Budgeting: Real Studio vs DAW

[@?,*???&?]

Didn't he already sort of do this? Ok, not in his own bedroom, but close enough. 'Ok Computer' was not recorded in a "real studio". The first few tracks were recorded in an old apple store on a fruit farm where the band rehersed. And the rest were recorded in a rented mansion in France. After reading a couple interviews, I get the feeling he prefers to work this way instead of in a "sterile" studio. The Red Hot Chilli Peppers recorded 'Blood Sugar Sex Magik' in another rented mansion. The Counting Crows recorded in a band member's living room. Beck locked himself in a storage room with protools and recorded 'Odelay'. A lot of what I consider the best recordings of all time, have come out of home studio environment.

Interesting dilemma here. A storage room will yield a single mic overdub which can be done anywhere. True. We need many more details of the Nigel Godrich sessions because if the studios were anything like 'The Manor' in England or 'Longview Farm' in Massachusetts, Nig was hardly winging it! Lol. These are home studios with full control rooms. Even Lanois' Kingsway Studio in New Orleans had a 16 buss API for tracking, although it had no control room. Don't think Nigel Godrich was hunkered down with a minimalist set-up, the guy is a pro. As for the Chili Peppers, I believe my friend Jim Scott did much of that disc and Jim won't be found recording or mixing without a Neve console at hand.

[gone]

...

[small sound]

I don't mean to sound like I'm not into good sound quality...I really am. But the bottom line to a lot of us is if the song had a good feel and vibe. One of the advantages of the home studio is it can be much easier to create and capture that vibe. What's the point of a song if it feels sterile, but the sound quality is awesome? Then you're like Steely Dan or something. Big deal. But if you can create a sense of mood in your music and really capture inspired moments, then music means something. I think that's the advantage of the home studio. Sure, it means there will be a lot of crap because now anyone can make a CD. But it also mean there will be a lot of amazing moments captured that might not have ever seen the light of day a few years ago.

[Mr. Dipity]

Radiohead and Beck probably get 7 figure advances to make albums. actually, if someone gave me a million dollars to record an album, i'd build a house, and a studio in the house, and pay Nigel to come over and record my album. and if the album flops, i'd still have a house to live in and a studio to record in. i guess for some, they DIY just doesn't go away.

The label wouldn't let you. By keeping you in the 'big' studio, burning money at several hundred dollars an hour, they make sure that you are surrounded by people who know the 'business', who know who's really buttering their bread (hint: it's not you - it's their repeat customer), and will make sure that the label gets what it wants - a commerically viable album.

Of course, if you were beck, you would get to do whatever you damn well please, damn him... :>

.. .. .. .. ..

I wouldn't know, but it feels like a lot of the grousing that is coming from the studios and professional recording industry is misdirected at the bedroom studio hobbyers. There a number of disconnects in the argument that 'buying a DAW system is an attempt to save money that gives you a poorer sounding end result than renting studio time'.

The argument that someone would be willing to invest several thousand dollars in to the process of making a record, and yet somehow unwilling to put the time and effort into learning to use the gear at home to get the results they want doesn't make sense. Sure, there will always be rubes who 'just want to be rock stars', and are easy with plunking down their money to do so, whether that be on studio time or a DAW system, but in either case, they are going to end up making artless shite. Did you really want them in your studio? Is this argument really about making better art or about fleecing the plebian in pursuit of their dreams?

Secondly, studios are out of touch with the times. How many studios are there that cater to the creation of emerging forms of music? How many are just set up to track guitar-rock trios? If you don't change with the times, you are going to die - what else do you expect? What can you offer me? As a consumer, it's not my job to tell you - you are the selling me your service, and are supposed to come up with creative ways of being of use to me.

There's also a lot of myth and hype surrounding the recording process. Both on the inside and out, it's regarded as some kind of mystical witch-doctory, that the uninitiated are incapable of approaching. Well, surprise - we were all uninitiated once. And, as a professional engineer with closing on a decade of experience, I fell comfortable saying that it's just a set of skills - the magic is the focus and creativity you bring to the task at hand. It's also in the gear, which you can buy for cheap now, if you know what you are doing - hence this discussion in the first place.

Finally, the reason that serious musicians are frequenting studios in less and less isn't because they are willing to put up lower quality 'home recordings', but because there isn't money in the process to cover the cost of the recording - the music industry has killed the studios. When every radio station in the country is playing the same 5 songs, all recorded in the same glittery LA studio, how are smaller emergent musicians going to see a return on the studio time they have invested in?

[@?,*???&?]

The vicious cycle unites us! At its core, computers are destroying the music industry! LOL!!

[Mr. Dipity]

The vicious cycle unites us! At its core, computers are destroying the music industry! LOL!!

Why do you say that?

Robots are destroying the music industry - human robots. Both the ones managing the business and the ones really in command - the ones buying the product. Will someone please stop them trying to stuff yet another guitar trio down my throat?

Computers are enervating music and allowing artists to reach unexplored levels of expression and originality. It's also making a lot of crap, but like everything, you have to know where to look.

[JES]

The vicious cycle unites us! At its core, computers are destroying the music industry! LOL!!

between that and the "home recording is a cop out", Jeff, you're starting to sound like a looney. I'm sorry, but home recording is a perfectly reasonable response to a set of objective conditions. And for lots and lots of music that's being made today, it's just fine. Yes, there are lots of crappy sounding home recordings, but there are also lots of crappy sounding big studio recordings.

It's also ridiculous to blame computers instead of the music industry for the shape that the industry is in. That's like me blaming my car if I rear end someone.

Not to diss the value of experience: there's no question that an experienced engineer is a rare and wonderful thing, as is a tuned room and a $100K mic locker. But really, the whole Tape Op ethic is to do the best you can with the tools you have available. I would never dream of releasing a record that didn't cross the desk of a professional mastering engineer. But I love home recording. It's cheaper -- even when you factor in the absurd costs of gearlust, it's more relaxed, and I've made better recordings than I ever have in a professional studio because I can take my time and try lots of different mixes over a period of months.

A lot of us record at home BECAUSE WE LIKE IT.

Best,
--JES

[dynomike]

don't be so hard on jeff. He's a pro... I know pros who started their recording career in a home studio and even they make fun of home studios! Its just natural.

I like recording at home because I am SOOO cheap and I always learn something from it. I'd love to record in a kick-ass studio with someone else pushing the buttons though, because I'd be able to focus on my playing rather than whether I forgot to turn that fan off or not... etc.

mike

[silversound]

Jeff, do you actually play music? Or do you simply engineer? Or both?

[wardshorsehead]

I have noticed a trend in this thread that became clear with the last post.

I think many of use are musicians first who get into recording as a means to archive, work out song ideas, demo things to others, etc. With time, experience, and gearlust, our Porta5 becomes a decent DAW or standalone recorder, better mics, a dedicated space, etc. Then the idea to actually record an album becomes a possibility. Again, for most this is often described as a vanity album. Some of us stop here, or continue in the same vein. Others have the ambition, connections, or enough muso buddies to do this on a limited basis for others.

I think it is a pivotal point when the notion of professionalism comes into play. When one decides that the process of recording as a career is of interest/viable, the stakes change (as do the expectations), and the goals, tools, and aspirations are elevated.

Do you take your car to the guy down the street with a few tools to have the top of your engine redone, or do you take it to a qualified mechanic, with a good reputation in a well setup garage? If it's your new lexus, it might be the guy in the garage. If it's your beater civic (the only expectaion is to make it run),then the guy down the street might be the ticket.

I think we all have to face the limitations of the DIY approach. I like the limitations. I'm not a pro, but I help record folks who otherwise might ahve done it themselves, or not at all out of lack of finances. On the scale of Porta5 to pro, i'm probably in the middle. I pass on work outside my capabilities (gear and otherwise), but enjoy the process of helping out others who are looking for a step up from their own capabilities. Other musicians who are in the same circumstances as me.

I certainly don't have a poor opinion of big studios, and have worked in them before as a musician. I actually have a decent rapport with some studio folks and mastering engineers because I send business their way. I can't say that they've ever reciprocated, but I don't expect them to. It's their living and my hobby. i don't need the money to live on, just to buy gear with.

I don't think I share Jeff's idea of an owing a studio anything beyond a simple respect of the work they do.

I think it's kinda like apples and oranges. The DIY approach is one thing, professional recording is another. Recording yourself is one thing, recording somebody else is another. There are certainly points where there is a cross over, and I think that folks who record at home know the difference between what they can do versus what can be done in a "real" studio. This is where I can totally see Jeff's point.

Don't confuse what you do with what a well equipped studio with good engineers can do.

If you want the big studio results, then by all means.

Frank

[silversound]

VERY WELL PUT.

[Bear]

To wank around at home and say you're happy doing it is cool because as a creative individual you have a release. But to leave a half-baked cookie in the jar- that you would still be willing to share is questionable. In this I mean, do you play your music for other people? Sure you do. If so, then my statement 'accepted level of competence' comes into play. If you haven't made product that has been released nationally, then you need the help of others who have or you're selling yourself short.

It depends on what exactly you're talking about here. Are you talking about radio friendly recordings? Then that's pretty true. But when it comes to the "indie scene," people are incredibly open-minded. Home recordings are perfectly fine for lots of us, sometimes even preferred. Which brings me to another point...

What's better: a shitty song with great production, or a great song with shitty production? Something lots of people seem to forget is that a good song is a good song. I've been listening to a lot of a guy named "Fog" lately, and all his stuff is home recorded and not even all that well. But his songs are great, so I listen, and because I like the music so much, the low end production actually has a charm that I wouldn't want taken out of the song now. I've learned to really like it. On the flip side of that, Micheal Bolton could spend 80 billion dollars on an album and I'd still pee on his CD when he was done.

Now I'm not saying that studios don't have their place. They certainly do. Lots of great records have been made in studios and, as you say, they really could not have been done at home. But I hear a hell of a lot more good stuff these days coming from DIY setups, because the music is better, more creative. So I'm all for the do it at home guys. And I'm sure a lot of the pros are gonna see all of us home-guys as a bunch of jerk-offs trying to mimick their jobs, but so what? If the song/atmosphere doesn't require a studios trained hand, then fuck it. If it does, then that's why you go.

And something else I'll mention--the average person really doesn't hear much of a difference. Production doesn't mean shit to them. They can hear when it's bad, but the more minute levels of good don't even exist in their ears, and in truth, they're just listening to the song.

[bigtoe]

most of the best music/records i've heard in the last 10 years has/have been done eitther outside the traditional studio or far away from mainstream engineers... actually make that last 20 years... or is that 30? wait a minute...make that 40...hmmm...chess/sun/stax/lomax/vangelder? make that 50...it's nothing new...

Mike

[EasyGo]

most of the best music/records i've heard in the last 10 years has/have been done eitther outside the traditional studio or far away from mainstream engineers . . . chess/sun/stax/lomax/vangelder . . .it's nothing new . . .Mike

Word. It's not like the Chess Brothers were born with a tuned room and an API console sticking out of their asses.

When RCA bought Elvis' contract from Sun, they had a hell of a time duplicating Sam Phillips slapback. No matter how much money, how many trained engineers, how many RCA ribbon mikes, and how nice the RCA studio in NYC was, they simply couldn't duplicate what SP did with a coupla tape decks and a modest room. They couldn't get the vibe right.

[@?,*???&?]

What's better: a shitty song with great production, or a great song with shitty production?

This is valid. A real studio can be a money pit. To really get the best out of it, you need to have the resources the see it through. I see too many go in and not get the best results because of time and budget constraints. This is usually because the guy who's overseeing the project doesn't have the experience to know how long everything takes. That's why I maintain, take it to a real studio to get the basics and then take the tracks home where time isn't an issue. Mix in a real studio if possible.