Post by rickyguitar on Jan 4, 2020 23:50:13 GMT -5
Just wondering if anyone here ever had a recording project where you walked away happy, satisfied with the finished product. I always have spots I am pretty happy with and spits where I am not. Never had the big picture really come together. You?
Post by tiedyeddevil on Jan 6, 2020 0:51:44 GMT -5
Took years to get there, but... yeah. I like what I hear.
Long story short: the more I simplified, the better the recordings became.
Started out doing the track-at-a-time multi-track thing: program the drum machine, lay down the rhythm parts, then vocals and leads... mix, eq and compress everything... You know the drill. Got some pretty OK tracks after a lot of effort. Also, the number of times I lost a take (or worse) due to fat-fingering some setting that I shouldn't have... Argh!
Things got better when I started doing live-in-studio recordings. I record with a trio in which everyone knows how to control their volume and dynamics. We're able to play quietly enough that bleed isn't a huge issue.
Over the years, I got the live multitrack thing dialed in so that mixdown was an exercise in trimming the tracks, running the mixdown (faders rarely moved) and doing the mastering. At that point I wondered why bother with multiple tracks; why not just mix straight to stereo? So I ditched the MTR for a nice digital stereo recorder...
It took a bit of trial and error to get the mix dialed to match the volumes we heard in the room. After a while, I left the mix alone (again) and we recorded dozens of sessions that came out (IMO) really well.
After years of recording that way, we turned off the room monitors and switched to IEMs. Same basic concept: record what we hear in the room. The only difference is that there's no longer any bleed into the drum mics (bass and guitar both go direct).
I've had decent results recording shows and rehearsals using a portable stereo digital recorder. The trick is finding the sweet spot in the room. My ears do get saturated quickly when tweaking, so I usually quit after a few EQ changes.
The wonderful thing about digital recording; the paint is never dry.
With that in mind I suppose it could (occasionally) get to the George Washington's ax … axiom.
"This is George Washington's ax … The head has been replaced twice and the handle replaced three times".
I know it would be the case every time if I were doing my own recordings of myself.
While I am just putting myself in a position to record music, I know from my other life experience creating things that I can make something that impress others very highly. Sometimes they are things that I myself am not all that impressed with because I know exactly where every mistake I made is and those mistakes are always right there glaring at me.
I know with my old business, if I could go to someone's house and do a repair on their carpet there was a point at which the homeowner and I had to agree; If I could find it and they could find it (because we knew exactly where to look and what to look for), but no one else could find it … that was success. Most folks are pretty agreeable to that premise.
I think if one can achieve excellence that's pretty darn good. Perfection is usually not really a healthy goal and with recording it's probably a target.
Post by markfromhawaii on Jan 16, 2020 20:59:47 GMT -5
Usually after several listenings I'll cringe at certain spots and think someday I'll punch in corrections. Then I'll forget about it and comeback months, maybe years later and think wow that was pretty cool. Ummm, that'd only be my opinion and not my friends and family's of course.