[subego]

I have a friend with a band (vocals, drums, guitar, bass, violins, cello), and he's considering setting up a recording studio. I'm wondering what kind of rig is going to hit the price/power sweet point.

Now, he's not f-ing around with this. This isn't his hobby. However, this will be only for his purposes. It only needs to handle one album sized project at a time.

Of course, if anyone wants to throw out some preamps they're in love with, it won't be frowned upon.

Thanks!

[Doofy]

See the fattest Mac Pro on the Apple site? Buy that. There is no price/power sweet point when recording music if it's not your hobby.
With a 26" NEC running at 1920 x 1200 if he doesn't want to go blind (some music software = very small fonts).

And I likes the Focusrite ISA preamps.

And if that's a real drummer, he'll save money by buying a Roland TD20 instead of the zillions of mics, preamps, input and outboard required to record a real kit.

[subego]

How does the necessity of such big iron break down? Do you need the slots, or are you thinking mainly in terms of faster is better?

[Doofy]

It's a bit of everything.

At some point, he'll run into "not enough processor" problems. This will be sooner rather than later, as some plugs are so power-hungry that they'll have even the big iron crying to its mom. So, more and faster always wins.

At some point, he's going to run into "not enough internal drives" problems. He'll want his OS, recordings and samples on different drives. Four is better than one, all week long.

And he might want to go with some proper interfacing at some point, which will require PCIe. Plus, of course, you can get DSP cards on PCIe to run some plugs on (see Duende, Powercore), which will ease the plug problem.

Even if he doesn't max everything right away, it's more conducive to creativity to be working with headroom rather than in a tight, cramped box.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

See the fattest Mac Pro on the Apple site? Buy that. There is no price/power sweet point when recording music if it's not your hobby.

No offense, because I know that this is your field, but this is terrible advice unless subego's friend has a massive wad of cash burning a hole in his pocket. As far as machines available in the Apple store, a low end Mac Pro refurb (around $3000) would absolutely destroy older Macs that I, and thousands of others, have recorded and mixed full studio albums on. Hell, there are still full sized studios out there happily running G5 PowerMacs if not G4s. The only upgrade required on a stock Mac Pro would be swapping in faster hard drives.

That being said, for a small recording setup, my preference would be to make it small and mobile, going with a MacBook Pro and a fast external FW800 drive. It could depend on the I/O hardware that will be used, though.

I always prefer dual monitors for audio production.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

It's a bit of everything.

At some point, he'll run into "not enough processor" problems. This will be sooner rather than later, as some plugs are so power-hungry that they'll have even the big iron crying to its mom. So, more and faster always wins.

At some point, he's going to run into "not enough internal drives" problems. He'll want his OS, recordings and samples on different drives. Four is better than one, all week long.

And he might want to go with some proper interfacing at some point, which will require PCIe. Plus, of course, you can get DSP cards on PCIe to run some plugs on (see Duende, Powercore), which will ease the plug problem.

Even if he doesn't max everything right away, it's more conducive to creativity to be working with headroom rather than in a tight, cramped box.

All good points. My previous post assumed, I supposed, that this fellow wouldn't be going totally high-end for the sake of recording solely his own act. That's a lot of money to drop if you aren't charging anyone for the resulting work. If he is either loaded or has significant financial backing, this could all be irrelevant.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by gradient 

No offense, because I know that this is your field, but this is terrible advice unless subego's friend has a massive wad of cash burning a hole in his pocket. As far as machines available in the Apple store, a low end Mac Pro refurb (around $3000) would absolutely destroy older Macs that I, and thousands of others, have recorded and mixed full studio albums on. Hell, there are still full sized studios out there happily running G5 PowerMacs if not G4s. The only upgrade required on a stock Mac Pro would be swapping in faster hard drives.

Yer problem is that the refurbs might be a good choice if they're running four-year-old software, but he's not going to find that old software in a hurry. And the new software (especially the plugs) sucks a lot more resource than the old stuff does.

It's doable, but not pleasant.

Originally Posted by gradient 

That being said, for a small recording setup, my preference would be to make it small and mobile, going with a MacBook Pro and a fast external FW800 drive. It could depend on the I/O hardware that will be used, though.

For recording a full band? Sounds like masochism to me!

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by gradient 

That's a lot of money to drop if you aren't charging anyone for the resulting work.

Due to the following...

Originally Posted by subego 

Now, he's not f-ing around with this. This isn't his hobby.

...I assumed that he will be charging someone for the resulting work.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

At some point, he'll run into "not enough processor" problems. This will be sooner rather than later, as some plugs are so power-hungry that they'll have even the big iron crying to its mom. So, more and faster always wins.

Do these need to run in real time? I mean, is that what they're supposed to do?

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Due to the following...



...I assumed that he will be charging someone for the resulting work.

He also mentioned the band lineup and said it was only for his friends uses so I thought he was saying that his friend was only intending to record his own band.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Yer problem is that the refurbs might be a good choice if they're running four-year-old software, but he's not going to find that old software in a hurry. And the new software (especially the plugs) sucks a lot more resource than the old stuff does.

You could be right there. Admitedly, I haven't upgraded my software platform in about 4 years.

Originally Posted by Doofy 

For recording a full band? Sounds like masochism to me!

Masochism, maybe, but years ago I was recording full bands on my iBook G4 with only the occasional hassle. I was doing mix-downs on the G5 I had at the time, mind you.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by subego 

Do these need to run in real time? I mean, is that what they're supposed to do?

Yep, for the most part they run in real time.

You can ease processor power by "freezing" (or "printing") the plug into the track (a sort of offline processing), or by bouncing the processed track through to another couple tracks, but this isn't ideal - it tends to slow the creative process (when you're trying for that awesome solo, you don't want the process interrupted by "where do I get an extra 10% CPU from, do I need to bounce tracks 3-12?").

Some modern plugs are so Norris that they'll kill a low quad just with one instance (which means you can't use them at all - you need at least one instance to be able to freeze or bounce). The industry is moving into real time analogue circuit modelling, which is brutal - it pays to be a little future-proof.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by gradient 

He also mentioned the band lineup and said it was only for his friends uses so I thought he was saying that his friend was only intending to record his own band.

I read it as: Private studio for friend's band, but friend's band isn't f'ing about and wants to go pro, making high-quality saleable product.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by gradient 

Masochism, maybe, but years ago I was recording full bands on my iBook G4 with only the occasional hassle. I was doing mix-downs on the G5 I had at the time, mind you.

Pfft. 16 MHz Atari!
But times change - it's a constant arms race just to run the software these days.

[Doofy]

Anyway, lest I start owning the thread, I'll leave it at: Go big or go home.

[subego]

All the answers from both of you have been useful. Thanks!

[Spheric Harlot]

The octacore is a pretty decent compromise between horsepower and wads of cash.

Lots of cores for lots of processes = lots of tracks and plug-ins.

Analogue circuit modeling is brutal, but far off. (Last I've read was that Desktop workstations will have enough power for modeling a SINGLE amp in about five years. Plug-ins always get hungrier, true, but at some point you will have to accept that ceiling.)

[brassplayersrock²]

All that I know about drum mics is from a friend that uses a BETA 57A for the BOTTOM of his snare.

[Spheric Harlot]

Some of the best-sounding rock drums I've heard was three mics - a stereo Neumann for the set, a Uzi a couple feet from the kick, and one more for snare/hi-hat (don't remember what).

That guy had an utterly killer tone, though, so all you wanted was to capture *exactly* what you were hearing. That is rarely the case. Other rock productions I've been involved in eventually resorted to V-Drums entirely, building a kit in the box.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Analogue circuit modeling is brutal, but far off.

Available now (see Wave Arts valve thingy), and very brutal.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Available now (see Wave Arts valve thingy), and very brutal.

Er, duh - now I remember where I read the "five years" figure: In the TapeOp review of the Wave Arts Tube Saturator! @ myself
http://wavearts.com/uploads/docs/TapeOp-TS.pdf

BTW, if you don't subscribe to TapeOp, you really, really should. Cheap, and excellent reading.

For reference, I asked Wave Arts when CPUs are expected to have enough power to run a Fender Bassman head model using the Wave Arts engine — about five years.

So yes, it's here now, and apparently quite good, and at a single mono instance taking up 33% of a single 3GHz core, it is brutal.

I still believe that the octa-core is a decent enough machine for a while, though, with the twelve-core not giving enough additional longevity, in terms of increasing requirements over time, to justify the extra cost.

I doubt that anyone unclear on which machine to buy will be deep enough in elbow grease to actually *need* the extra horsepower in the next few years.

Obviously, YMMV.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Er, duh - now I remember where I read the "five years" figure: In the TapeOp review of the Wave Arts Tube Saturator! @ myself
http://wavearts.com/uploads/docs/TapeOp-TS.pdf

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

BTW, if you don't subscribe to TapeOp, you really, really should. Cheap, and excellent reading.

TBH, I can't be arsed with any industry guff anymore as my rig remains reasonably static (replace when broken kind of thing). I'd rather subscribe to stuff about boats and boobies.

Besides, GearSlutz is even cheaper.

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

I doubt that anyone unclear on which machine to buy will be deep enough in elbow grease to actually *need* the extra horsepower in the next few years.

Good point.

[subego]

Again, this is all useful. I'm not a music guy, and though I can make CPU's bleed, it's never a real-time sort of thing, so I'm used to dealing with it via server farms. Way different power/price analysis going on.

It seems like my advice should be "if you're not going to spend at least $20-$30 grand, use your money for studio time."

Sound about right?

[Spheric Harlot]

That really depends entirely upon what and how he'll be recording.

If he wants to set up a real recording studio where he can record drums etc., possibly an entire band playing live, figure about ten times that amount. The most important component in that case is the room. If that sounds like shit, it's completely irrelevant how much money he throws at the component/processing chain.

If he's going to be working primarily in the box, with maybe a small chamber for recording voice and the odd instrument plus guitars, that figure can be met.

Does the guy actually know what kind of work he's going to be doing?

[Phileas]

Originally Posted by subego 

use your money for studio time."

I think that's the best advice for most people. Good musicians≠good technicians.*





*With important exceptions.

[Spheric Harlot]

I was going to suggest teaming up with an experienced engineer who knows what questions need answering, but didn't want to seem too presumptuous.

Hence my question about what kind of work he'll be doing.

[subego]

Forgive me here...

By "work" do you mean kind of music, or what his workflow is going to be like?

[Spheric Harlot]

Partly this:

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

That really depends entirely upon what and how he'll be recording.

If he wants to set up a real recording studio where he can record drums etc., possibly an entire band playing live, figure about ten times that amount. The most important component in that case is the room. If that sounds like shit, it's completely irrelevant how much money he throws at the component/processing chain.

If he's going to be working primarily in the box, with maybe a small chamber for recording voice and the odd instrument plus guitars, that figure can be met.

Also the questions of whether he'll be primarily mixing, or primarily tracking, in the box, outboard equipment, electronic, rock, acoustic.

I have no idea what you mean by "setting up a recording studio". That can be anything these days, from a headphone-based office desk in an apartment with cardboard walls, to a full-blown $3 million room suitable for recording string orchestras.

Is this guy an engineer, or is he a Guitar Player With An Inheritance Going On A Mission?

My own studio is based around a four-year-old black MacBook, but the horsepower is (barely) adequate, since I do very little in-the-box. (I need to replace it soon, though, as it's slowly showing signs of old age.)

Also, my studio is geared up for tracking, rather than mixing. But I only do electronics here, and some very, very basic microphoned stuff. Tracking Hammond or other "real" instruments, I'll usually do elsewhere. On some projects, I'll go to another studio for mixing.

That, in combination with *what type* of stuff you're going to be tracking, also determines to a large extent where the money goes, if you're on a budget.

Will he just go elsewhere for tracking? Or will he just go elsewhere for mixing?

If you say "This isn't his hobby", what does that mean? That he's a musician serious about producing? That he's a musician who's serious about *getting started* in recording his own stuff, but has no engineering cred to his record? That he's a capable engineer who also plays in his band?

[subego]

Let's see...

He's a musician who has little engineering cred that's serious about getting his own band recorded. He's also a control freak.

The workflow in question is TBD, partially because I haven't done an in depth interrogation, partially because he's not sure himself (see: little engineering cred), partially because that's dependent on gear that hasn't been (or never will be) bought.

From what I've been told here, trying to set up an actual recording studio is patently out of the question, there's not enough money or skill available, so I mislabeled the thread title. All I can say I'n my defense is I'm a film and computer guy, not a music guy.

Now, going back to the control freak angle, he's going to want to be hands on with the mix as possible. He does have loads of experience doing feature-length sound design/mixing/editing on really slow-ass computers. Is post-recording mixing (mixdown?) something that might be more cost-effective with a home setup?

[Doofy]

Gah. Even that question has eleventyzillion variables.

Gear-wise, there's really no difference between proper studio and home rig these days. You can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars with a home rig if you want to.
So it's really a case of balancing the available budget against how he's going to work and what type of quality he wants.

It's not out of the question to set up the recording side of things - he simply needs to realise that all drummers without a TD20 rig are a pain in the ass. Everything else is doable in a spare bedroom, if he chooses gear and room treatment wisely.

A mixdown can be done with Mac and software alone ("in the box"), but the results may not be ideal (actual hardware in the mix makes a difference to the sound).

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Is this guy an engineer, or is he a Guitar Player With An Inheritance Going On A Mission?

LOL. A GPWAIGOAM.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by subego 

From what I've been told here, trying to set up an actual recording studio is patently out of the question, there's not enough money or skill available, so I mislabeled the thread title. All I can say I'n my defense is I'm a film and computer guy, not a music guy.

I don't know that his desire to have a small recording studio in his home should be discouraged. If he's interested in creating a project from end-to-end, it doesn't need to be mastered in a million dollar studio under the watchful eye of Daniel Lanois.

If he's interested in simply structuring/solidifying material for a demo, what matters most is the music itself. It sounds like this is his first leap into home-recording and there's absolutely no reason why he should go "all balls on the table" out of the gate. He may find that he actually hates the mixing/mastering process and wants to sell his home-recording gear. He may find that he really enjoys it and has gotten great fulfillment from the process itself in which case he can upgrade pieces of his studio to suit. In the meantime, he'll familiarize himself with the basics such as building a sequence, midi implementation, loops and DA, compression, EQ, FX usage, knowing when "not to play", mixing, mastering, use of the audio spectrum, etc... this is all part of the process of creating a project that isn't dependent on super-expensive equipment.

It really depends on his goals and expectations. If he loves it and has a good ear, he'll know what to upgrade, why, and how to bring the $ together to make it happen.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

It's not out of the question to set up the recording side of things - he simply needs to realise that all drummers without a TD20 rig are a pain in the ass. Everything else is doable in a spare bedroom, if he chooses gear and room treatment wisely.

Roland V-Session/TD-10 user here; mostly as a controller anymore as the sounds are... well they're dated. I've daisy-chained an old TD-7 in with it. Wouldn't trade it for the universe. Decent feel (not quite there yet, but damned close for a bunch of mesh heads and rubber triggers) and absolute local control over its EQ and gain - no mics.

Quick pix (some aspects have been upgraded since, krk monitors, etc...)

[subego]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

If he's interested in simply structuring/solidifying material for a demo, what matters most is the music itself. It sounds like this is his first leap into home-recording and there's absolutely no reason why he should go "all balls on the table" out of the gate. He may find that he actually hates the mixing/mastering process and wants to sell his home-recording gear. He may find that he really enjoys it and has gotten great fulfillment from the process itself in which case he can upgrade pieces of his studio to suit. In the meantime, he'll familiarize himself with the basics such as building a sequence, midi implementation, loops and DA, compression, EQ, FX usage, knowing when "not to play", mixing, mastering, use of the audio spectrum, etc... this is all part of the process of creating a project that isn't dependent on super-expensive equipment.

He's done some recording work, and has a bunch of experience in audio for film and video.

When it comes right down to it, that whole process (and the related technology) is ultimately just a means to an end for him. I don't think he particularly enjoys it. He'd rather be working a crowd.

Now, I'm the opposite. Playing with technology is fun for me in and of itself. I'm probably (definitely) more excited about the idea than he is.

It's going to come down to a cost/quality analysis. Will the ability to work on it as long as he needs sound better/cost less than having to pay by the hour?


As an aside, we both saw Daniel Lanois perform about 15 years ago. Dude was like the French-Canadian Jimi Hendrix. He needs to record more often.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by subego 

It's going to come down to a cost/quality analysis. Will the ability to work on it as long as he needs sound better/cost less than having to pay by the hour?

I think Doofy mentioned it; that at no time in history has the opportunity of making good recordings in a home studio been more possible than it is these days.

There's something about the "red-light ON", crunchtime studio environment that can squelch the creative process. Having the equipment at your fingertips increases the odds of capturing "moments" that make a project larger than one's self. While it is difficult to reproduce these moments in a studio, having the equipment at home may increase your efficiency in an hourly-rate studio. There are other options too such as taking a project with individual tracks you've recording at home to a master-house for their expertise although the garbage-in, garbage-out rule applies if the equipment he's using is shoddy.

I wouldn't say $500k, I'd say more like $15-20k depending on the gear he already has and a little acoustical/functional feng shui in the home.

[BadKosh]

Its a shame so many of today's 'recording engineers' don't even know how to place microphones, or listen makes most of their recordings sound like basement junk recordings. That boosted 40Hz 'bass' and 1-3K makes for horrid listening. Dynamic range isn't everything.

[Spheric Harlot]

Yet, even the dynamic range was better in decades past, when people still had rooms worth recording.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Yet, even the dynamic range was better in decades past, when people still had rooms worth recording.

Stop whining about rooms and go buy an SPL Transducer.

Hammond -> electronic fiddly to get the outputs right -> Marshall JCM800 -> SPL.
I want to hear that.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Stop whining about rooms and go buy an SPL Transducer.

Hammond -> electronic fiddly to get the outputs right -> Marshall JCM800 -> SPL.
I want to hear that.

"Electronic fiddly."

That's the actual technical term for it?

[Doofy]

Allcaps