On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 09:38:30 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>>> Depends on the quality you're looking for, but yes, having the right
>>>> tools helps (in both cases).
>>>
>>> I'd suggest having the right technicians helps more. Mix engineering
>>> is non-trivial, whether you have the right equipment or not.
>>
>> I consider the personnel part of the toolset in this case.  Just like
>> if you're publishing a technical book, having a good technical reviewer
>> and editor is essential to ending with a good product.
> 
> Drifting somewhat off topic here, but today you can buy software and
> hardware that lets you use a home PC to do almost everything that would
> be possible in a recording studio. (About the only bit you *can't*
> easily do is really high quality recording of acoustic signals. But if
> you're making synthesizer music like me, that's irrelevant.)

Well, you can do it, but the capture equipment can get fairly pricey 
(good mics aren't cheap).  But at work, we do recording of voice with PC-
based equipment and no recording engineer (at the time of recording - we 
clean the recordings after the fact and re-record bits that need it) for 
our On Demand training offerings.

Not quite the same as music production, sure.  But we do have one guy in 
the group who used to do broadcast-quality radio recordings (so he's 
taught us a few tricks of the trade) and I have a little background in 
sound systems myself.

> The difference, of course, is that me twiddling with the equaliser knob
> is no match for a professional mix engineer who knows WTF he's doing.
> And if you listen to the music I've made, you can tell it doesn't sound
> very good.

Well, I've listened to it, and I thought it did sound good.

Jim

Post a reply to this message