Studio Reviews    Studio Forums    Main Index  Hop To Forum Categories  Recording Forum    Why doesn't your recording sound like a PRO recording? Here are FIVE good reasons...
Page 1 2 3 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
-star Rating Rate It!  Login/Join 
RD
1st kyu
Posted Hide Post
For me, what's happening in the "pro" world is mostly boring and over hyped for levels etc...so, its hard for me to be objective...all I know is that the stuff I listen to is more indie and as a result it varies wildly in production...

...so probably, for me the answer is that the pro stuff sounds more the same (production-wise) than less pro stuff...

...give me an indie artist who uses a minimalist approach and leave in some of the snot, and I'm happy....RD
 
Posts: 245 | Location: Paw Paw Michigan | Registered:: 01-06-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hoser
Godan
Picture of Bazz
Posted Hide Post
THIS studio in town, basically ONLY records indie music and has done well for themselves. Some where on their site they even say something to the effect that if you're mainstream rock, or metal, what-have-you, they're prolly not the studio for you and will reject the gig.

I lost out on a recording gig to these guys recently. It's hard to compete with $400 a day sometimes (10hr days). Too bad. It was a 3 piece punk band. Pretty easy recording gig.

If you listen to their player, you'll hear non-commercial music, for sure....but, I think they did some of the early Hot Hot Heat stuff..
 
Posts: 2003 | Location: North Vancouver, Canada | Registered:: 03-01-04Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Yondan
Picture of bandini
Posted Hide Post
quote:
And there's such a wide range of styles, from Black Eyed Peas, to ColdPlay, Nickleback, Christina Aguilera, Kayne, Kelly Clarkson, Sheryl Crow


Hee... I think you just proved my point with those examples...Smile

But my intention wasn't to get into a "is major label music good" thing. That's silly: it's just taste. There's nothing to "argue" about.

My point was just that for many of us, the qualities that distinguish a "pro" recording in the year 2005 are not necessarily desirable qualities. And I'm speaking more as a listener than as a recordist/musician-type.

Although there are of course loads of exceptions to all this.

Chris
 
Posts: 1601 | Registered:: 12-23-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Kyudan
Picture of Popmann
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Damn, if I read one more reference to Jackson Browne from Popmang, I'm gonna puke

Seriously..I have to hear some of this stuff I guess but I ain't gonna buy it. I'll keep my ears peeled to see if I can catch some


Nah, just listen to my stuff...it sounds just like that. :P

Ed Cherney ROCKS. Jus sayin'...so warm and natural. Not any kind of larger than life sound. Nothing compressed balls to the wall. It breathes nicely. Let's the musician's shine. He's done other amazing sounding stuff, too...but, none that I like the material as much.


.
.
.
.
For further proof of my lack of expertise, please listen to:My Tunes
 
Posts: 6502 | Location: Twangville, TN | Registered:: 01-06-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hoser
Godan
Picture of Bazz
Posted Hide Post
Ah,...well hook me up with an mp3 to check out Wink Pick your fave track.

Anything that gets away from the 'squashing the shit out of it' sound is worth checkin out.

cazbo01@gmail.com
 
Posts: 2003 | Location: North Vancouver, Canada | Registered:: 03-01-04Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Kyudan
Picture of Popmann
Posted Hide Post
Ask and ye shall recieve.


.
.
.
.
For further proof of my lack of expertise, please listen to:My Tunes
 
Posts: 6502 | Location: Twangville, TN | Registered:: 01-06-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Sandan
Picture of musical5
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dot:
I listed 10 reasons in a topic, What musically separates home recordings from major label releases?

quote:

I'd say it's mainly the arrangements.

I hear quite a few people who are good musicians who post MP3's here and in other forums. I hear very few people who are actually good arrangers.

Many bedroom/home recordings have a few things in common:

1. Showing off/Overplaying: The players are too busy showing you that they can play their instrument and that they're good, and forget to come up with perhaps the simple part that works for the song.

2. Holding it together: The lack of counter melodies and musical hooks. What many people tend to do is write a song, and then when they record it all the instruments just sort of comp to the root. No real tension is introduced. No additional musical ideas. I hear this a lot.

3. Insecurity: [ This is also true of live bands. ] People often do not explore their instrument enough to be secure enough to develop their own style. So, often it just ends up as the sort of boring, take-no-chances MOR stuff. [ personal and spiritual development might also be included here ]

4. The Silence: I don't think people realize that it's often what you don't play that can make a song really work. Home recordists tend to cover up the canvas completely in an effort to make something sound big and full, and miss the idea that the space in the music is a huge factor in making something truly palitable and tasty.

5. Doing too much: People who record at home often try to do too much by themselves rather than enlist help with the project. Too many people now "play everything", not really because they actually do play all the instruments well, but rather because they're too lazy or lack the skills to work within a larger group towards a common goal. Let's take the average major label CD release - and we'll say that everyone who worked on it has an average of 10 years experience. You've got a band of 5 people. 2 engineers. 1 producer. 1 mixer. 1 mastering eng. That's 10 people! Multiplied by 10 years each - and you get a total of 100 years total combined experience. That's 100 years [ and in many cases in the real world, it can be 200-300 years ] of sweat and experience competing with the average home recordist - who may have several years experience with a few instruments and a few years recording experience.

6. Lack of experience: Plain and simple. This part's OK, and everyone has to go through it. Everyone has to start somewhere.

7. Tones and timbres: Another very common "home" problem is that many people just simply don't know how to get the "right" sound on any given track to work with all the other sounds that just aren't quite right. A song has to be this kind of one world/thing that all works together as a single creation. This is an art and a craft unto itself - and takes years and years to learn how to do well.

8. The "seams": Just like a finely-crafted coat - all the seams need to be in place. Home recordings often have lots of seams showing and rough edges that don't match up well. And learning to make seamless music goes all the way back to the arrangement.

9. Living in the past: I notice this, especially with some of the older crowd. They just get stuck in some timewarp in a certain period or genre that has come and gone.

10. Listening: People who make the average home recording often haven't learned to listen. To just listen is probably the hardest part.

Just some thoughts and stuff I notice.




Great thoughts here Dan. You ever heard Lindsay Buckinghams first solo album? The first track was cool, but he played every instrument on the record, and it sucked. Im a huge fan of his, but a little colaboration would have done wonders. Heck, Chris Thile's solo album was a nightmare....IMHO
 
Posts: 690 | Registered:: 03-22-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Shodan
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Living in the past: I notice this, especially with some of the older crowd. They just get stuck in some timewarp in a certain period or genre that has come and gone.

I have to pile on here and disagree. I mean, on the one hand, it may not sound "trendy", what's heard mostly on the radio 'right now'... but a good song/arrangement done 20 years ago sounds as good today as it did then IMO.
 
Posts: 323 | Location: Cleveland OH | Registered:: 02-02-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
5th kyu
Posted Hide Post
problem IS whats on radio right now... and all the stations that play the exact same thing.

its a style.

but im noticing though right now there are so many "styles" happening right now, especially in the underground. its cool.

i think the problem is whats on the radio now, becomes "the" sound engineers start to get influenced by... then build upon. why its a problem i think, is there is so much history to draw upon as a mix engineer. what i hear on the radio is quite boring and homogenized... but that said there is becoming a certain "influence" because of it. i have heard people sing with an "autotune" vibrato naturally now. its weird. and with the influx of sample replacement, there is almost an assumption now that a drummer hits the drums the exact same way everytime. dont get me started by the influx of the "quantized" music [which i do love, but has it place in that style] and its absorption in to assuming other genres operate in that same mechanism.

so what is there to do about it? hell, even i hear a drum hit that sounded a bit off and took a sample from elsewhere to "tighten" up the song.

you know what was "timeless" about the songs of old referred to? the SONGS were timeless, not the production. hell, i listen to some of those old recordings and am like... that could sound SO MUCH better now [assuming modern production anomolies didnt interfere]... but like the bob marley and miles davis remixes by bill laswell, they sound SICK SICK SICK. beause our listening systems have grown a wider range... and the old recordings were made for the reproduction systems in their time.
 
Posts: 31 | Registered:: 10-03-05Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Kyudan
Picture of Popmann
Posted Hide Post
quote:
the SONGS were timeless, not the production.



So, then, they could be made boring and homogenous, and still be timeless. Cool.

Disagree.

They didn't have the very thing you complain about in modern stuff. Don't you think people's obsession with AUtotune and Beat Detective and sample replacemnet and fake tits is a symptom of another (greater) issue? An issue that keeps there from being a ton of "timeless" songs being written, either?


.
.
.
.
For further proof of my lack of expertise, please listen to:My Tunes
 
Posts: 6502 | Location: Twangville, TN | Registered:: 01-06-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
5th kyu
Posted Hide Post
obviously the production wasnt timeless or it would still be practiced today as the form of production.... of course people cover those songs. its rare people cover productions. so in a sense, the songs ARE timeless regardless of whatever production happened.

as for timeless songs being written today? i guess we will have to wait and see on that one.... but i can probably bet those songs arent coming out of the major label catalogs these days. i think the reason for that is music is no longer art but product with short term recoupment focus... failing to consider the long term investment [the key to timelessness].

i dont think is really has anything to do with technology, aside that its much cheaper now to make an album and tune a pretty face's voice for smoke... add some dancers for mirrors.


i dont know what peoples obsession with autotune and beat detective are... i rarely ever partake in either, but i do at times... well when i do midi kinda stuff quantized etc, and you DONT want to hear me sing w/o some serious autotune, and even then its fairly painful. but some music styles certainly are quantized as they should be... and i do to enjoy to listen to it.
 
Posts: 31 | Registered:: 10-03-05Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Kyudan
Picture of Popmann
Posted Hide Post
quote:
i think the reason for that is music is no longer art but product with short term recoupment focus... failing to consider the long term investment [the key to timelessness].


Well, I'd say we have very little in common musically (compare your current listening list with mine--it's pretty opposite)...but, we can agree 100% on that sentiment.

The thing about the idea of non majors writing the timeless tunes...so, if a tree falls in the woods...know what I mean? You think if Rumours had been a commercial failure, and wasn't the soundtrack of a lot of people's lives, it would be timeless? No one having heard it? I mean, I think Maia Sharp writes some fab tunes. And sings well. And makes good records. But, since no one's listening...how will they become the songs considered timeless in 20 years?


.
.
.
.
For further proof of my lack of expertise, please listen to:My Tunes
 
Posts: 6502 | Location: Twangville, TN | Registered:: 01-06-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
5th kyu
Posted Hide Post
um, what list? i listen to LOTS of types of music. but aside from overtly commercial music, it doesnt really matter much.

if a tree falls in the woods... it still falls regardless if anyone is there to witness it. but if one person does happen to witness the beauty of a tree falling...

consider many artists died pennyless and unknown... with works that sell for millions today. just because the current generation doesnt "get" something doesnt devalue its impact on the future.... the only thing that devalues it is its own survival.

i mean mozart only survived on paper. no one living ever HEARD mozart play. beethoven didnt even hear himself play.... although his playing apparently drove women to orgasm.

i actually think more underground music has an advantage of becoming timeless because it isnt the flavor of the week shoved down everybodies throats until they shit it out the other side flushing it like a drunken memory. it has the ability to transcend a release date/year even simply because its viral spread is inherently slower than mass marketing.

but i frankly dont know what any of this has to do with this discussion.... define "pro" for me, and i will tell you all about the tree that fell in the forest and the wonderful sound it made.
 
Posts: 31 | Registered:: 10-03-05Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Yondan
Picture of bandini
Posted Hide Post
quote:
so, if a tree falls in the woods...know what I mean?


Fuck "timeless". There's plenty of great music that's off the charts (and even once in awhile some that's *on* the charts). But the charts are no longer very valid as a measure of quality, or even of popular taste really, since there is no "mainstream" center anymore - it's all fragmented into a zillion subcultures and subgenres.

And we all know the "charts" are PAID FOR, right? It's that simple. They are meaningless.

"Timeless" is a term for marketing execs.

"Pro" is a term for audio nerds like us.Smile And it means less now than it ever has (& it never meant very much to most people).

No, there won't be songs from this period that EVERYONE agrees are great 30 years from now. The days of group consensus are behind us now. Things will never be that simple again.

And you know what? Who cares?Smile We're in an era of boundless riches music-wise. There's never been more music - from all eras - available than there is at this very moment.

Like I always say: the question of what's happening on the pop charts seems totally uninteresting in light of everything ELSE that's happening.

Chris
 
Posts: 1601 | Registered:: 12-23-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Yondan
Picture of Guitwizz
Posted Hide Post
I like the fact that, bands that gather a good following BECAUSE of mostly their sweat, despite their genre, can sell a ton of merch from the trunk of their cars at shows.

The cd replication packages seem to be getting cheaper every day..

Hey Chris, there is a band from O'Canada, thats 2 girls, is it, Keagen and Sara?? They tour down here sometimes, and I have a bunch of students that go see them. They both play a few instruments pretty well, and just sound, good.


"And on the 7th Day, He rested"
 
Posts: 1126 | Location: 5 feet from the water | Registered:: 03-04-05Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Kyudan
Picture of Popmann
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Keagen and Sara


Major label artists, if I'm not mistaken. I think it's Tegan and sara, though.

Universal Canada.


.
.
.
.
For further proof of my lack of expertise, please listen to:My Tunes
 
Posts: 6502 | Location: Twangville, TN | Registered:: 01-06-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Sandan
Posted Hide Post
"And we all know the "charts" are PAID FOR, right? It's that simple. They are meaningless."

I think the charts are meaningless only to the extent that a recording artist/band doesn't really care whether he/she/they makes a decent living as a recording artist. Yes, payola is alive and well and always has been. And the charts may be completely uninteresting and irrelevant, and in my view, total BS from an artisitic perspective. But they are here to stay and artists can work within the system for effective change or they can "play the game" – either way, you will have to deal with them if you want to do something besides sell a few CDs at your gigs and on your site.

drbam
 
Posts: 661 | Location: Prescott | Registered:: 09-23-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Yondan
Posted Hide Post
Pop music means POPULAR music.

Charts are a statistical way of measuring what is popular based on radio or sales. There are all kinds of charts. It's simplistic to say they are paid for. Advertising is done in many ways. To say that there is payola everywhere still is just not true. Is there STILL payola? Of course.

So to determine WHAT IS POP MUSICa way is to look to the charts.

Now I think most here are referring to the pop genre, which kind of creates a category of music that fits the mold of popular styles, without necessarily being itself popular.


All the best,

Henry Robinett
 
Posts: 1482 | Location: Sacramento, CA USA | Registered:: 09-01-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Sandan
Posted Hide Post
"To say that there is payola everywhere. . ."

Henry: I didn't say payola was "everywhere." If you read my comment closely, I said it was "alive and well" which is a simple fact that can be confirmed by anyone who wishes to do a bit of investigation or research. I'm not being argumentative – I just don't want to be misquoted on this.

Peace,

drbam
 
Posts: 661 | Location: Prescott | Registered:: 09-23-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Yondan
Posted Hide Post
I'm sorry. I was trying to quote anyone. I didn't even read very carefully. I just looked at the general tone and responded.

Edit - Oh yeah. I didn't read read your post by the time I wrote that. I see we agree.


All the best,

Henry Robinett
 
Posts: 1482 | Location: Sacramento, CA USA | Registered:: 09-01-03Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
 Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by eve community Page 1 2 3  
 

Studio Reviews    Studio Forums    Main Index  Hop To Forum Categories  Recording Forum    Why doesn't your recording sound like a PRO recording? Here are FIVE good reasons...

All rights reserved © 2002-2008 Studio Forums