sintz_productionshotmail. Posted December 29, 2000 Share Posted December 29, 2000 What is the line between hobby and pro. Most of the people on this board blow me away technically and have technique, a finely tuned plan during recording and mastering. The end results are a pro recording that is fully marketable. Talent and years of experience for the studio mainstreamers seems to be the dividing line, or am I off on this assumption? On the other end of the spectrum is artists like myself. Ive been an artist for over 30 years and write my own material, perform, record, mix and master it in my budget studio at home, care for a hot apple pie with that order? The McDonalds of "Jaquess Fine Cuisine", no less. I try to pick up as many tips as possible from others but I rely on my perceptions of the music and sound to guide me. Im sure many of you would laugh at some of my mistakes made during the recording of my music and the final results, but I work with what I have and my most valuable tools are my ears. They tell me whats good and whats not and whether Im butchering my production to sound like the soundtrack from the Flintstones, (or not). Many like me are striving for that sound or approaching the apogee that removes the home studio sound. Where did you start? How did you compile the huge databank of processes that produce that fat, tight sound as an end result? Who were you mentors? Im an artist, not a studio master so I have to depend on what I can get from you, the professional crowd to move forward. My modest studio is 24bit 96k with an old Fostex 450 16 channel 4 buss board (great headroom and pretty quite) and I want to get as much out of it as possible. Should someone like me upgrade to better equipment? Pay for studio time instead? (Possibly not an option) Keep learning and pushing for higher quality? Where does that line between pro studio and home studio fall? TC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chip McDonald Posted December 29, 2000 Share Posted December 29, 2000 Originally posted by SINTZ: Where does that line between pro studio and home studio fall? I think there's a gray area called "Trick the Ears of the Uneducated" that is affordable but entirely not satisfying. Subsiding in this area is something like audio purgatory, speaking of my own experience: if I could afford to get to the "real" level, as I think of it - in terms of a decent preamp (API, maybe a Great River, etc.), for example - I would be a lot more sane. So IMHO, if you have the money, don't bother with that gray area - it's a waste *of* that money. Sigh. That's something I try to get across to my guitar students, if I come across one that I think has "pseudo-career" potential: don't waste your money on interim solutions (mediocre amp, guitar) - get what you *know* will work and be done with it, it's cheaper in the long run. Much cheaper. The problem happens when it's a $1,500 decision and you're eating Ramen noodles. http://www.mp3.com/chipmcdonald This message has been edited by Chip McDonald on 12-29-2000 at 02:28 PM Guitar Lessons in Augusta Georgia: www.chipmcdonald.com Eccentric blog: https://chipmcdonaldblog.blogspot.com/ / "big ass windbag" - Bruce Swedien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphajerk Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 you will NEVER afford to have a PRO studio unless you win the lottery and plan to spend ALL the money on one. there are ways around it though. invest on good pre's if you can afford them, some good mic's [but it will set you back many thousands of $$$'s] etc. OR you can just rely on the performance because in reality [to john q public] thats ALL that really matters. i've got live show bootlegs recorded on MD players and i ask people how its sounds and they always say, "good enough for me" people really just want to hear the music. of course with your recording and mixing skills, make them ABLE to HEAR the music. everything else is just icing on the cake. beck's 'Loser' was done on a four track cassette and made quite a bit of noise for him and now hes able to afford to play in the big studios. the line between pro and not so pro is as simple as getting it DONE and fucking around with it for years and never putting it out here IMO. alphajerk FATcompilation "if god is truly just, i tremble for the fate of my country" -thomas jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dansouth Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 Originally posted by alphajerk: the line between pro and not so pro is as simple as getting it DONE and fucking around with it for years and never putting it out here IMO. Wow, that's really good advice! I'd like to offer a similar idea. Do whatever you can, even if your setup is simple. The more music you produce, the more you'll learn. Knowledge is the key: knowledge, creativity, and ability. Equipment is a distant fourth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigstarletyahoo.com Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 I'm always looking for advice on how to make my material sound better. In the end tho', it's always been more important to for the stuff to get out there and be heard. yeah, I know. Spoken like an amateur. But I'm still learning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 The best possible thing you can do for your music isn't a new preamp, or whatever. It's taking the final result to a professional mastering engineer. The difference between unmastered and properly mastered recordings is night and day. Trust me on this one. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pro Jules Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 Here's one example of the line... not one I am particularly proud of, but it shows 'a line'. I set up a Pro Tools rig in my house last year to 'learn it'. I couldn't seem to get round to using it at all, EXCEPT when I had a "client" or "real session" going. I noodled around a little bit, begged friends to come over an f**k around on it with me to no avail... It was only when I threw myself in the deep end to perform a 'job' fammiliar to me namely, recording a band for a manager or record label. That I got underway with the whole system.. My point, I am totaly client based. No client = no recording session. I have no music 'in me to get out' I am on the 'service side of the music industry'. I take my hat off to the tortured souls that are the "Artist / Engineer / producers' that one day work on their own thing then the next, record other peoples music. The "other peoples music" frequently drives them nuts! For me, no 'other peoples music' = no food on my table! http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Jules This message has been edited by Julian standen on 12-29-2000 at 06:04 PM Jules Producer Julian Standen London, UK, Come hang here! http://www.gearslutz.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Lambrechts Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 a "name - card" (don't know the proper term in english) with e.g. "John Doe - Professional Audio Producer / Engeneer / Songwriter / Jerk" will fool a lot of people in believeing that you realy are "pro" ------------------ Chris Lambrechts Chris Lambrechts http://www.sos-recording.com another nice place to hang out : http://www.gearslutz.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chip McDonald Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 Originally posted by Anderton: The best possible thing you can do for your music isn't a new preamp, or whatever. It's taking the final result to a professional mastering engineer. Since I posted the bit about the preamp I suppose this is an oblique reference of my music...? I admit to a less than professional result, but for my (recent) purposes a nice sounding quiet preamp would put me in the ballpark better than the mediocre ones I have now with great mastering. I think if a person has a pro signal chain - nice mic, nice pre, nice converters/tape machine - and behaves conservatively from an engineering standpoint (which I admit I don't do) the end result will be closer to "Pro" than a whole load of mediocre junk and great mastering. Hmmm... at the same time, I think a lot of problems with "amateur" demos/recordings stems from reaching beyond the practical in engineering terms (again, as I admit on my own music). Where it's *possible* to get a good result from a professionally mastered 4-track recording for *some* things (ala Beck), I don't think for other things it is going to be as successful. Sting's "When the Angel's Fall" comes to mind; no doubt Sting could write a great hit on a 4-track, but would *that* song sound right done similarly on the same medium? So I suppose I'm saying it depends on the style of music, and the immediate requirements, doesn't it? Personally, I'd rather have $5,000 in a signal chain or two than $4,000 worth cheesy compressors, preamps, mics and so forth and a $1,000 mastering job. Unfortunately neither is an option for me at the moment so this has all been quite academic. Oh well.... http://www.mp3.com/chipmcdonald Guitar Lessons in Augusta Georgia: www.chipmcdonald.com Eccentric blog: https://chipmcdonaldblog.blogspot.com/ / "big ass windbag" - Bruce Swedien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HMmgmtaol.com Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 I have done a lot of recording in various mediums. I even tried home recording on the crudest equipment. Being extremely technicaly ignorant & unprofficient I learned to seek out the best studios & engineers that I could afford & pray that they are in a good frame of mind while working with me & my material. I actual feel that in most cases, especially mine, that it is better to have someone else do all the technical things & also produce the sessions. It is not a bad idea though to have some quick way to put down basic ideas & keep working on material. Sooner or later one must chose what to expose to fellow Artists &/or the public. Tough choices are part of of it all. www.hatchetman-mgmt.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphajerk Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 i will certainly say that investing in some nice preamps has been the BEST thing i have ever done in getting the sounds. and im sure the mastering engineer is going to be a LOT happier too. there is just no comparision of a high end pre to a mackie [although one writer thought it would be when reviewing the Amek Pure Path, idiot] maybe not as noticible on a single point source [a la 3D Audio mic pre disc] but when you start compounding them, it gets painfully aware how much of a difference it makes. alphajerk FATcompilation "if god is truly just, i tremble for the fate of my country" -thomas jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Worthington Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 Originally posted by alphajerk: you will NEVER afford to have a PRO studio unless you win the lottery and plan to spend ALL the money on one. there are ways around it though... The way around it that I've found it to make friends with studio owners that complement you. I have a lot of video editing gear and a ProTools system. A friend here in town has a great sounding live room, vintage mics, etc. We trade time back and forth. They had a based one of their rooms on the Sony PCM-800 (a DA-88 compatible). I picked up a used PCM-800 and now we shuttle hi-8 tape back and forth. If I need to record stuff that I can't reasonably do in my studio, I do it there. Then I bring the tape home and load them up into ProTools. When they need to comp a vocal, it gets brought over here. It works out well for both of us and saves us having to duplicate a bunch of gear. jw Affiliations: Jambé Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Worthington Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 Originally posted by Anderton: The best possible thing you can do for your music isn't a new preamp, or whatever. It's taking the final result to a professional mastering engineer. The difference between unmastered and properly mastered recordings is night and day. Trust me on this one. I'm looking forward to the results of my first experiment with mastering. I just finished up a gig where the client wanted some "pre-mastering" done. They were sending the project out to LA, but because they couldn't afford to fly out to the session, they wanted to send along a CD with all of the fades, etc. the way they envisioned it. So I finish my rough cut and off it goes to Bernie Grundman. For fun, I then took the material and did what I thought needed to be done to get it sounding sweet. When I get the finished version back from Bernie I'll be able to A/B the two and hopefully learn something. It'll be educational either way. jw Affiliations: Jambé Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 >>What is the line between hobby and pro. Most of the people on this board blow me away technically and have technique, a finely tuned plan during recording and mastering. The end results are a pro recording that is fully marketable. Talent and years of experience for the studio mainstreamers seems to be the dividing line, or am I off on this assumption? On the other end of the spectrum is artists like myself. Ive been an artist for over 30 years and write my own material, perform, record, mix and master it in my budget studio at home, care for a hot apple pie with that order? The McDonalds of "Jaquess Fine Cuisine", no less. I try to pick up as many tips as possible from others but I rely on my perceptions of the music and sound to guide me. Im sure many of you would laugh at some of my mistakes made during the recording of my music and the final results, but I work with what I have and my most valuable tools are my ears. They tell me whats good and whats not and whether Im butchering my production to sound like the soundtrack from the Flintstones, (or not). Many like me are striving for that sound or approaching the apogee that removes the home studio sound. Where did you start? How did you compile the huge databank of processes that produce that fat, tight sound as an end result? Who were you mentors? Im an artist, not a studio master so I have to depend on what I can get from you, the professional crowd to move forward. My modest studio is 24bit 96k with an old Fostex 450 16 channel 4 buss board (great headroom and pretty quite) and I want to get as much out of it as possible. Should someone like me upgrade to better equipment? Pay for studio time instead? (Possibly not an option) Keep learning and pushing for higher quality? Where does that line between pro studio and home studio fall? TC<< Yo Sintz, check it out. The answers are in your questions. Do you read me? Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 >>Since I posted the bit about the preamp I suppose this is an oblique reference of my music...?<< For the record, it was not! I just picked on the preamp as one of those supposed "magic bullets" that will make your music cross that line. Sure, a better mic preamp may make a better-sounding piece of music. But a good mastering engineer can make a piece more musical, for want of a better term. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulferpacific.net.sg Posted December 30, 2000 Share Posted December 30, 2000 "The best possible thing you can do for your music isn't a new preamp, or whatever. It's taking the final result to a professional mastering engineer. The difference between unmastered and properly mastered recordings is night and day. Trust me on this one." Yeah, I do trust you on this one, and loads of people with experience say the same thing. But because I don't have this experience yet, I'd still like to hear an mp3 comparison of a tune in both unmastered and mastered incarnations so I could hear how much difference it makes. If you can hear a difference on mp3, it's *really* an important difference. Does anyone know of an mp3 A/B along these lines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRDay Posted December 31, 2000 Share Posted December 31, 2000 Am I not considered 'pro' when I make my living recording/playing etc. eventhough I don't have the gear the 'famous, popular' guys/studio's own. I'm not saying you don't need good gear to sound good or make good sounding recordings but maybe we need to redefine the term "Professional". My 2 cents! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pro Jules Posted December 31, 2000 Share Posted December 31, 2000 Who can afford a mastering engineer for every recording? Jesus H Christ! - Sombody please tell these desperados (!) to go buy a Finalizer, spend some real time learning to use it and crush their mixes to kingdom f**king come , just like all the 'pros' out there. Then they will have CD's that can stand beside 'Pro recorded' ones. YOU KNOW IT. Sigh.... (It's all true you know) http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Jules Jules Producer Julian Standen London, UK, Come hang here! http://www.gearslutz.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted December 31, 2000 Share Posted December 31, 2000 >>But because I don't have this experience yet, I'd still like to hear an mp3 comparison of a tune in both unmastered and mastered incarnations so I could hear how much difference it makes. << Go to: http://www.musicplayer.com/CDA/Player/Main/1,2000,Lessons-Keyboardist-92,00.html It's an article on using multiband compression for mastering that includes a before and after example. This is actually not that dramatic an example, because the piece had already been pre-mastered. The difference between unmastered and mastered is far more striking. You can not just hear the difference on an MP3, but a low bandwidth MP3! Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulferpacific.net.sg Posted January 1, 2001 Share Posted January 1, 2001 Hey, Craig - thanks, that was exactly what I was looking for. The song's good, too. "This is actually not that dramatic an example, because the piece had already been pre-mastered." Pre-mastered = mixed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted January 1, 2001 Share Posted January 1, 2001 >>The song's good, too.<< Reissdorf Force is a killer group, they're a blast to play with. >>This is actually not that dramatic an example, because the piece had already been pre-mastered." Pre-mastered = mixed?<< No, someone had already attempted to master it but the group thought maybe I could take it up a notch. I did not have access to the original files, only the pre-mastered ones. Your post has given me an idea. I am just completing a song now that's a remix from a soundtrack CD. I was thinking of doing an article that describes the mastering process and includes audio examples with the original mix, then after EQ, after compression, and after loudness maximization - sort of the "evolution of a mastering job." If I do, I'll post the URL here. You'll be able to hear how mastering changes the tune at each step. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sintz_productionshotmail. Posted January 1, 2001 Author Share Posted January 1, 2001 Lots of great information on this thread. Taking each track to be mastered is a great idea although finding someone that not only has the right equipment but has the talent Im sure will be dependant on the money your willing to spend. Here in Dallas theres quite a few studios that would do it but I really dont know any credentials so would be going at it blindly. Not sure about the pres as I have good signal, of course it could be better also. So are we talking tube pres for the job? Will it make enough difference in the mix to justify the expense? The example Craig gave is not only a great read but the comparison is pretty good too. I watched not only the levels, dynamics and Hz ranges but the sound from my crappy low-end monitors which sounded very good. I want that sound!! TC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sintz_productionshotmail. Posted January 1, 2001 Author Share Posted January 1, 2001 Curve Dominant, yea, I see what you mean but after reading this thread it give me much more to work with which was what I was after. Thanks TC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sintz_productionshotmail. Posted January 2, 2001 Author Share Posted January 2, 2001 Craig, I would love to hear a raw mix, which is probably close to my masters http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif as compared to a final master. I realize there are tricks to the trade as well as talent and a golden ear, but I plan to pursue music until I either die or my arms and ears fall off so everything is absorbed and used in some manor or fashion eventually. Thanks for all the input for you and everyone else TC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 >>I realize there are tricks to the trade as well as talent and a golden ear, but I plan to pursue music until I either die or my arms and ears fall off so everything is absorbed and used in some manor or fashion eventually. << The first thing you'll discover when mastering is that the tiniest differences when processing a completed track - a dB boost here, a dB cut there - makes a MASSIVE difference in the sound. You can do radical changes to tracks and not destroy a mix, but move one dB in the wrong direction while mastering, and you can really screw things up. I think I will do that article! Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Aragon Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 Mastering does make a huge difference... and as Craig says the smallest change can go in either direction. Most artists that record themselves at home don't have the tools, the know how, or both to master their own material. In my case I know what I want to hear but don't have the equipment to do it. I have no problem enlisting the help of others to do the things I'm not capable of myself. I am fortunate enough to have a great friend that has a decent Pro Tools system with the great plug ins to do a good job on mastering tracks. It's not uncommon to do several takes in mastering and taking them home to "live with" for awhile before deciding on which one works the best. At some point you have to decide enough is enough and make a decision on the one you'll keep. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 >>Curve Dominant, yea, I see what you mean but after reading this thread it give me much more to work with which was what I was after.<< "The answer is in your question" is something I heard the kung-fu sifus say a lot, and 95% of the time the students would figure out what they meant by that. Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 >>It's not uncommon to do several takes in mastering and taking them home to "live with" for awhile before deciding on which one works the best.<< Which is why CD-Rs are so fabulous! Even better, a lot of new gear plays CD-RWs, so you don't have to have all your experiments end up as coasters. Even my daughter's little $60 boombox will play CD-RWs...great for turning her on to music, because if she doesn't like it, I can at least recycle the CD. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Aragon Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 CD burning technology has defintely come a long way. I remember around the late 80's seeing that a consumer CD burner was finally available to the public. The cost? A mere $80,000 courtesy of Nakamichi. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/eek.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 Originally posted by Anderton: >>Your post has given me an idea. I am just completing a song now that's a remix from a soundtrack CD. I was thinking of doing an article that describes the mastering process and includes audio examples with the original mix, then after EQ, after compression, and after loudness maximization - sort of the "evolution of a mastering job." If I do, I'll post the URL here. You'll be able to hear how mastering changes the tune at each step. Craig, Please do it! It would be very interesting to see/hear how you work the mastering process. Looking foreward to it. The new year is so young and already such great ideas. This is going to be a good year. Best, Mats Nermark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.