Re: Higher End Studio Gear Can Make a Song

prez · Post by **prez** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 3:07 pm

Quote:I tend to agree with PREZ (though I'm no fan of his tone).Yeah...get in line and grab some Kleenex.

zircon · Post by **zircon** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 3:19 pm

Quote:Quote:I tend to agree with PREZ (though I'm no fan of his tone) that it's more about song quality than gear quality. Production quality matters as well, but high production values can be achieved with poor or mediocore gear, and great gear can yield crappy production...it all depends who's in the driver's seat.Andre Give us an example of high production values with poor gear?Brilliant usage of the gear at hand. I am one of about nine people that evaluate music at a website called OverClocked ReMix. The site is about rearranging video game music into all sorts of new genres, from rock, to hip hop, orchestral, solo acoustic guitar, new age, etc. We get hundreds to thousands of submissions a year. About 1/2 of them use the same basic software (FLStudio) with no additions or extra plugins/samples. Most of them sound terrible. Once in awhile we get people using the EXACT same gear but their songs sound amazing. Thus, high production values with poor gear.

prez · Post by **prez** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 4:09 pm

Quote:Brilliant usage of the gear at hand. I am one of about nine people that evaluate music at a website called OverClocked ReMix. The site is about rearranging video game music into all sorts of new genres, from rock, to hip hop, orchestral, solo acoustic guitar, new age, etc. We get hundreds to thousands of submissions a year. About 1/2 of them use the same basic software (FLStudio) with no additions or extra plugins/samples. Most of them sound terrible. Once in awhile we get people using the EXACT same gear but their songs sound amazing. Thus, high production values with poor gear. I wouldn't call FL Studio poor gear by any stretch of the imagination. If something sounds bad, it's more than likely user ignorance. Or lack of talent. Or both (ouch).Let's just take mics. Most people would say Neumann is the creme de la creme. Grant it, they sound good (through an equally good pre-amp), but may not necessarily be what you need. MXL's are becoming popular (and sound crazy good for the price. Pretty ridiculous) as well as the Rode NT Series..and they're not high end (again, I think this is subjective after a certain point).But you made my point rather clearly. Same exact equipment, different results. It really is how you use it and a good producer can take what they have and make it sound remarkable. Like the old saying goes, "Sometimes less is more."

ernstinen · Post by **ernstinen** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:39 am

Um, Sgt. Pepper was recorded in the best studio in the world with the best room, equipment, microphones, instruments, amplifiers, engineers, arranger/producer etc. It WAS recorded on a 1/2" 4-track and bounced a lot. I believe they synced up 4-tracks later on during the sessions (I'll have to look it up).The Abbey Road engineers were so well trained that they literally were the cream-of-the-crop scientists and wore white lab jackets.See more in the "Sgt. Pepper" thread. Lots of good information there.Ernie Pepper

ernstinen · Post by **ernstinen** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 9:45 am

Quote:Hey Ern then you'll need this? Ernie Pepper's secret weaponWow, Gunter, that's awesome! Never heard of this before. Just the instrument/amplifier list made me cough up a lung! Thanks for that,Ern

ernstinen · Post by **ernstinen** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 10:03 am

Ernie Pepper makes a boo boo! The Studer J37 was a ONE INCH four-track machine. No wonder it sounded so awesome!Ern

sgs4u · Post by **sgs4u** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 11:31 am

my example quoting the Beatles was actually in jest, for the times, the Beatles always used the best of everything available to make the sounds on their records. Prez can't be saying that those tools and methods, the Beatles used to create those masterpieces, were less than state-of-the-art? like the gear didn't matter? Buddy! but whatever YOU pay attention to is what matters, so as the boys say in Canada, Give'r I have a very small rig, but if my rig was big... hey that sounds like a lyric in there!

prez · Post by **prez** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:05 pm

Well..I stand corrected on the Beatles reference. Forgive my lack of in depth knowledge on that. That's why I asked the question in my post.The bottom line to whole thing is that we'll have to agree to disagree. I can do that. And even though you may not like my 'tone' or the fact that I make urban music, or whatever other excuse you have for not liking me, it'll change nathan just going back and forth about it. For me, it's a wrap. Peace.

ernstinen · Post by **ernstinen** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:10 pm

Quote: my example quoting the Beatles was actually in jestIt WAS!? Just to give the Beatles their props for songwriting/performing, have you guys ever heard "The Hamburg Tapes?" Terrible recording, fantastic performances. "Live At The Hollywood Bowl" --- same thing. Whatever they did (until the end) was great, IMHO, whether they had the best gear in the world or not. Funny story:June 6, 1962 Abbey Road Studios.Engineer Norman Smith: "They had such duff equipment. Ugly unpainted wooden amplifiers, extremely noisy, with earth loops and goodness knows what. There was as much noise coming from the amps as there was from the instruments.We gave them a long lecture about their equipment. When we finished, George Martin said 'Look, I've laid into you for quite a time, you haven't reponded. Is there anything you don't like?' I remember they all looked at each other for a long while, shuffling their feet, then George Harrison took a long look at George and said 'Yeah, I don't like your tie!' That cracked the ice for us and for the next 15-20 minutes they were pure entertainment. When they left to go home George and I just sat there saying 'Phew! What do you think of that lot then?' I had tears running down my face."Ernie Beatle

johnnydean1 · Post by **johnnydean1** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:22 pm

Quote:Quote: my example quoting the Beatles was actually in jestIt WAS!? Just to give the Beatles their props for songwriting/performing, have you guys ever heard "The Hamburg Tapes?" Terrible recording, fantastic performances. "Live At The Hollywood Bowl" --- same thing. Whatever they did (until the end) was great, IMHO, whether they had the best gear in the world or not. Funny story:June 6, 1962 Abbey Road Studios.Engineer Norman Smith: "They had such duff equipment. Ugly unpainted wooden amplifiers, extremely noisy, with earth loops and goodness knows what. There was as much noise coming from the amps as there was from the instruments.We gave them a long lecture about their equipment. When we finished, George Martin said 'Look, I've laid into you for quite a time, you haven't reponded. Is there anything you don't like?' I remember they all looked at each other for a long while, shuffling their feet, then George Harrison took a long look at George and said 'Yeah, I don't like your tie!' That cracked the ice for us and for the next 15-20 minutes they were pure entertainment. When they left to go home George and I just sat there saying 'Phew! What do you think of that lot then?' I had tears running down my face."Ernie Beatle As fab as the fab four were they were still capable of making crap records.Most of the tracks on Let It Be for example.