|
Post by drbill on Jan 28, 2021 16:46:37 GMT -6
I am overcoming this step by step and I try to focus what matters.... the music...the performance.... a little late in my life, but not too late. <thumbsup!!!>
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Jan 28, 2021 17:18:10 GMT -6
If you are an artist first, you do whatever it takes to realize your vision whether you have great gear or not. But once you have experience your preferences will change. I can do everything I want with driving a Suburu, and it’s pretty nice, but would I prefer a Mercedes, absolutely.. the ride is nicer, the experience more rewarding. I’ve found I’m more creative in well designed environments. Some people get more creative under adversity, but I struggled working in a little corner of my living room to make my last album, I would be much more productive if I had my own space with a reasonable amount of room and a few well chosen pieces to get the sound that I want quickly.
Again. I detached my thinking from I need XYZ kind of gear, environment to be creative. Since then, I love to work with LogicX more than ever before. Logic is made for creative minds.
|
|
|
Post by gwlee7 on Jan 28, 2021 17:58:32 GMT -6
Some people get more creative under adversity, but I struggled working in a little corner of my living room to make my last album, I would be much more productive if I had my own space with a reasonable amount of room and a few well chosen pieces to get the sound that I want quickly.And this is where this site has been the most valuable to me. By finally choosing well, I have become much more productive and what I am doing “sounds good”. It helps my decision making and creativity. It may be that I am simply on a “roll” but I believe getting ideas in the DAW that sound good spurs me on to greater things. And it doesn’t matter whether its ITB or OTB. Just that I am writing.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 28, 2021 18:25:27 GMT -6
Creativity always happens first for me, beginning with a song idea. Being my own engineer always slows down my creative process. So having the gear I want would help me get to where I want faster. It’s all about getting the sound you want isn’t it. The sound I want is hardware in, ITB for mixing and a Dangerous Music 2Bus + for final mix.
Today, the gear I want is a Cl1b, Lexicon delay, Bricasti reverb, maybe a stereo Pultec, ATC monitors and a few other things.
there can be a substitutes, but you get the idea that I want a basic high-end tracking system.
|
|
|
Post by gwlee7 on Jan 28, 2021 18:45:47 GMT -6
Creativity always happens first for me, beginning with a song idea. Being my own engineer always slows down my creative process. So having the gear I want would help me get to where I want faster. It’s all about getting the sound you want isn’t it. The sound I want is hardware in, ITB for mixing and a Dangerous Music 2Bus + for final mix. Today, the gear I want is a Cl1b, Lexicon delay, Bricasti reverb, maybe a stereo Pultec, ATC monitors and a few other things. there can be a substitutes, but you get the idea that I want a basic high-end tracking system. You and I think a lot alike. I have really concentrated on front end of the chain and then have a Silver Bullet with an Audioscape buss comp inserted on it on my mix buss. I am using mostly Gefell mics, Daking mic pres and then some more select Audioscape pieces for tracking or “retracking”. Since like you I am my own engineer I have been tracking with just the mics and the Daking pre but then going round trip again to get the compression and eq right.
|
|
|
Post by jmoose on Jan 28, 2021 20:28:07 GMT -6
There's a lot of rad thoughts here I'd like to comment on but totally swamped right now.
I'll say that specifically, with gear, the original Low End Theory concept was a focus on inexpensive stuff that hung with anything else in the room.
When I left the big studio somewhere around 1999 and was 100% on my own path I couldn't afford a vintage LA2a... but I knew I liked those Aphex Expressors and damn, I could afford a couple of those.
The Lex pcm42 was and still is super dope but was a lot of coin even then. Somewhere I discovered the Deltalab Effectrons and thought they were just as rad and a helluva lot less.
I still have and use my Expressors and there are 4 Deltalabs kicking around...
It's real easy to get hung up on the gear. Let that become the focus. But the gear doesn't do anything on it's own. It doesn't control anyone.
Ultimately in order to get It out of your head it has to be in your head to begin with.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2021 21:15:53 GMT -6
There's a lot of rad thoughts here I'd like to comment on but totally swamped right now. I'll say that specifically, with gear, the original Low End Theory concept was a focus on inexpensive stuff that hung with anything else in the room. When I left the big studio somewhere around 1999 and was 100% on my own path I couldn't afford a vintage LA2a... but I knew I liked those Aphex Expressors and damn, I could afford a couple of those. The Lex pcm42 was and still is super dope but was a lot of coin even then. Somewhere I discovered the Deltalab Effectrons and thought they were just as rad and a helluva lot less. I still have and use my Expressors and there are 4 Deltalabs kicking around... Yeah but with the clone market and cheap 500 series insanity it stopped being about DBX, Drawmer, Aphex, FMR, CAPI, Yamaha, LA4, the Midiverbs, old SPL before they decided they were a premium brand, really cool sounding PCB and digital boards, even used Distressor (these were cheap for a brief while), Focusrite ISA, Daking (these can go CHEAP) and became about stuff that was a crappier version of more expensive stuff. Now there's crappy expensive clones of expensive stuff. I even see this with mics. Nasty Chinese condensers and okay ribbons that the users don't have the pres for instead of good dynamics. Now good plugins are all sort of "low end theory" beyond overpriced UAD, MAAT, etc but 10-20 years ago, most decent plugins were as expensive as hardware, eg Waves Renaissance and Sony Oxford. The free plugins that worked like digital fish phones, Variety of Sound, and Vlad G's original stuff were that type of "low end theory" you describe. We had about 15 years of bad digital emulations of expensive hardware before they got okay. And the big plugin houses with dozens of programmers still try to sell mediocre plugins for hundreds of dollars and repackage and resell old DSP. You want the UAD 2254? You have to buy the 33609 from 2010 with it. A lot of the "models" are not component modeled at all and are glorified wave shapers like old waves plugs cleaned up a bit and sound way less cool than the ancient Oxford Inflator. There's all these known names praising or endorsing them as identical to their analog counterparts. Kazrog True Iron and the PA Amek 200's harmonic profiles were telling. Stick them next to a Tokyo Dawn plug and it's WTF. Stick any "modeled" VCA comp next to almost any hardware and it's WTF. They usually don't try at all to model the distortion of specific opamp circuits, the DBX and THAT VCAs, and the non-linearities in the sidechains.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jan 29, 2021 6:50:34 GMT -6
I did a shootout of the dbx 560A vs three or four 160 plugins, the hardware had a little more motion, but it was subtle. For some reason I thought the NI VC 160 was the winner at that time. I ended up, eventually, mostly using the Arturia one, which is not a 160 but one of the soft knee ones I think.
Does anybody else feel like musicians are now a herd of cattle buying everything? We've got youtube demos of every product and technique available. We get emails of crazy deals every day. Then the gear forums are largely based on gear seeking. Sometimes I feel more like a "gear fan" than a "musician." Like musician just means a consumer demographic now. The snake is swallowing its own tail or something.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Jan 29, 2021 10:23:10 GMT -6
I've thought about how so many songs use the same plugins now that sound exactly the same. Whereas it used to be "this 251 sounds like X and that board at that studio sounds like X" Of course the music being the most important part, it works regardless.
The Brainworx TMT is a step in the right direction, but they are still a limited number of presets, basically.
I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to have a tolerance randomize button. A given set of mins, noms and max to work within for every aspect of the channel. When you find a sound you like, you can store it and name it. And possibly have the only one with that sound.
There is a room reverb plug I have like this, I can't remember the name. But it's totally random every time you hit the button.
|
|
|
Post by Bat Lanyard on Jan 29, 2021 10:26:29 GMT -6
I've thought about how so many songs use the same plugins now that sound exactly the same. Whereas it used to be "this 251 sounds like X and that board at that studio sounds like X" Of course the music being the most important part, it works regardless. Such a great point. Reminds me of Iovine talking about mixing Refugee in the great Tom Petty doc, where they try days of mixing it in Cali only to be unsatisfied, then jumping on a plane with the masters to go mix it in New York. His quote was something like "Let's go see how it sounds there."
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 29, 2021 10:35:13 GMT -6
I've thought about how so many songs use the same plugins now that sound exactly the same. Whereas it used to be "this 251 sounds like X and that board at that studio sounds like X" Of course the music being the most important part, it works regardless. Such a great point. Reminds me of Iovine talking about mixing Refugee in the great Tom Petty doc, where they try days of mixing it in Cali only to be unsatisfied, then jumping on a plane with the masters to go mix it in New York. His quote was something like "Let's go see how it sounds there." Love that doc so much.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Jan 29, 2021 10:45:35 GMT -6
I've thought about how so many songs use the same plugins now that sound exactly the same. Whereas it used to be "this 251 sounds like X and that board at that studio sounds like X" Of course the music being the most important part, it works regardless. Such a great point. Reminds me of Iovine talking about mixing Refugee in the great Tom Petty doc, where they try days of mixing it in Cali only to be unsatisfied, then jumping on a plane with the masters to go mix it in New York. His quote was something like "Let's go see how it sounds there." I didn't know that. How true, though. The rooms, equipment etc all made for an infinitely more unique piece of art...
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jan 29, 2021 11:06:50 GMT -6
Joe Barresi has a running philosophical point about that too. He's a producer I admire. He advocates hardware for that exact same reason, that it's inconsistent. VS. everyone using the same standard plugins. My personal philosophy has always been to do things a little weird. Like I want my DIY hardware to be different from what other people are using. If you use the Plugin Alliance plugins, a lot of them have this little button on them called TMT, which switches to random component tolerances, within some limit. Maybe that's what you were thinking about Mister Chase
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Jan 29, 2021 11:15:25 GMT -6
Joe Barresi has a running philosophical point about that too. He's a producer I admire. He advocates hardware for that exact same reason, that it's inconsistent. VS. everyone using the same standard plugins. My personal philosophy has always been to do things a little weird. Like I want my DIY hardware to be different from what other people are using. If you use the Plugin Alliance plugins, a lot of them have this little button on them called TMT, which switches to random component tolerances, within some limit. Maybe that's what you were thinking about Mister ChaseAgreed. "Sameness" was one term I remember him using when it came to tracking with only one or two mics. Variety is part of the key. Though the homogenized sound of a console is great(but every channel is a little different of course) Yes, I mentioned the TMT above, but also what I feel are it's limitations. It's a preset number of channels (a lot of them) so it's not truly random or infinite. Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jan 31, 2021 11:37:15 GMT -6
If you use the Plugin Alliance plugins, a lot of them have this little button on them called TMT, which switches to random component tolerances, within some limit. Maybe that's what you were thinking about Mister Chase Yes, I mentioned the TMT above, but also what I feel are it's limitations. It's a preset number of channels (a lot of them) so it's not truly random or infinite. Just a thought. Kinda like a rotating handful of snare samples
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Jan 31, 2021 14:29:25 GMT -6
Yes, I mentioned the TMT above, but also what I feel are it's limitations. It's a preset number of channels (a lot of them) so it's not truly random or infinite. Just a thought. Kinda like a rotating handful of snare samples Exactly. More there than a single snare sample over and over, but still definitely not the real deal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2021 13:29:23 GMT -6
I mean, once you get into the Apollo threshold or higher, what is the "wall" that separates pro from consumer? If a person can't make great records with the technology we have today, can they ever? I've been thinking about this a lot lately... I often go on the self induced equipment snobbery spiral where I've obtained some decent sounding cheapo's but for some reason I have to find an expensive replacement for it. IME price doesn't seem to have much of a bearing when comparing the preferred sonic preference of a particular item. For example I bought a U89 bypassing an AT 4 series mic because it's "cheap" and ended up buying the AT anyway because I preferred it. Not that the U89 is a bad mic by any stretch it's just the Audio Technica sounded rather impressive in the mix. However I think this mentality stems from the early days when budget ruled the roost, over the course of a many years I probably could have bought a U87 plus a U67 for the losses I made chopping and changing cheaper mics (and other equipment). If there's nothing else to be said about the extremely pricey classics it's that that they just work.. That being said I sold my U67 when music became a personal endeavour and I've never been all that bothered by an 87. Still I get a small pang of am I missing out here? If I'm being reasonable for a second probably not no, thing is I might prefer my current setup over a tried and tested one by a fractional amount but in the long run it cost me more time and probably money to get here. Ultimately I don't think there's a wall per se just a marathon of hurdles dependant on the path one takes.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 5, 2021 13:51:30 GMT -6
I mean, once you get into the Apollo threshold or higher, what is the "wall" that separates pro from consumer? If a person can't make great records with the technology we have today, can they ever? I've been thinking about this a lot lately... I often go on the self induced equipment snobbery spiral where I've obtained some decent sounding cheapo's but for some reason I have to find an expensive replacement for it. IME price doesn't seem to have much of a bearing when comparing the preferred sonic preference of a particular item. For example I bought a U89 bypassing an AT 4 series mic because it's "cheap" and ended up buying the AT anyway because I preferred it. Not that the U89 is a bad mic by any stretch it's just the Audio Technica sounded rather impressive in the mix. However I think this mentality stems from the early days when budget ruled the roost, over the course of a many years I probably could have bought a U87 plus a U67 for the losses I made chopping and changing cheaper mics (and other equipment). If there's nothing else to be said about the extremely pricey classics it's that that they just work.. That being said I sold my U67 when music became a personal endeavour and I've never been all that bothered by an 87. Still I get a small pang of am I missing out here? If I'm being reasonable for a second probably not no, thing is I might prefer my current setup over a tried and tested one by a fractional amount but in the long run it cost me more time and probably money to get here. Ultimately I don't think there's a wall per se just a marathon of hurdles dependant on the path one takes. I think the time has passed when "low end" and "high end" actually mattered. Since then, it's simply a state of mind. Like tying your shoes the way you learned from your parents despite there being dozens of different ways to do it that are just as effective, someone who *had* to work through the era of professional vs. low-end equipment will remember all the reasons it was that way as if they were still that way. But then there's marketing. Everyone banks on portraying their wares as competitors to *something*.. "Sounds just like the U87" and all that. Some actually might as well, but the point made here is that you can just buy the real thing, or you can take your chance with imitations.. And let's face it, the audio industry is FULL of imitations. And then there's the big names and what they use.. Are the big name producers/engineers/mixers/etc using the off-brand stuff or the pro-sumer stuff? Of course not. Are they using the better known mid-level stuff like Apollo? Sure are. There seems to be a level of quality that you see the *names* using. They might have done research, or simply been gifted these devices in exchange for a picture and a smile, but if they keep using it, it must be "good enough", right?
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 6, 2021 5:42:51 GMT -6
How did I miss this thread before? Anyway...I think the old trope still mostly holds true - you usually get what you pay for. Then mix in cost efficient stuff. Better gear just gets me places faster. Gets out of the way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2021 7:13:31 GMT -6
How did I miss this thread before? Anyway...I think the old trope still mostly holds true - you usually get what you pay for. Then mix in cost efficient stuff. Better gear just gets me places faster. Gets out of the way. I don't really disagree (especially when it comes to monitors, I spent a year auditioning anything I could get my hands on) but it does seem to me that anything off the beaten path is just pot luck really. I've found a few cheap gems that I wouldn't trade for anything else which is great, although seen as it cost me a fortune to find them I'm not completely sure it was worth it.
|
|