this is a forum post that i posted on the Tape Op forum a week and a half ago and i'd love to get everyone's responses here at Electrical....
so here i am, 3 years into a "sucessful" recording studio business. i say sucessful because i am booked every day and have recieved enough recognition that it is apparent that word is getting around. I don't make much money because i don't charge much, for a couple of reasons 1. I wanted to work more to get my chops up and 2. i want to record bands that love what they do, not just bands that can afford it.
i run nuendo 3 on a PC. It works. I am able to record music and mix records and give people a product that they are proud of and can turn around and make money from.
so here's the thing. I've invested about $25,000 into this studio in a very DIY fashion and by going with all digital over analog, custom PC over Mac and Nuendo (h20) over PT layla 24's over RME and 16 trk over 24 etc... etc... i've managed to stretch that $25,000 into a "professional" studio. but, all this time i keep feeling myself drifting away from the studio that i believe in.
an analog studio.
a studio with 2" tape and a console. a studio with limitations that benefit the creation of music. like a lack of immediacy and track restrictions. no undo feature. etc. i'm not opposed to combining the benifits of both but i want to get myself heading in a new direction (or an old one).
i have about $10,000 saved up and i'm opening up this forum for your opinions and suggestions about how to start heading in that direction.
i'm heading off to LA for a week. I'll return and check this post next week. let the ideas fly!
i want out
2I'm no studio owner...a half-assed hobbyist at best. However, I'm of the opinion that you should work with what you feel comfortable with. I've heard recordings I like done on obviously digital gear, and ditto on the analog.
I think the difference in quality comes in for 'project' studios. I do some digital recordings (location, crap mics, etc.), and I like the flexibility of having as many tracks as I need, cheap. However, the recordings I have done that I loved were on a damned Tascam 40-4 with an old Mackie mixer. As soon as I played the tape back, I liked the sound. I cannot get that feeling from my digital rig, no matter what plug-ins I use. We just threaded the tape, and the magic happened. Basically, with digital gear, I can generate piles of recordings for nearly free, but I end up having to tweak the mixes so much just to begin to approach the 'quality' of tape that it ends up being something I won't charge for. Again, though, I'm no professional.
If I were, I'd probably do something like Chris Hanzek did and have both, and sync them. That way you could go so far as to track on both, even simultaneously, and decide for yourself what would work best...or mix between the two, for that matter. I think your clientèle's tastes, their typical instrumentation, and the way you choose to work with them should be more of a factor than anything else.
As a consumer of recording, analogue is a selling point, but a minor one. If I really like an engineer's work, I don't give a shit what tools he uses to get there. It seems more important to have someone I feel is 'on my team' aesthetically.
I think the difference in quality comes in for 'project' studios. I do some digital recordings (location, crap mics, etc.), and I like the flexibility of having as many tracks as I need, cheap. However, the recordings I have done that I loved were on a damned Tascam 40-4 with an old Mackie mixer. As soon as I played the tape back, I liked the sound. I cannot get that feeling from my digital rig, no matter what plug-ins I use. We just threaded the tape, and the magic happened. Basically, with digital gear, I can generate piles of recordings for nearly free, but I end up having to tweak the mixes so much just to begin to approach the 'quality' of tape that it ends up being something I won't charge for. Again, though, I'm no professional.
If I were, I'd probably do something like Chris Hanzek did and have both, and sync them. That way you could go so far as to track on both, even simultaneously, and decide for yourself what would work best...or mix between the two, for that matter. I think your clientèle's tastes, their typical instrumentation, and the way you choose to work with them should be more of a factor than anything else.
As a consumer of recording, analogue is a selling point, but a minor one. If I really like an engineer's work, I don't give a shit what tools he uses to get there. It seems more important to have someone I feel is 'on my team' aesthetically.
i want out
3i don't know man, but good luck.
keeping yourself happy while doing what you love is important.
otherwise resentment grows.
keeping yourself happy while doing what you love is important.
otherwise resentment grows.
i want out
4I've been building up a little studio of my own for a couple of years now. I'd love to be in the position that you are in, making money doing what you love. It's a great place to be.
I record digitally due to money constraints and space. If you have the money to get tape, do it. You will have the best of both worlds and probably get more customers as there are a lot of muso's out there who still won't go near digital.
I personally think digital is getting pretty good. It just depends on how you use it to get the results you want. But as you know, there is always something to learn.
I record digitally due to money constraints and space. If you have the money to get tape, do it. You will have the best of both worlds and probably get more customers as there are a lot of muso's out there who still won't go near digital.
I personally think digital is getting pretty good. It just depends on how you use it to get the results you want. But as you know, there is always something to learn.