Money Pit

trackmixstudio

I have come to the conclusion that getting top end pro gear leads to more!
I have gone a bit mad lately and bought loads of stuff.
It all started with my API A2D.
I wanted/needed a top quality 2 channel pre for overheads and guitars etc so I got the API.
Sounds so good that my Digidesign pre through the converters on my 01v96 console sounded awful in comparison so I sold the digi pre and got a focusrite isa828 with adat digital board.
The isa828 sounds absolutely amazing. The pres and especially the converters are superb.
Next I got thinking about the back end of my signal. I was monitoring through the DA of the 01v96 so I got an Apogee mini DAC.
WOW!!. Everything sounded WAY clearer. To test, I monitored with the apogee left and the 01v96 output right and panned between them to hear the difference. The 01v96 sounds like it has a boss overdrive pedal on it in comparison.
Then using the Apogee dac I noticed the muddy low mid frequency response of my Yamaha hs80m monitors, so now I have ordered a set of Focal twins which I should have early next week. Can't wait to hear them.
So now I have a very high quality front end (pres/converters) and back end (DAC/monitors) and no money to buy anyone christmas presents:p.
I am afraid to add up the total amount I have spent but fortunately have bookings up to March of next year.
If anyone here wants to call over to check out the focals when they arrive PM me to arrange.
They have been getting rave reviews even in America were they are considerably more expensive than they are in Europe.

teamdresch

You won't be disappointed with the Focals man.
You can look forward to your mixes improving.

dav nagle

Sounds like you are a true audiophile mixed with a pinch of shopaholic. Maybe a good councilor. You could explain that you are a Logic pro genius and that the notoriety and fame has got too much for your wallet. Paul now that your a mod, shouldn't this be moved to the PI forum? :p

Michael I would love to see your setup I will call you next week.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

tell me about it -

im not a pro studio dude - but ive upgraded every bit of kit continously - as you say -
you change one thing and it leads to you hearing the issues with the rest.

Regarding the focal twin - AP studios have been using them since the start , and they are superb.
Thats where I heard them , but my room is too small for those .( and im skint )

I recently tried out my DAVBG1 pre against the fmr RNP and the mackie ONYX and the DAV was the clear winner .
the mackie held up well but seemed to put a harshness on the tracks , the RNP was also nice ,
but smeared some of the finer detail that the DAV presented well.
I may sell the RNP and get another DAV - with a DI


my ultimate goal is to just have pres in to good converters with monitoring and inserts - and sell the mackie onyx desk.

Seziertisch

Partial upgrades are like getting your car half washed.

frobisher

You're a gearslut!!!

I actually fight this impulse very strongly. It depends exactly what you're doing I guess. It's been a while since I worked as an engineer recording others so as a self recording musician the best thing I can do to sound my best....... is write a good song! I think a lot of people forget that bit when they make the leap into the world of recording. That said, I'd LOVE some fancy new toys and mics!

PaulBrewer

frobisher wrote: »

....... is write a good song! I think a lot of people forget that bit when they make the leap into the world of recording. That said, I'd LOVE some fancy new toys and mics!

I agree - No one buys the song for the snare sound!
However, what then? What's the best way to present it? Record it well that's what!!

What do you need to do that, good gear of course!!!


.... and so it goes ...

dav nagle

Having an engineer and a songwriter who both are equally good at their jobs is recording at it's most rewarding. I have cash in the bank and I would love to buy new gear, microphones in particular but I would rather save my money for a larger premises and thats what I am doing.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

actually I disagree ,

granted the song has to be good - but a good song in a band context
with a band drum sound / groove section is gonna be crap .

and some snare sounds are the hook in a song to pull you in , think of when the levve breaks


once the song is good , the vocal good the drums and groove are solid

the rest is just ear candy .

Bowie tends to create full backing tracks then writes the song around this

Savman

That's the discipline.
That's pretty vacant, you know.
Yeah, it is what it is. It's that or we both better go do something else, pal.
I don't know how to do anything else.
Neither do I.
I don't much want to either.
Neither do I.

RealEstateKing

I used to be a gearslut too, back in the days when dance music was king - always looking out for that shiny new sampler, or a golden oldie synth that some old lady would be selling in the Buy and Sell for 50p, till one day I woke up and realised that once you have a certain amount of sound quality (Which almost anything you buy nowadays from M-Audio on up has) , it is ALL about Art, music, creativity, nice rooms (and crappy ones) and knowing where to place your microphones.

I sold all my junk, spent the money on nice instuments, and now make music on a Zoom 16 track recorder with an M-Audio DMP3 preamp and lots of nice real instuments. Those instruments make a much bigger difference than any smancy fancy Preamp did - at the end of the day, Preamps are just volume knobs with delusions of grandeur.

Seziertisch

RealEstateKing wrote: »

I used to be a gearslut too, back in the days when dance music was king - always looking out for that shiny new sampler, or a golden oldie synth that some old lady would be selling in the Buy and Sell for 50p, till one day I woke up and realised that once you have a certain amount of sound quality (Which almost anything you buy nowadays from M-Audio on up has) , it is ALL about Art, music, creativity, nice rooms (and crappy ones) and knowing where to place your microphones.

I sold all my junk, spent the money on nice instuments, and now make music on a Zoom 16 track recorder with an M-Audio DMP3 preamp and lots of nice real instuments. Those instruments make a much bigger difference than any smancy fancy Preamp did - at the end of the day, Preamps are just volume knobs with delusions of grandeur.

Not so sure about that. I know from my own experience that no matter how nice the instruments are or how good the sound is in the room, a lack of decent conversion for example can really let things down. It adds the 'kkcccchhh' factor which becomes even more apparent with better monitoring.

The reality is that sounds matters more to most non-musicians than they will ever appreciate. They tend to react indifferently rather than say, yeah, the vocals are submerged or the sub-bass is draining the energy from the track or you should duck the rhythm part when the solo starts or whatever. The same is true of gear.

Using better gear brings up the standard of the sound across the board. Listeners notice this although they might not be completely conscious of it. It is no replacement for a lack of skill or a lack of a decent sounding source but is just as much a part of the chain as anything else.

RealEstateKing

Not so sure about that. I know from my own experience that no matter how nice the instruments are or how good the sound is in the room, a lack of decent conversion for example can really let things down. It adds the 'kkcccchhh' factor which becomes even more apparent with better monitoring.

The reality is that sounds matters more to most non-musicians than they will ever appreciate. They tend to react indifferently rather than say, yeah, the vocals are submerged or the sub-bass is draining the energy from the track or you should duck the rhythm part when the solo starts or whatever. The same is true of gear.

Using better gear brings up the standard of the sound across the board. Listeners notice this although they might not be completely conscious of it. It is no replacement for a lack of skill or a lack of a decent sounding source but is just as much a part of the chain as anything else.

Sure it makes a difference, a little bit, but, far, far less of a difference than is made out by advertisers. It's generally of the order of "I think I can hear a difference but Im not really sure" (And that's from a trained sound engineer) , Joe Public cannot hear any difference at all.

Sure in a perfectly treated room, some of this glitzy stuff might matter a little bit, if you want to put extra gloss on the cake: But you absolutely do not need anything fancier than a Presonus or an M-Audio if you're recording in your house. End of story.

The 2000 quid preamp is likely to make a 1% difference to the quality of your sound, that you simply will not hear in an ordinary acoustic environment.

decent conversion for example can really let things down

Pure marketing that. There's a difference, but its nowhere near as different as the sound of one mic versus another, or one guitar versus another: it;s mostly of the order of "Mmm maybe it sounds slightly different, I think, but Im not really sure if it's better different or just different." And as far as Joe Public is concerned forget about it.

All of this marketing is designed to convince you that these infintesemal differences are hugely important, so that instead of being a fulfilled and happy creative artist with plenty of money in the bank, we become pale, sweaty , trembling gear addicts begging on street corners for a Euro to buy an API.

Nowadays even the cheapest gear is capable of giving a top drawer sound (especially if your recording something as sonically undemanding as hyper-compressed wall-of-electric guitars rock music with no dynamic range and no quiet bits).

Savman

Music Equipment Manufacturers in Aggressive Sales and Marketing shock.

'Scuse me while I call CNN.

PaulBrewer

Seziertisch wrote: »

The reality is that sounds matters more to most non-musicians than they will ever appreciate. They tend to react indifferently rather than say, yeah, the vocals are submerged or the sub-bass is draining the energy from the track or you should duck the rhythm part when the solo starts or whatever. The same is true of gear.

Using better gear brings up the standard of the sound across the board. Listeners notice this although they might not be completely conscious of it. It is no replacement for a lack of skill or a lack of a decent sounding source but is just as much a part of the chain as anything else.

I agree with the 'Tisch . In recording EVERYTHING matters.
However if you're happy with your rig , fair fecks to you.


I however can/will never be happy, stuff I think I'm doing at the moment that's good, will slide into the 'Ok' in 6 months time.

I don't consider myself a Gearslut. In fact my only interest in gear is it makes the music I record better, or the process simpler.

I have only basic operating knowledge of Protools and Logic for example.

So really it come down to what your relationship is with music, will an 'it'll do attitude' suffice?

Or do you want to make the very best recordings possible?

I've spent the last 5 years listening to statements like 'Nowadays even the cheapest gear is capable of giving a top drawer sound' which has been proved to me many times to be untrue in the only way that matters - results.

I'd love to hear some of your recordings RealEstateKing.

I'd also love you to hear the difference your fine instruments would sound like recorded through top quality gear, so let me make you an offer.

Come down to Clara some day and we'll record you for free.

In return for this you must come back on to Boards, hang your head in shame and declare that great recording gear does indeed make a huge difference, Only IF we convince you, of course.

Does everyone else think that's fair?

Seziertisch

RealEstateKing wrote: »

Sure it makes a difference, a little bit, but, far, far less of a difference than is made out by advertisers. It's generally of the order of "I think I can hear a difference but Im not really sure" (And that's from a trained sound engineer) , Joe Public cannot hear any difference at all.

Sure in a perfectly treated room, some of this glitzy stuff might matter a little bit, if you want to put extra gloss on the cake: But you absolutely do not need anything fancier than a Presonus or an M-Audio if you're recording in your house. End of story.

The 2000 quid preamp is likely to make a 1% difference to the quality of your sound, that you simply will not hear in an ordinary acoustic environment.


Pure marketing that. There's a difference, but its nowhere near as different as the sound of one mic versus another, or one guitar versus another: it;s mostly of the order of "Mmm maybe it sounds slightly different, I think, but Im not really sure if it's better different or just different." And as far as Joe Public is concerned forget about it.

All of this marketing is designed to convince you that these infintesemal differences are hugely important, so that instead of being a fulfilled and happy creative artist with plenty of money in the bank, we become pale, sweaty , trembling gear addicts begging on street corners for a Euro to buy an API.

Nowadays even the cheapest gear is capable of giving a top drawer sound (especially if your recording something as sonically undemanding as hyper-compressed wall-of-electric guitars rock music with no dynamic range and no quiet bits).

I can't really agree with a lot of that, as someone who had grown tired of the limits of budget gear and has stepped up (a bit). The difference is most certainly there to hear (for me at least).

By this logic, the difference between a T-Bone mic and an M-box, and say a U-87 into an API into whatever good quality convertors is only about 3 or 4 %.

As for Joe Public not noticing, I have friends who know nothing about recording but who talk about "Irish album syndrome" where they say that they would never consider a lot of Irish bands to be as good as their counterparts in the UK or the US because their records just don't sound as good (not as euphonically pleasing, ignoring songwriting) a lot of the time. Personally I have had the experience of a better recording of song x using better gear getting a much more positive reaction from listeners than the initial recording. People can't nail down the specifics of what it is they like about something a lot of the time but they do notice the difference. I have also had non-musician/non-recording-enthusiast friends tell me about something that was floating their boat saying that it is "a great sounding record", that they enjoyed the sound of it.

Hell, a large amount of electronic music relies on this, it is not about songwriting or melody or whatever it is about the beats being phat. Any old drum sound will most definitely not do. Maybe they are using an instrument (an 808 say) that gives a certain sound and sounds great straight off. But a lot of times nowadays it is done to the processing afterwards. I know a lot of even established electronic musicians in Berlin use Reason as the basis for a lot of their sounds, Reason that has been sent through God alone knows what esoteric outboard.

The music industry is also aware of the fact that the general public most certainly can tell the difference. For this reason there are those pros who are considered to be "star" producers or "star" mixers who demand serious bucks for their craft. I know a lot of this is down to skills but a fair part of it is also about gear (looking at the mountains of it that some of them have) i.e a lot of results would be just plain impossible without certain pieces of gear.

The name of this thread is "The money pit". I'd be interested to hear if the thread-starter's clients notice a difference in the recordings. He didn't state specifically what his reason for upgrading was, but I doubt it was so that he would hear improvements in his recordings which would be imperceptible to the bands he was recording (them not being trained sound engineers). My guess is that he is thinking better quality recordings will mean a greater chance or people coming back a second time and a greater chance of them passing on the word. The aim is for people to hear it to say things like "it sounds like something you might hear on the radio" or "it sounds good enough to be a commercial release" or whatever. He is presuming that Joe Public will notice the difference.

As for the wall of electric guitars, yeah, a lot of radio stuff is not exactly great sounding as a result of having the sh1te hammered out of it with compression along the way, but even the mid-range presence that those recordings have cannot be recreated with a budget set up. And should you aspire to getting a great guitar sound, one that will be able to hold its head high when compared to the best of them, just forget it with the budget setup. No amount of messing with plug-ins is going to get you what you are looking for.

I also don't understand the logic of saying an M-box is fine for recording in your house. If you mean that it is fine for doing demos, then fair enough. Otherwise the fact is that some great sounding records have been made in peoples homes/in non-studio environments. Off the top of my head, Bone Machine (Tom Waits), Exile on Main Street (The Stones) and Ok Computer (Radiohead) are all non-studio productions. As far as I know, they used pretty much the same gear they used in the studio.

Savman

RealEstateKing wrote: »

Nowadays even the cheapest gear is capable of giving a top drawer sound

Great but I'd love to hear how good it sounds after the buttons start to fall off.

Welease

I don't think it's ever that clear cut

Of course more expensive equipment should sound better.. but does it make "the music i record better"?.. well that is always going to be a matter of opinion..
Is a valve amp better than a solid state amp? or does it just sound more like the tone everyone else uses?

Michelle Shocked recorded The Texas Campfire tapes on a Sony Walkman (although I had originally heard it was an old 4-track).. and to me that is and always will be far superior to anything recorded by Boyzone in an expensive studio... Would it have sounded better in an expensive studio.. I am not so sure.. sound quality would be superior but the whole feeling would be lost.. at the end of they day, which is more important?

Seziertisch

Michells Shocked's recordings were then mixed and mastered professionally. I am well sure that they didn't just bring up the faders on the tracks and say there it is, mixed already.

Its the same as with the Strokes first ep (which a lot of fans rate higher than the actual first record). Recorded in their rehearsal space, people were saying that stuff like it goes to show that you don't need a load of fancy gear to get a great sounding recording.

Except that it was mixed and mastered in the Record Plant (if I remember correctly). All manner of seriously high-end gear was employed to shape, filter and clean the tracks, to remove the excess of bleed and generally counter the deficiencies you would expect on such a recording. So yeah, it was recorded through a rehearsal p.a., but no, in terms of what was done afterwards it was most definitely not a cheap home recording.

trackmixstudio

It is an old argument that the music is more important than the gear.
I wholeheartedly agree with that.
But while good music recorded with average equipment is certainly better than average music recorded with good equipment, the best is good music recorded with good equipment. This is the end of the argument as far as I'm concerned.
People who say that an API gives you 3-4% improvement over an m-audio are deeply deluded. Try and overdrive the input of your m-audio pre and see if the sound gets denser and fatter the way it does with an API.
Also the argument of "everything ends up as mp3 anyway" may be true at the moment but VERY soon the average joe will be listening to 24 bit wav files on their ipod HD and while they won't be able to put their finger on it, they will notice the difference in the end product between music recorded with quality pres and converters.
Any musicians I have recorded since I got this new gear have instantly noticed the improvement in clarity and since these are my customers, it was money well spent in my opinion. It also makes things much easier for me because, first of all, I can hear everything more clearly due the the apogee DA and now have crystal clear fidelity on the recorded tracks due to the quality of the AD on input.
If you are recording at home you can make do with whatever gear you want but as a business the extra quality I gain with high quality pres and converters is crucial. If my gear is not substantially better than what the band has at home I don't stand a chance!

PaulBrewer

trackmixstudio wrote: »

, the best is good music recorded with good equipment. This is the end of the argument as far as I'm concerned.

Yep.

PaulBrewer

trackmixstudio wrote: »

If my gear is not substantially better than what the band has at home I don't stand a chance!

That's another good point. I often hear the 'bands won't pay so why bother?' argument, my answer is always unless you have something of quality to sell them then why should they?

Most of the guys I've been working with in the last year in Clara have either started a project somewhere else but are unhappy or have discovered, through experience that, they can't get what they want without the expense of a 'proper' studio.

Whilst the studio I work out of diary's by no means full, it's full enough and getting fuller. We by no means charge a Budget price. Bands WILL pay once they get value i.e. the result they want.


It's a bitter pill to swallow for some guys.

dav nagle

I agree 100% and when I get my capital grant I'll spend loads of cash on loads of nice fat.


My only concern with all of this is how does your studio pay it's bills in the mean time if you are still building up a solid client base? I rarely hear anything from people on boards about the rent, bills, electricity? I am shi**ing the next step!

trackmixstudio

dav nagle wrote: »

I agree 100% and when I get my capital grant I'll spend loads of cash on loads of nice fat.


My only concern with all of this is how does your studio pay it's bills in the mean time if you are still building up a solid client base? I rarely hear anything from people on boards about the rent, bills, electricity? I am shi**ing the next step!

I have a very solid client base already and had several solid bookings (albums/films) before I bought this new stuff. I am debt free and aim to keep it that way. Getting into debt for equipment is not a good idea.

dav nagle

trackmixstudio wrote: »

I have a very solid client base already and had several solid bookings (albums/films) before I bought this new stuff. I am debt free and aim to keep it that way. Getting into debt for equipment is not a good idea.

Nice advice. Where were you at at 27 years of age equipment wise?

i57dwun4yb1pt8

jeez, no offense real estate - recording advice from someone who makes dance music wouldnt be the most reliable
you are working with DI synths and samples etc - not too much live micing etc - recording live drums requires very good gear .


I am also continously in debt to have the best gear I can afford ( or not )
beacuse even with my deaf ears I can hear the difference between a stock preamp , a good preamp and a great preamp , same with mics , same with converters.

its subtle , but its what puts the fairy dust on a recording to make it poke out above the rest of the pack- its the same for instruments , musicians , and songs.

it has to be quality and slightly different to be artistic , this holds for any thing used in the process to make an art form. - this includes mics, pres, performer, eq, the lot. it all adds up .

you can make a great home recording - but you need great gear to begin with.

PaulBrewer

Dadum makes good points.

I remember my first experience with a 'posh' pre against a none too shabby DDA console. It was an ISA 215.

On an A/B I thought, 'Well it's a bit better, but what's the fuss about?' I then proceeded to record the whole track with it straight into the 2 inch Tape Machine!

The real value of it came very clear when the tracks got stacked up. Up to that point it was the best sounding track I'd done and I'd not done anything different, just the mic pre was different.

The wool came off from over my eyes AND ears.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

just as a taster - here is a mic pre shootout I just listened to

http://hearthegear.com/a/83-Monochord_Madness_Cranesong_Flamingo.php


id really like a pacifica ;-)

but the dav will do

trackmixstudio

Got the Focal twins today.
Initial impression is that they sound fantastic (in a studio monitor sense).
I will post a review after I have done a mix on them.

PaulBrewer

trackmixstudio wrote: »

Got the Focal twins today.
Initial impression is that they sound fantastic (in a studio monitor sense).
I will post a review after I have done a mix on them.

Cool, is there a recommended run in time? They'll probably sound better again in a week!!

trackmixstudio

They are running overnight with daft punk's homework album on repeat.
Should do the job if I do this for a few nights.

PaulBrewer

trackmixstudio wrote: »

They are running overnight with daft punk's homework album on repeat.
Should do the job if I do this for a few nights.

Class!

i57dwun4yb1pt8

mornin * scratch*

you can download free break em in files on the web , do a search , I got a great wav for phones to break em in.

trackmixstudio

Homework has a great combination of high highs and low lows so is my usual "break in" album. Did a search for files to break in the speakers but got nothing.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

http://www.burninwave.com/

these work for phones and speakers - heavy drum is a good one