Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

For what purpose do you record?


Mike Gug

Recommended Posts

Originally posted by bpark@prorec.com:

You cannot possibly do it all, do it all well, and get anywhere, unless you have infinite time and money. Should you spend weeks writing a MIDI piano part for a song, or would that time be better spent writing more songs, and just strumming and singing demo tracks, or laying down a simple drum/bass, getting the idea down, and writing more?

Well..."infinite time" is a relative thing.

Some only want to spend a couple of hours or a couple of days working on anything...

...and another guy will spend a couple of months on the same thing!

I don't see that either way is wrong.

If you have the motivation...and you feel that there is more you can get out of something...

then stick with it for as long as you feel is necessary.

But then...there are those folks that just want things 1-2-3...otherwise they lose interest.

 

Also...while it may be complicated for someone that is only a guitar player...to try and sequence keyboard parts...etc

...it can be just as time consuming or costly and complicated to try and get someone else to do all those other things for you.

And...anything that you do yourself will always be a valuable learning experience...and things will only improve the more you do them.

That said...not everyone will be interested or capable of "doing it all".

 

SeeI dont just want to have 3000 songs I scribbled down on papereach with only a rough vocal and guitar demo.

I was doing that shit 30 years agoand I still have boxes and boxes of cassettes full of those rough demos. That didnt get me anywhere!

We all say that if the song is goodthats all that countsbut the reality of it isthe demo also has to be goodno, actually it has to be pretty much commercial CD-quality if you want to catch someones attentionthough there is the freak chance that your rough basement tape will open a door from time to timebut thats rare these days.

 

Writing and recording are two different disciplines/talentsthat can come together in the studio.

You can spend time writing a whole bunch of great songsbut thenyou probably STILL want to get them recordedandyour probably STILL want them to sound commercial CD-qualityor pretty damn close to it!!!

Soif you dont want to be bothered learning how to do a lot of things by yourself in the studioor if you dont want to spend a lot of money building a studio

well thenyou will still have to spend a good chunk of change every time you walk into a pro-quality studio, with all those session musicians that will play all those parts that you cant/wont.

 

Anyway you cut this cakeits NOT gonna be quick, cheap and easyunless all you wanna have is a bunch of rough demos of you and your acoustic guitar on cassettes, sitting in a shoebox

 

Yeahyou can hook up with a bunch of other guys in a bandand that might workand youll have the other people to play those parts/instruments that you cant/wont.

But even THAT approach has its pricesometimes a BIG price (not money)

and you will still find that its gonna take lots of time and money to get something that is commercial CD-quality

 

Like Bill saidyou need to figure out what you want to do...and whats it gonna take

and then really stick with it.

Just keep your mind openand be realistic.

miroslav - miroslavmusic.com

 

"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Originally posted by miroslav:

 

I don't see that either way is wrong.

 

..while it may be complicated for someone that is only a guitar player...to try and sequence keyboard parts...etc

 

...it can be just as time consuming or costly and complicated to try and get someone else to do all those other things for you.

 

SeeI dont just want to have 3000 songs I scribbled down on papereach with only a rough vocal and guitar demo.

 

... actually it has to be pretty much commercial CD-quality ...

 

Writing and recording are two different disciplines/talentsthat can come together in the studio.

You can spend time writing a whole bunch of great songsbut thenyou probably STILL want to get them recordedandyour probably STILL want them to sound commercial CD-qualityor pretty damn close to it!!!

 

We agree on most of these things, except for one. But let's discuss...

 

Guitarist/MIDI/other instruments... did you ever see a guitar player write a piano part? Or a drum part? Either too complicated or too simple, and usually nothing that a real drummer or piano player would do, unless it is REALLY BASIC. I've written what I think are some cool parts for single-note instruments like flute and cello, but my piano parts would make you cringe, were you a pianist. I've written some really dense orchestrations that sounded pretty good to me but sent the symphony guys to chaking their heads.

 

But as you develop a relationship with an arranger/MIDI dude, he gets to know wat you want and can quickly apply the elements that you want, while you are off writing, or just drinking beer. (Gotta keep the priorities straight...)

 

And what is better... 3000 songs, ready to be arranged and recorded, or four songs that you've decided are ready for radio? I vote for more output.

 

Where we do not agree is that the demo needs to be "CD quality". I don't think that this is true. Nobody that I know who has gotten signed had them, that is for sure. And no label guy is going to want to listen to how well you manipulate Pro Tools or AutoTune, or the latest popular reverb plug. He wants to hear the hook, the riff, the beat and they lyric. This is easy to do with something as simple as one of the 'lite' softwares and a box like the US-428, or whatever. Not a big dollar investment.

 

My studio evolved on it's own, through my desire to record my own demos. Other guys wanted to record with my stuff, they'd hear a demo and want me to do theirs, I'd get the odd corporate client... and I have this penchant for buying a bakery when I want a piece of bread. (Under the guise, of course, that it will be cheaper if I do it myself. hahahhahaha....) I can still write at the drop of a hat, about just about anything. But because of my studio work, I still don't have many demos of my own songs, and I have spent countless thousands of hours learning recording stuff that could have been spent writing more and getting better at what I started out to do in the first place... write songs.

 

At least, that is the way that I see it. :D

 

Bill

"I believe that entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot."

 

Steve Martin

 

Show business: we're all here because we're not all there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think with fairly modest equipment you can do "cd quality", in other words good enough to played on the radio recordings. There is plenty to learn and tons of stuff you can buy, but the main thing is, can you play and do you have good ears. With these two things, and some basic equipment that you can buy at Guitar Center, you can make recordings that sound pretty darned good. You don't need all kinds of fancy compressors and reverbs or $10,000 microphones. Its really about getting a good sound by playing well and placing the mikes right.

 

I am sure that Bpark has alot of experience at this and can get a good sound quickly. His ears are well developed from years of listening. But its not magic. There are some basic steps to follow that you can learn. Maybe you won't be able to sound just like any given recording, but you can get an accurate recording of how the band sounds. 30-40 years ago it was a big mystery of how the top engineers and producers got theor sounds. But with todays technology, and plenty of written material available, it really isn't that hard.

 

Just get a decent sound down and try and use a minumum of EQ and compression. Pan things and EQ things a little so that you can hear all the instruments and your done. Maybe you won't sound like Roy Thomas Baker or Alan Parsons but you could argue that they overproduced.

 

I've only done one full band recording so far. I was between jobs so had a little time to work at it for a month. I got a better recording than any of the professional recordings I had done before. It still wasn't air quality but I feel that with practice I could learn all I need. I would have payed more attention even to the initial sound being recording rather than trying to make it work in mixing. My ear got way better in the month that we were working on that project. I am sure if I keep practicing, recording a few songs a year without spending to much time I could do as good as I would ever need. I can't afford to go to Electric Lady or Abbey Road, but most of the mom and pop studios aren't the best route for me.

 

I have always been of the school of "If you want something sone right, you better so it yourself". If you do everything with the attitude that if you are going to do something to the best of your abilities, then spending time and effort just doesn't seem to matter. If you are going to do something half-assed, why bother. Maybe not every single musician has the temprament or talent to record. But someone in your band should be able to learn it. It does take study and an analytical way of thinking. I just got tired of paying for inferior recordings, some of which were so bad I wouldn't even play them for my mother. There was one session where after hearing the master tape I didn't even want a copy, it wasn't the performance. The studio engineer just had no clue how to record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by bpark@prorec.com:

Guitarist/MIDI/other instruments... did you ever see a guitar player write a piano part? Or a drum part? Either too complicated or too simple, and usually nothing that a real drummer or piano player would do, unless it is REALLY BASIC. I've written what I think are some cool parts for single-note instruments like flute and cello, but my piano parts would make you cringe, were you a pianist. I've written some really dense orchestrations that sounded pretty good to me but sent the symphony guys to chaking their heads.

Bill...I guess we may be talking about different kinds of music here. :)

Shit...as much as I took many piano lessons...did the classical thing in my early years...etc...

...I would still not try and pull off a very involved classical or jazz piece on the piano these days!

Like wise for playing very intricate bass or Neil Pert drums...or even some really high-brow guitar!

 

But see...all this time...I'm thinking that we are mostly talking about R&R/Pop music

in which case, playing some piano...some bass...and a little of this and that...IMO...does NOT require years of formal training and deep music theory!

 

While I'm typing this...I notice that Paul McCartney is starring at me from the Guitar Player cover...on the sidebar to the right...and he's a perfect example of someone who picked up many instruments as needed...learning them on the fly

and he laid down some great tracks over the years.

 

 

And what is better... 3000 songs, ready to be arranged and recorded, or four songs that you've decided are ready for radio? I vote for more output.
Well...more output can also lead to mediocrity...and you end up with a dozen songs...but in reality, only 1 or 2 are keepers worth recording.

Also...spending time refining an albums worth of songs...doesn't really prevent you from writing many more songs...does it?

 

You seem to suggest that the involved recording of several songs will somehow impede or limit any new output...?

Yeah...while your tracking/mixing you may not be able to sit and write at the same time...but I find myself often hearing all kinds of new things WHILE I'm working on something else.

And new songs will spring forth while recording others.

 

 

Where we do not agree is that the demo needs to be "CD quality". I don't think that this is true. Nobody that I know who has gotten signed had them, that is for sure. And no label guy is going to want to listen to how well you manipulate Pro Tools or AutoTune, or the latest popular reverb plug. He wants to hear the hook, the riff, the beat and they lyric.
I'm not saying that the A&R guy is going to be really focused on how well you mixed the rhythm guitars...etc

..but I'm pretty confident that a very well recorded/mixed song will get a much better response than that same song done as a very rough/sparse demo...unless of course the song really is supposed to be just a rough sounding vocal and acoustic guitar...etc.

 

And you know...I think just about everyone here must surely feel the same way...'cuz why the hell is everyone always talking about HQ gear, techniques to improve recording skills...hangin' on every word that a visiting "pro" may share...etc???

Yeah...I'm pretty sure that most people here...if they could...would put everything they got into everything they play/record. But that's just it...many don't.

Either they don't know how....or they can't afford the gear that will take them to the next level...or, they just underestimate the time and effort required...so they churn out stuff quick...before they lose interest or just hit a brick wall...

And then...they will console themselves that the rough demo really SHOULD be good enough....and that they really DON'T need to polish things up or try to sound more "pro"...

 

Refining your skills and your music...as much as you can...as an ongoing process...IMO...is what really counts.

Getting a deal...getting discovered...etc...

...that's a bonus.

 

Youre approach suggests that its better to just write and keep it simpleand then hope that one daysomeone will appreciate your barebones effort enoughthat they then sign you upand then you will finally be able to start recording as you always wanted to in the first place.???

Wellthats a possibilityit does happen.

But I thinklet me just focus on REALLY recording the way I want to nowand as best as I canand as much as I can afford.

At least, if I NEVER break through and make itwellat least I will have had a more fulfilling experience over the yearswriting AND recording on a higher level than just the old guitar and cassette deck approach.

 

Butthats just me. I really LIKE the timethe processin the studio.

The musicwell yeah, I love the music for itselfbut I also do enjoy the whole experience.

HeckI can have almost as an enjoyable day in my studio wiring up a rack of gear as I can USING that same gearif you know what I mean.

 

To someone who only wants to play their guitar...they sure might get a bored or frustrated with anything BUT playing their guitarand an involved recording process and studio rig might seem like more of a hindrance than a benefitso they look for simple/cheap/quick ITB solutions.

And thats finefor them.

 

I'm not trying to be snooty. For me, it IS an involved process.

As I said previously...I did my share of "rough demos"...and then things just evolved over time.

Now it's a whole process and a much bigger production...something that I do methodically and deliberatelywithout a whole lot of thought to how fast or slow its goinghow I could be doing something else.

There are days when things just drag alongand then at other times, stuff falls into place quickly and effortlessly.

I enjoy all of itregardless how much a bitch and moan when Im just puttering about and nothing is clicking. :D

miroslav - miroslavmusic.com

 

"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, as I said, we don't really disagree. I happen to think that one needs to write as much as one can in order to become a better writer. I think that it would be easier to pick 12 good ones from 3,000 than from 15. And since there are only so many hours in the day, if writing is what you want to do, then I suggest that writing is what you should be doing.

 

Oh, and a demo doesn't have to be rough, just because it is done simply and with minimal production values. But what I find, is that guys just can't seem to resist that temeptation that more is better. And since few guys with home studios have good monitoring setups... they put all of this time into stuff that really doesn't sound that good when played on a good system in a good room. I'm suggesting that keeping it simple is a good plan.

 

Bill

"I believe that entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot."

 

Steve Martin

 

Show business: we're all here because we're not all there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Gruupi:

But its not magic. There are some basic steps to follow that you can learn.

Yes...

 

...and no.

 

Sure, there are steps and procedures...

...like, you know where to put the mic in front of the guitar cabinet...and how to set the comp for the vocal...etc.

But there are times when the tried & true falls flat...and leaves you dumbfounded...!!!???

 

So I think there always IS a certain amount of "magic" that makes stuff work...and if it's not there...the process can be tough.

 

I recently recorded a somewhat involved, new tune...it has some twists and turns....and it isn't just a 3-chord repetition.

The damn thing just FELL into place!

 

Then, on another song...one that I knew very well, and have lived with it for awhile before recording it.

The damn thing has been a real PITA...fighting me every step of the way.

Finally...after re-recording a bunch of tracks and adding some others...I was able to break it, like you would a wild mustang...and now, I'm hearing a bit of magic in it.

 

The hardest and best thing you can do with a song...IMO...is to find it's soul...it's vibe.

After that...the thing will practically record itself! :cool:

miroslav - miroslavmusic.com

 

"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Gruupi:

I think with fairly modest equipment you can do "cd quality", .... You don't need all kinds of fancy compressors and reverbs or $10,000 microphones. ...its not magic. ....try and use a minumum of EQ and compression. Pan things and EQ things a little so that you can hear all the instruments and your done.

 

 

There was one session where after hearing the master tape I didn't even want a copy, it wasn't the performance. The studio engineer just had no clue how to record.

I heartily endorse everything in the top portion, but in the bottom part... er... well, you picked him, ya know?????

 

As far as the top part of your message goes, I see the biggest problem today to be the magazines that all focus on gear rather than on technique and basics of recording. Granted, they are responding to their readers, all of whom want to know about new gear. But isn't it rather like asking your kids what they want for dinner? All cake and ice cream, no meat and potatoes?

 

Bill

"I believe that entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot."

 

Steve Martin

 

Show business: we're all here because we're not all there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by bpark@prorec.com:

Well, as I said, we don't really disagree. I happen to think that one needs to write as much as one can in order to become a better writer. I think that it would be easier to pick 12 good ones from 3,000 than from 15. And since there are only so many hours in the day, if writing is what you want to do, then I suggest that writing is what you should be doing.

Here's the thing for me...

Writing is more gut wrenching and draining than recording.

Why...if it was THAT easy to just churn out dozens and dozens of songs...then yeah, I WOULD have 3000 to pick out only 15.

But it takes me time to write a song...a good song.

 

When I was younger...it seemed like I could nock 'em out!

Heck there was one period when I was writing 5-6 songs every week...

..but in retrospect...only 1 out of each "writing burst" was really a GOOD song.

I realized that just because I "wrote it"...it didn't make it good...or worthwhile recording it.

 

So...while I may spend long hours/days/weeks recording...it's not really keeping me away from writing dozens and dozens of songs.

Shit...I'm usually kicking around a piece of melody and a few lyrics in my head for weeks before I even try to get it down on paper.

 

I find that when I get those few pieces of a tune going...if I rush too quick to "get it down"...to force it out...it tends to fizzle or it becomes real difficult to deliver.

Instead...I like to really let it simmer...for as long as it takes...and then out it comes.

Then I record.

 

So...my recording time is really just the bridge between songs....and not an impediment to new material!

 

...guys just can't seem to resist that temeptation that more is better.
Yeah...I know what you mean, and THAT is a whole other way to spend time in the studio...over-producing shit...and tweaking and adjusting and letting that damn DAW features guide your decisions!

I'm not into that...I try and avoid that as much as possible.

But I really DO like to work the arrangements...or experiment with shades of tone, before I'm set on something.

 

Also...I may get 5-6 tracks down...and then I know I want to add a piano part or some additional guitar...but, I just can't get a handle on what that part's hook is going to be.

So...I let it simmer until it comes out. :)

And that...can take some time.

 

I really do move very slowly...and not because I'm inept with writing/playing/tracking.

It's just my way...letting things simmer til ready

miroslav - miroslavmusic.com

 

"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are so right about the trouble spots Miroslav. You end up spending 90% of your time on 10% of the project. Sometimes you just need to move on and try it another day, or put it to rest. It may be that your musical idea isn't quite what it should be. I am not saying I could record everything I could concieve of. My goals were much simpler. I wanted an accurate representation of what our 4 piece band sounded like.

 

I do realize that sometimes you need to double a part or have an extra instrument or two to fill out the sound. Some guitar tones can just be a bitch to record. But I have seen those same problems in "real" studios also. Whats nice about home recording is that you can take all the time you need to work these ideas out. The pressure of being on the clock and knowing that you have to get it done NOW just compounds any problems you might have. If you are recording for your own enjoyment, then you can take what ever time you need.

 

I am not suggesting that the Rolling Stones record everything themselves in their basement. But if you are unsigned and you are footing the bill, I think the money would be well spent buying the equipment, and learning the process of recording would be more productive. If you ever did go to a major studio, the knowledge of how to get good sounds on tape would be invaluable.

 

I have read that most bands go into debt to record their first album. That almost sounds like a scam to me. It shouldnt cost 100 grand to record an album. The band should work out their material ahead of time, be able to go in and record and be done with it. I guess the music business has fundamentally changed. Sign the band based on their sex appeal, then hire a producer to help them get their music together. Hire lots of outside musicians and make an album. I guess it works and makes money for the record company, but it saddens me that it isn't 4 guys playing their songs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Gruupi:

The band should work out their material ahead of time, be able to go in and record and be done with it.

Yeah, but it doesn't work that way.

 

For example, I really love the big, deep hats on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps".

 

Now, not everybody else likes these hats or finds them universally appropriate. And because you can't do much with hats in a rehearsal room, you let it ride (no pun intended)

 

But you get to the studio and yes, you CAN change the sound of the hats. Radically. So all of a sudden it becomes worth fighting over, and that sucks up money and time. And once you've worked out the drums, esp. the snare sound, you have to decide on how everything else should sound. And if you factor in drugs and the subsequent remix time, well... it all adds up, doesn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About as far as I get with pre-production...is to decide on the structure...(intro-verse-verse-chorus-bridge...etc...) and the tempo.

Of course, the song also needs to be finished...melody, chords, lyrics...though I have done minor changes part-way through tracking.

 

I don't work out every lick, every fill, every accent before I start recording.

But usually...I can hear in my head what the overall sound/vibe of the song is...like in a dream state.

I may have a general idea of the which instruments will be usedbut hey, its R&R/Popso like, it aint rocket science!

Drums, bass, guitar, maybe some piano/organand vocalsusually are always thereand then some other things may be added during tracking.

 

Then I'll start tracking...and little by little, what's in my head, starts to emerge during the process.

Maybe that's one of the reasons I move so slowly in the studio...but I also do like to savor the whole process...rather than go in there assembly line like...and just follow some predetermined process/decisions.

And....having my own studio...allows me the luxury of letting things simmer...."cuz I'm not watching the clock.

 

I had this one tune, that before I even started trackingI kept hearing a pedal steel part.

And I ended up using a pedal steel as the opening/closing accent for the song.

Im NOT a pedal steel player...but, I spent a day messin around with the thinggetting a feel for the pedals/leversand it really wasnt difficult to pull off a few riffs.

YeahI coulda looked for a pedal steel playerbut, that would have been time consumingand then I would have to wait for him to find the part that I was hearing in my headand then I also would have to pay the guy.

InsteadI learned a bit about how to play the pedal steeland now I can always add a bit if I need to. Oh yeahof course I had to buy a pedal steel (eBay)but now its a permanent part of my studio.

 

Right now.Im eyballin a sitar for my next instrument addition to the studioand then after that, maybe a cello or a violin. :)

miroslav - miroslavmusic.com

 

"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by miroslav:

 

Writing is more gut wrenching and draining than recording.

 

...only 1 out of each "writing burst" was really a GOOD song.

 

 

That is sort of what I am talking about. Most of us have to write a pile of dreck to get a single rose. The process of writing? You get better at it the more you do it.

 

If you are interested in getting more out of your writing, I suggest picking up Pat Pattison's book (he has a few, but there is a general one... I forget the title.) Pat has some great exercises help you to unlock the artists within, speak in your own voice, say important things and get to the meat quickly. Not bad for the $20-30 investment.

 

Bill

"I believe that entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot."

 

Steve Martin

 

Show business: we're all here because we're not all there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will check out the book for sure!

Use to have a bunch of song writing books (they're still around...somewhere).

I always have a Dictionary, Thesaurus and Rhyming Dictionary nearby for the lyrics...which for me, is the more time consuming aspect of writing songs.

 

Usually, the chords/melody come out relatively easily...and then I have to sit down...and bust some ass to get meaningful/coherent lyrics down.

 

I think if I just sat around and wrote a lot...I would end up with a pile of lyric-less songs...and/or snippets of unfinished ideas.

And that isn't a bad thing...cuz I've occasionally needed a piece of something to finish off a song...and I was able to find it in my pile of snippets. :D

 

Also...writing is not as easy to initiate as recording is.

If I feel like laying down some tracks for a tune, or doing a bit of editing...I can just turn on the gear, and off I go...

But...to write...I need more than just the free time...

...I really need the right mood too, otherwise, Ill sit there starring at the blank sheet for hours...and everything I try out, sounds like shit.

 

I prefer to wait 'til I really hear something substantial in my head...and THEN I'll sit down to write it down.

Until that happens...I'll be in the studio, recording/editing/mixing :thu:

miroslav - miroslavmusic.com

 

"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just checked out the Pat Pattison books...

So...they are specifically about writting lyrics.

 

When you said "general"...I though he got into the whole thing...chords/melody/lyrics.

 

Anyway...I think I'll order 1-2 of them...they are only $12 each on Amazon...

miroslav - miroslavmusic.com

 

"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

another thing you might check out... Masterwriter software. 30 day free trial.

 

I think that the single Pattison book is the bteer deal... I belive that it covers the same stuff as the others, just not quite as detailed. But it's got it all in one, might be cheaper than buying all the course books.

 

Bill

"I believe that entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot."

 

Steve Martin

 

Show business: we're all here because we're not all there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...