Members VladM Posted August 30, 2012 Members Share Posted August 30, 2012 I'm not looking to do anything fancy, just vocals and acoustic guitar. I'm trying to figure out whether or not to buy 2 good microphones and do it all myself or spend money at a studio. I don't really like the thought of being pressured to produce good takes in a certain time limit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators daddymack Posted August 30, 2012 Moderators Share Posted August 30, 2012 Cost wise, you should try it yourself first, and see how it goes....but there is a bit more to it than just two microphones...and actually, you could do it with just one. If, as you say, you don't like the idea of being pressured for a good take, studio time will kill your budget. That said, if you can't nail the song in two takes, you are not ready to record it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sologrrl Posted August 30, 2012 Members Share Posted August 30, 2012 That depends on who you're working with, and if you know anyone with a home studio. I did my entire album in 3 days in a basement studio of a family friend and paid approximately 350$ for it all to be master/mixed (and he even played instruments on it) Mind you, key factor in price for me was he was a "family" friend and he did give me a bit of a discount on the per day cost. Studio time WILL kill your budget so if you do decide to go studio route, shop around. Look for a studio that suits you. You're paying them, so you can take as much or as little time as you need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members VladM Posted August 30, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 30, 2012 I take around 8-12 takes for my home recordings. That just seems like it would cost too much in a studio. I have a lot of songs I want to record and produce and with the advancement of today's recording technology I think it makes more sense to buy a microphone for yourself instead of paying to use someone else's. If I had a band I would definitely need studio time to get it all sorted out but my approach is very minimalist so I am leaning towards just buying a microphone. I have over 90 originals ready and I imagine I'd go broke trying to get them all recorded at studio rates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sologrrl Posted August 30, 2012 Members Share Posted August 30, 2012 Most studios charge by the hour, or by the day, or even in 4-6 hour blocks of time. You'd be surprised what you can get done in 4 hours especially if you're a solo artist. If you are going to buy as microphone and DIY then get something akin to ProTools. Cakewalk and Frootyloops are sub par IMHO. You'll also want to make sure the recordings are Redbook (or whatever you call it down there) compatible if you're interested in getting the CD's pressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members backtoblue Posted August 30, 2012 Members Share Posted August 30, 2012 Buy a decent condenser mic and download Reaper recording software. You'll have everything you need to lay down your songs and learn a thing or two to boot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MargeHowel Posted August 30, 2012 Members Share Posted August 30, 2012 Originally Posted by VladM I take around 8-12 takes for my home recordings. If it takes you 8-12 takes you ight want to take Daddymack's advice and think about spending your time in the woodshed instead of the studio.That being said, you might want to record as you work on that. it'll get you used to the process, figure out your icing techniques and you can go back and listen to your practice.Especially if you an acoustic musician, one piece that people forget about is the room acoustics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members VladM Posted August 30, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 30, 2012 Originally Posted by MargeHowel If it takes you 8-12 takes you ight want to take Daddymack's advice and think about spending your time in the woodshed instead of the studio.That being said, you might want to record as you work on that. it'll get you used to the process, figure out your icing techniques and you can go back and listen to your practice.Especially if you an acoustic musician, one piece that people forget about is the room acoustics I can do a song in 1-2 takes if I really had to but it takes a while until I'm really feeling the song. Playing live, I can play a song error free easily but when I am sitting down and recording in my room I tend to go through a lot of takes to get the exact feel that I want, especially if it is a finger style piece where one bad bass note can ruin the whole song. If you miss a note playing fingerstyle live no one will notice because there are many more coming up after it, but on a recording one missed note really stands out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MargeHowel Posted August 30, 2012 Members Share Posted August 30, 2012 Originally Posted by VladM I can do a song in 1-2 takes if I really had to but it takes a while until I'm really feeling the song. Playing live, I can play a song error free easily but when I am sitting down and recording in my room I tend to go through a lot of takes to get the exact feel that I want, especially if it is a finger style piece where one bad bass note can ruin the whole song. If you miss a note playing fingerstyle live no one will notice because there are many more coming up after it, but on a recording one missed note really stands out. then you aren't getting it in 1-2 takes.That's what getting it in 1-2 takes means...actually getting it in 1-2 takes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members VladM Posted August 30, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 30, 2012 I am also looking for pricing advice. Can anyone tell me if the recording quality of this person is worth $25 an hour?http://lifeaftersix.weebly.com/There are links in the music samples section at the top of his page.Is this sound worth paying $25 an hour for? I liked the sound of the first acoustic track in his samples section it sounds professional to me. I could never get that sound without some serious investment in recording gear. I know I can record my debut album in under 3 hours quite easily. I've recorded a home demo of my album in under two hours all the songs are worked out to their maximum potential. To me this person seems like he knows what he is doing with his recordings but I would like some advice.This is where my home recording quality stands at this time:I feel like with an investment of $100 I could make some serious improvements to my sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MargeHowel Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 so that makes your tunes less than a minute and a half long on average say 10 tracks with 10 takes (your estimate) that's 100 so if they were a minute and a half long that'd already be 150 minutes...two and a half hours then you have to factor in if it's in your interest to record your debut album...if it's really time for that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Temple of Light Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 I'd produce that for $1200.00 for 12 tracks. 10 days work. Mixed, mastered and cover art.Or you could you know, just buy a microphone and a computer like every other tool on this site... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Johnny-Boy Posted August 31, 2012 Members Share Posted August 31, 2012 Originally Posted by VladM Playing live, I can play a song error free easily You may think it’s error free, but probably not if you had to listen to the "live" playback. Recording is a totally different ballgame. Every little blemish that wouldn't be noticed in "live" playing will stand-out like a gigantic wart on a recording. It will be like a Chinese water torture when listening to it over & over.If you’re on a fixed budget, recording in a studio where the clock is running will force you into compromises you wouldn’t have if recording in your home. In the long run, purchasing your own gear and learning how to use it will produce more satisfying results. Plus you’ll be able to record as many songs as you wish, rather than the occasional affordable one.Good luck whatever you decide.John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators daddymack Posted August 31, 2012 Moderators Share Posted August 31, 2012 well, the advantage in recording is that if you have a great take, with one bad note, you just do a punch in/punch out on that one note, and voila! all better...Still, Vlad, in all seriousness, if you are not at the 1-2 take level, then I have to doubt that you are up to performing these songs consistently live...which, for most singer/ songwriters, is the goal, right?Do the home recording thing, hone your skills on these songs, write some more, learn the recording process...because most people who spend big $ money on their debut CDs rarely recoup their initial investment. [this is the music business forum, right? ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BlueStrat Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 What most people fail to take into account with DIY recording is the necessary software and interfaces needed to make is sound like it isn't a home recording done on a mic in someone's living room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sventvkg Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Anywhere from Zero to infinity..What an open ended question...My last records I did cost me what I invested in gear plus $65 to get it up on CD Baby, iTunes, Spotify, Amazon, etc...But I did everything myself.You could so an album here in Nashville here in a studio with great musicians for a few grand. I have a friend who will put together a great group of top musicans and get you in his studio for $800 a day all inclusive. Can get 3-5 tunes a day so you do the math, plus recording your vocals, mixing and mastering. I would say you'll have something far superior to what you could do on your own for maybe $5K-$7K. There a million gradations in between. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ed A. Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Originally Posted by VladM I'm not looking to do anything fancy, just vocals and acoustic guitar. I'm trying to figure out whether or not to buy 2 good microphones and do it all myself or spend money at a studio. I don't really like the thought of being pressured to produce good takes in a certain time limit. Chris Price's album "Homesick" was done on an iPhone for $10:NY Daily News review of "Homesick". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members VladM Posted September 1, 2012 Author Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 I got a price quote of around $600 for a home studio that seems like way too much I decided I am just going to buy my own microphone and get infinite takes for myself. The person is charging almost a month's worth of rent for something I can do myself using Reaper, that just doesn't sound realistic to me at all. For just $100 more than what that person is charging I can get a quality microphone and do everything myself with no time pressure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JVGM-music Posted September 1, 2012 Members Share Posted September 1, 2012 Few days studio, few days mixing....design booklet ....mastering....500 cd's....... in Euro i would say about 3500 dollars that would be about 4000usd Rough estimate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sologrrl Posted September 2, 2012 Members Share Posted September 2, 2012 Originally Posted by VladM I got a price quote of around $600 for a home studio that seems like way too much I decided I am just going to buy my own microphone and get infinite takes for myself. The person is charging almost a month's worth of rent for something I can do myself using Reaper, that just doesn't sound realistic to me at all. For just $100 more than what that person is charging I can get a quality microphone and do everything myself with no time pressure. I find it amusing that we complain about paying absorbent amounts of money to sound engineers for recording and choose to record at home and then complain about the quality. One estimate isn't enough. You're not just paying for the use of the space, you're paying for a second set of ears, and a second opinion, and most often times, a superior sound skill set in terms of equalizing, balancing, blending and tonal qualities that we oftentimes over look as musicians because we're playing what we think sounds great but it could sound so much better with the proper touches in the mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators daddymack Posted September 2, 2012 Moderators Share Posted September 2, 2012 ^ agreed, to a point....that point being anyone who is willing to spend the time can master the means of production, and I have seen a quantum shift in home recording quality over just the last three years. That, however, also does not mean that they will produce a work of art on their home system, no matter how great the recording quality. The real essence is still the songwriting and the production. In Vlad's case, a one mic recording of two tracks, a truly barebones approach, really won't benefit from spending thousands on a pro studio with a skilled engineer and a producer. The place to spend the money on that would be mastering and promo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted September 5, 2012 Members Share Posted September 5, 2012 I highly recommend a good mastering engineer. When Bruce Springsteen recorded Nebraska, a lot of hype centered around the fact that it was recorded on a Portastudio. What wasn't mentioned as often was that they did something like 45 different masters trying to turn it into something "radio ready." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BlueStrat Posted September 5, 2012 Members Share Posted September 5, 2012 I got a price quote of around $600 for a home studio that seems like way too much really? You want to do 8-10 takes of each song on a full length CD and $600 is too much? Wow. That's 12 hours on a studio that only charges 50 dollars an hour. I just recorded my solo CD in June and July at a nice home studio. The guy who owns it is a good friend who used to do live recordings with the BBC in England. I have about 45 hours into including mixing it because I added mandolin, bass on some songs, electric guitar on some songs and hand percussion on some. My parts took only a take or two, and then I did the vocals as well. But the mandolin only took 3 hours to track three songs, the soprano sax took an hour and a half, the percussion was about 4 hours and the bass another three. That's about 12 hours. The rest of it was my tracking and singing. And no, I doubt you'll get a marketable product with single mic. Maybe. I used a really nice recording mic and plugged into the boars as well with my guitars. With electric I DI'd and miked the amp as well. My friend did my recording for free because he wanted to help me and he believes in my songs. But had I paid him, it would have cost me a minimum of 2,000 dollars. And well worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BlueStrat Posted September 5, 2012 Members Share Posted September 5, 2012 Originally Posted by Anderton I highly recommend a good mastering engineer. When Bruce Springsteen recorded Nebraska, a lot of hype centered around the fact that it was recorded on a Portastudio. What wasn't mentioned as often was that they did something like 45 different masters trying to turn it into something "radio ready." And the reverb / delay was crazy on that record, almost unlistenable in some places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mosby Posted September 5, 2012 Members Share Posted September 5, 2012 I don't mean to sound rude, but I think there is a disconnect with where you think you're at and what you expect. That said. I think you would benefit from investing in a basic home recording setup. Get good software, a decent interface, and a decent mic. Based of of what you've talked about, you have no idea of all the effort that must go into a "radio ready" recording - even for a singer songwriter situation. I don't say that to be mean,but as a statement of reality. Drop $1000 or so dollars get yourself some decent starter gear and record yourself. I think the process will clue you into what can be involved in the recording game. It is worth spending decent money for actual studio time - even in your situation. It's the engineers gear and ears that can make the difference. As far as dropping a $1000 plus and recording yourself - it teaches you how the flow of recording can go, but even if you choose to go to a pro studio, you a) have a better understanding of the process, and b) you can give the engineer a reference track - which only helps both of you. All said - get acquainted with what it takes to record yourself. How many takes it really takes to get things done. Understand that good gear and good ears matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.