You only have one choice....

[gregrw]

I'd take "B." Great ears with OK gear make better sound than crappy ears with divine gear.

(Though great ears with divine gear would be heaven on Earth...)

[Jay Kahrs]

The answer is B. No question about it. Right now I'm listening to an album that was done on a Wackie 8-bus and Adats to 1/4" and it sounds great because the band is great.

[Jules]

B

[Tim L]

Even with the limitations of "B" list gear, "B" is the place to "B"...

[Renie]

Beyond the obvious B answer, it's a tricky question.

Does A imply you have no talent and just gear?, then NO WAY.

But being a great producer/engineer needs great source talent from the artist and the talent to know what is the 'right' great gear for the job and how to use it, and often how to psychologically manage the job.

It is difficult to separate talent from gear in a job that for most genres requires highly developed awareness and skill in access to and use of tools.

Access to great gear alone is meaningless.

Talent starved of quality tools staves off brilliance.

[Steve Smith]

A. I did not read anywhere that option A did meant that you did not have the talent to make option B happen.. If that was the intent, B for sure, I side with Renie on that one.

[Remoteness]

I love the direction this is going!

Very strong!

[JayCrouch]

most definaty B...

although you can attemp to mix "warm", "punchy" and "sweet" - you cannot mix tightness.

when the notes are falling where they should be, and a band is controlling their volumes on their own to an extent, and a vocalist understands how to work the mic... the art becomes more of just capturing the music opposed to trying to make the music happen in the mix or production...

being able to sit back and just get some decent sounds knowing the music will prevail is a great feeling....

in the spirit of good music - go ahead and check out this band

http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/377/raisinhill.html

these guys did not want anything other than a snapshot of where they were musically at this time, the band open in one old room - no overdubs or punches, just a day and a half takes and alot of laughs...

nobody wants to be that guy that has all that crazy vintage gear collecting dust, record good music - it's good for the soul

[dean the dream]

I would choose the best gear. There are plenty of starving talented artists out there and plenty without any talent who are setting all kinds of bank deposit records.

In general, I believe that the production and the equipment present the artist and create the impression.

I will leave the roll call out of it. Furthermore, in many cases, take these so-called talented artists outside the comfort of a studio and I'm not so sure equipment made in the 23rd century will help a live performance. Enter the visual production realm. Lights, cameras, action, save the day. Can't sing a lick, no problem, just dance your way through.

Now take the other perspective. Let's say you're recording the likes of a Ronan Tynan and your equipment and production is a hair off, just a hair. What then? Can you afford to have the whole scene come in sub-par? You can't wish for another artist if the one you're recording is the best there is. If you don't have the right gear, you can only find yourself saying, "I wish I had that..."

Oh genie... for my first wish, give me the best damn AV gear & production equipment and the worst talent, the rest is up to ingenuity.

[Remoteness]

Here's a blast from the past...

It seems pretty obvious to me which is the better way to go.
Are there any different thoughts out there today?

youre just pulling out the old posts, huh?

[Remoteness]

Hello Chikkenguy:

Yeah, that's right -- I'm "just" putting out old threads. That's all I do around here...

I guess you don't approve of my blast(s) from the past...

I believed this was a good thread and thought it deserved more mileage.

Do you have any thoughts or an enlightenment on this subject?
If not, start a thread about something you may want to share with us. I'm looking forward to your words.

sorry, i didnt mean that as mean at all, i just saw that you had brought out two old threads. it was a lighthearted comment.

[Remoteness]

Cool Chikkenguy:

I can dig that...

So, what's your perception on the original thread topic?

You're given a choice to pick one of two options.
Which method would you choose, and why?

my initial reaction was that you didnt specify whether or not you could naturally become good or very good at recording if you chose option a. it might take 5 years for you to become pretty competent with all the expensive stuff, but at least you could learn.

but if the assumption is that you are stuck at some remedial level forever with all this nice gear, then i would definitely choose b.

some of my favorite records are not very hi fi sounding. and for some of the records, they are that much better due to the noise etc. one off the top of my head is "the creek drank the cradle" by iron and wine. recorded in his living room with a small pc setup, there is fan noise permeating the recording, but his composition is elegant, his lyrics are stunning, and the whole lo fi thing gives it a really intimate feel.

[Remoteness]

Awesome Chikkenguy!

You, Renie and Steve actually picked up on the tricky question...

You see at first, B seems like the best answer but, without additional information about A -- it's kind of up in the air...

If you have what it takes to be a success, A would be the best gift.

Hey, we're Gearslutz! Right?

[joaquin]

Hello. I'd say B, because If you are Good, you'll end up with lots of jobs and enough money to buy any Gear. Also, you'll be able to be a great Audio person with state of the art equipment, instead of having to learn all this fantastic gear and have it to be obsolete by the time you know it..........haa...whatever

Great Gear never grows old!!

[Remoteness]

Decisions decisions decisions; what do you say in 2009?

Would it be "A" the resources to have all the best gear to get your great sound or "B" the talent to make it so, without all the big time bells & whistles?

Remember, if you pick "B" you cannot use any of the "best" gear to get your equally great sound.

[d_fu]

Originally Posted by Remoteness

Remember, if you pick "B" you cannot use any of the "best" gear to get your equally great sound.

B. I'm perfectly satisfied with mygear, which may be one slot below "best" (but a better definition of where the cutoff is might affect such a decision).
I can live without esoteric preamps and Brauner, Manley, DPA or Sonodore mics. I like my Beyers, Neumanns, Sennheisers, AKGs...

[Dale]

choice a is resources for bells and whistle best

choice b is talent

if you don't choose a are you denouncing gearslutism?
(man I don't want a strike because I didn't conform)

if you choose b do you have the technical savvy too?

B the bells and whistles are to me marketing

[boojum]

"B", yes, most definitely yes. Being able to conjure a good recording with almost any gear means that I am going to get a good recording almost every time! With lesser talents and the "A" gear I will get good recordings some of the time, and not know how I did it. Kind of like what I am doing now. ;o)

But I am getting more good recordings with the gear I have, and understanding why. Study, practice, refine. With a little less false modesty I have to say that getting pointed to the right written sources, hanging around the knowledgeable boards and absorbing what I see and hear has helped a lot. I think I still have my first recording. It is not good. But it did light the fire of interest.

A windfall allowed me to buy some good remote gear, but it did not make good recordings automatic. I am listening to a six month old jazz recording I did with an MS. It is not bad. It has the feel of the live venue and the fun of the moment. If I were to do it again I would run a spaced card array a la Williams Stereo Zoom and the MS so that i could choose. The venue and the group did not lend themselves to multi-mic'ing.

Cheers

[fifthcircle]

I run into this all the time. Make great recordings of mediocre ensembles or do great recordings of great performance, but I have to fight the gear to get the sound I'm looking for.

I find that the second part happens most often with the band recordings I do. Great bands, but if they are on tour or similar situations where I have to split a preset live rig, I often have to compromise in ways that I wouldn't need to. In the end, the performance trumps the fact that I'm using a vocal mic or overheads that I'm not fond of.

--Ben

[BLP]

Bee ba bee be. Beee ba bee be BEEEEEEE.

B, I suppose...

I think this highlights one of the best part of remote/location recording, though. In the studio, people look at a gear list, see what you've got and sometimes even go on a tour of the facilities before booking (especially if you're working primarily with freelancers). When they get there, they expect their favorite mic to sing into, their favorite reverb, whatever. It seems to me that in location work it's more about getting it done with good results. QED!

[Teddy Ray]

Originally Posted by Remoteness

Let's say, you were given a "gift." But you could only pick one from the two options below...

Which method would you choose, and why?

A - The resources to have all the best gear to get your great sound.

Or

B - The talent to make it so, without all the big time bells & whistles.

There's one problem on the second choice, you can't use any of the "best" gear to get your equally great sound.

Can it be done?

Which way would you go?

the knowledge by far. What I really wish is that the old master/grasshopper relationships I keep hearing the old guys talk about still existed. Can't even so much as get the time of day from some of the guys I really admire in the recording realm because of agents,other obligations, etc(though Mr. Tony Faulkner has been very, very gracious with my idiotic questions as has Opus 3's wonderful engineer, Jan Eric Persson). To have the opportunity to work with one of the Old Guard, cleaning floors, getting coffee, taking out the trash, id kill for that opportunity.
What I am wondering is how some of the guys that got their big start, how did they get in favor with *their* mentors?

rambling I guess..

[jude]

i'll go with "A" and employ someone with more tallent to do the recordings

[Hendyamps]

Originally Posted by jude

i'll go with "A" and employ someone with more tallent to do the recordings

hahaha......yes!

[The Listener]

I'd pick "A" and hope that I already have "B".

But mostly - I would choose "C" - be born with an outstanding musical talent and the will to develop it properly, never to worry about recording at all, since I would be recording in the best studios of the world and playing in the best concerts halls of the world and get payed for that, not being the one having to bother with hiring those places or bother how to capture the nuances of that outstanding playing. Instead I would be doing that outstanding playing.

I would trade all the gear in the world and all the audio engineering talent there exists for the abilities of guys like Martin Fröst, Zakir Hussain, Paco de Lucia, etc.

[Jim Williams]

I pick option C. With the 'gift' I can hire the best. Let them work, I'll sit on the beach.

[rxeno]

Well I would choose A Oh Great Remotness.
Reason being my thought that I was so especially great may just be mine and mine alone, and perhaps a few drunken fools I hav convinced of my greatness.

BUT With A and AlL the great gear in the world I could open shop and have the AACTUAL greatest in the world come and make music in my place.

I like that.
Doors open