Premier Rock Forum

Good points. Sounds like the band was happy with that sound - so that's all that really matters.

But remember you don't have to be in a controlled, professional studio to apply good recording techniques. Hell, most Pro studios don't apply good recording techniques to begin with. I was in that situation a handful of times years ago, recording bands in their houses, in bad rooms. We always attacked the symtpoms and the end-results were never that great. After learning that a lot of what i knew or thought i knew was wrong, i was able to greatly improve what we could do in the same small rooms with teeny budgets.

A really great way to make a recording sound better is to have some depth of field in there. You'd be surpised what some distant mics can give you, even in bad, or dead rooms.

stephensolo wrote:Good points. Sounds like the band was happy with that sound - so that's all that really matters.

But remember you don't have to be in a controlled, professional studio to apply good recording techniques. Hell, most Pro studios don't apply good recording techniques to begin with. I was in that situation a handful of times years ago, recording bands in their houses, in bad rooms. We always attacked the symtpoms and the end-results were never that great. After learning that a lot of what i knew or thought i knew was wrong, i was able to greatly improve what we could do in the same small rooms with teeny budgets.

A really great way to make a recording sound better is to have some depth of field in there. You'd be surpised what some distant mics can give you, even in bad, or dead rooms.

I agree, most people don't. The same band I am refering to, hired me to fix the mastered mix of their first album...apparently the engineer sold them on his skills as a mastering professional as well....the mix was terrible. Every track was normalized in protools before being mastered(I HATE normalizing) poorly in protools as well...

This fella was just trying to bleed them for what they had...too bad really...

I usually find that the least amount of mics I can use on a kit, the more honest it sounds. I just got done with a project that had 52 on the kick, 57 on the snare, and a fanny pack stereo mic in leu of room or overheads. Best drum sounds i've gotten in a while.

Also I spend a decent amount of time with the drummer so I know his playing style. How hard he hits, how consistent he is with the striking of the drums and their average levels.

I second that. Sometimes, a single decent microphone can be cooler than a mix of close mics. Sounds weird, but several times I have been soloing a drum mic, and my buddy will jump up and exclaim, "Hey! That is exactly the sound I want!"

Tune the things well, and get some cymabals that don't sound like shit.

i suppose i would have liked to have seen this when it was posted rather than almost a month later, but hey! no problems!

i might have tried using the matched pair of oktava's in an x-y pair, with the 112 on kick (only there in case), and the c3 by the low tom, facing the snare.. 57 on the snare if you must. kindof like the glynn johns method with an x-y pair in the middle...

if i was feeling more experimental that day, i might try the x-y pair in front of the kit, 112 on the kick, and the c3 over the drummer's left shoulder (or under his armpit, depends on his height i suppose), aimed at the snare, but picking up some hihat as well. the use the 57 as a room mic a number of feet back.