Goldenvoice

I do not. I save that for the mastering process. Get things right in the mix. Give your ears a good long break, and make any other fine adjustments, then run a copy. The next day, play with eq'ing the mix all you want - you still have "the mix" to fall back on. I inevitably will end up with a dull mix - just my nature, I guess. I'll let the mastering house add the sizzle back in. Goldenvoice

Did I mention I play country...?

I've actually considered this (jackasses), since I live way out in a big open field... That would be a great place - 'cept for dust... G:freak:

Wow, that would be only $150 for a 30 second jingle... I hardly open my guitar case for that, yet alone spend hour upon hour arranging, recording, mixing, etc... I was thinking more 6 to 10 times that - or more - am I way off base? I will say last year we did 5 Christmas spots - 30 sec each - traded for a $2800.00 mattress set... yes, I sleep well Helped that the Vice President of Simmons Mattress comes in to listen to me when he's in town...

I've been approached about doing a jingle - actually it's in the works, for a local large furniture store. I know the family who owns it. They want one 30 sec & one 60 sec spot, with lots of room for voice-over, etc. Will air both local AM, and regional FM. How do I determine what to charge them? I'll do the writing, recording, producing, etc. I know I can't charge what the " big dogs" do, but where do I start? What do the pros charge? Thanks, G:wave:

I have found, through all my years of listening, I truly enjoy a good performance. The older recordings (I'm going back here) were played live in the studio, and recorded... on a single track - or 3 track. The production was kept to a minimum - more effort on arrangement - and talent - these artists and musicians actually could play the material - start to finish - and the outcome was real music. Todays music is WAY to cut and paste production, till there is little music left. As far as the original post - yes, much of the new stuff is too clean, un-natural, and maybe too digital. WAY to 'muilti-tracked'. I love the 'sound' of the older recordings, because they had one - a natural, musical one. Much of this is due to production tecniques, not the equiptment used, me thinks. (Could new recordings sound as sweet, if recorded on a DAW? Me guesses not). I should point out: major recordings in the 1950's and early 1960's were done using equiptment which is now WAY highly sought after, because it was, and still is, the best ever made. Injenious designs, hand built, pure unabtainium - and the rooms - and the engineers - and the players... (where are Grady Martin and Buddy Harmon anyway???) I find most of the newer recordings I like were recorded live on tape - gels better - sounds more 'real'. I think there's a magic with tape few of us really understand... (is it the digital summing discussion?) Example: Nora Jones - her recordings have a sound - natural - hit the human brain as music, as opposed to just noise. A drum machine, or loops, can "sound LIKE a drum", but don't really, - the brain knows the difference! I know my favorite recordings of myself are the ones done 'on the fly' - with little preperation - just me having fun playing. The more I work in the micro, trying to make the recording "perfect", the less I like it... OK, your turn.. G:idea: