Backstage With the Band

[New Trail]

Because of various factors (i.e. poor micing and vocals and instrument leaks onto the drum tracks) the CD that we have been working on for 6 months or so will never be a perfect product, at least not to us. Should we scrap it all and start again or just consider it a first effort and a learning experience and finish it, release it, and move on?

[Actionsquid]

Originally Posted by New Trail

Because of various factors (i.e. poor micing and vocals and instrument leaks onto the drum tracks) the CD that we have been working on for 6 months or so will never be a perfect product, at least not to us. Should we scrap it all and start again or just consider it a first effort and a learning experience and finish it, release it, and move on?

It's hard to offer an opinion on this without hearing it...

That said... can you see yourself re-recording it? Do you have the resources to do it again and do you still feel excited about the material? If yes, and you also see a clear way that you can make it sound significantly better th second time around, then why not?

On the other hand, how are the performance and overall feel? If it has inspired performances but uneven engineering/production, you might want to see what you can fix with mixing and mastering and just put it out there. It can be hard to recapture that energy if you are burnt out on the songs. Lots of classic albums are not especially well-produced but shine anyway.

[VanHalen]

It all depends on if you want to "make it big" or just be a local band. If the latter, it doesn't matter.

[SpaceNorman]

Depends on the nature of the imperfections. If it's a case of blatant issues with audible mistakes and/or production quality ... rework may make sense. If it's more a case of you wish you had a little more time to fiddle with tone, drum sounds, things that others who aren't as close to it as you are tell you are imperceptible ... maybe not. It's easy to fall into the trap of being uber-critical of recordings of yourself - and then allow that uber-critical-ness prevent you from getting anything completed and out there.

[SLScott86]

It's really hard to say without knowing how severe the issues are. 6 months is a long time, but if you REALLY aren't happy with it, it may be several years before you can do another one that you might be proud of. Less painful to wait an extra six months in that case. We weren't happy, brought in an elite producer in the genre to mix, and found ourselves happy with it. Bad vocals should be redone any way you slice it. Try to get a the best instrumental mix you can to record vocals to, and it will be much easier. No real perfect answer to the problem.

[wesg]

Frank Zappa released records he knew were imperfect.

[toddkuen]

If you're not sure get an independent third party with good credibility (studio guy, producer, some kind of sound pro) and let them have a listen but don't tell them why.

Then ask for advice...

[SLScott86]

One thing on instrument bleed. It's commonplace to, and this sounds awful because it is, edit all of the drum tracks down to only the transients in each individual mic. Have you tried running the overheads through a gate?

[Chicken Monkey]

To the OP: It'll never be perfect. "Good enough" is the goal, and it's somewhere between "not good enough" and "fucked with beyond the point of no return".

Originally Posted by toddkuen

If you're not sure get an independent third party with good credibility (studio guy, producer, some kind of sound pro) and let them have a listen but don't tell them why.

Then ask for advice...

In my direct experience, the advice is always, "You should re-record this in my studio/have me master it/have me do some punch-ins/etc.". So be picky with your ears--our record turned out really good (just got nominated for a bunch of local music awards) when we ignored the couple of studio guys and handed it off to friends and fans who have done home recording themselves.

[wesg]

What Scott said. If you aren't noise gating your drums you're doin' it wrong.

[kmart]

On the local/original music tip, I don't think it's any stretch at all to say what the OP has is the norm.

If anybody on this forum can deliver an example of a local/original recording that IS perfect...

[kmart]

On the local/original music tip, I don't think it's any stretch at all to say what the OP has is the norm.

If anybody on this forum can deliver an example of a local/original recording that IS perfect...

[SLScott86]

It won't be perfect. But it can be produced well enough to do the songs and performances justice. I think that should be the goal. You'll never getit perfect. The good thing about a third party mix is that you have no choice but to let it go, which is very beneficial. Otherwise, set yourself a deadline and try to let it go then.

[SLScott86]

It won't be perfect. But it can be produced well enough to do the songs and performances justice. I think that should be the goal. You'll never getit perfect. The good thing about a third party mix is that you have no choice but to let it go, which is very beneficial. Otherwise, set yourself a deadline and try to let it go then.

[StageMasters]

It all depends on what you are releasing a CD for.

If it's to be used as a demo to get some gigs, it doesn't need to be perfect as they may not even listen to the full songs.

They mostly want to know what you play, your general sound and your energy. They will go max until 1 minute on each song to make their opinion  unless they really like one of the songs

If it's to sell, it definitely has to be perfect. You owe that to your potential buyers.

StageMastersLive

[THX1138]

Just my opinion, but there's a big difference between "not perfect" and "not good enough". You are your own worst critic, so it'll never be perfect to your ears. Perfection can't be achieved, but not good enough can be fixed. And should be.

[Kramerguy]

I would not relelase anything original from the studio until I was satisfied that it was "as good as it's going to get".  Doesn't have to be perfect, but if you have bleeding issues and noticible engineering problems, tone deficiencies, or even flat notes, then you would do yourself a great dis-service by finalizing it.

I know because I made this mistake in 2009.  I left the studio knowing that it wasn't as good as it should have been, I heard a few minor issues with tones, playing, and even arrangements.  Most, maybe even all of the things I heard would most likely be missed by the casual listener, although I've often argued that the casual listener can still pick up on it, just not in a conscious way.  We did due diligence with the demos and pre-production, but after laying down professional engineering and production, things can and will change.

The bottom line is that I knew it could have been better, and I have regretted finalizing it ever since.  Don't live in regret, it sucks.

[Actionsquid]

---

The good thing about a third party mix is that you have no choice but to let it go, which is very beneficial.

---

I live by ths. Unless you have a very clear vision and a great set of ears (and even sometimes then), it's almost always best to turn the mixing over to someone else. (who is good at it)