• 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.

Recording an album: how many studio days?

B

belzebass

Feb 21, 2012
305
78
#1
Hello, fellow low-enders!

So our group is trying to plan a recording of an album. But we really have no idea how many studio days we should expect to use, for recording itself, as well as for the mixing of the tracks.

A little more detail on us: we are a reggae group with:
- Rhythm section: Drums, bass, guitar and keyboard
- 2 voices (female and male)
- 3 horns (2 saxophones and a trumpet)

On a couple of songs we have a flute too :-)

We have already recorded a single, so we know the sound we want, as well how we will record it.
We record in sections: rhythm section live together, then horns and voices in the end.

Any idea how much time (studio days) it might/should take?

Thanks a lot!
 
#4
Depends on how many songs you're trying to nail, how quickly you can get takes down, and how long you're going to spend mixing. Expect that each section will need at least one hour per song. The one time I went in with some friends to do a demo, we were a four piece doing the music first, vocals second. Three songs, each one took an hour or so to record, listen back to each specific instrument, fix any mistakes, and move on. Vocals were a little less time and we got the three songs done in about six hours, but we were hoofing it and not really paying attention to what we wanted in the songs.
 
#5
Best person to answer this question is the engineer / producer who will be running the recording session.

In general, this will depend on how many songs and if you plan to track everything all at the same time or of you are going to track it in layers. Tracking everyone at the same time is faster of course but the studio needs to be able to handle it technically / sonically. Also it depends on how prepared you all are... if everyone knows the songs and their parts inside out backwards and forwards that will speed things up. Also depends on how flexible you are.

Whoever is mixing should be up front with you about how much time they plan to take for mixing.
 
#7
Just did 13 songs in 4 eleven-twelve hour days in a studio with a decent producer, still needs 10-20 hours overdub voices and solos.

Agree it varies. there is always delays for equipment setups/adjustments. Dialing in the sound of one tune may not translate to another requiring resets. everything takes longer than expected...it's intense, slow and requires discipline.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Munjibunga
#8
Indeed, it does "depend". If you know your arrangements well, it will go quicker.

You'll need several hours just for set up. I see you plan to do rythm tracks (presumably over a reference vocal), horns separate, vocals separate. If set-up takes a morning, you can do 4 rythm tracks that day, another 6-8 another day, including some playback/feedback time. If your horns are all arranged, you should be able to lay down 12 tracks in another day. I'd allow half a day for vocals, more if harmonies are complex. I'd leave the rest of that day for feedback / mixdown planning / taking roughs home for listening , etc. A good engineer should be able to remix / punch etc. with an hour / song, so another day and a half for 12 tunes.

I may have lost track, but I think that's 5 .5 days + or - to a complete mix. This can all vary if you change the assumptions about complexity, preparedness, engineering skill, and downright fussiness.

Be prepared to live with your bass track issues (aside from major clam fixes) on that schedule. The re-dos will probably focus on vocals, horns, and lead guitar, at least in my experience. I still cringe on occasion when some old tracks get played ... oh well.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pwhalen
#9
I've recorded in a variety of ways, but The best recording results I ever participated in were well rehearsed tunes recorded live in real time, with little or no over dubs. Took an afternoon for about 6 tracks.
whenever I took part in a layered, "one track at a time until its perfect" approach there was always something lacking energy - wise. And the amount of work always seemed to expand to fill the time slot.

I other words: If you want to save time and money and sound better, Bust A$$ to sound amazing live.
 
  • Like
Reactions: franklindayala and Groove Doctor
#10
mambo4 said:
If you want to save time and money and sound better, Bust A$$ to sound amazing live.
Click to expand...
This!!

How we cut our studio time in half....
- If recording live, you want that live energy feel to come through strongly.
- Practice playing EXACTLY as you'll be recording it...as a 4-5 pce.
- Do a basic recording of a song yourselves.
- Listen back to each song and discuss ideas, improvements, etc.
- Then play/record it again. Repeat until you're happy with the result.
- if each person knows exactly what areas need improving before the day, the faster you'll record and the easier it is to maintain that live energy feel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oddly
#12
belzebass said:
Hello, fellow low-enders!

So our group is trying to plan a recording of an album. But we really have no idea how many studio days we should expect to use, for recording itself, as well as for the mixing of the tracks.

A little more detail on us: we are a reggae group with:
- Rhythm section: Drums, bass, guitar and keyboard
- 2 voices (female and male)
- 3 horns (2 saxophones and a trumpet)

On a couple of songs we have a flute too :)

We have already recorded a single, so we know the sound we want, as well how we will record it.
We record in sections: rhythm section live together, then horns and voices in the end.

Any idea how much time (studio days) it might/should take?

Thanks a lot!
Click to expand...


How many songs do you have ready to record?
 
#13
Oddly said:
The Beatles recorded Please Please Me in 13 hours.
Black Sabbath's debut took a day.
The Rolling Stones' latest took 3 days.

So I guess it depends ...
Click to expand...

Yeah, the words taken right out of my mouth............................adding, some of the best recordings ever done in the history of pop/rock/rock n roll/etc have been done in one day.

Actually, the less time spent recording produces a more real and a life like recording.

One of the greatest recorded songs of all times was done by the Kingsmen. Louie Louie. For $60 and there is a great big mistake half way through where the singer starts back in too early and then stops and starts again. This major mistake was not fixed (no pro-tools back then) and there was no 2nd take. What they did is what was released................LOVE IT! And very likely, Louie Louie might be in the top 3 all-time greatest Rock n Roll songs EVER!

Mistake @ 1:57

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Oddly
#15
If you record live, with most of the basic tracks (drs, bass, gts, keys) going in at once, and you have the songs down, I'd say 4 songs a day + vocal overdubbed. If you're going for a more layered approach (maybe drs and bass live, and guitars etc overdubbed), I'd say a day per song.
 
#16
That's an impossible question to answer accurately. As @Downunderwonder said, there are too many variables. I'll add, WAAAAY too many variables. The most important being:
  • How well everyone in the band has their parts down.
  • How meticulous your band is with the final product.
  • How well people sing in key.
  • How experienced the engineer/producer is.
  • How many cooks are spoiling the broth (3 people agreeing on a mix generally takes a lot longer than 1).
I've seen some studio guys do in 5 minutes what it would take another to do in an hour.

If you're looking to do a high quality recording and you want to budget your time and funds - it's a good idea to come up with how long you THINK it might take if everyone does their job efficiently, and then double that. That's pretty much how things have worked out whenever I've gone in to do a complete CD. I have 3 with The Nerve in which I've had almost complete control - and many with other bands where I was just a player.

How it usually broke down was a full day (8 hours) for rhythm (bass, guitar and drums), another day or 2 for guitars, 3 days for vocals (can be banged out in 1 if vocalist is experienced and can get the job done), and then a day per song for mixing.

Here's the last one we did, which was a little over 10 yrs ago. Produced by Ron Thal, who absolutely knew what he was doing. It took a ridiculous amount of hours, that wound up pretty much being a donation on his part:



I'll add that the very first CD I did with The Nerve, we did in my apartment, with programmed drums. It's the most efficient recording project I ever took part in, and took an average of 6 hours per song.

And I'll add to that, that it sounds like a demo. A very good demo, but a demo nonetheless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oddly
#17
Just echoing @Joe Nerve and @Downunderwonder , it depends on so many thing.

I have recorded 3 sonds in one afternoon (adminttedly only 2 voices and one instrument) and on other occasions it has taken days to get something right. One of the guys in a group I was in for years (vocals) was always the first to learn his stuff off by heart, but for some reason, as soon as we were paying for time, he just kept messing up. It took six 3 hour sessions once for him to get his vocals down on one song.

Sometimes you just have an "off" day and nothing goes right, other days, things fly.

You should talk to whoever is going to be recording you to find out how long they suggest you book, and ask them also what the deal is if you use more or less time than the agreed.
 
#18
Depends on if you want to do live takes or if you want to do clean track by track recording. I've done live recordings in studios and it takes about a day to get a take you want and a couple days to shape it. I've done separate sax tracks on top of live takes and same deal. But that's my experiences.
 
#20
Depends on how prepared you are and how deeply you've worked in composition, arrangements and sound aesthetics, and of course of your budget. In my case (originals HC band) I can only afford to show up to a studio with all the homework done, songs arranged to the slightest of details, vocals and backing vocals included, and with no less than 2 months of intensively rehearsing them, also to give time for the songs to mature and for everybody to make them their own, OWN YOUR SONGS (one of the MOST IMPORTANT things if you want your music not so sound like you're playing/singing a cover song you don't OWN). So, when we finally show up to a studio it takes us 2 weeks to produce an entire album. 1 day for drums, usually with bass playing along (haven't recorded an album with an amp for more than a decade -usually record both the effected and uneffected outputs of a SansAmp RBI-) so that it takes just 1/2 day more to get the bass right, then 1-2 days for guitars and 1-2 days for vocals. We've managed to record this 36 minute 14 track fast techie (sorta') melodic HC LP like this with nice results (also an EP in some 4 days), but also other albums in other projects, mine or hired hand. For this band, the one I call MY band, we prefer the money to go where it counts, we usually don't spend it on expensive studio time, we prefer "unconventional" studios (such as a decent rehearsal place) and to pay a renowned rock producer/engineer from Madrid to do his work (using his own gear and mics), including a previous round of advice on our material (not too invasive really, within our genre we're not crazy eccentric at all but very easy to listen to from the start). All be said, we're all in our early 40s, all technically solvent and all have enough studio experience.

I understand in less song oriented material, with heavier instrumental work layers and/or longer songs (our longest song is 3min40 IIRC) both recording and post-producing times can definitely soar.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back