>> 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).

The one thing a recording studio does better than a bedroom is... well, 
recording.

Good microphones aren't cheap. Nor are soundproofed rooms with flat 
acoustics. And rooms big enough to fit musical instruments in? Well...

However, as I said above, if all your sound sources are electronic in 
the first place, these points are moot. In theory, it should be possible 
to produce million-selling dance records using nothing more than a 
laptop and a bunch of software.

The reality is that mix engineering is *hard*. Oh, sure, getting 
something that sounds OK isn't too tricky. Getting something that sounds 
commercial-grade is another matter.

Still, I guess it didn't stop Stavely Makepeace...

> 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.

I'm sure most of it is fairly easy if you actually know what to look for.

>> 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.

Good, yes. Fantastic? No.

Post a reply to this message