It can be done, time to sell your outboard equipment

[alcohol]

Over at Gearslutz a poster tells how he did it. got a number one hit on Billboard all in the box with Pro Tools!

 

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php?t=80928

[where02190]

There have been tons of #1 hits done totally in the box. No one ever said it can't be done, but I personally wouldn't want to.

[The_Idiom]

I have only ever done about 4-5 mixes actually on a board using only channels and outboard effects... and most of them were fairly quick mixes playing around for a couple hours

 

and that being said i have probably only done 15 mixes completely ITB...

 

 

but outboard gear can be great for your signal chain in the recording process...

 

but i don't think i would ever feel the need to really use a peice of outboard for mixing.. especially with plugins that are out there now

 

Brandon

[C JoGo]

Never recorded anything in my PC yet--Been with the Roland VS systems for years. So its a PC outside the box ...Could not mix with a mouse >>> Still have to grab a fader for each channel + external FX with knobs . Just too many years thinking outside the box:p

[alcohol]

I'm a committed OTB person myself. I thought the Rikki whatever his name, hit of a few years ago sounded mediocre. I thought that hit was an anomaly. So I was surprised to see that post. I like the sound and speed that my outboard stuff does too much to quit now.

[Weatherbox]

Sure it can be done, but do you want to? I'd rather be tweaking knobs, watching levels, pulling patches, and pushing faders than tweaking a mouse and clicking menus. It's just more enjoyable to me, and as a result, I'll happily take the proper time to make things right.

[Kevin Stone]

Please send all your obsolete outboard equipment to me for, errr ummm, destruction. Yeah, that's it...

[guitwizz]

this is cool!

 

But he said he sent it to be mastered. Did they master it all ITB, or use any outboard??

[MASSIVE Master]

I have to admit - I don't mix much anymore, but I'm pretty comfy staying ITB for just about everything.

 

The mastering phase on the other hand...

[where02190]

 

but i don't think i would ever feel the need to really use a peice of outboard for mixing.. especially with plugins that are out there now

 

 

I'm guessing you've never used a Distressor or GML 8200 parametric have you? No plug in sounds even remotely close to good hardware.

[Spirithunter]

Originally posted by where02190 I'm guessing you've never used a Distressor or GML 8200 parametric have you? No plug in sounds even remotely close to good hardware.

 

 

[blue2blue]

Originally posted by where02190 I'm guessing you've never used a Distressor or GML 8200 parametric have you? No plug in sounds even remotely close to good hardware.

 

 

AMAZING!

 

A $1500 compessor is compared -- by the guy who bought it -- to software compressors ranging in cost from free to a few hundred dollars -- but that can be used in a number of instances limited only by your hardware capabilities -- and he finds his prized $1500 compressor sounds better...

 

Stop the friggin' presses...

 

 

 

SOME Of us have to work within budgets.

 

Those in the economic elite may well be able to afford the "creamy richness" (or whatever) of their arsenal of hardware toys but the rest of us have to work within practical reality.

 

 

What cracks ME up is when people at that tier look down their noses at the rest of us with withering disdain.

 

Toys don't impress me. Virtual or otherwise.

 

Good music impresses me.

 

 

And one thing I've seen over the decades: a LOT of people with a lot of very nice -- inarguably nice -- hardware (and software) make a whole lot of crappy, boring, forgettable music.

 

 

How many "state of the art" recordings -- you know, that exemplify the very best technical accomplishments of their era -- are ALSO in the best loved category... not too many, I'm thinking.

 

 

PS... I'm somebody who grew up on tape and "real" consoles. Even after I put together my first 8 channel PC based DAW in '96, I mixed OTB using submixes and folding my rack of MIDI gear in during mixing. So it's not like I haven't played on both sides of this street.

 

And -- to make it clear -- I'm not against those with the budget/resources chasing the last few percent of quality -- and it is an understandably expensive undertaking.

 

At a certain point and servicing a certain client base, it makes sense -- although I strongly suspect that skill, creativity/ingenuity, good work manners/CR diplomacy, and an innate sense of musicality will do far more to give one "competitive advantage" among people who matter.

 

But for those of us who do not have platinum budgets, finding the most cost-effective tools that work the way we want and augment our own creativity and workflow is of key imporatance, it seems to me.

 

It's nice to have that "golden glow" that comes from knowing you own (what you think is) "the best" -- but if it doesn't translate into the production of music of lasting value... well... it's all kind of wankery, then, innit?

[halljams]

Originally posted by blue2blue AMAZING! A $1500 compessor is compared -- by the guy who bought it -- to software compressors ranging in cost from free to a few hundred dollars -- but that can be used in a number of instances limited only by your hardware capabilities -- and he finds his prized $1500 compressor sounds better... Stop the friggin' presses... SOME Of us have to work within budgets. Those in the economic elite may well be able to afford the "creamy richness" (or whatever) of their arsenal of hardware toys but the rest of us have to work within practical reality. What cracks ME up is when people at that tier look down their noses at the rest of us with withering disdain. Toys don't impress me. Virtual or otherwise. Good music impresses me. And one thing I've seen over the decades: a LOT of people with a lot of very nice -- inarguably nice -- hardware (and software) make a whole lot of crappy, boring, forgettable music. How many "state of the art" recordings -- you know, that exemplify the very best technical accomplishments of their era -- are ALSO in the best loved category... not too many, I'm thinking. PS... I'm somebody who grew up on tape and "real" consoles. Even after I put together my first 8 channel PC based DAW in '96, I mixed OTB using submixes and folding my rack of MIDI gear in during mixing. So it's not like I haven't played on both sides of this street. And -- to make it clear -- I'm not against those with the budget/resources chasing the last few percent of quality -- and it is an understandably expensive undertaking. At a certain point and servicing a certain client base, it makes sense -- although I strongly suspect that skill, creativity/ingenuity, good work manners/CR diplomacy, and an innate sense of musicality will do far more to give one "competitive advantage" among people who matter. But for those of us who do not have platinum budgets, finding the most cost-effective tools that work the way we want and augment our own creativity and workflow is of key imporatance, it seems to me. It's nice to have that "golden glow" that comes from knowing you own (what you think is) "the best" -- but if it doesn't translate into the production of music of lasting value... well... it's all kind of wankery, then, innit?

This is a reasonable attitude but it is also quite telling as to your standards for the art of recording.

Possibly as well, it tells of your experience with really good gear.

 

Really good gear makes making music a lot easier because you are not struggling trying to compensate for mediocre technology and the cloudy dead quality it imparts on the recordings.

Good gear breathes life and oxegen into the mix, there is no denying it once you hear it, it is simply critical if you have a good ear for recording.

 

Yes the {censored} is ridiculiously expensive, but if you seriously deny the benefits that recording with good gear has on the end product and listener you are hurting the music itself because you are degrading the medium it is presented through.

You are also robbing the listener of (possibly a subconcious) part of the joy of listening to recordings, fidelity.

 

I'm not saying i don't see your point but don't be confused about the reality of great and mediocre with recording quality. It is very signifigant.

[Matt Hepworth]

I have a distressor in my studio. After all the hype, I like it, but I sure expected more from it. Particularly on snare. I guess I expected it to be the can't-do-a-project-without-it compressor.

 

I like the Digi Smack! just as well on some things, but not on others.

 

My UAD-1 1176 sounds pretty equal, to me. I prefer my UAD-1 LA-2A on vocals.

 

So, both can get you great results, IMO, if you know how and when to use them.

 

On the other hand, I've never been completely satisfied with a software EQ, but I have a couple that do a good job for me.

[where02190]

Matt, you need to either read the manuals for your Distressor, or simply experiement more. I have never met an engineer that thought it didn't completely blow away any plugin dynamic.

 

I love good music, and good music comes from great musicans and great gear in the right hands. While I understand that some have budget limitations and must use plugins, they will never IMHO sound like the real thing, which I am fortunate to have. I'll use them (plugins) on secondary tracks, but for the primary stuff, it's hardware all the way for me.

 

YMMV.

[UstadKhanAli]

I am in BudgetLand. I mix mostly ITB, although I send some of the stuff out so I can pass signals through odd filters, micing up speakers, reamping, etc., but it's still mostly ITB.

 

But I have used a Distressor, even though I unfortunately don't own one.

 

And a Distressor is noticeably better than any plug-in I've ever heard.

 

I have some pretty nice gear, although not the greatest outboard gear (compressors, etc.), but having been in BudgetLand for a long time, I would definitely never look down on someone because they don't have much gear. But the difference can be really amazing. I got an Apogee Rosetta 800 converter. Wow. Big leap up. Then a Neve Portico mic preamp. Both sure make my Lawson mic sound a lot better.

 

I don't have enough money to do this, but I'm willing to bet that getting a real Pultec would sound a lot better than one of my Waves EQ plug-ins.

 

The whole thing is that some of this gear makes it far easier to record something that really makes the recording express what I want it to, and give me that emotional quality and sound that makes the song come alive. Believe me, I don't have that much money. I save up for each piece of gear, and carefully make decisions based on what I feel I need. But if enhances my music and makes it much easier to create an emotional artistic statement, then it's totally worth it to me.

[C JoGo]

Hey, will this lower the price on that outboard gear ??? For a guy who never works with a wave...music to my ears.

But can a TC, etc. . effects box get any cheaper ?

 

Knobs over mouse

[blue2blue]

Originally posted by halljams This is a reasonable attitude but it is also quite telling as to your standards for the art of recording. Possibly as well, it tells of your experience with really good gear. Really good gear makes making music a lot easier because you are not struggling trying to compensate for mediocre technology and the cloudy dead quality it imparts on the recordings. Good gear breathes life and oxegen into the mix, there is no denying it once you hear it, it is simply critical if you have a good ear for recording. Yes the {censored} is ridiculiously expensive, but if you seriously deny the benefits that recording with good gear has on the end product and listener you are hurting the music itself because you are degrading the medium it is presented through. You are also robbing the listener of (possibly a subconcious) part of the joy of listening to recordings, fidelity. I'm not saying i don't see your point but don't be confused about the reality of great and mediocre with recording quality. It is very signifigant.

 

Oh... I'm not... I've done both -- at least to a limited extent. I've used Neumann mics, a Neve board, a few older high end pres, and yes, for sure, nice gear is NICE to use and CAN help you push the envelope of glossiness a little farther for your project. And, working as a producer, I've worked with at least one engineer I thought was top flight (indeed, a decade after I worked with him, one of his projects took a Grammy, for what little that's worth).

 

But -- I'll be blunt -- since I don't take clients anymore I don't often bust my ass trying to milk that extra little sheen out of a project. When I worked for other people, I felt that was part of my job.

 

But I guarantee you I usually settle for far less than even my modest gear is capable of... why?

 

Because that kind of tweakiness gets in the way of me making music. It always has. There was a point where I almost dried up because I was chasing the brass ring of sonic sheen.

 

Now, I think someone might well make a case for that arguing for a separation of artist and engineer roles -- but I'd rather have my independence -- and the dough I'd have to spend.

 

 

You know, if that "dooms" me to a certain level -- I'm utterly fine with that.

 

As I think I've hinted, I have loads of contempt for the glossy projects I've heard and occasionally worked on over the years that make boring cooky-cutter music.

 

I'd rather be sloppy and lo-fi.

 

If that cuts some people out of my potential audience -- I'm actually kind of happy about that.

 

 

[umm... lemme clarify, here. I don't go out of my way to sound crappy... it just happens. ]

[blue2blue]

Originally posted by where02190 ... I love good music, and good music comes from great musicans and great gear in the right hands. While I understand that some have budget limitations and must use plugins, they will never IMHO sound like the real thing, which I am fortunate to have. I'll use them (plugins) on secondary tracks, but for the primary stuff, it's hardware all the way for me. YMMV.

 

That makes plenty of good sense. I didn't mean to go class warfare there... nice gear is, indeed, nice and I wouldn't mind having more (some?) of it, myself.

[seaneldon]

I don't understand why engineers think they have anything to do with making music. Unless you're recording yourself...you really don't. The band is in charge of making music. Not the engineer (and CERTAINLY not a "producer", which I don't think is EVER needed. wanna talk about someone that gets in the way?)

 

As an engineer, it's my job to make sure that the band's music SOUNDS it's best, not to actually make the music. I'll use outboard equipment every day of the week for that. Plug-ins do not sound as good as a Distressor, so I'll use the Distressor. I do, in fact, use some plugins for tracks that I don't think "matter" so much. I don't really think that a rack tom track needs to be sent out to a $3000 equalizer and/or compressor. If it needs EQ, I've got stuff in the computer to do it for me, but I'd never choose plug-ins over outboard for like...a guitar, or a vocal, or a bass, or a piano.

 

To say that "tweaking knobs" gets in the way of music is really, really....I don't know. I just don't understand it. Your job as an engineer is to stay OUT of the way in the first place.

[halljams]

 

Originally posted by seaneldon I don't understand why engineers think they have anything to do with making music. Unless you're recording yourself...you really don't. The band is in charge of making music. Not the engineer (and CERTAINLY not a "producer", which I don't think is EVER needed. wanna talk about someone that gets in the way?)

 

This is shocking. Ok, no it's not.

There seems to be people who have had bad experiences with producers and engineers who then conclude that these people are not part of the creative chain.

Bull{censored}.

 

If you are the artist and the engineer recording your tracks (mikes,compresses,EQ's) incorrectly

for what the spirit of the final outcome is aimed at you are {censored}ed.

If the mikes are too close or too far, wrong mic choices.....say the enginneer doesn't have any taste for guitar sounds what so ever or drum sounds, that can be a complete {censored}ing disaster and it happens all the time.

 

The guitar player has a sound he loves but it just doesn's jive with the rest of the tracks, you gonna just step down and let the guy track it on his coin when you know the sound ain't happening and will hurt the final mix?

Just stay out of the way, man who isn't doing their job?

 

There is so much to engineering and good engineering requires alot of musicality and sensitivity to the back end of the recording process. Something most musicians have NO clue about.

So who takes care of it if the engineer just stays out of the way and lets the band make their music?

Everything nuetral, no contrast on sounds or tracks, same nuetral mic and preamp on everything etc.... that's pretty boring unartistic {censored}.

I bet if you recoded a good band like that they would hate it.

 

The engineer has so much to do with making music.

And the producer, holly crap, are you kidding me?

 

Dunno, this perfect world where you live, can i get a cheap flight there?

[blue2blue]

I think one approach -- maybe, almost certainly the trickiest -- is to do the one and look like the other...

 

... uh, and by that I mean to very much give the feel of staying supportive but out of the way -- and yet still sneak in the fatherly advice that we all know so many musicians need.

 

[GuitarPLayer61990]

 

Originally posted by halljams This is shocking. Ok, no it's not. There seems to be people who have had bad experiences with producers and engineers who then conclude that these people are not part of the creative chain. Bull{censored}. If you are the artist and the engineer recording your tracks (mikes,compresses,EQ's) incorrectly for what the spirit of the final outcome is aimed at you are {censored}ed. If the mikes are too close or too far, wrong mic choices.....say the enginneer doesn't have any taste for guitar sounds what so ever or drum sounds, that can be a complete {censored}ing disaster and it happens all the time. The guitar player has a sound he loves but it just doesn's jive with the rest of the tracks, you gonna just step down and let the guy track it on his coin when you know the sound ain't happening and will hurt the final mix? Just stay out of the way, man who isn't doing their job? There is so much to engineering and good engineering requires alot of musicality and sensitivity to the back end of the recording process. Something most musicians have NO clue about. So who takes care of it if the engineer just stays out of the way and lets the band make their music? Everything nuetral, no contrast on sounds or tracks, same nuetral mic and preamp on everything etc.... that's pretty boring unartistic {censored}. I bet if you recoded a good band like that they would hate it. The engineer has so much to do with making music. And the producer, holly crap, are you kidding me? Dunno, this perfect world where you live, can i get a cheap flight there?

 

 

Sorry man, but I wouldn't try and knock sean. He knows what the hell he's doing and has {censored}loads of experience doing it. He knows his {censored}.

[seaneldon]

 

Originally posted by halljams everything this guy said, blahblahblahblahblah.

 

 

I don't think you understand my mindset towards music at all. I've been involved with both sides of the music business. The playing side and the side that has nothing to do with playing. He who pays, and he who collects. I've had plenty of time to form my own jaded opinion on the creation of albums with I don't even want to count how many bands.

 

Producers, label types, corporate weasels...lately they're all starting to look, sound, and act exactly the same. A "producer" is there to make money with the bull{censored} excuse of "MAKING THE MUSIC BETTER!!!". Meanwhile...who the {censored} is this guy? He's not in the band. He should have nothing to do with their art. Even if it's really BASIC art that he THINKS needs to be more complicated or "radio-friendly" or "money-generating" (he's got points! of course he wants it to be money generating and radio friendly!). If the band can't come up with creative, fun music that's played correctly for an album...they should practice until they get it to that point, NOT hire some scumbag who then has a front-and-back-end deal for doing absolutely nothing but getting in the way of the band's original vision, and making my job retardedly hard, and that much more stressful.

 

The only opinions I give during the recording process are how things sound, and whether or not I think they'll work in the end. I'm not gonna tell the guy to play a different bass line, but I WILL show him a couple things he can change in his arena-sized bass rig to get a more recording friendly sound that will blend with his band. If I'm recording a song that's really {censored}ty, that's the band's fault, and it's up to them to scratch it. Not some guy who has got absolutely no business being there and somehow found a way to scam a perfectly sane band into giving him money for playing god with their music.

 

"Producers" make me sick. The whole idea of the job brings tears to my eyes. Especially when the "producer" has absolutely no musical background, and might have just been in a studio by accident when a "hit record" was made, and somehow pulled writing and production credits out of it because he wouldn't get the {censored} away from my talkback mic.

 

As far as me being uncreative in the studio, bull{censored}. You have no idea what I've recorded and how it sounded (some folks here have heard. Chime in and help me out). I do things at the request of the band. If the guitar player says "{censored}, man, I really wish my guitar had tone x and here listen to this song and try to get something like that", I'm gonna sit there and patch in different {censored}, ask him to try a few different guitars or amps, and we'll try and do it. It's THEY'RE album. THEY'RE paying me to record it. They SHOULDN'T pay someone who ISN'T recording it and is just standing with his finger on the button and looking at his watch, asking me why I drink beer when I work. {censored} those people. Sorry if I've offended anyone here who pretends to play that role in their daily life.

 

You can get a cheap flight to NYC, sure. Airline prices to JFK went rockbottom after 9/11. But you've gotta be able to find a way to make enough money to stay here. If I was recording great bands and turning out stale, boring albums...would I be able to do that?

[halljams]

Sean, i am sorry that all your projects are so {censored}ed up that a producer is nothing but a hinderance.

I also have been on both sides and am a well rounded experienced musician.

 

I don't get why you would take credit away from your self as an engineer, if you are good you know how important you are to the process.

As for producers, it sounds like things are pretty messed up in your circle.

 

In my world a producer helps the artist take the music up a level or 2 while still maintaining the artist's vision, and with that in mind helps decide how the recording should be presented using his knowledge of recording. It works, and it's necessary.

 

I can only speak for myself as a producer, but i get compensated very little for what i bring to the table. It is most important to me that the project is as good as it can be using the talent in the band, I take pride in helping them get there.

It seems to me that that is how it should be, but i don't live in NY or LA, Thank Christ.