Modern Recording?

[MylesBAstor]

 

[treitz3]

You know, if I didn't know any better I'd say that pretty much sums it up.

Tom

 

[andromedaaudio]

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

That's not modern recording. Until you got to the computer and ProTools (which is dramatically over-priced) it was quite vintage. Which was the thread with the link to the David Byrne article? He describes modern recording. The cost of recording has plummeted dramatically in the last couple of decades, while the quality (of the gear, the engineering is another question), by every objective standard, has risen dramatically.

And yes, I know many audiophiles disagree and do not accept the objective standards.

Tim

 

[Bruce B]

Plus, there are very few studios today that have such vintage ear candy at their disposal. There's only, maybe a dozen studios in the whole US that can claim the flowchart is accurate (ie: half-million dollar analog mixing console and it doesn't even have to be british!)!

 

[Andre Marc]

This is hardly modern recording. Try $2000 worth of software, computers, and hardrives..with maybe a few mics. That is reality.

 

[Andre Marc]

Plus, there are very few studios today that have such vintage ear candy at their disposal. There's only, maybe a dozen studios in the whole US that can claim the flowchart is accurate!

+1. This flow chart is a pipe dream.

 

[Bruce B]

This is hardly modern recording. Try $2000 worth of software, computers, and hardrives..with maybe a few mics. That is reality.

and the software is probably hacked!

 

[Andre Marc]

and the software is probably hacked!

...yep...or freeware....love those "tape" plug ins!

 

[JackD201]

The console should be right after the mic pre.

 

[Lee]

That's not modern recording. Until you got to the computer and ProTools (which is dramatically over-priced) it was quite vintage. Which was the thread with the link to the David Byrne article? He describes modern recording. The cost of recording has plummeted dramatically in the last couple of decades, while the quality (of the gear, the engineering is another question), by every objective standard, has risen dramatically.

And yes, I know many audiophiles disagree and do not accept the objective standards.

Tim

Jamie runs a recording studio (very successful including mixing for Taylor Swift) and this is pretty much his setup. So it very much is modern recording as he practices it. Jamie is an odd fellow who records in hirez but doesn't believe it matters. But the overall point and humor is right on which is why this diagram has been shared by so many engineers. The Atlanta club got a nice tour from Jamie when we visited emofest, the emotiva fall shindig.

Cost of gear has declined dramatically. Even better when we do location recording we went from 4 roadcases in the 90s and early 2000s to one rollerboard suitcase for mics, cables, and Sound Devices units.

 

[Lee]

I should also add that Jamie's recordings sound wonderful. He is a master at capturing the Nashville drum sound.

 

[Andre Marc]

Jamie runs a recording studio (very successful including mixing for Taylor Swift) and this is pretty much his setup. So it very much is modern recording as he practices it. Jamie is an odd fellow who records in hirez but doesn't believe it matters. But the overall point and humor is right on which is why this diagram has been shared by so many engineers. The Atlanta club got a nice tour from Jamie when we visited emofest, the emotiva fall shindig.

Cost of gear has declined dramatically. Even better when we do location recording we went from 4 roadcases in the 90s and early 2000s to one rollerboard suitcase for mics, cables, and Sound Devices units.

As Bruce points out...this type of set up is few and far between.

 

[JackD201]

You need more I/Os to do more than 16 tracks. Package with Two HD or HDX I/Os will cost around $20,000. I'm pretty sure the guy isn't using LE. LOL.

 

[Lee]

As Bruce points out...this type of set up is few and far between.

It's more common in Nashville than you might believe but yes that is true nationwide.

Still the main point holds true: lots of crappy playback out there.

 

[Gooch]

You need more I/Os to do more than 16 tracks. Package with Two HD or HDX I/Os will cost around $20,000. I'm pretty sure the guy isn't using LE. LOL.

Throw in another 20k for the mac daddy Waves plugin bundle and while your at it better get some more DSP cards

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Jamie runs a recording studio (very successful including mixing for Taylor Swift) and this is pretty much his setup. So it very much is modern recording as he practices it. Jamie is an odd fellow who records in hirez but doesn't believe it matters. But the overall point and humor is right on which is why this diagram has been shared by so many engineers. The Atlanta club got a nice tour from Jamie when we visited emofest, the emotiva fall shindig.

Cost of gear has declined dramatically. Even better when we do location recording we went from 4 roadcases in the 90s and early 2000s to one rollerboard suitcase for mics, cables, and Sound Devices units.

..

Jamie runs a very unusual recording studio, and the overall point of the humor is pretty wildly exaggerated for effect. Ever get a handle on what you're really listening to when you have a pair of excellent IEMs plugged into an iPhone? Overlook the imaging of headphones and a lot of "high end" systems should have such fidelity.

I don't think Jamie is odd to believe hi-res doesn't matter for playback media, unless you think it's odd for him to believe what he hears, and to accept the core findings of audiology that have been well-established for decades. This is not to say there is no difference between standard and hi-res playback, there is. It's just not "better," unless you like IMD. I find rejecting very basic science (the range of human hearing) and hearing distortion as resolution much more odd, personally.

The MP3 part is a good point, to a point. Beyond high quality codecs of 320kbps or above, it's mostly a academic one, though.

Did Jamie have Emotiva gear in his studio?

Tim

 

[egidius]

99$

That's not modern recording. Until you got to the computer and ProTools (which is dramatically over-priced) it was quite vintage. Which was the thread with the link to the David Byrne article? He describes modern recording. The cost of recording has plummeted dramatically in the last couple of decades, while the quality (of the gear, the engineering is another question), by every objective standard, has risen dramatically.

And yes, I know many audiophiles disagree and do not accept the objective standards.

Tim

..yes of course, the whole caboodle can be replaced by a single Zoom H1 for 99$. But - although a radiostation was raving about a recording of mine made with exactly this cheapo thing and wanted to broadcast it (i won't say which..) - it is NOT THE SAME!

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

..yes of course, the whole caboodle can be replaced by a single Zoom H1 for 99$. But - although a radiostation was raving about a recording of mine made with exactly this cheapo thing and wanted to broadcast it (i won't say which..) - it is NOT THE SAME!

Nope, a zoom is not the I same; neither is a good digital studio with good mics, board, converters, etc. But the latter is arguably better, and the argument is pretty strong.

P

 

[daytona600]

two " Modern UK companies "

http://www.gearboxrecords.com/Site/The_Studio.html

http://www.theelectricrecordingco.com/about