General Music Chat

What don't you like?

From my limited understanding Mastering is more about eliminating hiss getting all songs to equal level in volume, I would assume the engineer tried different compression levels to suit the song(s). imo the over-all compression is the key to me ears. I'm not using very good speakers here at work (so it could be why) but there is not a lot of dynamic range. Lots of mid to low. Not much in punch or highs anywhere... but again cheap speakers. For what that's worth.

If you don't like what you hear I would do comparisions of some similar songs to see if you can describe what it is exactly that you don't like.
Before you start spending more money is it in the mix or mastering?

My friend has lots of money, he has hired various people over the years to play on his recordings, from people in Blue Oyster Cult to Foghat to Ted Nugent (Derek St. Holmes). He also sent the recordings to be mastered in L.A. ($5,000+). And although the CD's sound great I've only listened to them once (he's a Satch-style shredder). Why? Because the music's just not that great. I would focus on getting the best recordings of the best songs you can and try to attract an investor or small label to get them professionally mastered.

The question was asked what do we use to record, at home i have a Roland VS1880 that I bought in 2000, it does everything, most of my originals on my player were done with it, not that Im trying to sell them just document things i have writted, the cover songs were done in my bassist home studio, he has done quite a few albums now. or cds I guess.

I like recording at home for comfort and just timing. But if Im serious about something its nice to go to his place and just plug in and play, without worrying about all the bell s and whistles, I actually have a degree in recording from the early 80s, but that was all tape based stuff.

When I go to Andys, I can just tell him what I want and he dials it in. When Im at home recording sometimes by the time I figure out how to get the sound the way I want it, I have lost all inspiration to record.

I do want to add that at this point my recordings are basically for my own listening.

If you want air quaility music then you are going to have to spend more money and way more time getting it there, of course i dont have any problems with lo-fi sounding things, but if you really want to market and sell it there is a certain standard that it needs to be at, if you cant do it yourself then you need to find someone that can.

Jimmy brings up a good point, if you are wanting to sell your music, you really need some un-biased listeners to determine if the quaility of your basic songs has legs to begin with.

I know lots of guys like Jimmys friend who do shredd type cds, and spend lots of money, but to me the basic songs get boring.

The first step is focusing on your songwritting and make sure its good to begin with, and I know everyone on here thinks thier sh*t dont stink, but honestly over the past 5 years, Ive only heard a couple of songs that I thought should even be submitted for airplay.

Jimmy brings up a good point, if you are wanting to sell your music, you really need some un-biased listeners to determine if the quaility of your basic songs has legs to begin with.

I know lots of guys like Jimmys friend who do shredd type cds, and spend lots of money, but to me the basic songs get boring.

The first step is focusing on your songwritting and make sure its good to begin with, and I know everyone on here thinks thier sh*t dont stink, but honestly over the past 5 years, Ive only heard a couple of songs that I thought should even be submitted for airplay.

That's the bottom line.
If the songs are no good, then no matter how much money you throw at it, you still can't polish a turd.
But, if the songs are really good, the listener will forgive a lot of shortcomings.
Good production is just icing on the cake, not the cake itself.

"You can't polish a turd".

Your mastering will make or break a cake, if the cake is "reasonable" to begin with.

Don't make a gingerbread cake and think all the world likes gingerbread.
They don't. Everyone doesn't like "fruitcake" either.

"If you want something done right, DO IT YOURSELF or suffer the consequences".

I've been listening (I mean listening!) to some newer tunes on the local 'River' (indie-style, no corporate playlist) radio recently, and maybe I'm wrong, but many of these songs are not 'professionally' recorded (meaning in a high bucks studio).
I hear vocals that are obviously recorded with less expensive mics, drum/rhythm tracks that are programmed, not 'live drummer', yet these bands are popular (not just local) and the songs are getting tons or airplay.
What's that tell me? *It's the song*, not the production.

Why do I go to all the work that I do recording/mixing my songs?
"Demos" is a sucky word. Like a few others have said, demo means a rough recording used to present the song to others (yoru band, for example). I used to do demos (back in the early 80s) with a boom box and the cassette deck in my stereo, 'bouncing' tracks by recording on the boom box, putting the cassette in the stereo, then blasting that while playing/singing into the boom box again.

I'm a 'jack of all trades, master of none' - I can write a little, play a little, sing a little, mix a little ... If someone wanted to record one of my songs or pay it live (professionally or not), I'd be joyous.
But, I don't record/release these songs to make money or become famous or anything like that - I do them because they are IN ME, and I need to get them out. If I get 1 or 2 people that say 'they like' a song, then its all good. And if no one says that, well, I can live with that too.

I recorded my first CD with a little Boss BR600 digital recorder and a Shure SM57 mic. A friend with pro equipment mastered it for me, but he could only do so much with what I gave him.
Now I use Reaper as my DAW (and computers really do give you great personal control of the recording and mixing process). I participate in the forums and HomeRecording.com, where you really can learn a lot.
For hardware, I've got an AKG Perception 220 condensor mic and a couple of SM57 clones I now use for acoustic guitar. I still use DI for keyboards and electric guitar (sometimes using the DI out from my Spider amp) because my recording environment would not let me get a great mic-ed amp sound.
Other gear: Tascam US800 audio interface, Mackie ProFX16 mixing board (I use it for the preamps occasionally), M Audio monitors, headphones, and old Sony amp with some old bookshelf speakers (used to compare mix sounds)
My 'studio' is also my gear storage area, main computer room, filing space, dining hutch area, inodoor plant aread in the winter, etc, and is only 10' x 10' - there's not much I can do with it, but its what I have to work with.

In other words: work with what you've got. If you want to spend (and have it) the money to record in a pro studio, pay for pro mastering, go for it, but make sure your songs are 'pro', too, otherwise you are kidding yourself. No one on these forums is ever going to sell 100,000 copies of anything.

PaperDog - I'll listen to the tracks you upload tonight, but I suspect they got over-compressed, which robs the song of dynamic range to get it louder overall - this is what some 'master engineers' do, especially if they are used to doing metal/heavy music.

"You can't polish a turd".

Your mastering will make or break a cake, if the cake is "reasonable" to begin with.

Don't make a gingerbread cake and think all the world likes gingerbread.
They don't. Everyone doesn't like "fruitcake" either.

"If you want something done right, DO IT YOURSELF or suffer the consequences".

I think there was an I Love Lucy episode where Fred & Ricky tried to bake a cake.
What came out of the oven was flatter than a pancake.
So, they piled on LOTS of frosting to make it LOOK like a cake.

The baking analogies just reminded me of that.

My experience is that the greatest song in the world can fail if poorly recorded and mastered.

The flip side is the best recording and mastering in the world can't make a crappy song good.

I see recording and mastering (production) as both connected and separate at the same time.

Recording is engineering- tone, quality of the track, noiseless, performance, etc.

Mastering is mixing, levels, etc.

Production wraps around both. With recording, it's arrangements, flow, working out what doesn't sound right, hooks, everything. With mastering, it's knowing what is too much or what is missing, and mixing it in a way that allows the music to breathe and flow, and also to avoid headroom conflicts, dissonance, noise, and over-compression.

Nothing in the world beats a super clean and crisp recording where the noise levels are balanced, all reverb and echos are subtle, yet pronounced and clear enough to hear the nuances, stops are felt, but not empty, and full-on all instruments isn't muddy or hard to hear each individual instrument.

Most of what comes out of "professional" studios can't even live up to those standards (most over-compress), so finding a great engineer and producer (master-er) are the two most important things. The rest is filler.

JW, Jimmy, Scotty, Mike N

To me, the issue isn't whether my songs suck or don't suck, (That's simply a separate problem)... The issue is that regardless of the song, there should be a standard for packaging... What I don't see in my case, is the proper packaging.

I think Mike B nailed it... The work was over compressed and the dynamic range is buried. Even turds deserve the benefit of dynamic range.

Jahva, Cheap Speakers are never to blame (Laptop defaults not withstanding) ... If you threw in a Cold Play or Foo Fighters Cd, the cheap Speakers would not be an issue.

The dynamic range of the songs sound decent on the headphones...They just fail on speakers

I absolutely cant be buying any more shovels on the 'prospect' of gold...What a fukin racket!

There is one touch of irony to this...The situation surrounding my efforts does indeed match up to my title track (Posted)

I don't really have the resources to pursue this project any further. I hereby declare it a flop. Moving forward, I'll still hand copies out to friends & family. Maybe even post on other sites . I definitely have no regrets whatsoever... The journey was awesome. I did my part. The next journey will have to be on somebody else's dime.

I've been striving for the best all my life,

You settled for less here. how does it feel?

Sorry Ted, I'm calling bullshit here. Have you arrived at your best? If you have, please do point it out...

Calling bullshit for what?

Yes, it's not that hard to do your best daily. Not sure why you'd even ask that?

It's true that what satisfied yesterday isn't your best today, but that doesn't mean you allow for doing anything less. If your songs are better than the next guy's songs, then why hide that in a less-than-stellar approach to recording them?

Not sure I understand why you sound irritated though. It is within your power to improve how your songs are recorded, and no one else is responsible for the results.

As long as you learned something it is not a waste (flop).

"f you could hire (fill in the blank of your favorite all-time musician heroes) to play on your album for (fill in the blank with $$$ that isn't too far-fetched) would you do it? Would you sell your car or take a second mortgage out to hire (fill in the blank) as your band? "

I might but basically the product I'm looking for requires our own Klugmo on vocals and for the rest, I'm happy to play all but the drums myself.

It's the recording part that is turning my musical life to sh*t and believe me, I'm paying a LOT of attention to all the things you boys have been writing about that.


cheers
Talbot

My experience is that the greatest song in the world can fail if poorly recorded and mastered.

The flip side is the best recording and mastering in the world can't make a crappy song good.

I see recording and mastering (production) as both connected and separate at the same time.

Recording is engineering- tone, quality of the track, noiseless, performance, etc.

Mastering is mixing, levels, etc.

Production wraps around both. With recording, it's arrangements, flow, working out what doesn't sound right, hooks, everything. With mastering, it's knowing what is too much or what is missing, and mixing it in a way that allows the music to breathe and flow, and also to avoid headroom conflicts, dissonance, noise, and over-compression.

Nothing in the world beats a super clean and crisp recording where the noise levels are balanced, all reverb and echos are subtle, yet pronounced and clear enough to hear the nuances, stops are felt, but not empty, and full-on all instruments isn't muddy or hard to hear each individual instrument.

Most of what comes out of "professional" studios can't even live up to those standards (most over-compress), so finding a great engineer and producer (master-er) are the two most important things. The rest is filler.

Kramer, well said... I believe that all you described for a good recording is quazi-present in some of my songs, and not there at all in other of my songs. At the end of the day, it ain't A-grade quality, cause it aint nash-holly-ville..(But what did I expect with what amounted to 4k out of pocket?) To be really fair, George, who recorded , mixed, contributed the bass, the drums) did an outstanding job, considering all he had to do for my stupid songs..The guy is a trooper..bar-none an outstanding professional, who never complained and did his best to meet up with my dictates... His chops are far superior to mine, that's for sure.

I never understood the concept of producing a REALLY GOOD demo.

Do you understand why an architect draws a building before the carpenters show up?

A "demo", to me, is something to just scribble an idea on.
There is no intention to release it to the general public.
It's just a rough outline.
A sketch.
A simple boombox or 4-track recording should suffice if THAT'S all you're going to do.

True, but there are different uses for demos so what works for a "help me remember the song" demo might not be suitable for a "please book my band" demo which might not be suitable for "please record my song, oh Major Label artist" demo which would all be short for a "please sign my band and remix this and keep all the money, record label" demo.

If you're going to commit to building a home studio, you're spending a considerable amount of money and putting a lot of work into it.
So, why wouldn't you put all that toward the finished product?

I've had a few friends who started putting all their time & energy into building a great home studio. Before long they are renting out the studio to pay for some of the toys they've bought for it. After a while, they become more engineer than musician.

Engineering can easily be a life-long pursuit requiring specific education and a huge investment of ever-updated gear. It's fun and intellectually stimulating, but like anything else it takes a long time to become a true professional. I'm pretty good at getting a great home demo, some of my non-professional friends can't tell the difference. I'm also a pretty good lead guitarist...but who buys a "pretty good" record? I'm going to hire a great lead guitarist and use a great engineer to produce something worth buying.

Having a home demo studio has helped me save $$$ in the "real" studio by knowing how the process works.

So we can put in years of experience and money to do it all ourself, or we can shortcut that process by renting an expert who has investing his life's knowledge, time, and money to build a broadcast quality studio.

Okay, first, I'm a realist.
If I could afford to hire my dream band, sure I would do it.
But, there is NO WAY that I could afford it.

Every band striving to be successful is a business. Any (successful) business owner knows there is an investment to get a business to the point of being profitable.

It would be stupid to invest in something you don't really believe in, but if you honestly think you have something to offer the greater world around you, then why not treat it like a professional would? You aren't competing with the best local band in town...you're competing with the Rolling Stones, Lady Gaga, etc..

You can't "psyche yourself" into being good...that take real-time experience and work...but if you are ready for prime time (like I think Grant is) then ACT LIKE IT

The music world is filled to the brim with unrealistic people.
People with stars in their eyes, with the vain belief that they are destined to be famous rock stars or something.

Those people are very sad.

Yea, but many a successful rock star started out that way.

We should individually define "success" on our own scale. Like I've said before, traveling non-stop isn't for everyone but you do what the job requires if that's the job you are called to do.

I have no doubt that neanderpaul would entertain any audience he plays in front of. It wouldn't be hard for him to go full-time if that was what he wanted to do. Yet he has chosen to stay home every night because being available every moment of the day for his daughters is his idea of "success".

Who couldn't respect that?

You can be fairly successful as a musician and make a meager living, if you don't mind being homeless for a lot of years.

Any business you might start will have lean years in the beginning. The only question is whether the (potential) pay-off is worth the work, imo.

No one gave me a chance when i started work on the CD that helped me get to that point. Even my own wife expressed strong doubts. She couldn't see the end from the beginning. Yes, it will take a strong will and lots of chudspah (guts), but when you really believe you have a product that people want to buy, you'll do whatever it takes to get it to an audience.


It's no secret how recording artists "make it". They produce a recording that's worth buying, go play concerts where fans can buy it, and after that cycle is complete, they do it all again. So you have to be at, or near, your best almost every day and repeat the process about every 2 years.

If that is the business you want to be in, you'll find a way to come up with the necessary investment to get it off the ground, even if you have to sell your mother-in-law.

Btw....anyone want to buy an 85 year old lady?