor told me when i was starting out "The secret to making a great record is to record Stevie Wonder." That always stuck with me. That, and "You can have the greatest snare sound in the world, but if you're an asshole nobody wants to work with you." Sage advice.

[Meriphew]

If the band in question was putting the record out themselves (on their own label), then I'd be more inclined to say go ahead and record it yourselves, but they're doing it for a label (perhaps a decent size indie label, as the guy said they were in a fairly well known indie band). That label is going to have some expectations of receiving an album that isn't sub par in audio quality. I'm not trying to discourage anyone from taking the DIY route, but this doesn't seem the appropriate time to do it IMO.

On the subject of this board getting to be snooty - like "Gearslutz" (personally I think most of the posters at Gearslutz are good people), I don't see it happening. I see people who have learned more over the last few years, and are speaking from a more experienced point of view, but I certainly haven't noticed people being condescending.

[msmith]

They should alot 5k for recording the record at a dedicated facility with an engineer that they like. They should then spend the reamining 1k on a weekend getaway and celebrate not breaking up over trying to record their own record themselves...

[chris harris]

They should alot 5k for recording the record at a dedicated facility with an engineer that they like. They should then spend the reamining 1k on a weekend getaway and celebrate not breaking up over trying to record their own record themselves...

yeah... If they don't have a "take charge" guy in the band, that the other guys trust, and who's really, really interested in doing this, then they're pretty fucked.

I'm lucky enough to be that guy AND have bandmates and lots of friends that I trust to keep me in check and keep me from overproducing my own records.

[Where's Russ]

if I were in this situation, I would ask the question "what does the Label expected?"

I've heard bands do great recording on their own, but if it's not what the label wants, well then their out X amount of dollars and have to spend another X amount of dollars to rerecord.

Personally, I've had a band give me session in which they tracked themselves but had other people mix. After replacing kick, snare, and toms, it sounded good. My philosophy for a low budget record is record drums in a great room. With all the micing a drumset takes, you're going to end up hearing the room. Even with vocals, the singer isn't loud enough to escape the room reflection.

[trodden]

They should alot 5k for recording the record at a dedicated facility with an engineer that they like. They should then spend the reamining 1k on a weekend getaway and celebrate not breaking up over trying to record their own record themselves...

yeah... If they don't have a "take charge" guy in the band, that the other guys trust, and who's really, really interested in doing this, then they're pretty fucked.

I'm lucky enough to be that guy AND have bandmates and lots of friends that I trust to keep me in check and keep me from overproducing my own records.

I always try to be that guy but get shot down.. but when it comes to freakin' technical, sound, recording, stage, stuff.. i have to do it all.. "what, after ten years you still don't know how to plug this into this?, you still dont' know what side of the stage you go?, you still dont' know how to put a DI in your signal chain?" i swear, last tour i had to be sounddude, stage manager, and bonus rocker each night.. that is not fun.

then it comes to songwriting its "trodden, don't use that fucking synth patch, we're not ladytron..., don't use that horn sound, we're not a fucking ska band" CLOSED MINDED I TELL YOU! just cause its a horn or a cool synth, doesn't mean i'm trying to make the band electroclash,ska,or anything else that is not "doom metal" fuck.. i'm worked up now. should have never sold my trumpet, bust that thing out and show them what they're missing.

ok, i feel better. its good they keep me in check. hahaha.

[Moon Unit]

Let's suppose you're getting married.

Your fiance's parents are footing the bill for the photographer. They give you six grand to take care of the pictures. They don't specifically tell you how to spend that six-K. But one would be safe to assume that they expect you to hire a wedding photographer.

The best man happens to like taking photographs. He has a good consumer grade digital camera. You've seen some of his stuff. Not a whole lot, but enough to where you have been impressed with a lot of his pics.

Do you give the six grand to the best man to go and buy a professional camera, and trust that he's going to get the job done? And justify it by saying "well, her folks didn't say I HAD to hire a professional." ? ?

It's not discouraging in the least if you tell the best man that you're going with a pro. On one hand, he's standing in the wedding, and he has other things to worry about. You need him to look sharp and to be where he's supposed to be ... to give a speech at the reception and to greet the guests and tell the ushers where to be ... etc. etc. etc. He's an integral part of what will be one of the most important days of your life.

Maybe you're missing out. Maybe the guy is a budding pro photographer in the making, and maybe his photos would have been stellar. But what if they're not? Are you going to take that risk on your future in-law's dime? Keep in mind, these people are going to be your new family. You don't want to get off on the wrong footing here. It might be best to play it safe for now.

On that same line of reasoning ... don't give the label any excuses to drop you. You might not get another opportunity.

.

[fossiltooth]

I haven't seen any truly dickish posts on this thread yet. (I don't know did I skim over one from Jeff Robinson or something?) Telling the one's honest opinion plainly doesn't make someone a dick.

Sure, anyone can record by themselves... great! But there's definitely something to be said for collaboration, and specialization. At the very least, one of the best parts about working at an outside studio is that you don't have to engineer all this shit yourself! There's a lot of stuff to worry about already. You could get to be a musician... like god intended! For chrissakes, I am an engineer, and I'd never want to engineer my own full-band tracking session or mix my own music. That's pretty crazy. If you have a budget of $0, at least get a friend to come over and help you out.

Additionally, I don't see TapOp as a "D.I.Y" magazine, and neither do it's editors. It's about doing the best you can, right now, with your available resources. Perhaps this band has better available resources, no? Working with a talented outsider might be one of them.

Home recording can be great! But, just because there are a couple home-recorded albums every year that people go ga-ga for, doesn't mean that's anywhere near the norm. People only seem to remember the exceptions.

My brother recorded a demo of this 2-minute long instrumental piece in his basement a few months back. He played all the instruments into a single sm57. He's not an engineer and has no idea what he's doing. I swear to god, it sounded better than any mix I've ever slaved over in my life. Everything else he demoed at home before or since? ...Sounded pretty crappy and home demo-y. That one arrangement just worked.

It all comes back to this: What's the aesthetic? If they want something that sounds like most Deerhoof releases, then sure, buy some cheap gear and get crackin'. "Prior experience" isn't a prerequisite either. I remember shaking my head in disbelief when I read that TapOp article about how they slave over their sounds and spend all this time listening on little laptop speakers... I can't listen to Apple O' straight through. It's just too grating, too consistently sonically annoying. I'm not talking about their music. I like Deerhoof. I do. Thos records sound how they should, and I'm sure they're able to recoup a $6k budget on their own.

I also love the Wipers, but some people talk about Greg Sage like he's some Sonic Genius... he's far from it. When it comes down to brass tacks, most of their original catalog is terribly mixed, and just plain ol' don't sound good. But you say, what are you talking about? "Of course the Wipers sound good!" Well it only "sounds good" because (aside from a few forgettable tunes) you're listening to some of the coolest rock music ever recorded in the history of the world.

Either/Or by Elliot Smith has some of the most annoying drums sounds I've ever heard. But, most of the time it's easy to listen past them so they don't detract from the music. Every once in a while the mix is absolutely retarded (on Ballad of Big Nothing for instance). But, if you listen to these things enough and fall in love with them, all these shortcomings will start to sound "good" to you by association. What kind of audience are you trying to reach?

You can make records that sound like old Magnetic Fields records or old Guided by Voices records by yourself with little to no knowledge. Same goes for most Deerhoof records, most of the Wipers catalog, or Pavement. Early Elliot Smith, Moldy Peaches? Go for it. It doesn't matter that you've never done it before, you'll be fine. These are albums that some people love. In fact you're probably better off going it alone as a beginner, if that's the aesthetic.

But, try for the Beatles... hell try for Blonde Redhead at home as a beginner, doing it yourself. Try for Air, or Neil Young or Tereolab or Martin Hannett, Sufjan Stevens or the Pixies. (if one more person tells me that Sufjan does all his stuff himself at home I'll flip out. It's just not true. Ask him.) There's plenty of impressive-sounding and beautiful music out there that was recorded in real studios on reasonable budgets. Not every record was meant to sound like it was recorded on a magical 4-track cassette deck and mixed by a novice.

There are rare people who are able to make great-sounding recordings at home without help, in a total vacuum. But... you probably can't think of many, can you? Wait, I'll give you some more time... Think of any more yet?

In the end, it's all about people working together. Nirvana's Bleach was recorded by Jack Endino in a pretty minimal studio. Just about everything on that record went through a single sm 58. I doubt most people engineering for the first time could make a record that sounds half as good to my ears with twice as much 'gear'.

I think it's great to home record and teach yourself and go DIY and all that. Do it when you're writing your songs. Do it when you're demoing you're songs. If that sounds good enough for commercial release, then go for it! If it isn't up to your standards yet, that won't change overnight, just because you suddenly got $6k worth of gear.

A hybrid approach can be great. It requires a smaller investment in gear. If you ask the average person, they'll probably tell you that getting a good mix is a more specialized skill than getting a good overdub, so remember that when thinking about your budget. On the other hand, getting a great recording also takes quite a bit of skill and experience..... or a lot of patience and experimentation.

[JGriffin]

Not every record was meant to sound like it was recorded on a magical 4-track cassette deck and mixed by a novice.

Can I make that my sig?

[fossiltooth]

Not every record was meant to sound like it was recorded on a magical 4-track cassette deck and mixed by a novice.

Can I make that my sig?

Sure thing.

Damn...

Looks I can type almost as much as jjblair or mike caffrey.