Printable View
we're checking out a local studio tomorrow in preparation for recording our debut full leangth album. any advice on things to look for, questions to ask, etc would be greatly appreciated.
tomorrow's just a general get to know eachother kinda thang, see if the guy's compatible, has the wherewithall to do what we envision. i figure we'll get down to brass tacks after that, assuming tomorrow goes well.
listen to spose, and then listen to things the studio has recorded. gear, mics, and the lot don't really amount to much if the people don't know how to use them. remember that saying about if you gave jimi a squier and a crate amp...well, the same holds true (pretty much) in the audio recording world.
First off, I look to see the studio is neat, clean and organized. If I see DATs and CDs laying around without labels and unorganized, forget it.
Then I ask about the work process the engineer follows and determine whether is is compatable with the project.
Ask if he can add effects in edit. Very important. It allows you to play a solo or rythym part dry and then experiment with different effects while listening instead of playing and is the equivalent of recording 10 solos at once.
References is a no brainer.
Finally, while mike placement and settign levels isn't all that hard, post production is everything. Nearly anybody with ears can do a decent mix, but there are very few that I've found that can master. The mastering process is the real key to a professional sounding recording, and will determine how you sound when played on your customer's car stereo or home system. It might sound great through those expensive flat responce studio monitors, but will it sound good coming out of the average car stereo speaker?
Ask for a PRODUCTION CD from a previous project, and go play it in your car and at home. Listen to it and see if the work is right for you.
Ask to hear a mix and then a master of his work and have him explain what he did to the master.
After going through this process you'll have a good idea of whether to go with the guy or not.
Wow. This is great info. This would make a great FAQ!!!
More important than gear though, is having a producer. The engineer often doubles as producer and often does a fair job of it. Ask about that. I have been to some great recording sessions that fell totally flat on the playback because there was no impartial person helping to direct the band in the recording process and helping to draw that little extra performance out of them when it's necessary. This role is imperative! A person in the role of Producer can say the things to the band members that need saying. Band members saying these things to eachother in the studio environment only piss eachother off.
All the best gear in the world will not yield a good recording without the right guidance and attention to detail an impartial producer can bring to the mix.
If you do not have some form of decent producer involved, you can pretty much resign yourself to having a mediocre recording right now. Sure, it will sound good, and it will be well mixed and balanced, but it won't "live".
wow! all great advice. we're leaving in about half an hour, but i'm gonna have the guys come in and read this before we head out. thanks so much!
and? what's the dealy? gonna be making a record soon? hope all went well.
First there's you. Spose nails it with the last line of post #4:
Know what you want to record and have it well rehearsed.Quote:
pre-production is KEY to a successful recording session.
After that, it's really about the engineer. Listen to the work he's done. A great engineer can make stellar recordings on a Teac 3440. A lousy engineer can record you with a Studer and a Neve board and make you sound like shit.
It's you, then the engineer. The rest is just stuff...:D
well, we checked it out. bear in mind, we're in the middle of bumfuck egypt out here, so no neve boards and such. truthfully, i was a little underwhelmed w/ the equipment. not bad, just not what i expected.
the owner/engineer/producer is a nice guy, and we share similar tastes in music, producers, and production values. the rates are pretty reasonable ($100/song, mixed and mastered), and the production CD he gave us sounds really good, 'cept it's not a particularly guitar oriented band, which we are.
that brings up my biggest concern. he mentioned he prefers to record guitars direct and tweak the tone digitally. i have some reservations about that, but it might just be the tube snob in me. i'm willing to try it, but if it sounds like shit we're slapping a 57 in front of my reverberocket and that's that.
if we go with it, which i think we're leanig towards, we've got about four weeks of pre-production, which will mostly consist of picking which songs we want to do and fine tuning a few things (we've been playing most of the materiel live for several years), then we're ready to roll. hopefully we'll have finished product in our hand in august in time for the sturgis rally.
You're not going to find ANYONE to record for less than 100/song mastered. That's just plain crazy.
Go for it. You can't lose. If you don't like it you had some rehersal.
A good engineer/producer is all you need. Some of the best recordings I've heard are done in a friend's apartment. He has now produced for a few major artists. Has produced albums for John Doe and more and is now working on one for Jason Mraz.
He has only a couple of decent mics and a couple ADATs and borrows other things he may need.
Seriously, a good ear is all you need.
Many of the best albums in history were done with gear not as good as the afore mentioned 3340 deck.
Go for it and have fun.
OK, I give up. who is Jason Mraz?
He had a huge hit with "Remedy"...
i didn't know jason mraz was in the black crowes :)Quote:
He had a huge hit with "Remedy"...
:hee...although he does wear silly hats like Chris Robinson...
http://publicinformation.luther.edu/.../jasonmraz.png
$100 per song is a strange way to go about this.
Whenever I have done any serious recording, the band always took a whole day or two sometimes, to lay down the drums and bass tracks. We played scratch tracks on guitar and keys and did scratch vox for vibe and placement.
Once the foundation was built, we did guitar rythms and over dubs the next day.
Then we would take a third day to do all the vocals. Sometimes we'd split this up between two days depending on the difficulty of the vocal parts.
And lastly, the guitar solos went on. We always did that last so it would be in response to the vocals and all that pesky "over-stepping" was no longer an issue.
Then we'd leave the engineer/producer alone to rough out the mixes. Once that was done, one or two of us would go back in to the studio and fine tune the whole thing.
I have some great sounding recordings using this process. How you split that up to $100 per tune, I have no idea. That's like saying, "it comes out the way it comes out."
If you want a decent sounding album you just have to take the time it takes to get it done right. The only thng that can expedite the process is being incredibly well prepared before you ever set foot in a studio.
it all depends on how people run the place bob. my buddy will charge by the song if that's how people want to pay.
what it seems like to me, is that at the studio bonefish looked at they'll track each song individually and completely. then the guy will mix it and master it.
sounds like a decent price.
i don't know about the direct recorded guitar parts though. if you are wanting to be able to tweak sounds for each song great, but if you already have an idea of what you want the songs to sound like (which it does to me) i would say to go with micing the amps. sometimes i think producers and engineers are too into making shit perfect as opposed to catching the vibe and letting the band sound like themselves as opposed to some overproduced major label album.
i see it all too much, if the stuff people are working on doesn't sound like _____ (enter major label band) then it's shit. which is completely preposterous. sound like yourself, and make it sound the best you can. go back and listen to some jimi and zep cuts. they are not always pristine and pretty, but they still kick ass because they both had a vision of what they should sound like. and forget the people who say it's not "correct". hell, tom petty's "full moon fever" album sat for a long time before being released.
i'm getting off my soap box now. hope to hear some recordings of your band in the future. keep on rockin in the freeworld! :dude
I record guitars direct all the time and it sounds fine, but I'll bet you guys want to track it live, right? This is where you separate the engineers from the "trackers", the midi guys. Mic placement is everything when tracking live. Does he have a live room with gobos? chuck mentioned Jimi and Zep. That stuff is all about mic placement. Eddie Kramer was a wizard at using three mics on the drums and making it sound huge.Quote:
Originally Posted by bonefish
Wilko has it right, at 100 bucks a song you can't wrong, but I'd do one song and see how it turns out. If it goes well, then I'd do some more...
"Wilko has it right, at 100 bucks a song you can't wrong, but I'd do one song and see how it turns out. If it goes well, then I'd do some more..."
An excellent suggestion.
If I could only put the word "go" between can't and wrong. Then my suggestion could be taken seriously.:hee
from his brochure:"Most studios (project and pro) charge their clients by the hour, keeping one hand on their log book and one eye on the clock. not only is this annoying, it is probably the worst possible atmosphere for frugal musicians who are trying to express the emotion of a track that they have conceived.
At W.S.S., we are commited to charging by the project and not by the hour. We have reasonable time allotments for every track which means a very comfortable environment and no clock watching."
i tend to agree with him on this, unless of course by some bizarre twist of fate we get it all in first takes and wind up paying $1,000 dollars for 8 hrs of studio time. :lol
we would like to track as much as possible live. my initial plan would be to mic the drums, DI the bass, and mic my amp, do the basic tracks w/ a scratch vocal, then overdub vocals and solos and such. however, he's only got one room, roughly 12x20, so i don't know how much bleed from the guitar the drum mics would pick up. i guess if that's a problem we could stick my amp in his garage w/ his bimmer. :D
like i said, i think we're gonna go with it. frankly, there's not a lot of options in this neck of the woods, and it's way past time we got decent recordings of this stuff. we've probably got 20 or 30 songs, some that go back 12-15 years. heck, we might even do a full length album and a five song EP (tentative title-"Bonefish:the Pirate EP-songs in the key of AHRRRGH!").
Cool. Live tracking is lots of fun.
The last time I did that, I had the engineer set me up in the control room so I didn't have to wear head phones. I just played along with the studio monitors. I do that for most of my overdubs too, unless I need feedback from the amp. It feels a lot better than playing with the "cans" on. It sounds better too.
Like the Stones said, "Let it bleed"
Exactly. It's the sonic glue, baby!
Quote:
Like the Stones said, "Let it bleed"
that's what i've always said. i don't know where this whole idea that every track has to be sonically pristine came about.Quote:
Exactly. It's the sonic glue, baby!
anywho, we had a band meeting up at a friends cabin the other night (way up in the woods, would be a perfect place to record if we had the gear) and we decided we're gonna do this. figure we'll knock out one tune start to finish, and if we like the results we'll go for broke and do everything we've got. as i said earlier, i'm willing to try recording direct, but if i don't like it we do it my way. hey, i'm the one paying the bill, right?
right!
good luck on your recording. :dude
thanks, chuck, and everyone else too. rest assured, you guys will be some of the first to hear it.