• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Big Studio vs. Small Time

SirFunk

SirFunk

May 24, 2001
275
5
41
Topeka, KS
www.jeffutter.com
#1
Hi,

I'm in a band that has been together in some formation or another for about two years. We are rather popular locally and plan to begin touring around to different colleges in the fall. We want to do some recording but we don't really know what to shoot for. We've done some really poor quality demo stuff that we never released. It was recorded in our colleges new recording studio (run by the radio-station) they know nothing about how to use mics or anything, so it wasn't very good (but it was free) I mastered it at home with Cubase and it turned out OK (listen at http://upnorthmusic.com/)

Anyway, we want something more professional that we can sell. Our singer/rhythm guitar player who is sort of our frontman/manager is pushing for spending "BIG BUCKS" going to a real studio and doing a 3 track demo. I on the other hand think it would be much better (and cheaper) to go with someone smaller and do a full length album. In particular my roommate has a real nice pro-tools setup and has done wonderful work with his band ( samples at Link Removed .. however i don't' think those recordings were done with his pro-tools setup).

What I'm wondering is:

If you are a small band that isn't associated with any major label and you go to a big studio, does the quality really make a difference?

Do they give you as much attention as a famous/signed band?

I know they will do a good job with the engineering but without a producer of sorts being there telling you "why don't you try this sound instead" will you end up having about the same quality you will out of a smaller studio?

I know it varries from studio to studio, but does anyone have experiance with differnet levels of studios, enough to draw some general conclusions?

Thanks,
Jeff
 
#2
With Big studios you will not get the same attention unless you can shell out the cash. Here are my two, "professional studio," experiences. One kind of a nightmare. And what I am doing now.

1. in this band for years, have skads of originals, never been in the studio once, we get a drummer a bass player and just a few months later go into a studio to record 13 tracks. Which was stupid on our part should have done 2-3 and been done. We had no studio experience.

The owner/engineer was nice, studio had a 250-500k board, the works in this place. Our drummer wasn't ready it took many, many hours just to get drum tracsk that had fluctuation or poor changes, and the drums sounded like poop, because of a poor set.

This whole thing took us like two years. we went once or twice a week and often got bumped from the schedule when label work would show up to record. It cost us close to 8k when all was said and done I think.

Everything was rushed because we didn't have the big bucks, and as we didn't know anything about recording were at the mercy of his mix. It ended up costing a lot of money and doing nothing for the band. Like a said we should have picked one or two and made them pristene. But we didn't know better.

2. same band different drummer. We go to a different studio with great engineers. We only do a two song demo in two days costing $800. They had expensive stuff too, but knew how to do it and mix better. The songs came out way better quality. But, even the engineers pointed out that if we had more money they would have been able to do more with the overall sound.

I was not happy with the vocals, because I was trashed from singing over and over to get the drummer on time, so when it was my turn It wasn't there. Also, didn't like the guitar tone, as we used a studio amp and miced it, sounded good at the time, but we needed heavier for what we were doing. Great engineers, but don't think they knew what a truly heavy guitar tone should sound like.

3. spent the cash on a Korg digital 16 track, drum machine, monitors, a good mic, and some books on recording and mixing. Our stuff now sounds better than both of the studio recordings. At the time the Korg cost 3K, but now you can get it and many other simlilar digital recorders for cheaper.

This is because I can take the time and sit and tweak, or redo a vocal days later when I feel like it, or just work on a guitar part for hours. I can twiddle and see what I like in the eq and mix.

Best thing I ever did, only way I'll ever go to a studio again is if I get lucky enough to get on lablel and have them pay for the time and pro engineers.

Personally I think computer based recording is a big fat waste of time. It puts an interface in the recording process you don't need. And now with digital recorders you can plug straight in and record and not have to worry about latency or if the computer is fast enough.

I tried it and it was a hassle. Plus most of the digital recorders have touch screens and track views. Maybe you don't want to spend the money, but if I had it to do over again, I'd save my money for something I could use over and over again and learn how to use.

And actually the learning curve for recording wasn't hard. Recording guitar was easy, plug straight in and it sound great with the right processor. Drums would be a bitch, but I used a drum machine and most people can't tell the difference. Current drummer is getting an E kit soon so will be able to record with him.

The thing I like about the korg was that it had quickstart instructions to get you going quick, and then more in depth instructions to tell you how to eq.
 
#3
I have recently been recording my band's music in our home studio. It is a very simple studio, basically foam on the walls, and our BR-900 CD set up with a couple of mics to pick up all of the sounds. We have done a lot of experimentation with where to place our amps in relation to the drums to achieve the best mix. All we've done right now is play and record ourselves live (mostly to hear our mistakes playing together and attempt to put out a few demos for local venues).

It sounds surprisingly good for what it is. Almost studio quality. But, that is us recording ourselves live. What we are going to do is mic the drums as they are (one mic near the kick drum and one hanging overhead), then plug our guitars into the BR-900 CD through XLR inputs and record each track separately. The drums sound awesome miced in our studio (so do the guitars, but I think that if we do a multi-track recording, it will sound better plugged right in).

Basically, we are going to have four or five tracks, one for the drums, one for the bass (YEAH!!!!), one for the rhythm guitar, one for the lead/solo (if there is a need for one) and one for the vocals.

If you have access to equipment like this, you may want to give it a try. You can probably find a BR-900 CD for about $600-$700 and mics for between $100-$200, plus cables. BUY FOAM FOR YOUR STUDIO!!! It really helps deaden the echo, producing a clean sound.

Just my two cents.
 
#5
We live in a lucky time when recording technology is affordably in the reach of any musician. Recording is a process that you need to learn just like playing your instruments. I'm with Burtonisalive, get a DIY home setup and make your own record until your are really ready to spend the big bucks and go big time, if you ever need to after you learn all the tricks. BTW Knowing how to record yourselves will save time and money if you ever do go to a pro studio, easily repaying the investment many times over.

IMO it is just foolish to throw money away by going into a pro studio expecting return on your hard earned money when you do not have a clue about the process. The only way for novices to do it successfully is to get a producer that knows their way around the studio and is invested in your sound.
 
#6
I have had similar expereinces. In 1991, the band I was playing with at the time recorded our full length CD in a professional studio. This involved 1 year of travelling back and forth to Burbank every weekend and about 25k dollars in recording fees. 3 years ago I got in to home recording and was able to produce three songs that were far superior in quality on a laptop and 20$ microphones.

I've learned this, when it comes to recording, time is what really matters. Of course, you do have to have some level of quality gear with the capability to make quality recordings. I think with a little knowledge and a few bucks to spend anyone can make a professional quality full length CD these days including manufacturing for about $5000.

If you want to bypass the learning curve, my best recommendation is to find someone in your area that has a small home studio with some decent mics, preamps and plugins and spend the money where it counts...In the time spent recording and mixing your tracks to perfection. Listen to some recordings the engineer has done, pay particular attention to the drums....If they can get good drum sounds, chances are pretty good that they know what they doing.

Answering your questions: Doing a little research will tell you that no one "in the biz" pays attention to the quality of the recording as much as they do the songs/songwriting. My opinion is that both are important and depends on who you are trying to impress. I believe that most people on an subconscious level tend to relate bad recordings with bad music regardless of how good the songs are. Presentation counts for alot! Our ears are so use to hearing superb quality music that anything less is grating on the ears. In your case, do it for your fans and don't even bother trying to impress someone for a deal. If you're worth signing, chances are they will come find you. Don't waste your money unneccesarily. Besides, if you can't sell at least 1 million records, being signed is a waste of time anyway right? =)
 
#7
Thanks for all the replies.

I bet you guys are all pretty biased as this is the "recording gear" forum :-D but i'm glad to see you are taking my side. I personally do have the capabilities to record. I'm a little short in the good mic category, but I do know a thing or two about mixing/mastering. However I would like to keep our bands stuff in the hands of a 3rd party, mostly because I know i woudl be tweaking it forever and it would never be "done". That being said, I'm sure that a small studio/home studio is the way to go now the question is:

How do i convince my lead guitarist to spend $800 for a full length album in someone's home studio instead of $8,000 in a pro studio for 3 tracks? I don't think just giving him samples of their work will be enough.
 
#8
Simple, have him read the postings here from those of us that have been through it! Better yet, have him do his own research on the net. He'll come to the same conclusion after an hour or two on Google. Simply put, no one in thier right mind needs to spend 8 grand on a three song demo.

I think we all go through a phase as musicians where we start believing that a high $$ studio and engineer is what we need to make us sound like a rock star. Until we figure out that, as explained in previous posts, it's really the time spent that makes all the difference in the world. Those high didge recordings we hear on the radio cost 200K + to make and were made by the best producers and engineers out there....Meaning out of your reach! Yes, there are exceptions I know, I am generalizing. If all else fails, fire him and find someone else =)
 
#9
SirFunk said:
Thanks for all the replies.

I bet you guys are all pretty biased as this is the "recording gear" forum :-D but i'm glad to see you are taking my side. I personally do have the capabilities to record. I'm a little short in the good mic category, but I do know a thing or two about mixing/mastering. However I would like to keep our bands stuff in the hands of a 3rd party, mostly because I know i woudl be tweaking it forever and it would never be "done". That being said, I'm sure that a small studio/home studio is the way to go now the question is:

How do i convince my lead guitarist to spend $800 for a full length album in someone's home studio instead of $8,000 in a pro studio for 3 tracks? I don't think just giving him samples of their work will be enough.
Click to expand...

Wether you go with pro or someone elses home studio you really should just concentrate on 2-3 songs and make them the best you can. Two reasons.

1. If you do more it will become very complicated and the songs will suffer. 3 well done songs is better than 8-15 have assed rushed ones. And thats whats going to happen for $800 and full length in someones home studio, it will be rushed half assed and too much to keep track of. It will become a hassle and a big pain in the but that you just want to be over with. done it myself and know a few bands that made the same mistake. you will also learn more about recording doing just three song as the actual playing part will be over much more quickly.

2. Labels want to hear your best three songs and that's about it. If you give them something with ten songs on it chances are that they will not listen to it at all, or miss the track that is your hottest one that you feel represents the band.
 
#10
8k for 3 songs ? PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE do not do it...UNLESS...you have a real pro producer holding your hands thru the ENTIRE process, including extensive pre-production and mixing and mastering. Chances are your in a similar boat like the rest of us and aren't so lucky; if you spend that money as the guitar player thinks you should, within a year the band will be beating up twice weekly for a month.

I would agree with the comments above. A few years ago, my old band spent around $4,300 for 4 songs in a local studio, the owner, also known as a producer, produced it, worked with us on pre-production and mixed it and it sounded really fantastic, just about radio/2 hundred thousand dollar major label recording. But...

The most to consider is : drums in the big studio, probably NOT the 8k studio...they sound really expensive, but a great room, good mics and pre's, drummer on a click if he can do it, and very well rehearsed too. Take those tracks to a home studio set up and spend time getting the other tracks just right. You'll be very happy !
 
#11
Yeah, i was kind of exaggerating about $800. But my roommate would give us a real good deal for a full length. I want a full length album so we can have something to sell at shows that are away from home, so people will remember us and whatnot. Most people won't pop a demo cd into their cd player normally ya know? Anyway, I think I'm going to record all the songs on our own before we go into the studio, so we can be SURE we have all the timing down and we aren't dickign around doing that in the studio...

Anyway, thanks for all the replies.. I'll try to talk to him next time i get a chance (he's in NYC for most of the summer interning at a record label) hopefully i can sway him.
 
#12
i am personally with your singer, you know, quality over quantity

I dont know about you but i am quite partial to a demo every now and again, if i liked the band and bought a CD i would rather have 3 or 4 songs that are killer over an album of stuff that is just good, but man, you know your room mate and i guess you will see the guy that will mix and produce this demo for you so although we all have our opinions you are the only one out of us who can tell for sure.


goodluck with it whatever you do

Dave
 
#13
Where I live there are more studios than there are clubs to play at. And like it has been said, recording technology is so cheap now that you can d@mn near do it yourself. Getting the drums right what takes the time. But, if you can get the track into your computer and have good software, you can correct just about anything accept poor musicianship. The gap between the big expensive studio and the back yard shed is becoming more and more narrow. Technology that cost 10K 20 years ago can be had for pennies on the dollar and computer editing wasn't around then at any price.
 
#14
There are tons of different ways to make a record. There are huge advantages to working in a big studio and huge advantagages to working in other situations. The one thing to keep in mind is that the people involved in your recording is a more important variable than the studio assuming the gear is not complete garbage.

Regardless of your budget check out guys/gals that you think you want to record with you and hang out with them and talk about your ideas, and your budget and see what they think they can do. Be sure to listen to work they have done (make sure its work they actually recorded, some guys will hand out demos of songs they just assisted on).

If you do have 8 grand to record with you are actually starting to inch up to a decently recorded full album in an OK studio assuming you are good players. Do not spend 8k on a 3 song demo.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back