[analogbox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal /img/forum/go_quote.gif Money and expensive equipment have little to do with it. You can mix an album with Audacity and Izotope that will blow away 99% of this century rock. All you have to do is lay off the compression and bowl shaped eq. It has nothing to do with money. What is happening with upstart bands is they are required by their small time label to boost the levels in order to get the contract. Like signing with the devil, only most of them don't have the artistic insight to realize what has happened.

So, you're saying $2,000 dollar setup studios can sound just as good as $20,000 dollar studios? I very much doubt so. We do have a small studio for local bands and such but with a small studio setup you just don't get that "Professional" sound no matter however you want to eq it, even without the compression.

 

[infinitesymphony]

$2,000 can buy a respectable computer, some soft-synths, a small audio interface, and a semi-decent microphone. With some time, care, and a good set of ears, music produced on that setup can sound better than stuff recorded at multi-million dollar studios. Not every genre requires a truly professional signal path, and sometimes that professional sound even gets in the way of the music. The other side is that if a band can record an album on budget gear that sounds great, they should be able to make an even better album on expensive equipment.

But if the people making the album have tin ears or obligations to hard-limit the sound, all of the gear in the world won't save them from awful-sounding production, which is what we're seeing with these masters.

 

[analogbox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by infinitesymphony /img/forum/go_quote.gif $2,000 can buy a respectable computer, some soft-synths, a small audio interface, and a semi-decent microphone. With some time, care, and a good set of ears, music produced on that setup can sound better than stuff recorded at multi-million dollar studios.

You may think that's possible but it's far from reality. Granted, I'm talking about very small group of people (low-fi indie bands) but no matter how talented or dedicated the engineer is about SQ, with sub par equipments you just don't get the pleasant and balanced hi-fi sound. You can get detailed, noise free and distortion free sound from any cheap microphones and mixers but what you don't get is the smooth balance between different channels of audios which mixers costing tens of thousands can achieve very beautifully. Of course, it does require high level of engineering, too.


Quote:

Not every genre requires a truly professional signal path, and sometimes that professional sound even gets in the way of the music.

I don't understand this statement. Can you give me some examples regarding this statement and explain what you mean by professional signal path?

Quote:

The other side is that if a band can record an album on budget gear that sounds great, they should be able to make an even better album on expensive equipment. But if the people making the album have tin ears or obligations to hard-limit the sound, all of the gear in the world won't save them from awful-sounding production, which is what we're seeing with these masters.

I don't argue that point. Poor SQ doesn't necessarily mean poor quality of stuffs and they can always have great albums even in poor conditions. In the same way, right equipments can make horrible results in the wrong hands. I absolutely agree.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif So, you're saying $2,000 dollar setup studios can sound just as good as $20,000 dollar studios? I very much doubt so.

The size and cost of the studio has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of a mix. You can go out and rent any mike you want for the day for relatively little money. The thing that makes music sound good or bad is *creative* choices and the knowledge to know how to apply the technology. Really good equipment can help, but ultimately, it's the engineer that makes the difference.

See ya
Steve

 

[analogbox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif The size and cost of the studio has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of a mix. You can go out and rent any mike you want for the day for relatively little money. The thing that makes music sound good or bad is *creative* choices and the knowledge to know how to apply the technology. Really good equipment can help, but ultimately, it's the engineer that makes the difference. See ya Steve

You're right. The engineers are the most important factor in recordings but only up to where their equipments can take them. Microphones have little to do with SQ. Overall SQ is mixture of microphone/eq/mixer/compressor in simplest form and if there's any cheap equipment in between, there creates a bottleneck and one's input is only as good as other's output. It's as if you can't fully enjoy K1000 matched with a cmoy. You can always EQ to a certain level but it won't make your $2,000 gear into $20,000 worth. Just like EQing PX100 will never turn it into RS-1.

 

[Nocturnal310]

In the age when people listen to music on Youtube (mono) ...the Recording doesnt even matter to 90% population.

these people listen music on their laptop with onboard soundcard via ibuds and claim 'wow, ibuds are soooo good'.


Thats why i say...the ONLY solution is to popularise Head-fi.

only forums like head-fi can enlighten people..then they ll demand better recordings..and the Recording studios will pay attention to mastering.


So spread Head-fi.

 

[PeterDLai]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nocturnal310 /img/forum/go_quote.gif In the age when people listen to music on Youtube (mono) ...the Recording doesnt even matter to 90% population. these people listen music on their laptop with onboard soundcard via ibuds and claim 'wow, ibuds are soooo good'.

*shudders*

 

[basic-chanel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif So, you're saying $2,000 dollar setup studios can sound just as good as $20,000 dollar studios? I very much doubt so.

Then how come I've heard things made with nothing more than a laptop in a bedroom that blow away music done in these high-end studios?

Honestly, what worries me more than people listening to music on youtube (and I doubt that anyone does so for anything more than a preview) is people that feel you can not create well-produced music with anything other than an overpriced studio full of equipment that few can afford.

As far as I'm concerned, the day of the "professional" studio is dying; this is the era of laptop and bedroom musicians. In today's world, one can buy a laptop or build a PC, buy an audio interface and a MIDI controller, borrow a copy of their favourite DAW and bang out tunes in their own home for $1000 or less.

That all aside, I'd rather take a lo-fi tape recording of quality music than garbage made in a "professional" studio.

 

[analogbox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by basic-chanel /img/forum/go_quote.gif Then how come I've heard things made with nothing more than a laptop in a bedroom that blow away music done in these high-end studios?

Those are synthesized music which uses banks of pre-recorded sound clips. Anybody can make music using only a synthesized keyboard or module which involves no recordings and equipments and that's a whole different ball park. But what we're talking about right now is the live sound, more specifically small time indie bands and their way of recording and the options they have.

 

[analogbox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by basic-chanel /img/forum/go_quote.gif As far as I'm concerned, the day of the "professional" studio is dying; this is the era of laptop and bedroom musicians. In today's world, one can buy a laptop or build a PC, buy an audio interface and a MIDI controller, borrow a copy of their favourite DAW and bang out tunes in their own home for $1000 or less. That all aside, I'd rather take a lo-fi tape recording of quality music than garbage made in a "professional" studio.

Synthesized sounds will never replace live sounds any day (except techno, trance, acid, etc.). Computers cannot capture the emotions and expressions we humans make. Isn't that what we search for when we listen to music?

 

[basic-chanel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif Those are synthesized music which has banks of pre-recorded sound clips already. Anybody can make music using only a synthesized keyboard or module and that has nothing to do with recordings and equipments which is not the topic we're discussing right now. We're talking about live sounds, more specifically small time indie bands and their way of recording and the options they have.

Nowhere was it ever mentioned that we can only discuss "live sounds", nor does "indie" describe what sort of music and sounds that can be created. That aside, clearly you do not know that a variety of instruments can be connected through an audio interface and recorded directly to your DAW of choice. Additionally, samples and loops must be recorded through some means before they are ever digitalized, thus I fail to see how computer-based music can only be created through virtual synths.

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif Synthesized sounds will never replace live sounds any day (except techno, trance, acid, etc.). Computers cannot capture the emotions and expressions we humans make. Isn't that what we search for when we listen to music?

Honestly, that is one of the most arrogant things I have ever read, and it truly breaks my heart to hear someone say that all this music that honestly moves me far more than anything created through traditional instruments and means is entirely emotionless and lacking in expression.

 

[analogbox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by basic-chanel /img/forum/go_quote.gif Nowhere was it ever mentioned that we can only discuss "live sounds", nor does "indie" describe what sort of music and sounds that can be created.

I simply meant that that wasn't what I was speaking of all these times and you threw me an argument which is different from what we were discussing. You are free to discuss anything you want but next time when you have to counterpoint somebody, please try to counterpoint on the topics on hand or ask for more explanation if you didn't understand the argument. You weren't and you didn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by basic-chanel /img/forum/go_quote.gif That aside, clearly you do not know that a variety of instruments can be connected through an audio interface and recorded directly to your DAW of choice.

Quote:

nothing more than a laptop in a bedroom

I don't see any mention of instruments in your earlier post and yet you're accusing me for something you didn't even mention. Please re-check your own statement before making an insult like that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by basic-chanel /img/forum/go_quote.gif Additionally, samples and loops must be recorded through some means before they are ever digitalized, thus I fail to see how computer-based music can only be created through virtual synths.

Well, I did mention they are pre-recorded, didn't I? I never said the clips were created digitally. I just meant that that clips weren't recorded by you but by well-controlled professional environment and you're just using those clips over and over again creating loops of beats and melodies digitally. I've had my fair share of experience over looping programs, thank you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by basic-chanel /img/forum/go_quote.gif Honestly, that is one of the most arrogant things I have ever read, and it truly breaks my heart to hear someone say that all this music that honestly moves me far more than anything created through traditional instruments and means is entirely emotionless and lacking in expression.

I'm sorry if you were offended by that statement. This was just my personal opinion and by no means I meant no offense. That's why I made that exceptions in the parenthesis. Some genres of music, don't require live playback of guitar strums or violin singing and you can be plenty moved by'em. But I believe synthesized loops of guitar solos will never have the same effect as Jimi Hendrix's crazy, abstract guitar solo or B.B. King's emotional, delicately aged sweet guitar solo.

 

[slwiser]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PWilson /img/forum/go_quote.gif Actually, I think the ipod and the car radio are in part responsible. Well... perhaps not responsible, but the catalyst. If you've ever tried listening to music with good dynamic range on crappy equipment in a noisy environment, it really suffers. It's quite hard to get the details, and the softer parts can get fully drowned out. Hence, equalisation, to get everything up nice and loud, so it can all be heard through the crappy speakers/earbuds over the noise. I have no problems if they do this with the radio, but bloody hell, leave my CD's alone

Good summary....

 

[Nocturnal310]

Ya....its the Sales department which is causing this change....

everything is sales driven these days....even the world famous Apple has used Plastic for the first time (iphone 3G) to be cost effective & increase Sales revenue by reducing cost.

i recently went to a Recording Studio open house in Singapore and spoke to the head Engineer..he told me about the industry and how it has changed totally.

he showed me how he has to be careful with recordings ...he has to decide what kind of environment the track will be played it...because the majority uses average equipment and they will be disappointed if the Sound is too dynamic..

the average earbuds cannot actually work with a great dynamic range...most details will be lost.


Then he also showed me how he works on the Tracks for 5.1 Channel.

..

I ve gotten interested in Sound engineering ...watching lot of videos by famous Sound engineers.

 

[analogbox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nocturnal310 /img/forum/go_quote.gif he showed me how he has to be careful with recordings ...he has to decide what kind of environment the track will be played it...because the majority uses average equipment and they will be disappointed if the Sound is too dynamic.

I find this to be very true in today's recording industry. If I remember correctly, I think I remember seeing somewhere that Amy Winehouse's latest album was created with that same idea, and that that is why it sounds crappy when listen through high-end stereo.