By Joshua Hoyer
The following article is the second in the “Lincoln Recording Studios” series begun on August 24th.
Link to Part I.
THE CONVERSATION PART II:If you are a large studio, how do you remain competitive with smaller/home studios? What do you have to offer that they cannot? And how do you see the future of large recording studios?
Brendan McGinn: Having worked in a larger studio, they remain competitive by offering more services and generally higher quality gear. Larger studios create an environment that shapes the experience of "creating an album". Projects might take a more serious tone. Also, bigger studios have people working there who may have more experience than someone working out of their basement.
Brett Holihan: I'd say Startracker is a pretty big home studio. I haven't given much thought to competitive smaller home studios, as many of the small Lincoln studio owners have received training in my classes, and Startracker continually remains busy. Music education and specifically, the one-on-one training I received with an RCA engineer in Madison, WI back in 1974 gives Startracker a nice edge: solid audio engineering skills with the ability to take audio and production quality out of local to national standard.
The fact that I share the dream, actively writing and producing music professionally, gives me the ability to connect on common ground with fellow artists and helps to draw out the best the musician has to offer. Equipment and facility wise, Startracker offers a world class console, the Amek Angela, (boasting some of the nicest mic pre's in the industry), a tried and well-proven acoustically designed studio, and many really nice mics, (from the SE Isis to the Neuam U69i).
Further, Startracker is a full service recording studio offering more than professional audio: mastering, a three semester audio engineering program, (offered through SE Community College), audio and video duplication, nice in-house graphics and printing, and inexpensive PA rental. There will always be some top level risk venture capital and/or investment into national level artists that will support some large recording studios.
When one thinks about it on that level, assuming a large studio has to support the ever-rising purchase or lease of a commercial building, property taxes, utilities, a couple of qualified engineers, a tech, secretary, repair and upgrade investment . . . $150.00 to $200.00 an hour is not out of line. Unfortunately, with a troubled economy, involving substantial rise in cost of living, along with a great reduction of performance opportunities for local and regionally travel-based artists, I believe one can safely say many large studios have not, and many more will not survive.
Kechley/Johnson: A large studio offers up a variety of differences from a small studio: room isolation, quality of room sound, quality of equipment, hours of operation, knowledgeable and trained staff. Any home studio that has those things in place also has an investment in their studio, an overhead to maintain and may be priced closed to the larger studios. From what I see on the local level, the issue lies more between the pro studio and the home studio that's more of a hobby.
Yes, the Beatles may have recorded on 4-track tape machine, but remember that was a $10,000 3M machine, hooked up to the best mic pres or mixer of the day. Add in world class mics, still a standard and highly prized by most industry studios 40 years later. Now place all of that into a world class facility called Abbey Road and top it off with a great producer and some of the best engineers. That's the difference. However I have listened to some well produced home recordings. Usually that speaks to the quality of the person running the gear and band.
Ian Aeillo: I've worked at large studios and small studios all over the country. From home studios in Lincoln to RCA B in Nashville. A large studio simply has better accessibility and generally better acoustics. The best sounding home recordings are nearly always mixed at large studios or at least mastered at large studios. The neat thing about a large studio is it gives you the ability to record a ton of strings, an entire band at once, or score a movie. Very hard to accomplish those things at your house and have it sound good.
Kellison/Saddler: Most of the time, a "large" studio is nothing more than a bigger converted space--like a giant basement. You won't find much quality sound difference in a space like this other than the ability to isolate a full live band (which is a plus, don't get me wrong). The key to having great sound--the highest end stuff--is having a building that is purpose-built from the ground up, not converted. We don't really know what other people have in their studios, nor do we really see anyone as competition (there is enough music in the world to go around, and we wish everyone the best of luck).
At SadSon Music Group, if someone wants to see and hear the difference, all they have to do is walk in and check it out. We have the best mics, monitors, boards, wiring, and producers (we currently have 4 musicians on staff doing production) you can find anywhere. We don't just press record and expect people to know all the ropes--we have great musicians on staff to add to the musical environment and help answer creative questions.
Know this, though--if a big studio and small studio have the same gear, the sound quality will probably be similar. We would recommend bringing a notepad to your studio tour and researching (Google) the equipment you'll be running through. As for the future of large recording studios...we have 1800 square feet. If that is considered large then I think we'll be okay!
If you are a small studio, what are the advantages and drawbacks of having a smaller-scale studio? What do you have that large studios do not provide?
Brendan McGinn: Freedom to experiment. Time does not mean money. Ideas can be fully flushed out, changed, and even discarded as the artists are free to create as they see fit. A portable set up allows me to go to the band in a more informal manner and is, I feel, more relaxing. Sometimes there might be noises in a recording like a squeaky door or something else that would not happen in a ‘professional’ studio. How important the presence or absence of this is, is up to the bands themselves.
Bryan Klopping: I see recording differently than anyone I've ever met. Being a self-produced-and-recorded musician, I tend to make my recordings more like a work of art than a hit single. I work to document the message and emotion behind the piece, rather than focusing on a minimalist, high-quality recording. You can record the same song a hundred times over the span of a decade, and the musician will be a different person every time. Because of this, I emphasize the ‘snapshot’ feeling to a recording. I have never met an individual or recording company that approaches music from this angle.
Eric Medley: I’m kind of a hermit nowadays in that I very rarely actually ‘see’ the client. They send me stuff and I mix it or produce it. I’m typically the only one in my space. I can actually work more quickly this way. Having it close at hand allows me to work when it’s convenient. If a client calls with a quick request, it’s easy for me to run out and tweak it and get it on the website for them to download. If I had to drive to a commercial space, it probably wouldn’t happen.
Chris Bowling: Here we try to have things be more relaxed. When you go into a big studio and drop a few grand, you can become really stressed out. So here, I am open to experimentation, whereas in a big studio a lot of times you have ‘go-to’ tricks that get used to record everything. Certain mics for certain things, here we have that same frame of reference, but we're not afraid to take chances on mic-ing something up differently, or just trying new things.
Mark Wolberg: The greatest advantage of having a small-scale studio is that there are no bills to pay. The greatest benefit of which is that I can keep my rates extremely low, which ultimately keeps my clients from looking at the clock and stressing out everyday. It benefits everyone, because then we’re all willing and able to spend the time needed to produce the best result. Another really great thing I can offer as a smaller studio is my interest in every project I take on.
It is guaranteed that I will care about the outcome of your album and your experience because I don’t have to take on projects just to pay the bills. Recording remains a passion this way - a privilege instead of a 9-5 work week. It’s intimate and it’s a casual environment: a great place to break in a band that’s less experienced in the studio and also for a band who wants to spend more time on their album, but doesn’t have the cash for a professional studio.
Sean Beste: If you're truly serious about recording, then you probably want a larger studio. If we were to say that a kid with recording software and a mic has a studio, then a larger studio means: more stuff. If a large studio has more than two rooms and a mixing board that won't fit into my Buick, then I too would like a larger studio. A facility that is capable of tracking 'live' band situations or projects requires more space and more stuff.
Ian Aeillo: Small studios can provide the personal touch that large studios have problems with sometimes. I love quality home studios because you're generally not on a time frame. You don't have to be anywhere at anytime. You can just do it. Cost plays a very important role. I love not paying $450 a day and not being stressed while I sit at a friends house and record.
At the same time, what passes for a home "studio" is pretty funny. Apparently you can have a low-res interface, some shitty china mics, and $40 in cables and all of a sudden you can call yourself a studio. It's like if all it took to call yourself a hospital was to own a scalpel and some rubber gloves.
Chris Steffen: Well, let’s be honest. Most guys (and girls) who are really into recording would probably love to own a large studio, but it's important to keep things in perspective.
Large studios are hugely expensive to build much less maintain. By extension, large studios have to charge large fees in order to keep the doors open. Even an affordable large studio probably costs more than a lot of bands can swing.
As a smaller purpose-built studio it's possible for me to offer truly high end service and sound for a price that's very competitive. Are there disadvantages? Sure there are. If I want to get a "big room sound" I may have to pick up and go to another location to track. If the band wants to hang out in the lounge...well, let's be frank, there is no lounge. But if a band needs to take a break you can always hit the pause button and go to the bar down the street for a drink. With a little bit of flexible thinking, most disadvantages can be minimized and sometimes they can even be made to work in your favor.
Mitch Cady: I think because of the higher overhead associated with larger studios, they are, and will continue to see some of their business move towards smaller-scale and home recording studios. Technology has leveled the playing field in many cases. It's not always feasible for smaller-scale studios to have the fanciest toys or the huge rooms of large studios. Right now the trend is to move smaller and keep costs down because, quite frankly, the profit margins in the music business have nearly disappeared in the realm of recorded music unless you are a blockbuster artist or have a huge hit.
There is not the same loss of quality associated with going to a smaller studio now because the new digital platforms provide even home studios with the ability to make great sounding recordings with much less money invested. Studios like Plan C make it possible for smaller to medium scale bands that don't have big budgets to actually release their music and see a return on all their hard work with great sounding recordings.
Link to Part III.
Recent Comments