New topic
Printable| Author | Message |
The new cost 2 be your own boss The Digital Divide Blues
As I progress toward reopening my recording studio in L.A., I'm beginning to see a pattern emerging in creative technology...the ever escalating cost of updating & replacing computers and software! The digital revolution has affected Hollywood twice. In the beginning it was an opportunity for artists to realize their dreams at a sliver of the cost of renting out old-school tape machine studios. And so all us indie producers jumped at this wondrous technology. Digital was supposed to be an affordable alternative to the old school way of recording and editing music, and it was, for a time. Most of us didn't get rich off of it, but we all invested ($$$) into the phenomenon anyway, with the hope of finally being able to even the playing field, alongside big time studios and multi millionaire producers. Suddenly you had underground artists like Moby, Creed, & David Grey, recording full albums in home studios, and eventually selling millions of copies. Hip hop artists from all over the globe could affordably give a real voice from the ghetto without "corporate imaging". MTV and major record labels were only too happy too jump on this cheaper bandwagon (the new artists were doing their groundwork for them by recording and pre-marketing music to DJ's & Fans, saving them time & millions of $$$!), and encouraged the entire industry to make Mac computers & software like Pro Tools the "new standard" of recording. Everyone was gettin' majorly paid except for, you guessed it, Mac & Pro Tools. Or should I say, not enough. The potential windfall from overpricing the "new standard" was too temptuous a sin to resist. Today, the cost of Mac computers and Pro Tools software & hardware and their counterparts is nearly equal to or more than the cost of analog machines back in the day. What's worse, computers and software versions are made obsolete every 2-3 months by "updates". A $5000-$10,000 investment in new hardware/software is not unusual every 2-3 years! And so, once again, it's a rich man's game: big business wins again. And the music producer without a Sony or Universal record deal yet? Well, he's been cancelled out of the equation, back to begging for free recording time at multi-million dollar rental studios (now computerized!) in order to have a competitive sounding CD to shop around, indebting him before he can even sell disc one. Or he can try to giveaway inferior mp3's made on cheaper gear. Welcome back to the plantation....look, its just over the "digital divide".... : )[b] "...This 1's 4 Yosamite Sam & Tourists At Disneyland..." -Lady Cab Driver | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
Macs have always been expensive and so has Pro Tools. There are cheaper options if you don't want the fastest computers and the best software.
"Welcome to the plantation", what the fuck is this suppose to mean? I mean I know the man is keeping us all down but what's up with the drama in regards to the cost of recording? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Only those fooled by the keep up with the Joneses mentality are slaves to the marketing system. Any good engineer will tell you, its what you put in that makes greatness. Anyone persuing a career as a professional recording artist HAS TO INVEST IN THEIR CAREER. You can get a LOT more done with about $3000 these days than you ever could say...9 years ago. Jumping on the bandwagon and not being able to distinguish what you "need" from what you're "told to want" is what will put you in the financial doghouse. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BlaqueKnight said: Only those fooled by the keep up with the Joneses mentality are slaves to the marketing system. Any good engineer will tell you, its what you put in that makes greatness. Anyone persuing a career as a professional recording artist HAS TO INVEST IN THEIR CAREER. You can get a LOT more done with about $3000 these days than you ever could say...9 years ago. Jumping on the bandwagon and not being able to distinguish what you "need" from what you're "told to want" is what will put you in the financial doghouse.
I agree. The important thing is to MAKE music, not what you make music ON. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The point of this thread was 2 highlight a financial question, not creative: Has it gotten cheaper today to make the same HIGH quality recordings that were once made on 2-inch 24 track tape? If you want to acheive THAT level of warmth, prescence, and clarity in the digital realm, you WILL spend the same amount in a real studio. Period.
Most recordings on the market today are louder, some have interesting edits (I've made some myself!), but for the most part homemade digital sounds like second best. Any musician who says well, "its good enough to sell" or "most people can't tell the difference" is missing the point. C'mon let's be real....what good would it do Picasso to paint in Photoshop? 
Listen, I got no problem spendin' the dough. I'm part of the system too! The technology argument is moot, we all know it saves time and energy (although I don't know if that's really good or bad anymore). But if you say a digital recording of sonic masterpieces like Purple Rain, Parade, and Sign of the Times would cost less today then 20 years ago....as a full time producer in Hollywood, I'd sadly disagree my friends. The Matrix has us all fooled..again.  "...This 1's 4 Yosamite Sam & Tourists At Disneyland..." -Lady Cab Driver | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Well, without a doubt you get what you pay for. If I spend a half a mil on an SSL board, 6 G's a pop on Manley compressors, etc. OF COURSE the quality is going to be higher. If you're somehow trying to say that a $18k Pro Tools set up won't get you an excellent recording, then your engineer SUCKS. There are lots of ways to make the recordings warmer. Use Apogee DA converters rather than the stock ones, spend more on a high end preamp for vocals, etc. The technique of acquiring warmth as opposed to controlling warmth is the issue. The reason Pro Tools is industry standard isn't because it DOESN'T work well. Most high end consoles are built with integrating digital technology in mind these days anyway. Warmth can be ACQUIRED on digital gear, though. As an engineer, you have an aquired taste for a certain sound that comes from analog boards. Its your ear that is seeking a certain texture in the sound recording. Digital recordings have a different sound. The bottom line is WHO WANTS THAT SOUND? Engineers. Audiophiles. That's about it. Protools will give you a damn good recording if used right and you can get a MUCH more versatile mix than you can via analog means. There are just some things that you can do mixwise that are simply physically impossible otherwise. Because you can record your mix moves, it CAN make a world of difference. Britney Spears's "Toxic", for exaqmple or Nick Lachey's "Shut Up" are examples of good use of digital technique. The average ear doesn't give a damn whether a Focusrite RED EQ was used to attain a nice texture on the guitae or whether Avalon mic pres smoothed out the background vox. People want to DANCE and enjoy the music. If you are trying to imply that digital recording systems CAN'T make product, you are in an elite group of fading geezers. Digital technology is here to stay, dude.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |