Is it all worth it in the end..(rant inside)

[[UEAK]Clowd]

of course there is always that other side, I am not an idiot but taking an obviously shit band that is not prepared to work as hard as others, wiping their asses and fixing there shit is not teaching anyone anything and is only going to continue the issue we have today and that is the OVERWHELMING amount of un talented 'musicians' that are all round us, becoming successful in the place of other much more hard working musicians. If something is not going to be good enough to build your portfolio, DON"T RECORD THAT BAND.
It would be the equivalent of an artist becoming famous for 'painting by numbers', its not fair to the real artists that can conceive the entire art work themselves from start to finish. This seems to be one of the only art forms where it is OK to take ownership of work that is not entirely yours.

I understand replacing samples is necessary for consistent level and tone etc, or moving the ODD part round to tighten up hits etc but I am talking about re playing parts or programming drums without telling the artists you have done so, or slip editing every note, or playing a solo that is too hard note by note by note... THESE things are just wrong, in my humble opinion.

this doesn't make any sense.

why would you pass up $$$ just because the band won't be able to play their shit live? THAT is what is their problem. how the record sounds is your problem.

In my opinion, you gotta sacrifice some dignity in order to keep yourself going to get to the truly talented bands. I don't know about you but I'd much rather edit some shit band to 100% fakeness than flip burgers @ mcdonalds.

 

[jipchen]

this doesn't make any sense.

why would you pass up $$$ just because the band won't be able to play their shit live? THAT is what is their problem. how the record sounds is your problem.

In my opinion, you gotta sacrifice some dignity in order to keep yourself going to get to the truly talented bands. I don't know about you but I'd much rather edit some shit band to 100% fakeness than flip burgers @ mcdonalds.

This.
And one day.. hopefully.. you'll get to record bands with actual talent, you just have to dig through the shi... uhm the rest first.
*sigh*

 

[DudeManGuy]

But if they can't play tight it IS your problem. The mix will not be as good as it could have potentially been with tighter guitars, which will lead to you not getting as much work.

EDIT: Who wants to listen to a mix with terribly played guitars? Sadly, most people will coin this issue on the engineer as it is their job to make sure everything is recorded well.

I agree to a point here, this topic blurs the line between producer and AE, my two cents on this:

Recorded well = AE's job

Played well = Producer's job

If I'm putting my name on something as a producer, yes, it has to be tight but if I'm only tracking/mixing it and it doesn't sound right because of poor performance, I will make sure to take credit only the AE.
Trust me, good musicians will be able to tell a good production from a bad one, even if the players are not that good. That is, of course, IMHO

DMG

 

[pikachu69]

Recorded well = AE's job

Played well = Producer's job

If I'm putting my name on something as a producer, yes, it has to be tight but if I'm only tracking/mixing it and it doesn't sound right because of poor performance, I will make sure to take credit only the AE.

Basically what I said in the OP.

You may be the one tasked to record and mix the project but it is the bands responsibility to play their own parts to the best of their ability, no matter how good or bad they are. If the finished product sounds like shit it is their problem entirely. If they came into the studio with parts wrong or sloppy playing and did not notice it before,(and unless you are paid to produce as well) chances are they won't hear it in the recording or notice a difference with the parts re recorded or programmed.

Sorry if that does not read well, I wrote that at 4am

 

[AdamWathan]

So in your opinion should a band only get one take to perform their songs from start to finish? Or do you stop and punch in to fix mistakes? Because that's all we're doing, tracking things over and over and in small sections to make sure there's no mistakes...

You can't mix poorly played shit, you just can't.

 

[AudioGeekZine]

+1 ^

Editing has always been worth the effort, well whenever the song is worth mixing anyway.

 

[pikachu69]

So in your opinion should a band only get one take to perform their songs from start to finish? Or do you stop and punch in to fix mistakes? Because that's all we're doing, tracking things over and over and in small sections to make sure there's no mistakes...

No, thats not what I am saying at all. I am talking about re playing a bass line or guitar line, or replacing real drums with a programmed track or what ever with out the consent or knowledge of the band/artist.
Let the band play it to the best of their ability but don't replace it just because you can.

 

[Plec]

Hahaha!

This must be the biggest source of anxiety and point of ethical discussion in todays music industry. It's really a sign of the times.

Without going into a long winded rant that would end somewhere around the moon...

Draw a parallell to the model industry for starters. Bands (girls) set unachievable standards for themselves that can only happen with computer manipulation, thinking it's the real deal. How would it look if a photographer said "I don't want a make-up session for this model, and no computer manipulation"?

A metal record today is just like the front cover of Playboy Magazine.

I think everyone in this discussion is right about both sides of the coin. Thing to keep in mind is that the average listener doesn't know and never will, just like has been said. A listener will just put on a record and boom... there it goes. Either it's good or it's bad. If that depends on the mix, the master, the producer having a bad day or the drummer hurt his foot... doesn't matter. It's either just a positive or a negative experience for the listener and that experience will reflect on every single persons name mentioned on the CD.

And I do agree that the only thing "chargeable" in this day of "studio market" is experience like "dcb" is getting at. Engineering involving quality of gear is something that the listener doesn't hear anymore or has the experience or listening situation to fully grasp. Like on a side note I heard from one of the most experienced and talented technicians in the world who was even hired by Amek to modify their Rupert Neve designed 9098 stuff before the company went down, that pretty much every piece of high-end audio design on the market even ranging up to $4000 preamps contain huge compromises in the audio path and build quality, just for the sake of making them cheaper and of course to make money. It was extremely humbling to hear his hard facts about gear that are considered staples at forums like here and GS, that can be made to sound and work a whole lot better just by changing out some cheap key components that the original designers put in to save a buck. It was just like.. wow.. we are so duped into believing all this hype about our gear it's just silly. And so.. even if we who are supposed to be "experienced engineers" don't know about what's really going on under the hood.. why should anyone else ever care or be willing to pay for it?

So it all comes down to what makes a tangible difference musically, and if you want to look at magazines with less than perfect looking models. :hotjump:

 

[Josh M.]

I've been thinking about this topic quite a bit lately and it's a relief to read what some of you are saying. I guess in the end of the day, artists = money and it's not our business whether the raw product is as good as the processed (end) product.


On a slightly off topic note, I'm getting these ads about portrait editing software with before and after shots. Completely relevant to what PLEC has mentioned

 

[Ermz]

Hmm, that might explain why my clones are the best sounding pieces of kit i have. The builder prolly did a better job than most manufacturers.

 

[Plec]

Not surprised at all about that!

Branded gear, even very expensive ones are hugely over-priced considering a lot of the stuff they put in there. The 9098 range for instance was apparently one of the most cheaply made pieces of crap ever constructed speaking in pure engineering terms. They show a lot of bad low-level distortion given the right situation that would not be considered very musical, and those are still pretty nice boxes according to many. It's also funny that a lot of the tube gear out there is worth a big eye-roll. Apparently it's in some ways the same syndrome as with guitar amps. Where manufacturers pushing for "tube-tone" and the distortion isn't even created by the tubes.

Even with tube preamps, tube compressors etc... most of that stuff is the guitarists equivalent of a Marshall Valvestate amp which mixes solid-state and tube into a hybrid thing.

API was one of the manufacturers actually having earned this guys respect for putting out very well built stuff. I also found out that the new SSL consoles EQ's and preamps are better built than a lot of todays dedicated outboard gear, so that makes my AWS purchase plans feel very good indeed and kind of justifies the price tag a bit more.

 

[Ermz]

Ah man, that makes me feel great too.

I tend to avoid tube gear like the plague - most tube pres and EQs sound like balls to me. The Millennia has been set to all solid-state since the day I bought it. In fact one of the only tube pieces I have any respect for sonically is the LA-2. And in terms of pres, I always use API. Seriously done so many shoot-outs, and the API stuff just wipes the floor with everything, every time. I almost wanted to cry when the studio owner where I freelance called me to tell me they got a new Angela console in and got rid of all their lunchboxes loaded with 512c's. Seriously can't get enough of those things.

PS. I just called him after this thread just to check, and they're definitely gone . Have to use the desk pres. And I think there's some outboard SSL strip there which I'll give a good look at. The 512c's have moved to their new facility which is packing a G-series. If they end up grabbing some Opals, I may try to do some mixing there!

 

[DiveRightIn63]

Honestly, editing is great to me when working with legitimate songs and people that appreciate the work put forward. I get really pissy if the music/band/people suck, though...

 

[006]

I've said this before in a similar kind of thread but...

What a band does live has nothing to do with your job when recording them. Two totally separate venues. Your job is not to worry about how well they can play live for their SHOWS. Your job is to make them sound as good as you can for the project. If that's with a million takes, a fuckload of editing, reamping, et al - so be it. I have worked with a bunch of shitty performing bands over the years and I just worry about making it sound good with whatever I need to because people WILL avoid working with you if it sounds bad. 98% of the time they don't and won't realize that it's the band not you if it sounds like crap. They just will not. Tracking bands and letting them put shitty takes down or refusing to edit this or that for the sake of hoping they will improve and all that nonsense doesn't do anything but make YOU look bad. Live shows and the recording are totally separate and unless you are involved with the live show you should just worry about the damn recording. IMHO, of course.

 

[Scott Horner]

I don't think I could record a band without producing them. Even the best mix on a crappy performance is going to sound crappy, regardless of how well it is mixed. If someone hears a bunch of sloppy performances on a disc they are going to equate everything about that disc to pure shit. In most cases there will be nobody that will appreciate the time that was put into mixing something that isn't played tight. I really don't think I could just let someone come in an track a few songs and be able to bite my tongue if I heard a terrible performance. If my name is going to be on something then I want everything about it to sound as good as possible, by any means possible.

 

[Plec]

Ah man, that makes me feel great too.

I tend to avoid tube gear like the plague - most tube pres and EQs sound like balls to me. The Millennia has been set to all solid-state since the day I bought it. In fact one of the only tube pieces I have any respect for sonically is the LA-2. And in terms of pres, I always use API. Seriously done so many shoot-outs, and the API stuff just wipes the floor with everything, every time...

Not trying to hi-jack...

The standard mod by Fred Forsell to the Millennia NSEQ-2 involves gutting out the tube parts of the EQ and just making it a monster solid-state one for instance.

Same thing here with both my STT-1 and NSEQ-2... they're just set for Solid-State operation 90% of the time.

Looking forward to trying some API pre's and EQ's later on. Have never touched them in the analog world. I love the Nebula emulation of the Dual Equalizer though but thought Waves API bundle was kind of... meh.

Another tech told me, who apparently is the only guy officially licensed by SSL to do maintenance work under warranty here in Sweden, that even the onboard EQ's and compressors of the Duality and AWS isn't the same circuits as their outboard lunch-box ones. Thus the console variants are of better build and sonic quality. Which you might not be inclined to believe of course since they're marketed to be the same thing anyway.

So... a lot of stuff going on that not many people know about.

Sorry... hi-jack end..

 

[JayB]

Then again you may follow the Albini philosophy and just like making records that sound like shit. To each their own.

haha I remember when Zao came out with this , "produced" by Steve Albini , my jaw fuckin dropped at how shitty it sounded

 

[Loki Laufeyiarson]

Hmmm...
Just retracking badly played stuff yourself and not telling the band is plain stupid. Not (just) because it's cheating and not teaching the band they suck at playing and need to practise, but because you miss out in cash. Because you're doing a performance on that record, every time a copy gets sold or played on the air, you're entitled to some cash. By not telling anyone you did it and thus not registering your performance at the proper autorities, you miss out on it.
In an ideal world bands would just record everything natural, because they could play their stuff. But I do realize that when someone is (apsiring to be) making a living out of it, stuff like editting, sampereplacement, drumprogramming and retracking yourself are needed, but I believe it should never be done without the band knowing it. If you tell them, you can charge them for the hours as well. Imho off course, since I'm just some amature nobody here...

 

[drew_drummer]

haha I remember when Zao came out with this , "produced" by Steve Albini , my jaw fuckin dropped at how shitty it sounded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqrzP38RgGA

Sounds fucking awesome if you ask me.

 

[GarethSE]

Sounds fucking awesome if you ask me.

Yeah, not my sort of thing musically, but the production most definitely fits.