FAQ

RECORDING FAQ 101

RECORDING FAQ 101

In search of sound quality.

Sound is really what it's all about. Period. There is often a schmooze factor in choosing a studio, but gold records on the wall have very little to do with the studio quality. That usually has more to do with the price you'll be paying. The gold record came from promotion of the CD rather than the studio. It will however be a good indicator that the studio has the potential to produce quality sound. What you should strive for is sound. Great recording, great mixing, great mastering and great choice of tones and sounds. So you need a quality sounding studio for cheap. Well there's good news and bad news.

The good news is because of the recent jumps in technology and computers you can get top quality recording cheap. Really cheap compared to five or ten years ago. A studio setup that once cost 100,000 dollars you can get nowadays for 10 ,000 to 20,000. The bad news is everybody and their drummer has a studio these days, and most of these studios are producing very poor quality, but a few are producing excellent quality.

So while this is very good news for your wallet, it also means your chances of getting a quality CD drop proportionate to the savings, because there's a lot more to recording than just hitting the record button. Technology hasn't helped engineering, mixing or producing skills very much at all. However, with some critical listening and careful searching you can minimize these risks considerably, and in fact benefit from it with a better performance because the pressure's off and you can afford to spend the time comping tracks and getting the best chops out.

I can't stress enough the importance of choosing a studio carefully. I've seen people spend their hard earned money only to have it turn out virtually unlistenable. Recording even at 20$ per hour still adds up. Five hours spent in a budget studio that turns out badly is not as good as one hour spent in a higher end studio for the same money.

What is critical listening?

When you first are considering a studio you need to listen to what they've done before. Some examples of their work. Samples can be misleading but are usually a good indication of the studio's quality. Remember, don't judge the song you're listening to, just the sound. Also don't let the good or bad quality of musicianship in the sample throw you off. It's about sound and to some degree producing.

It is preferable to hear an example of the studio's work in the same genre as yours, but it's not crucial. First you want to listen to the over all sound. Like is the bass too heavy? Treble too much? can't hear the vocals? Then you want to go a little deeper into the sound and listen to individual instruments in the mix. Like does something or some instrument sound screechy or bassy? Are all the instruments well balanced? can you pick out the instruments individually? Do the instrument sounds match the type of music? Like for instance if it's heavy rock does the snare sound like a cannon or a firecracker? Sometimes you want a firecracker and sometimes a cannon, but does it fit with the style of music?

Another good way to check the quality is A/B a sample with one of your favorite CD's. Watch out for mistaking volume for sound quality. Often a commercial CD is crunched and limited so it's louder than most CD's. A small drop in volume between a commercial CD and a studio sample is okay and fairly common. A large drop in volume is a sign the studio doesn't know how to master properly.

Another tip about critical listening is the first few seconds tells you the most. Especially when A/B'ing the sample with a commercial CD. So before you dive into the mix and start picking out individual instruments and how they sound, listen to the overall sound for just a few seconds then turn it off and let it sink in a bit. Then do the same with a commercial CD. Start the few second listen in the middle of the tune because often a tune will start with only guitars or whatever. You need to jump in the middle to get that all important first impression.

Trust your ears and have a few people listen to it to hear what they think. This is an important decision so take your time, trust your ears and don't get sucked into a sales pitch with name dropping. After you have it narrowed down to a few, ask each of them for a sample CD to take around and listen to on different systems. I should think most studios would be fine with giving a free sample disc, I would. A CDR is only a buck. Mind you....

Another thing is go by what the studio provides as a sample of their best work rather than a CD your buddy did there. It's not always the studio's fault if a CD sounds bad. It could be the writer self produced it badly, or disliked the sound of his own voice and buried it in guitars. There's a hundred ways to ruin a CD that have nothing to do with the studio. They're there to do what you want done, and if you want to wreck it they don't have much choice. This where a producer comes in.

And finally, while you were listening to the sample did you keep finding yourself grooving on the tunes and forgetting to listen critically? That's a very good indicator the sound quality is good. It's an even better indicator the tune is good, but really the object of recording is like reading a novel, if you become aware of the author then it's not well written. If you become aware of the recording it's not well recorded or mixed.

A word about sample CD's.

Examples of a studio's work can be misleading. It's an easy place to uh... stretch the truth shall we say. Was it mixed by the same guy who will be doing your tunes? Was it mastered elsewhere? Are there loops or samples in it? An expensive mastering job can do miracles on a mediocre mix, and loops or samples can be misleading as well. Ask details about the sample.

Always remember the very ultimate most important factor in a studio is the guy doing the recording and/or mixing. If the sample CD you hear isn't recorded and mixed by the same person who will be doing your CD then it's utterly worthless to you as an example of the studio's quality. I've seen guys get the special deal in a high end studio because the trainee needed to fill his portfolio and even with all the expensive gear it was awful. Make absolutely sure the same guy who mixed and recorded what you're judging the studio's quality on will be the same guy mixing and recording your CD. This is crucial. Usually in the smaller studios there's only one guy doing everything, but make certain.

Loops, samples and sequencers.

A loop is a prerecorded few seconds of an instrument that people will loop over and over to create a song. Drum loops are the most common but there are loops of every instrument available. Entire songs with full instrumentation and even vocals can be created from loops. Loops are an inexpensive way to create music without having to hire musicians or learn an instrument. Loops are often heard as background music with voice-overs on TV. Some people are creating some pretty good stuff with loops, but they're somewhat limited and involve some tech prowess on the computer. Loops are more geared towards groove and trance music.

Loops are NOT a good indicator of studio quality as they are prerecorded and premixed to drop in place. When listening to the studio's sample CD find out if there are any loops in it and what they are. There's nothing wrong with using loops but you need to find out if the studio is capable of doing what it is you want to do.

A sample can be any instrument or sound played on a keyboard. You can get entire symphonies as samples. A sample of a cello is a recording of one bowed note, a full selection of sampled cello would have a recording of every note on the cello's neck. You sequence that or play the cello notes on a keyboard and there's your cello part. Samples can be an indicator of studio mixing quality because they are not premixed. They are not however an indicator of the studio's recording quality. The capture of sound is half of recording, mixing is the other half. Samples are quite common in studios and on stage. Most electronic keyboards these days use sampled piano for example.

I asked a friend of mine who composes for film down in California about samples in film and TV, he was kind enough to fill me in with this:

"See, 90% (give or take) of "Hollywood" film soundtracks are live orchestra, not samples. The big budget films mostly record live. The composers for those big dollar films only use the sampled version as a demonstration (a mock-up) for the director to get a "sense". Then they trash it and do it for real... but they may add some samples to the real recording... making the final dub anywhere from 50% sampled to only like 1 or 2 % sampled (if that). But the majority is 100% live.... if you're hearing an orchestral-ish score in "Hollywood" type film it's definitely not samples.

The samples are used for final dub "mostly" in indie, documentary, and low budget films where they can't afford to 'then' track it for real. (in other words they'll just use the demo)

In TV it's mostly samples due to time constraints and budget, but they still use some live instruments too (same with indie films). But I'd say 90% of it is sampled instruments."

Thanks to Kid Surf for that info.

A sequencer is a programmed sample... basically. A drum machine is the most common type of sequencer, but you can sequence any sampled instrument. Like programming the horn solo.

My personal thoughts on loops and sequencers is often they're too sterile. The imperfections of real musicians are part of what makes it sound more honest. Music is emotion, and recording is capture of that emotion. Some of the biggest bands in history weren't always the best players, but they were always believable.

That being said, loops can save you money. We can't always afford a horn section. And like anything else, some guys are very good at making samples loops and sequences sound believable. Using loops etc. is fine in the writing and preproduction stage but personally I don't like using them on a CD. In fact we have yet to use one here at Cosmic Pig Studios, but they do have their place. And as always in recording, if it works then do it. If it's possible, get the real thing, you won't be sorry if you hire good players.

Loops and samples can also be used as a sound tool rather than a live musician replacement. Like in rap music. I see rap as having the emotion and feel in the voice, while the beat's sterility is the offset to enhance the emotion. The stark difference between the electronic beat and the emotion of the voice is part of it's honesty. Lots of different styles will use loops as a tool rather than trying to replace a real musician.

Tracking at one studio and mixing at another.

Another cool thing with the technology is you can record in a bunch of studios then easily take the raw tracks to a more expensive studio for mixing. Or if you're not happy with the mix and can't seem to get it right at one studio just take them to another. Hopefully you won't need to though. It's fairly common practice in the more high end and specialized studios, but generally in the cheaper ones you should be able to do it all in the same place. Specialized studios are way expensive too.

If you have a collection of tunes recorded over the years at different studios and are thinking of putting them all on one CD, I would highly recommend having them all remixed at one studio. Consistency is very important, and having five different people mixing will sound too different from one tune to the next. For a proper remix you'll need to get all the raw unmixed tracks of each instrument. If that's not available and all you have is the stereo two track masters, then at the very least have them all mastered at the same place.

Common mistakes.

"Hey he's a great guitar player! Therefore he must be a great engineer!" Or; "The engineer knows somebody famous and he'll have them listen to my stuff!" Or; "The engineer used to be famous and he'll turn us on to some big time record exec's!"

Always keep in mind what you're looking for is sound, not a new buddy. Lots of studios both big and small will drop names to get you in the door, but 99% of the time they're blowing smoke. They don't know these guys well enough to phone them up and tell them about your CD, or else they're saving the connection for their own stuff. It seems most of the recording industry is comprised of much blowing of smoke. Even at the higher levels. I've seen lots of musicians base their choice of studio on the possibility of making a connection or being discovered while recording, and that's a mistake that will likely cost you money. Every one of us who've ever written a song have that little fantasy that maybe it'll go big if the right guy hears it, and that's a good thing, but it doesn't happen at the recording level, it happens at the promotion level after the CD is finished. Studios will use this fantasy to get you in the door.

However, if you have a LOT of money then I would recommend a larger studio mainly because people in the biz will listen to you harder if you've spent lots. But here's a tip; what the record exec's look for is a potential to make money. The best way to give them a whiff of that potential is to have a huge following of fans, and to help develop the huge following you'll need a well recorded and produced CD.

Watch out for sales pitch but mediocre sound. Trust your ears!

Don't judge a studio by it's cover.

You can get great sound from all kinds of surroundings. A studio with fancy lighting and a pretty receptionist will cost you money and won't make any difference to what your CD sounds like. There are some excellent recordings made in small basement studios. Conversely there are some bad recordings made in very expensive studios. Usually the more you pay the better your chances of getting a quality CD, but not always.

Most small studios do NOT have the quality of the larger ones, but SOME DO! This is usually got more to do with the engineer behind the desk than the gear in the studio. With the advances in technology you can save thousands and still have the quality if you choose carefully. Another advantage to recording in a smaller studio is you have less pressure and more time to get that perfect riff. You're more likely to accept inferior chops from yourself if it costs a lot to fix it and there are money pressures.

What's a "demo" studio?

"Demo", is a bit of a gray area. It used to mean a smaller studio with cheaper gear where a band would go to record demos and get the tunes ready, then they would go to the more expensive studio to do the final album. With the technology these days I guess it's any studio that doesn't sound good enough for a CD or radio.

Finding a studio.

Ask around. Check the net. When you get a referral to the world's best studio from a fellow musician check it out yourself with an open mind and open ears. Most of the time a referral is honest and good, but sometimes in a project false "up" is created to mow over shortcomings without dealing with them. And the false "up" can include saying a mediocre studio is great. Or a player's best buds own a studio and he wouldn't suggest anywhere else even if it was on fire... or something. Most guys will tell you straight if they're happy with a studio but always check it yourself and trust your ears. Many players after spending all their hard earned dough on recording and reproduction won't admit they weren't happy with the product. As we all know, to some people sales comes before honesty, and admitting their CD was badly recorded is not an option. Again... trust your ears. Go out and get the samples and listen for yourself. You have the same ears as everyone. You know what sounds good as well as even the golden eared mastering engineer does. The only difference is training, but you hear what they do. Hearing good sounds is easy, the tricky part is getting them. If you follow the tips in Learning critical listening, you'll be able to make your own decision.

What's the difference between mixing and mastering?

Basically, mixing is bass treble and volume of individual tracks or instruments. Mastering is bass treble and volume of the whole mix, all the tracks together. After you've recorded all your tracks and they've been "mixed", they are bounced down into two tracks (right and left) for mastering. Your basic audio CD is two tracks, right and left. There's a lot more to mixing and mastering than that of course, but that's it in a nutshell.

Should I have my CD mastered?

Yes. It'll sound better. All commercial CD's are mastered. It's the paintjob on a new car.

Most smaller studios do not have the facilities to do proper mastering. They can at best pseudomaster. Mastering studios are often mastering only because it's a whole different ballgame from recording. Something that surprised me when I first got started was the differences between speakers and stereo systems. You can mix on a set of home stereo speakers and make it sound great on those speakers, but when you put it in any other stereo system the sound quality drop is astounding. What sounded good in your home stereo sounds like utter garbage in another. This is why we master, to make it sound good on all systems. A good mastering job can make a massive difference in the quality of your CD. Good mastering adds sparkle to the highs and fullness to the lows. A lousy mastering job can make your CD sound cheap. I've seen guys spend as much on the mastering as they did the recording, and it was totally worth it. I've also heard some fine mastering jobs from some smaller studios. Usually mastering will cost between 50$ and 150$ per song.

The reason mastering can get expensive is they have the listening environment and the monitors, and of course the expensive compressors and EQ's etc. The listening environment is specially created for sound, and that in itself can be more expensive than a whole budget studio. The monitors they use are expensive, and the tools are top of the line, also expensive.... So, it can be expensive to master, but it's worth it if you have the flow. It can make the difference between pro and demo. Mastering is one area that digital technology has copied, but not mastered yet. Pun intended and apologized for.

Choosing a mastering studio is one area where name dropping is okay. And of course a sample disc is required. Always make sure the mastering engineer you hear on the sample disc is the same one you'll be getting. As with anything else to do with recording, the guy behind the desk is the important thing.

Should I get a producer? What do they do?

Yes. A producer has a huge job of details both minor and major. They are basically your guide to creating a CD as you envisioned it. Or as the record company envisioned it, depending on who's footing the bill. The producer is like the coach on a sports team. He'll know what areas need work and what areas are fine. He or she can make the difference between a good CD and a bad one, and a good one will make the difference between a good CD and a great one. A good producer might be at practice to help get the tunes ready. Proper preproduction can save you money and frustration in the studio. The producer can offer insight into major stuff like removing an entire verse/chorus to shorten a song to radio length or minor things like a weird chord that needs to be changed a bit. They will make sure everyone's equipment is tuned up and ready to go. Fresh strings, drum heads, amps etc.

When you get to the studio he will help with all aspects of the recording. They should share the vision of the band and the writer for what the song should sound like. They'll keep the focus. They will know the strengths and limitations of the musicians, knowing when to use the talent and when to move on from a difficult passage. They should know what sounds the band wants wants, individually and as a whole. They might bring in some commercial CD's for the engineer to use as a sound reference.

Many musicians/writers try to produce their own material, and that's okay if you're on a serious budget, but if you can afford it get a producer. If you've written the song and play with the band all the time you get too close to the material to be a good judge of what it needs or doesn't need, on individual instruments and the song as a whole. For instance, sometimes a guitar player might put too much white noise in the distortion to cover their amp's shortcomings. A good producer will recognize this and find out what the guitar player considers a good sound then know how to get it, usually by finding the right amp. Or another common problem is instrument parts that are redundant. If it doesn't add to the song it doesn't need to be there. By the same token a producer should know when a tune needs some ear candy in the musically blah areas.

Or another thing that happens is the writer, after going though the song for the billionth time gets bored of something and starts changing the song around or adding or taking out parts. This is usually okay, but sometimes the original vision or inspiration gets lost in the shuffle. The producers job in this case is to keep the vision clear and the CD consistent throughout.

A producer can be invaluable if he or she is good, and a complete waste of money if he or she is bad. Producers can make an album gold or garbage. You'll need to check out their work as carefully as you would the studio's. A decent producer should have a sample CD just like the studio. Wend your way carefully through this one, but get one.

Sometimes People will use a fellow musician friend as a producer, and that's okay sometimes, depending on your budget. Make sure the vision and his duties are crystal clear. Make sure everyone knows who has the final say on whether to use that vibraflap solo or not. It should be you. Or possibly whoever's footing the bill. These can be tricky waters but if carefully chosen he or she will make a big difference in your CD.

By the way... I happen to be a producer for hire. If you need a producer pop by for a free consultation. This isn't really a sales pitch. My goal is to help musicians through the potential minefield that is recording a CD. As you may have surmised from this FAQ, I like to talk about music and recording, and if I have a spare hour and I can help with anything don't hesitate to call or email me. I'm in it for the music and if I'm not the right guy for your stuff I'll tell you. If it works out and you hire me you'll be rich and famous. I'm pretty sure. But really, if you need any of my humble advice or can't decide on what producer or studio to hire send me a link or a tune and I'll give you my two bits worth.

Can the engineer double as a producer?

Yes it's fairly common. Usually in small studios the engineer is also the unofficial producer. You'll have to decide on your own if you should listen to him or not. Usually engineers see the same mistakes made over and over and can save you a lot of pain and money, but sometimes they know how to get good sounds but not what sounds good, if ya know what I mean. You'll have to decide, but I would listen and consider carefully everything they say. Most of the time they know what they're talking about, and quite often their input is invaluable. If you don't have the coins for a producer, when interviewing engineers ask what stuff they've had a hand in producing. Then establish very clearly and in advance what the engineer/producers job is going to be.

When I do both jobs I usually work it by telling the guys I'll always toss in my two bits worth but they have the final say. Period. I tell them that If I jump up and down while telling them stuff they should listen a little harder, but they still have the final say. Then I warn them of the impending and ceaseless I told you so's to follow. On occasion I've had to do full producers duties and I was always clear what I wanted and flexible. And of course, the customer always has the final say. It's their CD. I suggest you keep it loose but clear as to what the engineer's producing duties will be. If you're not digging it down the road demote him to just engineer. You are the boss. A good engineer will recognize that not everybody will agree when creating something as personal as music and happily shut up. Keep everything above board and professional and it should be all hats and party favors.

So why don't I just go buy the equipment and record it myself?

It should cost the same, right? And then I'll have a studio to record whenever I want. If you go by what the ads say in the recording mags about two grand and I should be good to go. Well the ads are lying. Your basic 16 track digital recorder has the same storage medium of ones and zeroes that the big studios have, but that's about as far as it gets. You need mics. I don't mean your old 58 either. You need lots of quality mics and one killer one for vocals. You need analog to digital conversion. The A/D converters in a 2000$ 16 track don't cut it. That's just the beginning. Quality cables are expensive. Monitors are expensive. The list goes on and on.

Okay, to buy the equipment to record your own CD you'll need to spend at least 10,000$ (canadian) to get the quality necessary. With that and some seriously careful mixing you might pull it off, but 20,000 would probably be closer to reality. Then you'll need a spot to set everything up. Then you'll need about two years to learn how to record and run everything. The first year when I started was spent with just mic placement. Seriously. I'm not stupid either. Well maybe a little.

Another thing to consider is lots of people have the gear and even after years of trying still can't mix their way out of a wet paper bag. You really have to want to do this. Or you could go the other route and try and get a job in an already established studio. Then you get in line with thousands fighting to work for free getting people coffee. Never did understand that one. Maybe chicks dig engineers or something.

Okay, so learning the ropes of recording is a huge undertaking. However, learning how to operate an eight track digital recorder to write songs is easy. You need to ask yourself if you want to write songs or be a recording engineer. Keep in mind the studio market is saturated right now. My advice for what it's worth is stick with writing songs, then have someone else record you. Learning how to engineer is a full time gig, you won't have time for writing tunes. Or a gig at the end of it. If you get into engineering your playing will suffer, if not disappear altogether. Trust me, you can't do both. Most engineers used to be musicians. The technology may have brought the price to get into it down, but it hasn't changed the engineer's job, or the years it takes to become a good engineer. And don't even get me started on Gear Aquisition Syndrome (GAS). Every nickel goes to better equipment. Sorry if I sound bitter, but I thought it would be fairly easy when I started because of the technology. It wasn't. Now I'm all bitter. Ha. I'm kidding. I love it, but it is a tough road.

Being ready to record.

Get the sounds you want. Crap in, crap out. First thing when going into the studio is, be ready. It'll save you huge dough. The band needs to know their parts perfectly. Make sure the strings on your guitars are fresh, the drum skins tuned and the buzz in the bass grounded. Many lesser studios will just let stuff like that slide and record anyway. And always remember when in the studio, crap in, crap out. Contrary to popular belief, most stuff CANNOT be fixed in the mix. A guitar buzz can't be taken out. A out of tune guitar can't be tuned. Some stuff can be fixed in the mix, like if the guitar is individual notes you can autotune it. If the buzz is exactly in one frequency you can sometimes remove it, but most of the time it sounds crappy when you remove part of the sound to fix something. So assume crap in, crap out. Here's where a producer can be way worth it by making sure the tunes and equipment are ready. Tune the instruments constantly. Make sure the intonation is good.

Recording is like getting your picture taken. How often do you look at a picture of yourself and go eek? What a horrid picture I need to take it again. That's what recording is like except worse. What sounds killer at practice or on stage might sound awful recorded. That minor seven with the astonished fifth at full distortion that you thought was all avant garde will bite you on the ass in the studio. Record the tunes with a blaster or something to tweak them constructively before ripping one in the studio. Recording is like taking a snapshot of your playing, and you might be surprised what areas need work.

Getting "your sound" in the studio.

when recording in the studio remember the very loud distorted guitar won't sound the same through a small stereo as it does through your Marshall 4-12 cab at 800 decibels. Same goes for loud drums. When you're playing on stage at very loud volumes it might sound pretty cool with the low end flapping your pantlegs, but the same amp recorded won't be the same through a home stereo. Very loud sounds change the way your ear hears things, and a decent mic will capture the actual sound rather than the sound you hear when it's loud.

There are a few things you can do. For guitars turning down the gain or distortion will clean up the highs. Some drummers will tend to hit cymbals harder than toms or vice versa. There's a great long explanation why drums need to be somewhat evenly hit involving gates and compression, but suffice to say if the cymbals are louder than the toms in the tom mic there's gonna be trouble.

So Really what I'm saying here is don't go into the studio assuming that your sound is what will be captured. Don't be afraid to experiment with your sound to achieve your sound recorded. You shouldn't need to change the sound or way you play so much that you lose the fun factor though. It's the engineer's job to capture the sound as you hear it at the volume you like, but there are ways to help him or her capture it more accurately that will save you time.

How much should it cost?

Determining price in a studio can be a little tricky because there's so many variables. The best I can do is list the variables and you figure it out.

Here at Cosmic Pig Studios our hourly rate is 25$ an hour (canadian), and 200$ per tune for editing, mixing and mastering. I've had bands in who had their stuff together who managed about 300$ per tune. If the band has all the intros and endings down cold I'll cut them a break on the editing costs, which can knock it down to 200$ per tune. But that's not often.

For someone without a band and hiring the players and working out details in the studio it costs more. My general rule of thumb is hired players make gig wages, which around here is 100$ for a four hour shift, so 25$ an hour for the hired players. Notice the studio is also only making gig wages. The 200$ per tune we charge for editing mixing and master works out to about 10$ an hour if I'm lucky because I'm fussy and want everybody to be deliriously happy. The prices for hired players will shift radically from free to thousands depending on the player. If the player is your buddy he might do it for free, if he played with Santana for ten years he'll probably charge more.

Generally hired guns can do about four or five songs in around four to six hours. Another option is to have all their parts written out for them. It goes quicker but players who read are more expensive too, so it still works out to be about the same cost for four tunes. Whether they can read music or not it's always good to have basic chord charts made out in large letters to speed things along.

So if the band has the tunes down cold a ballpark guess is four hours per song. If it's an individual hiring players who has the songs down cold and knows what the parts for the hired players are it takes around one hour per song for each instrument. Laying down the map can take anywhere from a half an hour up to infinite depending on how well developed the song is.

Due to the proliferation of studios lately most are barely scraping by and you can ask if a deal is available. Take advantage of that huge monthly payment for gear that studios have. If nobody is recording at that moment they need cash flow. They need you, not the other way around. The only trouble with this theory is studios that are putting out good sound are not that common, and they are often busy. The ones who've been around a while usually won't do per song deals because they always lose on those when the singer takes three days to get the lines just right. So shopping around is limited. Never choose a studio based on price. Always choose sound quality before price. Choosing a studio based on price gets you a CD you'll be pissed off with for the rest of your days.

The way to get a deal is to figure out with the engineer approximately how many hours it'll take then dicker over the price for that many hours. That way the studio is covered if it takes longer. Here's another little tip; however long you think it should take to record a song, double it and that'll be closer to how long it actually takes. It's been my experience that it usually takes twice as long as you think. Sometimes not, but usually.

The key of course to keeping costs down is having the songs down. The more preproduction you do at practice the quicker the session. So set up a cheap tape deck and record your practice. Then really listen to the details. Listen for problems not how great the tune is. Intros and endings, solos, chord structure, Word cadence, lyrics, anything that won't sound good when heard clearly. Anything you miss that needs work will show up in the studio and add to your time spent. Make sure everyone can play the whole song through with few mistakes. Then take the tape to the engineer or producer and ask them if they can hear any potential problems.

Another tip; make sure the gear is in good shape. New strings and drum heads will inspire you. Take a minute to oil the squeaky kick pedal at home not in the studio.

Yet another tip; don't marathon record trying to get everything into one day. Sometimes you have to in a busy higher end studio, but in the smaller ones you usually don't need to. After six to eight hours everybody starts to burn out and everything takes longer. You start to lose your ears and have a harder time deciding what's an acceptable take. Inspiration is the first to leave a session.

So once you've settled on price, don't go in worrying about trying to keep the hours to what you specified. Part of creating good music is not worrying about anything, especially time. If it costs more than you thought then it costs you more than you thought. If you start letting tracks go by that are inferior because of the schedule the CD will be inferior because of the schedule. The key is have fun and create in the studio. Worry about time at the end of it. If you have to suck back and reload the finances for a few weeks before finishing the CD that's not a big deal. What is a big deal is almost getting it right. It'll bug you forever.

Mind you, it's not that complicated. If the time starts mounting on one person's part then move on to the next part and send him home with the tape to practice. There's always one or two people in the band who suddenly realize they don't have the parts down as well as they thought. No probs. That goes for hired guns too.

What's the recording process?

There are three basic methods of recording music, live in the studio, one instrument at a time in the studio, or live on stage. The most common method is one instrument at a time in the studio. First we'll look at the live in the studio, which involves recording everybody at the same time as if on stage.

Recording live in the studio

There's something that happens when everybody plays together live in front of an audience. There's a huge boost or vibe you get from the crowd, and an almost ESP thing that happens when the band locks in with each other. The moment when the house is a rockin'. The dance floor is packed and they start dancing on tables and in the aisles. There's not a drug on the planet that comes close to that experience.

Once you've experienced it you spend a lot of time and energy hoping to recapture it every night. That moment is an addiction that for many determines their life path. The CD you are about to record is probably just another attempt to get more of that drug...The Moment. The theory being if the crowd was bigger the drug or moment should be larger. Well it does get larger. Ask anybody who's been on a big stage with a few thousand screaming people in front of you and they'll tell you there's nothing like it ever.

Naturally you hope to recreate that in the studio. Well.... you can't. Sorry.

There is a definite benefit for some styles of music by playing it live in the studio. Styles like jazz and blues are somewhat improvisational and eye contact is needed to follow the nuances of the music. Unfortunately it doesn't benefit most of us. For starters most of us aren't world class accomplished musicians. We need to do the part a few times and Comp the tracks to get our best performance. I'd say about 90% of the musicians you see playing professionally in bars and at weddings get better recordings doing it one track at a time.

The other thing you'll need for doing it live is all the players have to know the songs inside and out.

There's a fundamental shift of focus between stage and studio. The goals are the same, but the focus changes in many ways. As I explained before recording is like taking your own picture, and most of us like to get the pose just right. So right off the focus changes from the audience to getting your part right. Often when you see bands on TV in the studio recording it appears they're doing it live, but most often they're playing along to the finished tracks they did one at a time and pretending it's all live.

Lots of bands like the idea of doing it live to try and capture some magic, but the reality is most often that we get better performance with one instrument at a time. It might sound like I'm against live recording, but I'm not, I just want you to be aware it might not turn out like you thought, and it might cost you in studio time or performance.

The method of recording live will change from one studio to the next, but basically everyone is isolated, or just the amps are isolated, and you play with headphones on. Here's a tip about headphones; don't hesitate to stop everything and get a headphone mix you're happy with. A good headphone mix is crucial always, but especially when doing it live.

Often you do that for the just bed tracks, or drums bass and rhythm guitars, then you do the vocals and solos one at a time afterwards.The true jazz and blues purists usually do everything at once, but for most people the vocals and solos are afterwards.

Recording live on stage.

You'll need to find a studio that's setup for mobile recording for starters. Then you'll need a stage you can spend a bit of time setting up the recording stuff. You should record yourselves with a cheap blaster a few times to make sure the tunes are tight. Basically it's the same as above when recording live in the studio, do lots of preproduction at practice. Make sure all the intros and endings are solid and everybody knows the tunes backwards. Try and make sure you have a good audience that night. You can add audience sounds after the fact but it kinda defeats the purpose if the club is empty. You should keep in mind it will sound like a live recording. That's not a bad thing but it might not be the "pro" sound you want for a demo or CD.

Recording one at a time. The most common method.

There's a basic method for bands and a slightly different method for individuals who hire the players.

Generally for rock bands you do the drums first and have everybody do their tracks to that drum track one at a time. The drums usually go first because they're the drive of the tune. To get a good performance from the first player in he'll need the band to play along with him. But the band has to go direct to the board so there's no other instruments in the drum mics. Direct to the board doesn't sound that great on guitars and such but it's close enough that the drummer will be able to put some feel into it. The whole object is to have the band playing along but if you take the headphones off all you hear is drums, and maybe the singer singing quietly in the corner. This is assuming the studio has one main playing area, if they have an isolation booth you might put the singer in there so he can belt it a bit.

When you record the drums you also record the other instruments you've ran direct so you can use them as scratch tracks for the rest of the song. Minor mistakes aren't important on the scratch tracks. All you want to capture is a good drum take.

Then you do bass or rhythm guitars or piano. Generally you want to work from the least focused instrument to the most focused. So often it's bass next. Bass, while vastly underrated, is not a focus instrument. Vocals being the main focus is always last in.

So if it's bass you decide comes next, the engineer, after setting up the mics and getting the best sound possible, will take the scratch bass tracks out of the mix and the bass player will record his part. Probably a few times. If one bass track is good all the way through he still might want a few more takes so he can Comp it later in case he finds a small stumble during mixing. It's better to have a few just in case. Sometime even with everybody listening closely you'll miss a small glitch.

And so on down the line with guitars and keyboards or whatever. Solos and vocals come last because they're the most expressive instruments and are the most dependent on a good sounding solid bed to wring the emotion out of it.

Some tracks you'll do two or three keeper takes, others you'll do ten. Vocals and solos often take several tries to get just right, and often you'll Comp them.

When changing from one instrument to the next be patient with the engineer while he sets everything up. The setup of mics and amps determines how good the capture is. It can take anywhere from 5 minutes to an hour to get everything set exactly right. If your amp doesn't sound right, or isn't a great sounding amp, he might have to try several methods to get the sound he wants, or you want. Never underestimate the value of mic placement. Something that surprised me when I first started is the difference in tone when you move a mic a few inches. If you swing it around in front of an amp with headphones on it sounds like a phase shifter pedal.

For individuals using hired players the only difference is you need to lay out a map for the players. You record a scratch or throwaway track with vocals and guitar and a drum machine or click track for meter, so when the players come in to do their parts they'll play along with the scratch tracks. The method is basically the same after that. If I've confused you email me and I'll answer any questions you might have.

What's a click track and should we use one?

Click tracks are for meter. A click in your headphones to follow along with. If your drummer has any meter problems you'll need to use one. It's not a big deal either way. Click tracks go in and out of fashion faster than Britney Spears. I try not to use one because a slight ebb and flow of the meter is sometimes a good thing. It can enhance the feel of certain songs. Sometimes you'll run across a song that's hard to hold down, or some shuffles can be tricky and need to stay rock solid. Then I use one. If you plan on doing any midi instruments or sequencing you'll need one. If you think you'll need to Comp the drums you'll need one so the tracks line up, although if the engineer discovers a problem later he can often copy a part from a different part of the song if the drummers meter is good. There's a lot of debate amongst engineers about click tracks but bottom line is if you need one use it. If you don't need one use it or don't use it. Doesn't really matter.

What is comping tracks?

Comp is short for composite. That's where you record the same solo or vocal track five or ten times then take the best phrase or lick from each one to build a composite of the ten tracks. For example the singer might sing the phrase "ooh she took my heart and stomped it bad" five separate times. Say he sang "ooh she took my heart" really well on the second take, and "stomped it flat" was sang well on the fourth take. You take those sections where he sang it well and "comp" it to one single track, so the main vocal track is a composite of the best from all the takes.

When in the studio doing this watch out for flubbing in the same spot every time. This is a good technique for getting the best out of your playing, but don't rely on it too much as it can get time consuming. Your better off practicing your parts before you go into the studio rather than trying to salvage a good take from several bad takes. For an occasional flub it's good to have a few alternate takes to choose from.

Mind you, if you have the time it can be fun in some instances. One of the best solos I ever did was from about 20 takes where I improvised every take off the cuff, different every time. You can hear it on Helene Duguay's Tunes Page. Scroll down to Unchained Melody. You could do that too if you don't mind wasting two days in the studio for one lousy guitar solo.

What is editing?

Editing is basically when you take one part of a track and move or copy it somewhere else. It can be whole sections of songs or one bad chord in the guitar track. It could be moving a snare hit that's off time over a few milliseconds so it's in the right place, or it could be copying whole chorus's and pasting them over bad ones. Editing is also comping tracks. Autotuning could also be considered editing.

Usually almost every track will get some level of editing. Small problems can be taken care of with editing, but big problems can't. Editing can fix small mistakes in performance but not mistakes in sound. A bad sound will still sound bad no matter where you put it.

A note about recording drums....

Tune them! Tune the crap out of them! Make them perfect! Or they will sound like out of tune drums. If you have the coinage buy new heads too. Or sometimes the studio will have a tweaked house kit. Another option is to replace all the drum hits with prerecorded drum hits. That's actually fairly common, but it won't sound as good as the real deal because you'll be able to open up those gates/expanders a little bit to let the real sound through. If you don't know what gates/expanders are don't worry about it, just trust me.

Most drummers don't know how to tune them, and that's okay, they're drummers. Look it up on the net to find out how they're tuned and anybody in the band with a decent ear can help tune them. I sat down with the best drummer in town for an hour helping him tune. Between the two of us they sounded awesome. It's no probs doods. Don't assume because it's heavy tunage the drums need to be out of tune for maximum fuckyou, even the heavy shit is tuned. Tune them. And what the hell, tune the guitars too.

Ten drummers in a row will sit down and twiddle the drum key for a while then declare them tuned. Nine of them will be wrong. Give 'em a break. They're drummers God love 'em. Being a good drummer has nothing to do with tuning.

Try not to compromise sound or chops.

It's easy to blow past tuning problems or weak parts of the song or a million other details because the next tune is the hit or you're bored of this tune and want to move on. Don't do that. Or hire a producer. At least that way you'll have somebody to blame for the train wreck ending that you didn't fix cuz you wanted to get onto the next song. Remember this when you're painstakingly setting everything up again to play for two seconds.

Having all your buddies play on the CD.

Something that happens when you're recording is you get pretty happy about the whole thing and want to share it with musician friends by having them come down and do guest appearances on your CD. this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but there are a few pitfalls to watch out for. It can ruin the consistency of your CD, and it can split friends up when their solo gets cut because it didn't fit in. Or the CD gets shelved because you don't have the heart to tell your best friend he's an awful bass player. Or the dreaded "Gee I dunno what happened he looked great on stage". It's common, but tread carefully through it because it can backfire. If you want to use friends then tell them straight up at the beginning their stuff might not make the CD but it's not a reflection on their playing, you just have a vision of what it should sound like and you're trying things out. It's a good idea to tell that to all the players on your CD if you don't have a band.

Keeping your CD consistent.

Consistency in a CD is important. Having all the players, whether hired guns or a musician friends, at around the same level of musicianship can be important. The object of the game is to not have something pop out that makes everything else look bad, like if the band is novice and you put an expert guitar solo by a hired gun in it, it enhances the other musicians shortcomings rather than enhancing the tune. I always use the Rolling Stones as a perfect example of this. None of them are great players, but put them together and it's magic. An accomplished musician in there would stick out like a sore thumb, and ruin what they are.

Are you good enough to record?

Yes you are. If you're a complete novice you're good enough. All you need is to have something to say musically. I would however recommend getting a producer. In fact at all levels a producer is good, but at the novice level it gets to be more important. A producer can help you through the many pitfalls that can sidetrack your vision. Throughout history there have been many famous recordings done by novice musicians. Accomplished playing is not what makes a song good. Hot licks are great, but there's a whole world of simple but thoroughly enjoyable tunes out there.

Schmooze: factor 9. Putting a big name somewhere in the credits.

Going to a famous studio and getting an engineer or producer with a big track record of hits does nothing for you most of the time, and it's very very expensive. Sure it'll sound like a hit, but the only thing that will get you airplay and famous and rich is serious cash flow for promotion. Lots of it. Promotion doesn't come cheap. Half a mil should just get you started if that's the route you want to go. However, if you're like most of us, you need a CD you can sell from stage and use for promotion for gigs and possibly in the hopes a promoter or management will think your band is worth spending some time and money on. Sound quality and the tune is more important than having a big name in the credits. The only time recording in a famous studio or having a famous musician playing on it is when you're in the serious heavyweight category, or you're filthy rich. In which case you're probably not reading this. To all the people not reading this, mlah.

Watch out for the schmooze factor further down the food chain too. At the local level lots of minor players/producers/engineers/promoters will tell you they're big stuff 'round these here parts and how things should be done, but really they don't know any better than you do. That's the beauty of music. People in the biz all think they know what connects to an audience, and while they might know the formula to sound exactly like Nickleback or Creed, they don't know what sounds good any better than anybody. Stick to your vision of what sounds good. If that vision doesn't attract an audience that's one thing, but if you try to adapt your vision to what's hot on the charts and it doesn't make it because you didn't have a million dollars to throw at promotion... well. You'll never know if your honest unaltered vision was the one that would have made you famous, and you'll never be completely happy with the CD. I'm digressing all over the place here, but all I'm saying is if you dig gregorian chants with shred guitar solos and the sound of women weeping in the background then do it.

Sign ze papers! Bwa hahahaha...

If you get to the point where you're going to be signing anything at all, get an entertainment lawyer. I'll repeat that a few times... get a lawyer get a lawyer get a lawyer. You absolutely need one guy who knows the shark infested waters on your side.

I've heard many horror stories of musicians losing everything to a shady manager or promoter. A musicians life savings gone on ounces of cocaine for "promotion". (he found this out after it was all gone.) Or signing away their songs to a record company that did nothing with them, and then not even being legally allowed to play their original work in the clubs. Those stories invariably end with the phrase, "I can't believe I trusted that person." So do it. Get a lawyer and don't trust anyone. It's business not music.

Have fun!!!

Another thing that's nice about a smaller studio at a lower rate is you don't need to worry about doing it in one take or feeling stupid because you are having trouble with a part. Going into any studio whether it's big time or small time really needs to be fun. Fun is important for performance and helps with all aspects of recording. Have a pep talk with everybody before each session outlining what you want to get done and tell everyone to stay positive. Remember, you're there to create, and that's way cool. Try and keep the positive feelings honest, don't force it. Forced positive often leads to ignoring major problems with a session or CD project that will screw you down the road.

Go into the studio with a good well balanced attitude. I find the best way is have fun. Screw the "I'm the best" or the "I can't do it" attitude, just have a good time with it. Creating music is the coolest thing on the planet ever.

You're too stupid to have fun.

If the engineer or staff at a studio treat you like an idiot or are condescending in any way, fire them or find another studio. No matter whether you're in Abbey Road Studios or Rick's closet, there's no excuse at all. Ever. Strangely enough I've run across engineers who for whatever reason think belittling musicians is fun or hilarious. How they stay in this business I'll never know, but they're there. Some of them think they're artists and need to be treated with hushed awe or something. By the way, all the above goes for musicians too.

That being said, you might keep in mind that everybody gets bitchy sometimes, and it's probable someone will at some point in a long project. So don't take no crap but be patient too.

So now that being said.... There's also the Phil Spectre (famous producer) school of rock, whereby screaming like Hitler at the podium gets the tunes done. I don't dig it, but judging from Phil's track record it obviously works so who the hell am I? But if you get fired from your own project don't come crying to me.

Final word... bet you thought I'd never shut up.

So if you made it this far through the FAQ... Much of what I said here is conjecture, based on my own experience. I'm not an expert on studios. I've had a few studio engineers I know on the net help me with this and read through it and the they all say it's fairly accurate. Some even said it's freakin' brilliant, but they were probably drunk. If it's helped at all that makes my day. Special thanks to Kid Surf down in California for helping me with the samples and loops section. He composes film scores and does music for movies down there.

. Happy hunting and happy recording!

Rick Boulter,

RECORDING FAQ 101

RECORDING FAQ 101

by Rick Boulter