The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Guitars for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Can i make studio quality tracks with a 600$ bass?
Old 5th August 2014
  #61
Lives for gear
 
foldback's Avatar
B-E-A-D bass tuning

Yes, or even with an (almost) FREE bass. I've got a nice '51 Fender P bass reissue but wanted a five string.

A friend gave me a 4-string Squire P Bass, it had a pretty nice maple neck on it so I replaced the stock pickup with a Seymour Duncan P-Bass 2 (about $60 off Amazon) and new high quality pots (under $30 from Stew Mac), then I set it up as the last four strings of a 5 string so it's tuned B-E-A-D.

I put on the heavier strings that are appropriate for the low-4 of a 5-string. I had to do a little nut filing to get the two fatter bass strings to sit right but now it plays great and has those low notes I've been craving but could not get out of my 4-string '51 Fender P Bass.

So my Squire bass with replacement parts was under $100 and it has tone and sound that my $1500 Fender does not. Tone and performance truly are where you find them, that is why we're here, to go on the quest searching for them.

Good luck and good music to all!
Old 6th August 2014
  #62
Lives for gear
 
lame pseudonym's Avatar
 

I recall Paul McCartney saying that he chose the Hofner bass because it was inexpensive. He said that he was raised to watch his money, in contrast with John and George, who bought the most expensive guitars that they could get.

Of course, in the US it wasn't inexpensive, because here it was the Beatle Bass. I think that the House of Guitars guys had something to do with that.
Old 6th August 2014
  #63
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
oh wow! Paul M and the Hofner is such a perfect example, the most perfect, actually!
Old 6th August 2014
  #64
Here for the gear
 
Nalkas's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Hahn View Post
All the OP was asking is how minimally decent he can get away with.
This was my purpose with this thread.



Think i'll simply go to a local store and try out a few basses and then make up my mind
Old 6th August 2014
  #65
Gear Guru
 
FFTT's Avatar
 

I guess the point I've tried to make is why settle for an inferior instrument?

What's the rush?

This is after all a musical instrument you are talking about.

I've owned my Jazz Bass for 41 years and my Hofner even longer.

Has your ability to earn money suddenly ceased?
If you managed to save $600.00 how long will it take you to earn a bit more, so you can afford the real deal?
Does you local store have a layaway plan?

Is the money you already saved burning a hole in your pocket so badly, that a bit of patience is out of the question?

Do you have a paid gig or studio project that requires you to buy a bass immediately?

To find a good bass, any good bass, takes time and patience and research.

You might get lucky, but chances are you'll need to go through a bunch of them to find the pick of the litter.

I'm trying to give you the best advice I can.

Just for perspective, my youngest daughter worked and saved $7000.00 working part time at age 17
in order to buy her first car for cash.
Old 6th August 2014
  #66
NKB
Gear Nut
There are a lot of great Squier basses out there in the $300-$400 range, but there are also a lot of duds. I'd recommend you go out and play as many of them as possible to find the one that sounds the best to you.

You may also want to consider looking at the used market. You should be able to find used Fenders, G&Ls, Yamahas, or maybe even a Lakland Skyline in the $600 range.
Old 6th August 2014
  #67
Gear Guru
 
Brent Hahn's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FFTT View Post
I guess the point I've tried to make is why settle for an inferior instrument?

What's the rush?
Because the OP wants to make music right now. If I were in his position I'd want that too. And all he wants to know is, will $600 get the job done.
Old 6th August 2014
  #68
Gear Guru
 
FFTT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Hahn View Post
Because the OP wants to make music right now. If I were in his position I'd want that too. And all he wants to know is, will $600 get the job done.
Hopefully, with a bit of luck he'll be using what ever bass he ends up with for quite some time. Over the long haul, will he be better off going for a better instrument?
Old 6th August 2014
  #69
600 will definitely get the job done. The real question is, what BASS will get the job done.

There's that bass out there that you will pick up and snap right into and know it's the bass your after. Your hands will tell you.

It may be 600. It may be 200.

i wanted solid body, ultimate craftsmanship. It just sings. But I also picked up some cheap squires, for 150. They feel great and play right, but not as much as my number one.

The answer to the OP's question can only really be found by the OP
Old 6th August 2014
  #70
Gear Guru
 
FFTT's Avatar
 

I'm not going to recommend something I wouldn't buy myself.

I understand broke more than most of you might imagine, but I choose my compromises.

After all this is Gearslutz, not Cheapslutz.
Old 6th August 2014
  #71
Gear Nut
 
Luke17's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lame pseudonym View Post
I recall Paul McCartney saying that he chose the Hofner bass because it was inexpensive. He said that he was raised to watch his money, in contrast with John and George, who bought the most expensive guitars that they could get.

Of course, in the US it wasn't inexpensive, because here it was the Beatle Bass. I think that the House of Guitars guys had something to do with that.
I remember George saying in an interview that he bought a few guitars on time and never paid anything past the initial payment...'a quid down and another quid when they catch me'
I remember Paul was using a yamaha (not sure) with 'Wings' and someone asked him what he liked about it and he said something like 'I like it because it was given to me for Free.
Old 6th August 2014
  #72
Gear Nut
 
Luke17's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sameal View Post
600 will definitely get the job done. The real question is, what BASS will get the job done.

There's that bass out there that you will pick up and snap right into and know it's the bass your after. Your hands will tell you.

It may be 600. It may be 200.

i wanted solid body, ultimate craftsmanship. It just sings. But I also picked up some cheap squires, for 150. They feel great and play right, but not as much as my number one.

The answer to the OP's question can only really be found by the OP
I bet by now, the OP bought his bass, did his recording gig, got married, had kids, got his first SSA check, and now kicking back eating his pudding with a Grandchild dangling from his knee
Old 6th August 2014
  #73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke17 View Post
I bet by now, the OP bought his bass, did his recording gig, got married, had kids, got his first SSA check, and now kicking back eating his pudding with a Grandchild dangling from his knee
Did I fall for someone digging up ancient threads again?

God damnit!
Old 6th August 2014
  #74
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
that's a lot of action in four days
Old 6th August 2014
  #75
Gear Nut
 
Luke17's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sameal View Post
Did I fall for someone digging up ancient threads again?

God damnit!
Nah, your right on page...it's been a long thread and I thought we haven't heard from the OP in awhile but he actually posted just a few posts back.
Old 8th August 2014
  #76
Quote:
Originally Posted by chainrule View Post
But a studio quality bass player can be someone who is good at editing in protools and someone who can use a compressor to fix poor dynamics. You can go line by line and make it sound pro. And what's wrong with that? if it sounds good it sounds good.
No. That's not what a studio quality bass player is. That's what an incompetent dilettante playing with toys is. And in the case of someone like that a higher quality instrument will be utterly wasted. Might as well use a $150 Squier Affinity.

You can't create a great feeling bass line by editing in Protools. A kinda OK, no obvious error bassline, maybe. But not anything really good. You can't use PT and end up with Jamerson or Entwistle. Hell, you can't do than and end up with Dee Dee Ramone!

And it is impossible to use a compressor to fix poor dynamics in a bass line. It can't be done, that's not what compressors are for, no matter what the gear pimp at Banjo Mart might tell you.

A studio quality bass player is a bass player who can hear the song and nail it in a couple or so takes. And while such a player may (or may not) benefit from a more expensive axe he'll be able to do just fine on a $600 one, as long as it's a good $600 one. Which means a well made, basic instrument without a lot of unnecessary bells and whistles, which may be good selling points to novices but aren't needed or desirable in a studio instrument.

Which is to say that a basic $600 passive Fender Precision is a much better studio bass than some flashy thing with active hoo-hahs and widgits (which detract from the money available for good quality basic parts and are not needed in the studio anyway, since you have better processing in the studio than any active instrument short of an Alembic will have onboard.)
Old 8th August 2014
  #77
Quote:
Originally Posted by chainrule View Post
Obviously a pro bass player is the best bet but lots of those guys want to get $$paid$$. I personally would rather cut and paste and punch in line by line than pay a guy.
Well, then you're not really interested in creating a quality result and you don't value your time.

If I need to pay a guy $50 or $100 bucks to come in and lay down a part that's way beyond what I could do myself and have it done in an hour I'm HAPPY to pay him. It's well worth the money, both for the savings in time and effort and the increase in the quality of my record.

Let me give you a hint to live by - when you're recording, always try to work with people who are better than you are. They'll make you look good.

This is ESPECIALLY important in the rhythm section.

Quote:
Cutting and pasting requires talent in itself at least to avoid the type of rigidness you are talking about. You don't have to cut and paste everything exactly. Just take the worst duds and move them, and adjust amplitude of notes that stick out or are hidden. Melodyne is great for this.


You can't cut and paste balls into a track. You can't Melodyne in soul.

Do you want music that's great or music that's "kinda good enough"? Your choice.

Quote:
Takes like 10-20 minutes to fix a bass track even a really bad one. The trick is to know what to fix and what not to and then know how much of a percentage of duds to actually fix it. Not being sarcastic but editing is almost an art in itself nowadays. It takes a little know how to make things not so obvious and rigid while still fixing a poorly played track.

I worked out of some bigger studios in the 80s and I recall lots of **** going on like bass players tuning down a half step playing to a slowed varisped tape to get it really tight. Lot's of compression, razor editing, punch line by line, 2 people playing different bass parts of the song. Some well know guys too. Same with guitarists and drummers. Lot's of these guys were "pros". But no one is perfect and in that decade you had to be. Everyone thinks people only cheat nowadays... not at all.. Lots of stuff went on in every era. Sure it is worse now since you have to keep up with the jonses.
You know, crap isn't exclusive to this decade. There was a lot of crap released in the '80s (in fact that's when things started getting pretty bad), and most of that stuff tanked, sank, and has never been heard from again except on internet threads about bad album covers. Back in the '80s there was budget to razor blade edit bands that really shouldn't have been signed in the first place - or, to look at things from a more traditional perspective, should never have been allowed to play on their own albums.

Quote:
My opinion is do whatever it takes to get the job done quickly and cheaply.
My viewpoint is to do what needs to be done to do the job RIGHT, to the best of your ability and resources.
And it deserved it.

Creation of crap is not a thing to aspire to.
Old 8th August 2014
  #78
Quote:
Originally Posted by FFTT View Post
Even with 3 excellent basses, it was easy to burn up 6 hours just figuring out which bass and which strings to use and if we were going D/I, amped or both and then to get the technique down to everyones satisfaction.

I didn't need to bring my Rick or my Hofner or even bring my SVT, because after that 6 hours, everyone agreed my jazz bass with nylon wraps sounded best, D/I through a $250,000.00 API Gold Seal Console.

6 hours paid out of pocket by the band with the band waiting to get rolling on their parts.

Getting a usable drum sound took another 8 hours before the 1st beat went to tape.

Just something to consider.

Yes you can record with a budget bass, but when your instrument costs everyone you are working with, time and money,
it may be better in the long run to hold out for a better instrument.
Well, $600 isn't exactly "budget", more "mid-line".

If you're a studio player who wants to cover many different sounds and styles then a selection of basses, strings, etc might be called for, but if you're doing one general type of music you should be able to figure out what you need and stick to it, and a $600 instrument, well chosen, should be just fine. Might need to swap out the pickup(s) and of course you'll need to change strings. I don't even figure strings into the cost of the instrument anyway, it's like figuring gasoline into the cost of a car.
Old 8th August 2014
  #79
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
No. That's not what a studio quality bass player is. That's what an incompetent dilettante playing with toys is. And in the case of someone like that a higher quality instrument will be utterly wasted. Might as well use a $150 Squier Affinity.

You can't create a great feeling bass line by editing in Protools. A kinda OK, no obvious error bassline, maybe. But not anything really good. You can't use PT and end up with Jamerson or Entwistle. Hell, you can't do than and end up with Dee Dee Ramone!

And it is impossible to use a compressor to fix poor dynamics in a bass line. It can't be done, that's not what compressors are for, no matter what the gear pimp at Banjo Mart might tell you.

A studio quality bass player is a bass player who can hear the song and nail it in a couple or so takes. And while such a player may (or may not) benefit from a more expensive axe he'll be able to do just fine on a $600 one, as long as it's a good $600 one. Which means a well made, basic instrument without a lot of unnecessary bells and whistles, which may be good selling points to novices but aren't needed or desirable in a studio instrument.

Which is to say that a basic $600 passive Fender Precision is a much better studio bass than some flashy thing with active hoo-hahs and widgits (which detract from the money available for good quality basic parts and are not needed in the studio anyway, since you have better processing in the studio than any active instrument short of an Alembic will have onboard.)



Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
Well, then you're not really interested in creating a quality result and you don't value your time.

If I need to pay a guy $50 or $100 bucks to come in and lay down a part that's way beyond what I could do myself and have it done in an hour I'm HAPPY to pay him. It's well worth the money, both for the savings in time and effort and the increase in the quality of my record.

Let me give you a hint to live by - when you're recording, always try to work with people who are better than you are. They'll make you look good.

This is ESPECIALLY important in the rhythm section.





You can't cut and paste balls into a track. You can't Melodyne in soul.

Do you want music that's great or music that's "kinda good enough"? Your choice.



You know, crap isn't exclusive to this decade. There was a lot of crap released in the '80s (in fact that's when things started getting pretty bad), and most of that stuff tanked, sank, and has never been heard from again except on internet threads about bad album covers. Back in the '80s there was budget to razor blade edit bands that really shouldn't have been signed in the first place - or, to look at things from a more traditional perspective, should never have been allowed to play on their own albums.



My viewpoint is to do what needs to be done to do the job RIGHT, to the best of your ability and resources.
And it deserved it.

Creation of crap is not a thing to aspire to.

The only bands that recorded the way you are describing were bands like Van Halen and early Black Sabbath. Most other bands spent months in the studio.


You need to open your mind. Bands playing live in the studio simply does not exist.... it never has... move on... all that matters is the end product it doesn't matter how you got there. If the product is bad fine it's bad, but no one cares how an album was recorded, they only care about the songs and how the records sounds. Bands like the Beatles and Pink Floyd and Queen spent 6 months making records. What do you think they were doing? Doing everything in one take an then just sitting around smoking and drinking running up the billable hours for fun?

Have you ever even worked in a professional recording studio? you have a weird perspective that is not inline with reality. Which is kinda cool actually.
what's the difference between a band that cuts and pastes a record or a band like Steely Dan who went though 5 or 10 studio musicians for each instrument to get it right?? I mean what's the difference? so you can brag that someone actually played the song all the way through?? seems silly to me. Just do whatever it takes to get the sound and feel you want. If that means cutting and pasting then so be it. If you want to prove to the world that you can play live then make a live record..... all of which are overdubbed by the way... go figure
Old 8th August 2014
  #80
Lives for gear
 
Yuri Kogan's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chainrule View Post
The only bands that recorded the way you are describing were bands like Van Halen and early Black Sabbath. Most other bands spent months in the studio.


You need to open your mind. Bands playing live in the studio simply does not exist.... it never has... move on... all that matters is the end product it doesn't matter how you got there. If the product is bad fine it's bad, but no one cares how an album was recorded, they only care about the songs and how the records sounds. Bands like the Beatles and Pink Floyd and Queen spent 6 months making records. What do you think they were doing? Doing everything in one take an then just sitting around smoking and drinking running up the billable hours for fun?

Have you ever even worked in a professional recording studio? you have a weird perspective that is not inline with reality. Which is kinda cool actually.
what's the difference between a band that cuts and pastes a record or a band like Steely Dan who went though 5 or 10 studio musicians for each instrument to get it right?? I mean what's the difference? so you can brag that someone actually played the song all the way through?? seems silly to me. Just do whatever it takes to get the sound and feel you want. If that means cutting and pasting then so be it. If you want to prove to the world that you can play live then make a live record..... all of which are overdubbed by the way... go figure
Well, we recorded one last night. Will be doing it again on saturday with another band
Old 8th August 2014
  #81
Quote:
Originally Posted by chainrule View Post
The only bands that recorded the way you are describing were bands like Van Halen and early Black Sabbath.
Bullshytte.


Ever heard of The Band? Tom Petty? Almost anyone working out of Nashville? Cyndi Lauper? F*ck, even Albini, if you like that sort of thing....

Quote:
Most other bands spent months in the studio.
In overdubs, sure - AFTER getting the basic rhythm section tracks down. Because that's where the essence of a great recording lives.

Quote:


You need to open your mind. Bands playing live in the studio simply does not exist.... it never has... move on...
Nonsense. The greatest albums almost all have the basic rhythm tracks done live in the studio.

It's still the way the best albums are done today in Nashville and other centers where the quality of the music takes precedence over so-called digital perfection.

Quote:
all that matters is the end product it doesn't matter how you got there.
Yeah. That's why so much "modern" music fails to engage the listener.

Quote:
If the product is bad fine it's bad, but no one cares how an album was recorded, they only care about the songs and how the records sounds. Bands like the Beatles and Pink Floyd and Queen spent 6 months making records. What do you think they were doing?
If you're The Beatles or Queen and have the budget to spend year screwing around in a top studio, fine. You're not The Beatles or Queen. You're not even Badfinger.

Quote:
Doing everything in one take an then just sitting around smoking and drinking running up the billable hours for fun?
Who the hell said anyting as moronic as that?

You get competent people. You cut the track. You either go to the next track or go to the next session. That's the way PROFESSIONALS do it.

Quote:
Have you ever even worked in a professional recording studio?
The Automatt and Wally Heider's/Hyde Street to name two in my town. Also CBS Disque in Paris and I don't really remember where else.

Quote:
you have a weird perspective that is not inline with reality.
Not in line with compromise, yes. Reality? Mine obviously is not the same as yours.

Quote:
Which is kinda cool actually.
what's the difference between a band that cuts and pastes a record or a band like Steely Dan who went though 5 or 10 studio musicians for each instrument to get it right?? I mean what's the difference? so you can brag that someone actually played the song all the way through?? seems silly to me. Just do whatever it takes to get the sound and feel you want. If that means cutting and pasting then so be it.
You know, I';m not at all a Dan fan. In fact they annoy the crap outta me.

BUT - they can damn sure play the music. And they're definitely not mediocre, edited to death garbage although they may be ****** and played to death.

As much as I hate to say it, I'll take ****** played to death over godawful beat detected, slice

Quote:
If you want to prove to the world that you can play live then make a live record..... all of which are overdubbed by the way... go figure
All of your self-serving nonsense aside,

The question was about studio quality - not whatever wannabees might be trying to record an album. ir stuff that's so bad it requires "fixing" to make it acceptable to the focus groups currently programming the 20 available slots on broadcast radio.

We're talking about MUSIC.

The answer is dead simple - if you're a STUDIO QUALITY PLAYER you can do the gig on a relatively modest instrument. And nail it in one or two takes. Guys like that are NOT that uncommon.

If you're not you can't and it takes innumerable screwing around by an "engineer" (really a neophyte editor who probably couldn't engineer a track properly to save his life) to "save" the track and transform something horrible into something mediocre. That's truth.

Maybe you make your money doing that. Good for you. But it's not making great music. And it's one of the things that is killing the music business in the present decade.

Sorry, it's truth.
Old 8th August 2014
  #82
Gear Guru
 
FFTT's Avatar
 

I would have no problem getting professional results with one of the new Gretsch Semi-Hollows with flats, if that's what the material called for.
Posted Retail $899.00, you should be able to do a bit better.

The Fenders are so popular as studio standards, because they record so well going straight up D/I too. Tried true, proven.

A used American Standard Jazz or P-Bass should be doable for around $900.00

The Gretsch or the Epiphone should also be fine going D/I, but Round Wound Strings as equipped OEM may or may not cut it.

If you can't go over the $600.00, I'd take the Epiphone Jack Cassidy and get it set up by a qualified luthier who can really fine tune it. To be truthful, I like the bridge setup on the Epi
better than the Gretsch.

I have not tried the new Firebird bass, but the white one looks killer.
Old 8th August 2014
  #83
Quote:
Originally Posted by FFTT View Post
I would have no problem getting professional results with one of the new Gretsch Semi-Hollows with flats, if that's what the material called for.
Posted Retail $899.00, you should be able to do a bit better.

The Fenders are so popular as studio standards, because they record so well going straight up D/I too. Tried true, proven.

A used American Standard Jazz or P-Bass should be doable for around $900.00

The Gretsch or the Epiphone should also be fine going D/I, but Round Wound Strings as equipped OEM may or may not cut it.

If you can't go over the $600.00, I'd take the Epiphone Jack Cassidy and get it set up by a qualified luthier who can really fine tune it. To be truthful, I like the bridge setup on the Epi
better than the Gretsch.

I have not tried the new Firebird bass, but the white one looks killer.
Or you can get one of the better Squier P-basses and fit it with Fralins or even the DiMarzio P-bass pickup which is not bad at all. If you wanna really trick it out add a Badass bridge. Still well under 6 bills.
Old 8th August 2014
  #84
Gear Guru
 
FFTT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
Or you can get one of the better Squier P-basses and fit it with Fralins or even the DiMarzio P-bass pickup which is not bad at all. If you wanna really trick it out add a Badass bridge. Still well under 6 bills.
Modding a cheaper bass, you end up spending near as much as the real deal and never recoup your investment.

Just looking at new offerings, while I'm not wild about basswood bodies and would have to seriously check out a bunch, the MIJ Fender Aerodyne Jazz Bass or PJ is a stunner cosmetically at least.

A bunch for sale used in the TalkBass classifieds.
Old 8th August 2014
  #85
Quote:
Originally Posted by FFTT View Post
Modding a cheaper bass, you end up spending near as much as the real deal and never recoup your investment.

Just looking at new offerings, while I'm not wild about basswood bodies and would have to seriously check out a bunch, the Fender Aerodyne Jazz Bass
is a stunner cosmetically at least.

But for me, I'd want it to sound good stock and then just get it set up.
I have a bass I made from a piece of 12x2 from a dumpster (probably pine), a no-name Japanese neck (maybe Aria? I dunno.), a DiMarzio P-bass pickup, and a Badass bridge that sounds freakin' AMAZING. It's ugly as hell (on purpose), but nearly everyone who's played it tried to buy it off me. One of these days I'll post a pic, along with the 6-string guitar I made that's equally ugly.

The bass cost me less than a hundred bucks to put together out of used parts.
Old 8th August 2014
  #86
Gear Guru
 
FFTT's Avatar
 

A good bass player can coax a pretty good sound out of any bass, but most good recording bass players have at least one Fender in their collection.

The reason I'm not opposed to a semi-hollow is because the last 4-5 up and coming younger groups I've seen on TV have been using Epiphone and Gretsch basses.

That McCartneyesque hollow body - flatwound - Rickenbacker bass sound is making a comeback, but you don't need a Hofner or Rick to do it.
Old 8th August 2014
  #87
Gear Head
 

You can get a great performance with a 3 string, dusty old esp bass form 1999.
Old 8th August 2014
  #88
Quote:
Originally Posted by chainrule View Post
The only bands that recorded the way you are describing were bands like Van Halen and early Black Sabbath. Most other bands spent months in the studio.


You need to open your mind. Bands playing live in the studio simply does not exist.... it never has... move on... all that matters is the end product it doesn't matter how you got there. If the product is bad fine it's bad, but no one cares how an album was recorded, they only care about the songs and how the records sounds. Bands like the Beatles and Pink Floyd and Queen spent 6 months making records. What do you think they were doing? Doing everything in one take an then just sitting around smoking and drinking running up the billable hours for fun?

Have you ever even worked in a professional recording studio? you have a weird perspective that is not inline with reality. Which is kinda cool actually.
what's the difference between a band that cuts and pastes a record or a band like Steely Dan who went though 5 or 10 studio musicians for each instrument to get it right?? I mean what's the difference? so you can brag that someone actually played the song all the way through?? seems silly to me. Just do whatever it takes to get the sound and feel you want. If that means cutting and pasting then so be it. If you want to prove to the world that you can play live then make a live record..... all of which are overdubbed by the way... go figure
Dude, those Steely Dan cuts aren't cobbled together. The vocals and solos are clearly overdubbed, but they'd change out entire bands, not single players. Those entire bands were all world-class players, too. Either it was happenin' in the studio, or it wasn't. They were big on deferring decision-making which is why they were early adopters of reamping.

There's a difference between working in a professional studio dealing with mediocre, but well-funded musicians and producing high-quality records. You're right, in a professional studio, being able to auto-tune quickly and cobble edited tracks together is a valuable skill.

The Seeger Sessions by Bruce Springsteen was recorded live in a room. It also won a Grammy for best engineering. All of those great Motown hits were live in a room with overdubbed vocals. The band was live. Marvin Gaye's What's Going On is a great example. That was a chart that was arranged, put in front of players and then performed. So, your claim that "it never has" is bunk.

John's right, when you cobble together, copy/paste, you loose a ton of feel. You can absolutely pro tools something to death. It's what's lost when you play all of the instruments overdubbed to a click as well. I've cut records without headphones and kept entire takes, people react to the music in my signature differently than when I overdubbed everything.

The problem is most bands aren't capable of playing their parts competently every time. Once you get past the point of editing around mistakes, then editing becomes a much different process, where you're keeping the best of the best, not the least-terrible of the crummy.
Old 8th August 2014
  #89
Gear Addict
 

YES.

If anything (generalizing obviously) to really maximize the sound of a bass in that range, I'd get a 4 or 500 bass with a straight neck and good fretwork and upgrade the pickups. My bass player has a cheap Squier fretless and a $2000? NS Electric upright. With a pickup upgrade, they are on par actually. Tho obviously the electric upright has a different attack sound.
Old 8th August 2014
  #90
Lives for gear
 
lame pseudonym's Avatar
 

I actually like the way that the thinner body on the cheaper Squier resonates....

I'm not sure what to think about this hollowbody thing though. It strikes me as mostly a fashion.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump