how important is 1073, 1176 to tracking stage vs mixing stage?

[Rick77777]

what is the biggest difference between tracking with a 1073, 1176 with live takes (through high-end mic and converters) vs. recording clean with nothing special prosumer gear (but also through high-end mic and converters) and mixing *after* its recorded *with the high-end 1073, 1176 gear? In other words if recorded with prosumer gear and then later mixed with high end gear is the result near the same? Or is the initial stage absolutely critical in order to attain that pro quality sound?

[BOWIE]

IMO... If you crap it up w/ prosumer gear on the way in, you will lose detail and bandwith that you will never get back. You really need to do the shaping on the way in. A lot of guys these days are afraid to make decisions and it's a shame because the best sound is usually the one that is most of the way there when it hits the tape or the converters. Molesting it afterwards never sounds as good.

I think of it as cooking a steak. You can't bake it in the oven, refrigerate it, then throw it on the grill later. If you want the best quality product, do it right the first time because it will never be the same after.

[DeepSpace]

Originally Posted by Rick77777

In other words if recorded with prosumer gear and then later mixed with high end gear is the result near the same?

I have to agree with Bowie here. What you lose at any stage of the recording process is (with few exceptions) gone forever. Once you turn the signal into a turd by passing it thru the digestive systems one of the many prosumer turd-makers, you can "polish" it all you like during mixing and mastering, but all you will have is a *polished* turd.

There is a weakest link of the chain phenomenon here. You need the whole chain to be at a pro level if you want pro results. Having said that, the mic generally has a bigger impact than the pre, the pre generally has a bigger impact than the converters and the performer has a bigger impact than all the above - as does the room. So cut your cloth accordingly.

[DeepSpace]

FWIW, I thought gregoire put it rather well recently when (on another thread, a week or so ago) he said:

Originally Posted by u b k

...you cannot process out graininess, smallness, blur, hardness, or stridence. there are things we can do to help, but there are definite limits to what can be done to alter or rescue the tone of a recorded source...

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by DarkSky

FWIW, I thought gregoire put it rather well recently when (on another thread, a week or so ago)

+1 on that - a great mixer might be able to enhance an originally weak sound, but the result is always likely to sound worse than a minimally tweaked, well recorded sound made with good equipment.

[Jules]

Originally Posted by BOWIE

IMO... If you crap it up w/ prosumer gear on the way in, you will lose detail and bandwith that you will never get back. You really need to do the shaping on the way in. A lot of guys these days are afraid to make decisions and it's a shame because the best sound is usually the one that is most of the way there when it hits the tape or the converters. Molesting it afterwards never sounds as good.

I think of it as cooking a steak. You can't bake it in the oven, refrigerate it, then throw it on the grill later. If you want the best quality product, do it right the first time because it will never be the same after.

What he said (with the proviso that living in your car to acquire that gear probably isn't worth it .)

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by Jules

(with the proviso that living in your car to acquire that gear probably isn't worth it .)

an extremely important statement!

- c

[Rick77777]

so basically all the guys out there who record ITB and use UAD plugs to closely emulate the pro stuff are way off the mark no matter what they do? Without the initial pro gear going in it sounds almost pointless to waste one's best musical efforts on a hopeless placebo effect (ITB daw) recording then. I guess thats all I needed to know for now.

[Nishmaster]

Originally Posted by Rick77777

so basically all the guys out there who record ITB and use UAD plugs to closely emulate the pro stuff are way off the mark no matter what they do? Without the initial pro gear going in it sounds almost pointless to waste one's best musical efforts on a hopeless placebo effect (ITB daw) recording then. I guess thats all I needed to know for now.

Well, I would say two things here. One, you can recording through professional audio gear to PT and still be recording "in the box." Secondly, the purpose of high quality plugins is to improve the sound of the mixing process. Plugins don't come in to play during the tracking process at all, so I'm not quite sure what you mean here.

Truly, preamp differences are quite small, however, and I think that given a certain "good enough" standard of quality pre, your mic, source, and placement will all matter much more.

I would also say that no matter what equipment you have, recording is never a waste. Just go for it!

[G-Spot]

Just look at it as taking photographs... if you take a photo with a cheap camera with cheap lenses and cheap films (or with cheap converters in digital cameras) the details will be lost forever... afterwards there´s no point in taking a photo of the original photo with a better camera... you will not get those details back. And also there´s no Adobe Photoshop that can put the original details back...

So the best thing would be to get it right the very first time you record it.

[Brad McGowan]

You should just make it all sound as good as you possible can going in because that sound is forever. You can never undo any harm done with lesser quality gear.. Every piece you add to the chain during mixing is only a lateral move sonically at best. Sure you can add some Neve transformer mojo to that vocal recorded through the M-Audio Mobile Pre during mixdown, but you are never going to recover the detail and depth you never captured in the first place. All you can do is add transformer distortion to distract the listener from noticing there are things missing.

Brad

[adoucette]

i agree with bowie 100%, not really much else needed to be said

[RKrizman]

Get it up front.

-R

[Silver Sonya]

The very nature of the question reveals a fundamental misconception.

Do not seek out a "pro" sound, seek out a pleasing sound to you. The only way to get a "pro" sound is --- say it with me, everyone --- to work with a professional. Plugins can be great in the hands of a skilled person, but I am concerned about this desire to sound "pro."

The culture of this particular website, though it can be great, can be misleading to neophytes who think "Oh, these numbers come up a lot... 1176... 1073... 670... that's how to make things sound good..."

Skill and experience and good taste are so much more important than gear. This is a fantastic EQ, but I guarantee you it can be made to make any signal sound worse by simply selecting the wrong setting.

With respect to EQ and compression, there are many many more wrong settings than right. Trust me!

Knowing this, just proceed with joy and curiosity and humility. Have fun. Be a kid in the sandbox. Experiment. If you are new to recording, enjoy your failures as much as your successes. I master records for a living, and it's easy to spot amateur engineering --- it's even easy to spot the relatively new phenomenon of amateur plug-in abuse (which should be a thread in itself!).

I say: Jump in, don't be careful, don't be timid, mess around, enjoy yourself! Burn mixes and listen to them on car trips. That's my advice. You're not going to make Tom Petty's "Wildflowers" (or pick your favorite audio production benchmark) the first time out. It's just not going to happen. Know what I mean?

Orient yourelf to the pure pleasure of music and self-expression. Let go of any fantasy of sounding "pro" until... you've hired one, or you are one yourself.

- c

[Rick77777]

Sonya i understand what you are saying, and I am primarily a musician so chances of mixing as well as pro's is not likely. However... my point is also that with the answers provided so far, I can come to the conclusion that at the very least recording into the heavywieght gear 1073, 1176, 670, la-2a etc would result in a recording that I could give to the pro's to mix later on. But when I record I prefer to do it alone and at such odd times that setting up a day to record at a studio doesnt suit me at all. So understanding just how necessary this gear is for my own home studio, is essential to my long term goals. I'm glad for the feedback so far, believe me.

[basho]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

The very nature of the question reveals a fundamental misconception.

Do not seek out a "pro" sound, seek out a pleasing sound to you. The only way to get a "pro" sound is --- say it with me, everyone --- to work with a professional. Plugins can be great in the hands of a skilled person, but I am concerned about this desire to sound "pro."

The culture of this particular website, though it can be great, can be misleading to neophytes who think "Oh, these numbers come up a lot... 1176... 1073... 670... that's how to make things sound good..."

Skill and experience and good taste are so much more important than gear. This is a fantastic EQ, but I guarantee you it can be made to make any signal sound worse by simply selecting the wrong setting.

With respect to EQ and compression, there are many many more wrong settings than right. Trust me!

Knowing this, just proceed with joy and curiosity and humility. Have fun. Be a kid in the sandbox. Experiment. If you are new to recording, enjoy your failures as much as your successes. I master records for a living, and it's easy to spot amateur engineering --- it's even easy to spot the relatively new phenomenon of amateur plug-in abuse (which should be a thread in itself!).

I say: Jump in, don't be careful, don't be timid, mess around, enjoy yourself! Burn mixes and listen to them on car trips. That's my advice. You're not going to make Tom Petty's "Wildflowers" (or pick your favorite audio production benchmark) the first time out. It's just not going to happen. Know what I mean?

Orient yourelf to the pure pleasure of music and self-expression. Let go of any fantasy of sounding "pro" until... you've hired one, or you are one yourself.

- c

What a good post. A small oasis of common sense in a desert of consumerist hyperbole.

[basho]

Originally Posted by Rick77777

Sonya i understand what you are saying, and I am primarily a musician so chances of mixing as well as pro's is not likely. However... my point is also that with the answers provided so far, I can come to the conclusion that at the very least recording into the heavywieght gear 1073, 1176, 670, la-2a etc would result in a recording that I could give to the pro's to mix later on. But when I record I prefer to do it alone and at such odd times that setting up a day to record at a studio doesnt suit me at all. So understanding just how necessary this gear is for my own home studio, is essential to my long term goals. I'm glad for the feedback so far, believe me.

Rick. I have gotten tracks to mix that were recorded by beginners on expensive gear that sounded rotten. I have also gotten tracks recorded by beginners on cheap gear that sounded great. Make of that what you will!

[Fleaman]

Originally Posted by Rick77777

Sonya i understand what you are saying, and I am primarily a musician so chances of mixing as well as pro's is not likely. However... my point is also that with the answers provided so far, I can come to the conclusion that at the very least recording into the heavywieght gear 1073, 1176, 670, la-2a etc would result in a recording that I could give to the pro's to mix later on. But when I record I prefer to do it alone and at such odd times that setting up a day to record at a studio doesnt suit me at all. So understanding just how necessary this gear is for my own home studio, is essential to my long term goals. I'm glad for the feedback so far, believe me.

Don't forget you gotta have a 'Pro' sound before you even connect a mic up.

This is one of the easiest ways to get 'Pro' results and yet it is one of the biggest beginner oversights.

A bands ability to play together with great tones and dynamic levels that don't fight each other live can make many amateur recorders seems like a Pro.

All of these will have WAY more influence on that Pro sound than any of the gear you listed.....BY FAR.

On that note: Garbage in---Garbage out. Get a good result going in....everything matters. Try not to compress while tracking unless you really are a PRO....you can't undue compression and you won't know how much and how to apply it until you start mixing the tracks.

[Rick77777]

Fleaman, question about compression going in: based on what I have read on Gearslutz and other forums, it sounds like it is wise to patch through a high end compressor if only for the sake of adding its colour to the chain. What if I were to at least put my signal through an LA-2A or 1176 without tweaking anything. Would this not impact it in a positive way? I also say this after A/B testing dry tracks with the UAD plugs compressors and without a doubt there is a difference for the good from the software versions let alone the real gear. Any input on this? thanks in advance

[Fleaman]

Originally Posted by Rick77777

Fleaman, question about compression going in: based on what I have read on Gearslutz and other forums, it sounds like it is wise to patch through a high end compressor if only for the sake of adding its colour to the chain. What if I were to at least put my signal through an LA-2A or 1176 without tweaking anything. Would this not impact it in a positive way? I also say this after A/B testing dry tracks with the UAD plugs compressors and without a doubt there is a difference for the good from the software versions let alone the real gear. Any input on this? thanks in advance

That would be fairly safe and probably beneficial.

You should experiment. You can also compress a little going in....just touching a tiny amount of compression on the way in can also be safe and cool. It allows you a little more of a finished product while allowing you to further compress on mixdown if needed, basically giving you 2 stage compression. Actually quite common with the pros. Even on mixdown pros will use 2 stage compression.

Experimenting with settings is the key, it's how you'll learn. Just remember you can't undue the compression nor the color once recorded that way.

[Brad McGowan]

Originally Posted by Rick77777

Sonya i understand what you are saying, and I am primarily a musician so chances of mixing as well as pro's is not likely. However... my point is also that with the answers provided so far, I can come to the conclusion that at the very least recording into the heavywieght gear 1073, 1176, 670, la-2a etc would result in a recording that I could give to the pro's to mix later on.

This is not necessarily true. I think you missed Chad's point. Using your ears to make good engineering decisions will result in a recording that you could give to the pros to mix later on, regardless of the gear that is being used.

Repeat this to yourself when you go to sleep tonight: Good gear does not a good recording make.

Brad

[Brad McGowan]

Originally Posted by Rick77777

Fleaman, question about compression going in: based on what I have read on Gearslutz and other forums, it sounds like it is wise to patch through a high end compressor if only for the sake of adding its colour to the chain. What if I were to at least put my signal through an LA-2A or 1176 without tweaking anything. Would this not impact it in a positive way? I also say this after A/B testing dry tracks with the UAD plugs compressors and without a doubt there is a difference for the good from the software versions let alone the real gear. Any input on this? thanks in advance

I may be in the minority here but recording through an LA2A or 1176 isn't going to do squat for your tracks if your sounds are not absolutely rocking in the room, and in a good sounding room preferably. It will only impact your sound in a positive way if you have the ears and experience to know and recognize positive benefit in the context of your production. That is a skill that takes time. I think you would be better off spending time and money making your room and instruments sound the absolutely best possible and then capturing sounds in a way that doesn't screw them up. In other words upon playback you should hear something that sounds inspiring and represents the sound that you heard when you were just playing it.

The best thing you can do for yourself when learning this mysterious craft is to not give yourself too many options. Have a simple set of tools and then master them before learning how to use new tools. There's so much you can do with one microphone, one preamp, and an acoustic space.

Brad

[Confusionator]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

The best thing you can do for yourself when learning this mysterious craft is to not give yourself too many options. Have a simple set of tools and then master them before learning how to use new tools. There's so much you can do with one microphone, one preamp, and an acoustic space.

Brad

Excellent point! Having less gear to hassle with allows you to focus on what's really important--tuning first, then great performance. Every instant of concentration lost on these issues can result in a clam that gets tracked and requires eons to fix.

[Fleaman]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

I may be in the minority here but recording through an LA2A or 1176 isn't going to do squat for your tracks if your sounds are not absolutely rocking in the room, and in a good sounding room preferably.

Brad

As already said by me.

But, if he already has an LA2A and/or 1176, they will give a sound/color even when not compressing, just going through the trannys,etc.....and for some/many that can be desired even if so ever slight (which it is).

[Jeff D.]

I agree that you should make sounds that please YOU. Don't second guess your gear or speakers or room. Don't copy others. Only replace gear that you can't trick into sounding good.

Make music that sounds good to your ears.

It took me forever to learn that. I'm much happier and sounding better now.

[bcgood]

What is this talk of 1073 and 1176 numbers? How do these numbers help you record better? Is this the total harmonic distortion numbers I've heard so much about?

[jigsawlogic]

Especially to someone new to the game, the difference between mic pres (if they are of good quality) is of far less consequence than the difference between mics and their placement. And your recording space itself is the limiting factor of what quality you can expect from your mics.

Trust me on this point: You don't need a 1073 to make a great recording. I don't own a 1073, but a client of mine brought in a rack of 8 1073s, which was used in my studio for 6 months. The difference between that rack (which I used almost daily) and my usual pres was pretty damn minimal compared to a good mic in the right place.

As Sonya said, be like a kid for awhile, and treat recording as a new playground filled with delights and surprises. It's far too early for you to start formulating a dogma about the process; let your philosophy build out of your experience, rather than your experience be confined to a pre-defined philosophy.

In the end, you'll be surprised how many sonic negatives which have inadequate gear as the only possible explanation turn out, when looking backwards through the lens of experience, to be pilot error after all.