Why Spend???

[NaeDae]

My old music teacher had an album full of songs he wrote and spent like $10,000 to produce. It never sold and he ultimately spent $10,000 to sound more professional to himself.

So, having some experience with mixing, I'm starting to realize the average listener doesn't really listen to little stuff all that much.

For example, if you take a professional producer, and they mixed a recent hit song on garageband with a $300 mic, it would sound effectively the same in the end as if they were in a high-end studio. At least to the average listener.

For example, Pumped Up Kicks was produced in a home studio as a demo, but Universal decided it sounded professional enough and decided not to do a studio version when they got the rights to it.

So, honestly, why do people spend money on $8,000 mics, when the end result isn't even substantially noticeable to the average listener?

[jamesnorth]

It's about different genres in this case, but also it's about production ideas generally.

You couldn't record a 'commercial sounding' live rock, indie, jazz, funk, soul band with cheap gear - it would be fatiguing to listen to. It takes great gear, great playing, great parts, great ideas and a great mix.

But, you can make virtual instrument based pop/r&b/hip-hop inside the computer and have a pretty decent mic for the singer - then have someone do a good mix.

Foster The People's single sounds like a well performed demo - and that's part of their genre. Heaps of people hear/feel a vibe from that sound in that genre and it works really well. There are also heaps of great mix tricks going on in that song to hide the recording quality - low fi vocals, heaps of reverb/delay on certain parts etc. I've got heaps of great gear and if a band like them came in, I'd aim for the same sound. If all I ever did was record whimsical sounding indie pop - I'd need like 10 grand of gear total.

The other thing I've found is that people stop listening to bad quality recording subconsciously. They won't say "I can't listen to it because it sounds cheap" - they just migrate away from it.

All of this talk about gear is irrelevant though if the material and the performance is lacking - and that probably explains more about why that 10k spent on the recording was a waste!

However - if the teacher got heaps out of it and it was a life-long goal - good on them!

[Len911]

My old music teacher had an album full of songs he wrote and spent like $10,000 to produce. It never sold and he ultimately spent $10,000 to sound more professional to himself.

So, having some experience with mixing, I'm starting to realize the average listener doesn't really listen to little stuff all that much.

For example, if you take a professional producer, and they mixed a recent hit song on garageband with a $300 mic, it would sound effectively the same in the end as if they were in a high-end studio. At least to the average listener.

For example, Pumped Up Kicks was produced in a home studio as a demo, but Universal decided it sounded professional enough and decided not to do a studio version when they got the rights to it.

So, honestly, why do people spend money on $8,000 mics, when the end result isn't even substantially noticeable to the average listener?

NaeDae, I'm not quite sure I agree with your premise. Not knowing exactly what the $10,000 was spent on, could be some of it was room and board and liquor tab?? Who knows?

Having experience mixing on both low and high end equipment??

I'm not sure how many professional producers actually mix hits on $300 mics and garageband and how common that is.

Pumped up kicks-wiki-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped_Up_Kicks

Soon after Mark Foster formed Foster the People in 2009, he wrote and recorded "Pumped Up Kicks" in five hours while working as a commercial jingle writer at Mophonics in Los Angeles.[1][2] On the day of recording, Foster debated between songwriting in the studio and going to the beach...Thinking that he was just recording a demo, he played all of the instruments on the song,[4] and using the software Logic Pro, he arranged and edited the song himself.[5] The demo is ultimately the version of the song that Foster released.[4]

Mophonics, home studio? Home studio doesn't necessarily mean low end gear.

To conclude that there is no difference in what gear is used, doesn't seem to be the consensus of the majority of those in the business.

Imo, the 3 most important things for focus in getting the best sound you can is 1) mic 2) preamp
3) a/d converter.

I think the question is really where to spend. If you do everything in the box, you don't need the above. If you need 1 channel analog in though. Budget only means you have to overdub, not make any sacrifice to the input chain. Think of anything more than 1 or 2 channels as a luxury if you're on a budget.

$8,000 mic, no, but here is an example of what $3,135.70 can buy you:
Neumann TLM 103
API A2D
+whatever digital AES or S/Pdif method you have into your computer.
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/APIA2D
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/TLM103

The API actually has 2 preamps, but the a/d converters are included. If later you decide you need or want to insert a compressor or eq or?? you can, though probably not really necessary. Versatile though if you play an instrument and sing at the same time...
The point being is this is a first class, top of the line, no compromise, single or double channel pro studio quality, small price example of what can be done in a home studio.

[kova]

But then there is the question of whether that $10,000 your teacher spent was for the equipment or for the skills of the engineers, technicians, and other personnel who had the know-how for things like equipment selection, mic placement, mixing, mastering, and whatnot in order to produce a professional product.

Having great equipment isn't going to guarantee that your song will sound like a winner. You mentioned the professional producer with a $300 mic. Yes, he probably can get a great sounding product out of it but not b/c of the equipment. He'll know where to place the mics to achieve the best sounds and he'll know how to manipulate the sounds in the mix to achieve the best product.

All of this, of course, is moot if the songs themselves aren't winners.

On the other hand, there is a difference in quality in equipment. Sure, the quality curve sort of levels out once you hit a certain price point but there is a noticeable difference between a $200 mic and a $2000 mic. For my part, I'll take the $2000 mic if I have access to one not because it's more expensive but because, all other things being equal, a recording with a $2000 mic is easier to mix than one with a $200 mic.

Yes, the average person isn't going to be able to tell you exactly what is wrong with a mix or whatnot; however, don't underestimate the average person. It's like CGI in movies - the audience can always tell when it's cheap. It may not matter much if the movie is off-the-wall awesome but it definitely won't help the experience.

[NaeDae]

My old music teacher had an album full of songs he wrote and spent like $10,000 to produce. It never sold and he ultimately spent $10,000 to sound more professional to himself.

So, having some experience with mixing, I'm starting to realize the average listener doesn't really listen to little stuff all that much.

For example, if you take a professional producer, and they mixed a recent hit song on garageband with a $300 mic, it would sound effectively the same in the end as if they were in a high-end studio. At least to the average listener.

For example, Pumped Up Kicks was produced in a home studio as a demo, but Universal decided it sounded professional enough and decided not to do a studio version when they got the rights to it.

So, honestly, why do people spend money on $8,000 mics, when the end result isn't even substantially noticeable to the average listener?

NaeDae, I'm not quite sure I agree with your premise. Not knowing exactly what the $10,000 was spent on, could be some of it was room and board and liquor tab?? Who knows?

Having experience mixing on both low and high end equipment??

I'm not sure how many professional producers actually mix hits on $300 mics and garageband and how common that is.

Pumped up kicks-wiki-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped_Up_Kicks

Soon after Mark Foster formed Foster the People in 2009, he wrote and recorded "Pumped Up Kicks" in five hours while working as a commercial jingle writer at Mophonics in Los Angeles.[1][2] On the day of recording, Foster debated between songwriting in the studio and going to the beach...Thinking that he was just recording a demo, he played all of the instruments on the song,[4] and using the software Logic Pro, he arranged and edited the song himself.[5] The demo is ultimately the version of the song that Foster released.[4]

Mophonics, home studio? Home studio doesn't necessarily mean low end gear.

To conclude that there is no difference in what gear is used, doesn't seem to be the consensus of the majority of those in the business.

Imo, the 3 most important things for focus in getting the best sound you can is 1) mic 2) preamp
3) a/d converter.

I think the question is really where to spend. If you do everything in the box, you don't need the above. If you need 1 channel analog in though. Budget only means you have to overdub, not make any sacrifice to the input chain. Think of anything more than 1 or 2 channels as a luxury if you're on a budget.

$8,000 mic, no, but here is an example of what $3,135.70 can buy you:
Neumann TLM 103
API A2D
+whatever digital AES or S/Pdif method you have into your computer.
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/APIA2D
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/TLM103

The API actually has 2 preamps, but the a/d converters are included. If later you decide you need or want to insert a compressor or eq or?? you can, though probably not really necessary. Versatile though if you play an instrument and sing at the same time...
The point being is this is a first class, top of the line, no compromise, single or double channel pro studio quality, small price example of what can be done in a home studio.

Yeah I agree there's a difference in cheap and expensive mics, I'm just saying that ultimately an average listener wouldn't be able to tell the mic was $300 if it was mixed well.

Of course a trumpet section or live orchestra is very different but that's not what I'm talking about, I'm just talking about pop/rap.

[NaeDae]

But then there is the question of whether that $10,000 your teacher spent was for the equipment or for the skills of the engineers, technicians, and other personnel who had the know-how for things like equipment selection, mic placement, mixing, mastering, and whatnot in order to produce a professional product.

Having great equipment isn't going to guarantee that your song will sound like a winner. You mentioned the professional producer with a $300 mic. Yes, he probably can get a great sounding product out of it but not b/c of the equipment. He'll know where to place the mics to achieve the best sounds and he'll know how to manipulate the sounds in the mix to achieve the best product.

All of this, of course, is moot if the songs themselves aren't winners.

On the other hand, there is a difference in quality in equipment. Sure, the quality curve sort of levels out once you hit a certain price point but there is a noticeable difference between a $200 mic and a $2000 mic. For my part, I'll take the $2000 mic if I have access to one not because it's more expensive but because, all other things being equal, a recording with a $2000 mic is easier to mix than one with a $200 mic.

Yes, the average person isn't going to be able to tell you exactly what is wrong with a mix or whatnot; however, don't underestimate the average person. It's like CGI in movies - the audience can always tell when it's cheap. It may not matter much if the movie is off-the-wall awesome but it definitely won't help the experience.

Have you listened to "Panda"? The vocal in that sounds like it was recorded on a laptop and the EQ is lowcut terribly. I don't mind the song, and neither do a lot of people. They definitely can tell, but I don't think everyone cares.. Idk.

[Len911]

Yeah I agree there's a difference in cheap and expensive mics, I'm just saying that ultimately an average listener wouldn't be able to tell the mic was $300 if it was mixed well.

Of course a trumpet section or live orchestra is very different but that's not what I'm talking about, I'm just talking about pop/rap.

You will notice!!!!

I can't tell you how much time I have wasted trying to tweak sh*t gear. You will always compare yourself and try to "mix as well" as the pros. It won't happen. If you sing it will also destroy your confidence.

everything is relative for sure. If you are a guitar player, the instrument choice is perhaps the number one thing.

Rap? Ok rap's not my taste, however, I've found it a little peculiar that rap vocalists are really fond of the Neumann M149. It's a $5,000 mic.

Here's the deal, whatever artist(s) are your favorites, find out what they used. Years ago I subscribed, when they were still a paper magazine to Mix Magazine. They used to have a section every month where they gave an overview of recording sessions. Here's a few
http://www.mixonline.com/news/classic-tracks

[mojobone]

Because not all the listeners are average and they're not all listening on average gear. Furthermore, what constitutes average is bound to change, so it's probably a good idea to try to future-proof your music by making it as good as it can be. It's easy to spend a thousand dollars a day in nearly any studio, if you're paying for musicians to all play at the same time and for many kinds of music, that's the only way it'll ever sound right. Today, a couple hundred dollars and the laptop or tablet you already have is more firepower than Elvis had at Sun Studios, but if you ain't Elvis, you're not gonna sound like him; without that sound, that vision and those players, nobody could. Sure a lot of this is genre-dependent; there's lots of ways to get an indie or lo-fi sound, but there are rap guys who won't walk into your studio, if you don't have an Avalon compressor.

[Cwadroon]

Some quality gear is less expensive then others. Sometimes a 100 dollar Sm57 sounds better for a situation then a 5000 dollar U87 .. etc etc. If you want to be an engineer / producer , it will take you a lot of time to be able to achieve what a good professional can do. That's often where the studio price is worth it... knowing when to use that 57 vs the 87. Big dollar gear isn't always the best solution... But your teacher probably didn't want to spend YEARS learning and practicing the art of sound. He probably wanted to make music. Marketing is a whole mother game as well

[Len911]

Why is it some people would freely spend on a new car or pickup or boat, but might go into a panic attack just thinking about a standard pro hammer, I mean mic, like a $3,200 U87??

What's a Bass Tracker fishing boat going for now days? How many fish do you have to catch to make buying one a good choice?

How can I justify buying a $40,000 pickup to drive to work and do errands? I'd be afraid to do any real work with it for that price,lol!

My Dad and I used to go round and round about horses vs dogs of all things. He would constantly remark about the costs of dogs from whatever the ridiculous sources he used. One day I happened to be a little edgy,lol, and said well yeah, why do people buy a $30,000 pickup, a $15,000 trailer, a $2,500
saddle and bridle, the stall and land, all for a $1,000 horse for trail riding? His response was because he liked horseback riding. Ok then, there you go, I like dogs, and don't spend near as much!