p.201

CHAPTER 14

FAQs. Hear It From the Pros

A few years ago, I began compiling a list of the popular questions asked in my classroom and in the studio. I thought it would be valuable to ask a diverse group of respected audio engineers from around the country these questions, to gather their answers and opinions.

The questions in this chapter range from “What is the first microphone I should buy?” to “Which recording software do you use?” to “How did you get started?” The answers vary, giving us insight into what the pros think, and hopefully will give you confidence that there are many ways to achieve the same end result.

p.202

Below is the list of those engineers who participated. In addition to being audio engineers, many of the participants are producers, musicians, artists, audio educators, mastering engineers, technicians, and studio owners.

GEAR

What Is the First Microphone I Should Buy?

Mitch Easter (ME): Get a dynamic mic that costs around $100, or a nice used one that originally cost that much new. You can record anything with it, and get pretty good results! Dynamics are tough and can be jammed against guitar amps, stuck in bass drums, etc., and they won’t care. At the same time, they sound perfectly good on voices. Supposedly Bono and Tom Petty have done vocals on their hit records with Shure SM58s, which seems entirely plausible to me.

Chico Jones (CJ): Buy the mic that sounds best on your own voice or instrument. You may need a friend or bandmate to help you with this test. It’s a great way to begin learning the subtle differences between mics – using the human voice. Do some research. Borrow a couple of mics first. Buy what you can afford. I think the Sennheiser MD 421 is a good mic that you won’t outgrow too quickly. If that is too expensive then a Shure SM57 or Beyer Dynamic M88 will be handy as your collection grows.

Mary Podio (MP): The first mic you should buy is a mic that you think sounds good and that you can afford. Don’t worry if it’s not a U47; plenty of people have made great-sounding records with inexpensive mics. Your greatest asset is your creativity. Trust your ears and make whatever you have work for you.

Travis Kelley (TK): I’m pretty “Shure” my first microphone was the SM57 . . . what I love about it is that it sounds pretty good on pretty much anything, I’ve never seen a mic kit in the studio or live that doesn’t have one . . . and it can double as a hammer. The trick though is getting your mic placement technique down. Even your high-end microphones will sound like trash if you don’t know where to put them! If you’ve got the extra cash, up your game to a Sennheiser MD421.

p.203

Andre Moran (AM): Shure SM57.

Greg Smelley (GS): The one you can afford right now. It really depends on what you will be recording. The decision between dynamic, condenser, or ribbon may be dictated by style of music. I do, however, think a Shure SM57 or 58 is worth having early on. Everyone is familiar with the sound of those mics, so getting a usable sound can be easier because you can get a familiar sound. If you can afford it, I got a lot of mileage out my Sennheiser MD421 when I only had a handful of mics. It sounds good on almost anything. Vocals, drums, bass . . . My favorite workhorse mic now is the Sennheiser e604. It’s small, lightweight, and is intended for snare and toms, but to me it sounds very similar to a 421 and at a third of the price. It’s fantastic on guitar amps.

Mark Rubel (MR): Probably a (Shure) SM57!

Tim Dittmar (TD): A (Shure) SM57. It’s affordable, it is durable, and it works for many things. But, if you are looking to record just vocals and acoustic guitar I would purchase a large-diaphragm condenser.

Ray LaManna (RL): Shure SM58. With a little bit of compression and EQ you can get a usable sound from any source with the 58. Vocals, guitar, drums, brass etc. Dynamic microphones tend to keep the room noise out the recording. As a plus, you can also use it during rehearsal.

Charles Moon (CM): SM7.

John Harvey (JH): A Shure SM57 is a great choice because it is sturdy, reliable, inexpensive, and extremely versatile.

Hillary Johnson (HJ): This depends on what the application is and what you’ll be using it for. Most people will tell you that you can’t go wrong with a Shure SM57 and they’re only around $100 and useful for dozens of things; however, if you’re recording vocals or something more delicate, you might prefer a condenser mic and which one would depend on your budget.

Robert Sewell (RS): Whatever you can afford.

Craig Schumacher (CS): An SM57 because it’s the workhorse of the biz.

What Is Your Favorite Compressor?

(TK): I’m a huge fan of the old dbx stuff. The 160VU is an amazing compressor with loads of character to really get a track to sit in the mix and still retain the punch you’d need for a bass guitar or a lead vocal. If you’re looking for bus compression, the Smart C2 is the way to go!

(MP): I don’t have a favorite compressor. I like different compressors on different things. I like the dbx 160 on bass, I like the distressor on vocals. It just depends on what kind of sound I’m going for.

p.204

(CS): An Empirical Labs Distressor with the British mod as it can behave like any compressor ever built and then do some other cool tricks as well.

(ME): The Empirical Labs Distressor is as good an all-around compressor as I can think of. It can go from subtle to extreme, is well made, and you will keep it forever. I bought a pair when they first came out and use them every day. There are loads of great compressors, but these do everything well.

(RS): Depends on what it is for . . . but the Tube Tech CL1B.

(GS): All around, and probably a lot of engineers would agree, the Distressor is pretty amazing. I heard another engineer, I can’t remember who, say this at a conference and it always pops into my head when I patch it in: “It’s hard to make it sound bad.” I think I use that as a mental crutch to justify using it so much. My new favorite, though it is only new to me, it is the original Pro VLA. I picked one up cheap when they came out with the MKII a few years ago. It sat in the box for a couple of years before I ended up using it. I had used one at a studio in the past but didn’t really have a chance to experiment. When I finally put mine in my rack, I was surprised by the color/character it is able to impart. You can get a really cool sound on a drum mix. I like it on bass and guitars too. At the end of the day, most compressors, when used judiciously, can be made to sound okay. Even some of the very inexpensive ones. It’s nice to have options, though.

(AM): The Empirical Labs Distressor. I love how incredibly versatile it is – it can be very transparent or very colored depending on how you set it. My second choice would be an 1176.

(CJ): What day? Analog compressors all have unique characteristics. Right now, I’m in love with my Purple Audio MC77s and my Manley Vari-Mu with the T-bar mod.

(TD): Just like mics it depends on the situation and what sound you are picturing. I love almost any compressor. Some of my favorites include the UREI 1176, LA-2A, dbx165a, Distressor, Tube Tech CL-1B, API 527 500 Series, Purple Audio Action 500 Series, and for an affordable option the ART PRO VLA II.

(CM): Neve 33609.

(MR): The UA175, a fantastic-sounding variable-mu tube compressor.

(RL): Depends on what I’m going for but I’d say an 1176 style compressor. I use it a a lot on rap vocals as well as bass and sometimes snare.

(JH): There are many different compressors I like for specific tasks. Empirical Labs EL-8 Distressor is the most versatile, and will work well on virtually everything.

(HJ): This depends on what I’m looking to compress or limit, so I don’t have one favorite. I will use whatever is available to me. dbx makes a great line of older and newer models. The Distressor is also a handy tool. If you’re looking for plug-ins, Massey’s L2007 is fantastic and oh-so-simple.

p.205

What Is a Good Vocal Microphone?

(MP): There is no one good vocal mic. I like to try several mics on the lead vocal, so I can pick one that is best suited for the quality of the voice. Often, I wind up choosing a different mic each time I have a new vocalist. Don’t be afraid to try mics that are considered “guitar” mics or “bass” mics on vocals. You might be surprised to find a great vocal mic in there.

(RS): The SM7 is a good multi-purpose vocal mic.

(TK): Always a tough question to answer . . . the human voice is the most complex and dynamic instrument I’ve come across. For a male vocal, a good place to start would be the Elam 251. The price tag is pretty insane for the real deal, but there are a ton of manufacturers making amazing-sounding clones . . . the Peluso version is one I’d be happy with. Female vocals will love an AKG C12 (and the clones thereof). If you are looking for a live handheld, the Sennheiser 935 is a great choice. Great isolation and very warm mid-range.

(CM): I’m a fan of the Neumann U87, mainly because it was around when I first started recording.

(MR): There are many, and the answer to nearly every recording and especially recording equipment question is the same: “it depends.” The best vocal mic is the one that helps you achieve the sound you are striving for. You have to define what “good” means for you with a particular singer in a particular sonic and musical context. Try everything that’s available to you, and figure out where you are on various spectra: from “representative” to “flavored”; from full range to bandlimited; across the spectra of different sounds and functionality. It’s like everything else, you’ll know when you hear it. Don’t forget that under most circumstances the microphone choice is less important than the song, the performance, the singer and their comfort level, and a host of other factors. So it’s best not to keep the singer waiting while you swap out mics. Put a few up, listen to them and choose, or record them all, and figure it out at a time when it doesn’t impede the creative process.

(RL): For hip-hop and R&B vocals I always recommend the Shure SM7b. Mainly because a lot of my students are cutting vocals in their bedroom with very little acoustic treatment if any at all.

(TD): I use a large-diaphragm condenser mic about 90% of the time. That being said, every singer has a unique voice and you ultimately want to have a few mics to choose from so you can A/B them and find out what suits that singer the best. You would be surprised what may end up working. It is possible your kick mic might be the mic that suits the vocal sound best or that mic you never liked before makes the voice come alive. Get to know your mics and don’t be afraid to experiment. My favorites under $300: Shure KSM27, Cascade Elroy, Cascade 731r, and Oktava 219, and for over $300: AT 4050, U47, Mojave 201 FET, and AKG 414.

(GS): Generally I use large-diaphragm condensers for vocals. Often one with tubes in it. Lately my go-to mic that works on a wide variety of singers has been the Peluso 2247 LE. Sometimes I’ll use an Audio Technica 4047/SV with great results. I’m really fond of the 4047 on a variety of sources, especially guitar amps. Sometimes, though, it is perfect for the right vocalist. Dynamic mics can be great on vocals too. I tracked an album for a band where we did twenty-one songs in two days. The band was very well rehearsed and all the players were good, but we still had to be extremely efficient. For the vocals, I set up three dynamics: an RE20, an SM7, and an MD421. It was a triangle formation with all the null points in the center. The three vocalists tracked all their vocals live, together. I may have moved them around to different mics to figure which mic suited each singer best, but those were the three best dynamics in the house. Dynamics have good rejection and pickup drops off pretty rapidly once you move away from it. It worked out great in this situation. Going back to LDCs . . . there are new ones coming out all the time. They are getting better and cheaper. There will always be the classics, but there will always be “new classics.”

p.206

(CS): AT 4050, for its ability to record all types of sources from the sublime to the powerful.

(CJ): One that suits the singer within the recorded track. That could be a blown-out lapel mic or a $5000 Neumann. I tend to like my Lawson L47 tube, a Shure SM7, an AKG 414 B-ULS, or a Neumann TLM-103.

(HJ): This is like asking, “What is a good cuisine?” Voices are the single-most unique sound out there and every one requires trying different signal chains (starting with the microphone) to see what works best. A lot of the time it won’t be the most expensive mic the studio has to offer. I’ve used Neumann U67s/U87s, AKG 414s, Shure SM58s, ribbon mics, everything. What’s your budget?

(AM): Any microphone that sounds good on the singer you are recording. I say that slightly “tongue in cheek,” but it’s really true. When most people say “vocal mic,” they’re really thinking “large-diaphragm condenser,” but that may not always be the best choice. Dynamics can sound great on vocals (Shure SM58, Shure SM7, ElectroVoice RE20, and Sennheiser 421). Then again a really good Neumann U47 (or a recreation thereof), or an AKG C12, or an ELAM 251 can truly be a thing of beauty.

(JH): We usually try six or eight different mics to find the best match for a particular vocalist. We often choose the AKG C-12, Neumann U-67, or Neumann U-47. These mics are all very expensive, and for someone starting out as an audio engineer I would recommend the EV RE-20 or the Shure SM7 because they sound great and they are reasonably priced.

(ME): Typically, people like condenser mics on vocals and you can’t go wrong with general-purpose mics like the AKG 414 or Blue Kiwi. You can spend a lot less and still get good sounds from the Chameleon TS-2, a great-value tube mic, or some of the sE models. Consider that any microphone a person is singing into is a “vocal” mic! I love the Sennheiser 421 on vocals, and the Shure SM7. These are dynamic mics which you can use on anything. It’s worth trying a few things on people because sometimes a certain voice just sounds good with a certain microphone. Use your ears, not what some ad says about what you should use. Sometimes a cheap mic from the thrift store is just the thing!

p.207

What Is Your Favorite Microphone? Or if You Could Only Take One Microphone With You to Record Your Favorite Artist What Would It Be?

(MP): If I had to pick one mic to take to the end of the earth with me to record, it would be the Gefell UM900.

(AM): The Coles 4038. I am continually blown away by how good it can sound on a wide variety of instruments.

(MR): My Neumann U67s.

(CS): The AT 4050 because it is what my favorite artist – Neko Case – prefers for her vocals.

(TD): Whatever works for the situation at that time. Each mic has a personality so it depends what I am going for, but a U47 doesn’t suck!

(ME): You could easily do an entire record with a Sennheiser 421. Scott Litt said that to me, and I think he’s right!

(TK): OK, desert island microphone, let’s see here. I do mostly live production and have been in love with dynamic microphones these days. The Sennheiser MD409 (or the newer e906) is a mic you don’t see too often but really sings on almost any source. Generally speaking, I find myself reaching for microphones that accurately translate the 200hz to 2kHz range, which is really crucial to any mix, and the 409 capsule is crafted to do just that. Just ask Daniel Lanois! Plus it’s supercardioid pickup pattern gives great isolation and it’s side-address so it maintains a low profile.

(RL): I absolutely love my new Slate Digital VMS One. It is a virtual microphone system that models some of the most sought-after microphones and preamps in the business.

(CM & RS): The Sony C800g for obvious reasons.

(HJ): Probably an AKG 414. Not only do I like the sound, but I like that it doesn’t need a separate power supply. If I could only take one mic with me, I could put it in my pocket.

(JH): I would bring the Neumann CMV-563, a vintage tube condenser with interchangeable capsules that sounds great on everything.

(GS): Until I find something I like better, I guess it would be my Peluso 224LE. I’ve also had a Peluso 22 251 for a while, that I have only recently started to love. I want to explore more microphones when my budget allows. But for now, I am happy with these.

p.208

(CJ): Beyerdynamic M160 ribbon if they are quiet. Royer R-121 if they are loud. I like ribbons. If it had to be a condenser . . . AKG 414 B-ULS because it is more neutral than most condensers. Neutral can be useful if you have only one mic to use. Then you shape your tone at the source – instead of with the mic.

Which Recording Software Do You Use? Nuendo, Pro Tools, Logic, or Another Software Program?

(MP & JH): We’re using RADAR Studio running Pro Tools, Wavelab, and (of course) the Studer A827 with RMG 911 tape.

(CS): Pro Tools unfortunately and it is a love/hate relationship for sure.

(ME): Pro Tools HD. All these things work well, I just got Pro Tools because it’s the most common and I wanted other people to be able to tell me how it worked! This was most helpful in the early days.

(MR): I’m using Digital Performer now, but probably switching to Pro Tools soon.

(TK): I’m using Pro Tools 99% of the time. Say what you will about Avid’s slow response to trends in the industry and reluctance to adopt some features that are standard in other DAWs, but the workflow is very natural to me compared to Steinberg’s Cubase/Nuendo. Plus the GUI is really comfortable and the shortcut key combinations are pretty intuitive once you learn the basics.

(TD): Doesn’t matter to me, but I typically use Pro Tools or Nuendo, because that is what most studios use in my town. I have Pro Tools on my laptop that I use on simple, mobile projects.

(CJ): Cubase versions 4 and above use exactly the same engine as Nuendo but cost half the price. All software is buggy. I prefer analog for fidelity and reliability. Don’t let all the marketing and advertising folks influence your beliefs. I also use Ableton Live. But I haven’t heard a DAW that can sum multiple tracks better than a good analog console. I still haven’t installed ProTools. In other parts of the world, Avid does not have such a strong marketing share. Do you drive a Honda, Toyota, VW, or Chevy? Oh really? You aren’t professional and you are never going to get there in that vehicle. SUV = DAW.

(AM): Pro Tools.

(CM & RS): Pro Tools, Ableton, Logic or whatever I need to get the sound I want.

(HJ): I have used Pro Tools since the mid-90s. I’ve dabbled with other software but keep returning to Pro Tools due to familiarity and flexibility.

(RL): Cubase; it’s very similar to Nuendo and owned by the same company.

(GS): For the last few years I have been using Cubase. I came out of a studio partnership before starting up my new place and that’s what we used. I also know a few other engineers who use it so it seemed like a good idea to have a network of friends all using the same stuff so we could help each other out and share projects. I deliberately stayed away from Pro Tools. I always felt like the proprietary nature of their platform did not have the user’s best interest at heart. I heard horror stories of studios spending a fortune to upgrade, only to find out a month later that the next version had been released. It always seemed very expensive and limiting. Now they have opened up their platform for other hardware and I am considering switching over. There are some features I would like to see added or improved before I do it. If I do switch over, I may end up running both Cubase and Pro Tools. All the DAWs out there are amazing, complex pieces of software. They all have their flaws too. At the end of the day, it’s just a tool I use to record music. It doesn’t really matter which one I use.

p.209

Do I Have to Use a Mac for Recording?

(MP): You do not have to have a Mac to record.

(CJ): No, you don’t. And I intentionally saved money by building Windows machines with Intel processors so that I could buy analog gear – gear that outlasts, outperforms any platform, and any computer. DAWs are mixing tools. Microphones and mic pres are recording tools. Somehow the digital companies have fooled us into believing otherwise. A plug-in is a post-recording tool. And it sounds equally bad on PCs and Macs.

(TD): Certainly not. Among my engineering friends it is pretty evenly split between Macs and PCs.

(MR): Not at all. You don’t even have to use a computer for recording!

(RS): I guess not . . . but why would you not want to use a Mac?

(RL): No, I’m a PC guy. Every time I think about converting over to Mac they change something that keeps me from converting.

(CS): No, but it helps if you are a Mac user obviously but you can get more processing power for less money with a PC. It’s all a trade-off and what works for one is not always good for another, so go with what you know and understand.

(TK): Absolutely not!!! There is certainly a bit more of a learning curve with the Windows OS and the wide range of hardware options that can cause some compatibility issues . . . but it gets the job done just as well as any OS.

(AM): Not really.

(ME): No.

(CM): Technically no . . . but, c’mon, Apple over everything.

(JH): You do not need a Mac for recording.

(GS): Ha ha ha ha . . . absolutely not! Are they better? Maybe. I have a love/hate relationship with Macs. I ended up using PCs kind of the same way I ended up using Cubase. Early on, Macs were designed for multimedia and PCs were designed for business, so back then it actually made a difference. When I got out of college I really wanted a Mac because that’s what I had been using in the computer lab and all my production labs, etc. I either couldn’t afford one, or couldn’t justify one, so I ended up with a PC. I was recording on ADATs at the time and mixing down to DAT. Multi-track to a computer was not really in anyone’s reach at the time. Later, when my DAT gave out and I decided to start mixing down and editing with a computer, I already had a PC, so it was natural to just get the hardware I needed for that and keep my costs low. I have always flirted with the idea of switching to Mac, but also always felt a little alienated as a consumer by them.

p.210

(HJ): You can use a Mac or a Windows-based computer for recording. You can also use a multi-track tape recorder that you could find cheap on eBay or Craigslist. Don’t be afraid to experiment with your recording medium. Just don’t do it on someone else’s dime.

SKILLS

How Do I Become a Skilled Mixer?

(ME): Mainly, don’t get frazzled! If you lose perspective, step away from it. Eventually you know when you’re going down a blind alley, but I think when you’re starting out it’s easy to get frustrated quickly, then nothing sounds good! Never listen to things alone for long. Listening to one drum by itself is mostly a waste of time. To start, push up several sounds and listen to how they work together. It may be overwhelming to listen to everything at the beginning, but avoid trying to perfect one track, then another, because what matters is how the sounds work together. Think in big, bold terms! On most sounds, ±1 dB is inaudible; don’t get hung up on tiny tweaks. Think about what listeners will actually notice! Always go for vivid, rather than careful. Keep doing it! You always figure out new techniques, even with the same equipment.

(MP): The only way to get good at mixing, is to mix. Experiment with different types of music and outboard gear. Trust your ears; you will get better and better.

(TK): Listening is key. In an era of instant gratification where convenience is king, streaming services (Spotify, Pandora, et al.) are dulling our critical listening skills. Set aside an hour or two a day and sit down with headphones or some good-quality monitors, hit play, and close your eyes. Shutting down one sense will strengthen the others. You’ll be surprised at what new things you will notice in tracks you’ve heard for years! Plus your clients will think you are some sort of savant wizard. Also, with all the free DAWs and plug-ins out there it really doesn’t take any investment to play with EQs and compressors to learn what they are doing.

(RL): Practice, practice, practice. About ten years ago a big-name mastering engineer told me, “You need a good computer, nice set of plug-ins and learn how to mix.” Ouch, it hurt but it was the absolute truth. An acoustically treated room and a good pair of monitors are essential too.

(TD): Mix a lot! Make a lot of crappy mixes. Practice and experience are essential to get good at mixing. Listen to other people’s mixes that you enjoy and try to match what you hear. Don’t be frustrated if some of your mixes aren’t very good. Keep in mind that many factors make a successful mix: a great song, awesome arrangement, excellent musicians, and an adequate budget.

p.211

(GS): Mix as much as you can. Read about mixing as much as you can. Talk to other engineers about mixing as much as you can. Experiment as much as you can. Learn to record so it mixes itself. I guess that’s the real trick, but you’re not always mixing your own tracks, so knowing how to deal with problems is important. Sometimes I get tracks from other engineers and my first impression is usually, “wow, that sounds good . . .” I always end up having to work just as hard building those mixes as with my own tracks. I guess it just sounds different than my recordings, and that’s refreshing to my brain and ears.

(RS): Mix every day and as soon as you think you’re good keep mixing.

(JH): Compare your results to other recordings in the same musical genre. If your mixes don’t compare favorably, try to understand what is different and make changes accordingly. It takes time and concentrated effort to train your ears, so mix as often as you can.

(CM): Hours and hours and hours and hours and hours of watching YouTube, asking questions, and practicing.

(AM): Mix. A lot. Every day. In as many different styles of music as you can. Also, listen to good mixes in lots of differing musical styles.

(CJ): Get good at recording the source material first. Modern mixing is often overrated and self-indulgent. Leveling and panning great tracks and great performances can be very powerful.

Many engineers believe it is their duty to touch or change every sound they record. That’s not mixing. Of course, if your career is based on reinterpreting what the artist intended so that he/she can sell millions of records then your focus is beyond mixing – you become a hands-on post-production producer at that point. And young engineers can sometimes feel entitled to screw up a band’s sound because they own the DAW with the cracked plug-ins. Wrong.

So, good mixing comes from good recording. And when you screw up the track while placing the mic, or choosing the mic incorrectly, or missing the tone settings on the amp, or tuning the drums poorly, or picking the trumpet instead of the viola for that overdub, then you have to “mix around” your shortcomings. This teaches you to pay attention while tracking . . . and your mixes get better as a result.

(MR): Mixing is a technical art, and one gets good at it as does any artist: work, practice, study, reading, concentrated deep thinking, comparison with others’ work, study of and dedication to arts of all kinds, and a commitment to learning what listening really means.

(HJ): You can get better at mixing by critically listening to records, including records you don’t particularly care for, records of varying sound quality. Then, mix about five records on your own. Then master one of them. Mastering your own recordings truly helps you find your weaknesses as a mixer.

p.212

(CS): Spend many years listening to mixes you like, learn proper unity gain structure from start to finish, understand how we perceive stereo, check your work in the real world on as many different speakers as possible, and then find a great mastering engineer and leave them some headroom to make your work sparkle and shine.

How Valuable Is an Education or Degree to Becoming a Successful Engineer?

(CS): An education can get you started properly and you can learn from others’ experiences and mistakes.

(MP): Education is always a good thing. Knowledge and experience are what help you deal with any situation you get into, and education is a big part of the knowledge side of that equation. Experience, you’ve just got to go out and get. However, it’s easier to gain experience with something if you’ve got a basic understanding of how things work.

(GS): I believe it is paramount. Education, that is . . . You don’t necessarily have to go to school to learn it, but you have to be educated . . . and you have to keep educating yourself. Without the fundamentals and basic understanding of sound and its reproduction, you are like a ship adrift at sea. I am not very good at, or perhaps don’t have the patience, to teach the fundamentals. I think you have to have a passion for this type of knowledge and that passion can never be taught.

(CM): I’m sure there are technical things that you can pick up but being someone who didn’t go to school for it I think what it takes is self-discipline, drive, and curiosity.

(AM): The most valuable part of going to school to learn recording is to gain access to the equipment and to get as much hands-on time with that equipment as possible. Second is having a good foundational understanding of audio (especially signal flow) so that when you do get to work in a studio, you can contribute more to the session and not ask overly simplistic questions.

(RL): I think a formal education is invaluable. It definitely cuts the learning curve way down. I believe formal education provides structure and a solid foundation to build from. You’d be surprised how many of my students shout “side chain compression!” instead of just EQ (referring to the kick and bass relationship). Thanks, YouTube!

(RS): What is more valuable is real-life experience. Work with as many people as you can and ask as many questions as you can.

(TK): An education is definitely important, but getting a degree isn’t necessarily. The fundamentals of engineering are not something that’s easy to learn outside of the classroom, especially with all of the misinformation that’s on the Internet. On the other hand, I don’t think I’ve ever been asked for a résumé . . . it’s all about building relationships with your peers and instilling trust in your clients. THAT is what will get you the next gig.

p.213

(JH): A degree or certificate is useful if you want to apply for a job at a large business. A person wanting to work as a freelance engineer or small studio owner is better off spending money on equipment rather than tuition.

(CJ): It is important to challenge yourself. There are so many do-it-yourself engineers out there making a living and growing without formal education. But a good learning environment can immerse you in situations that push you forward and force you into critical thinking. Some people need that. And how many engineers under thirty years old know everything there is to know about recording? You can be an assumptive a-hole or you can be better any way possible.

(TD): As a studio owner I would hire someone with experience over someone with a degree that doesn’t have experience. Someone with experience may not have a college degree on the subject but may be way more educated on recording through their experience. However, college can provide a great backup plan, educate you on the subject matter, and give you a place to meet other people like yourself to network with. Whether you go to college to educate yourself on recording or through another means, you will never know it all. That is what makes it challenging and always new to me.

(MR): It depends . . . These days some technical training can be helpful, mostly as a way of more quickly learning the technology and techniques. It is such a multi-faceted area, and there is so much to know about, including recording and audio technology, acoustics, computers, communications, electronics, music theory and history, recording history, and endlessly onwards. The degree may or may not be important to establishing oneself, but the education never ends.

What’s equally important probably is what goes along with it: mentorship and a philosophical framework. It’s also very important in regards to establishing and maintaining a career, to establish a network, starting with your teachers and their contacts. Also, the peer network that is established by friendship with other students is one of the most valuable assets you will ever have.

(HJ): You don’t need a degree to become a sound engineer. However, spending time studying any of your passions will help you immensely as an individual in the field of recording in many ways that are difficult to account for. My college minor was in Psychology and I can’t express how helpful that has been to my recording career.

(ME): Music recording is totally word of mouth. Nobody cares where you went to school, they only care if you recorded something they like. Of course, school can make you skilled and ready to work; it may speed up things for you. Connection to the music world is mostly something you have to do by making your own way in some music scene and showing people that you have the goods. To work for a broadcast operation, it might look good to have a nice educational background. Music recording is really down-home, and totally based on grassroots reputation, and being friends with people.

p.214

Do You Record/Cut With Compression or EQ?

(MP): I record with compression or EQ if it sounds good. My main goal is to capture good sounds, then I don’t have to do much to them later in the mix.

(MR): I tend to record with EQ if I think it needs it, and not to track through compressors. I monitor through them if I think I’ll be using them, and write down the settings if I find something nice.

(TK): It depends on your workflow. Personally I like to cut with some very broad strokes of mild compression and EQ . . . especially if I’m going to be mixing in the box. It’s a great way to vibe up your tracks with some analog mojo (technical term), plus it forces you to commit to a sound and get on with mixing. I feel a lot of the time wasted in the studio is due to fear of commitment and lack of pre-production.

(RL): I typically cut vocals with a little bit of compression just to tame the vocals a bit. I personally don’t cut vocals with EQ. I try to choose a microphone with the desired frequency response to give me the sound I’m after.

(CS): Depends on the instrument being recorded and the relative abilities of the artist. I prefer to “EQ” via mic placement, choice, and preamp characteristic and “limit” as needed to prevent distortion or clipping.

(ME): I don’t use much compression when tracking, maybe one or two sort-of special effects type things, like, say, a smashy room, but that’s about it. But I don’t shy away from EQ. I know I’m going to cut a lot between 300 and 600 Hz on a bass drum, so why not go ahead and do it? I know some people really do cut everything flat but I’d rather always be working toward the final tone.

(RS): Of course.

(CM): Yes sir.

(CJ): Yes, tape compression, GP9, 456, and especially ATR Magnetics formulations to sixteen-track two-inch. Maybe a little overhead compression, maybe something on the bass for control. I try to adjust the EQ at the amp or by choosing mics that shape the sound at the source. Multiple mics (in phase) can offer a way to EQ later simply by balancing levels of two different tones on the same source.

(JH): I record with EQ, compression, and effects to get the tone as close as possible to the final sound. I like to make firm decisions about sounds as I record, and then as I overdub I can tell how well the new track fits with what is already on tape. This makes mixing very easy.

p.215

(AM): Yes, sometimes, but I love it when I can cut without. Whenever possible I try to get the best microphone/preamp combination for the instrument at hand. I also try to change/modify whatever I can at the source, that is, changing guitars, pickup selection, amp settings, swapping drums (especially with snare drum), tuning drums; then moving the mic before I resort to EQ. That said, certain instruments do often need EQ when cutting, especially to get certain sounds (e.g., modern rock drum sounds – they need a lot of EQ).

In a similar vein, certain instruments are very challenging to record without compression: vocals, for example. I also (like many engineers) like to use a little compression while tracking just to add certain coloration to some sounds – for example, on bass. I might only have the compressor kicking in on a couple of dB, but running the bass through a tube compressor adds a great color.

(TD): It depends on the session. If I am cutting ten songs and mixing them in a weekend I will cut with whatever is necessary to finish the session. Also, I tend to do more processing with novice musicians versus skilled professionals. Skilled professionals are likely to play more consistent and have better tones, meaning I don’t have to apply as much compression or EQ. Exceptions would be if a unique or different sound is needed, then anything goes.

(GS): Sometimes. Depends whether it is analog or digital. Who will mix it, etc.? I used to never do it because I wanted to keep my options open. Now, with DAWs, there are so many options that it can be a good thing to start making decisions early.

(HJ): Usually I track with compression or EQ; it depends on the instruments and how they are being played combined with natural room acoustics. I won’t go crazy though unless we (myself and the artist/s) are 100% sure we want a specific sound. It helps to tailor your sounds but not premix them when you’re recording.

How Do I Know When a Mix Is Done?

(CS): When it’s balanced in stereo, and makes you smile on playback because it moves you emotionally and makes you want to hear it again.

(ME): When you truly enjoy listening to it! This can be difficult when you’ve been working for hours and are basically tired and worried! Consider that most iconic tracks were done in the days before a million revisions and recall mixes. I am still a big believer in concentrating on a mix, doing my best and leaving it alone forever. Here it is: The Mix. These days, somebody will pop up a month after a mix is done and want to make a tiny change that nobody will ever hear. It’s fairly easy to do in an in-the-box (all-computer) situation, but I think it’s a bad trend. It leads to nobody ever being satisfied with anything! I think it was a truly better situation when mixing was seen more as a performance, something you captured and then congratulated yourself on your genius!

No, sometimes you can redo a mix and improve it, but what I see these days is a lot of worry and the inability to get finished with anything. It’s better to finish, and then make your next record!

p.216

(MP): I know when a mix is done when it sounds good and the client is happy.

(TD):

(RL): A finished mix depends on the artist’s budget and/or deadlines.

(MR): You feel it.

(TK): That’s probably the most difficult question to answer. That can be governed by a lot of things such as budget and release deadlines, but really it’s done when it feels done. With the DAW, you can mix and remix to your heart’s content for years but at the end of the day, it’s about realizing the client’s vision and once they are satisfied . . . it’s done.

(CM): It’s never really done, more so of knowing when to walk away from it.

(GS): That’s a good question. I’m not sure I know when a mix is done. A lot of what I’m doing when mixing is dealing with the things I don’t like first. Once I get through that, then I can start to concentrate on getting everything else where I want it. I’m presented with new challenges all the time when mixing. Especially if I am mixing another engineer’s tracks, or even something someone recorded at home. With DAWs I find myself going down rabbit holes of drum sound replacement, sidechaining with gates or compressors . . . all to try to “fix” things. When I have to do that, the mix never really sounds done.

(JH): A mix is done when it either sounds good to you and your clients, or you run out of time and money.

(RS): When you’ve reached your deadline.

(HJ): A mix is done when you can step away from it and hear everything the way it was intended to be heard . . . or when you run out of money!

(CJ): It makes you physically move. You might be dancing around or singing along or pounding your fist. That is important. Plus, you burn a test CD to play in your thirteen-year-old Honda. And you effectively measure the mix against the thousands of hours of music your brain and body have enjoyed in that familiar space. Then you stop being a stubborn jackass and let a good mastering engineer handle the final phase of the process. It’s the band’s album, not yours, control freak!

INDUSTRY INSIGHTS

How Did You Get Started?

(MP): I got started when a friend built his studio. I was good at electronics and carpentry, so he asked me to help. It sounded like fun, so I said yes. Fifteen years later, I’m still here, helping out in any way I can and having a great time.

p.217

(JH): I had some experience doing live sound, and then went to a recording school. I got an internship at a large major-label studio in New York City that eventually turned into a job. I mopped the floor, made coffee, and ran to get lunch for more than a year before I got to assist in a recording session. I moved to Austin, Texas, and opened my own studio when I couldn’t find a job at an established studio. My studio has been in business for over fifteen years.

(AM): I interned at a studio in Boston while I was still in school. I don’t even think I got credit for it, but I didn’t care – I just wanted to be in a studio. After school I moved to San Francisco and went to every studio in town and basically kept knocking on doors and calling to work for free (interning, again). I eventually interned at four or five of the big studios out there until I got a foothold at Hyde Street Studios. I interned there for a while and proved to them that I wasn’t a flake, that I didn’t have an ego/attitude, that I knew my stuff and that I was willing to do whatever it would take to do the work. My first paid work there was doing the “Midnight-to-8 a.m.” sessions – pretty brutal, but I did it to “pay my dues.” That progressed into more second engineering work, assisting outside engineers that would come to work at the studio. That was a great experience, working with amazing, talented folks that had been making records for twenty to thirty years.

(MR): I have always been rabidly interested in music and recording, and started a small studio in 1980 with a group of friends.

(CM): There was nothing else to do in a small town in New Mexico so I started producing (not so great) beats out of boredom with friends which slowly became an infatuation with all parts of the music industry.

(RS): Went to Guitar Center, bought a mic and interface, put up egg crate foam in my closet, and started recording friends.

(ME): I played in bands, did a lot of thinking about what was actually going on in those sounds on record, and then when the Teac four-track machines came out in the early 70s, Chris Stamey and I did non-stop recordings on a Teac 2340. That really taught me how to make things add up! We had the Teac, three dynamic mics, a little box that made the four tracks play back left, right or center, and later, an Echoplex tape echo device. Over the course of a school year we got drastically better at doing this, and we never had any EQ, compressors, or processors of any kind aside from the Echoplex. So, although this sounds like a typical old-fart story, it does prove to me that it’s all about getting your hands on whatever you have and working with it. Once you have enough stuff to make a sound, you just have to go for it.

In college, I realized I really wanted to try to do recordings for real, so I sold some things my parents had given me and bought some used professional gear. This was a good move; this gear was from the days of truly “pro” gear, really high quality, and I still use most of this stuff which I bought over thirty years ago! And I used what I learned with the Teac and just kept going with the pro gear. It sounded better and I had enough confidence from playing in bands and doing all these basement tapes that I figured the “pro” version was essentially the same task, which it is! But I think the most important thing was that I understood what the bands wanted, and tried to give it to them. I was never dogmatic about the “right” way to do things; that’s boring and sort of uncool . . . of course, there is a bit of “right and wrong” in this work, but music recording is about fun and excitement, so bands often came to me after working in some uptight place where the engineer just yelled at them for being too loud or something. If you are working with artists, they are the number-one consideration. You can argue with them a bit if you think there’s something they really need to consider, but you must always convey respect and interest in what they are saying!

p.218

(TK): (Cue black and white flashback footage) It was 2003, I was playing guitar in a punk band with some high-school buddies. We got a chance to record a demo at a studio with a Soundcraft Ghost, a one-inch sixteen-track tape machine and some nice outboard gear. As soon as I heard my parts played back in the control room I was hooked. Fast forward to my second year of college for audio engineering at Austin Community College. I got a call from a desperate engineer at a club in downtown Austin who had gotten my contact info from a professor of mine. I got the opportunity to shadow the house guys and with next to no experience I was thrown into the fire during SXSW. It was pretty horrible at first but I was able to lean on my instructors at ACC and slowly but surely I started getting the hang of things. Ten years later you can still find me mixing at that club!

(CS): By accident, being the guy who bought the gear and was curious about how to record my own band and friends’ music. From a garage at my house that ended up being a neighborhood nuisance to a leased space that was big enough to track bands and build up one patch cable, mic stand, guitar pick, headphone, microphone, preamp, and so on and on till you have what you think you need to do the recording you want to do. It never ends, actually, so I’m still getting started to this day.

(HJ): I was lucky and jumped at a chance to manage a small studio in hopes that I would train as an engineer at the same time. It was 100% about who I knew, people I became friends with in college.

(RL): I got started in 2002 to 2003. I met a guy from a different walk of life who shared a common interest in music. We hit it off and later he told me he could record me rapping using his computer. Lol imagine that . . .

(TD): Started off playing drums and guitar in my single digits. Figured out multi-track recording soon after by recording and bouncing between cassette decks. I was always the person in the band that knew how to hook up the PA. Thanks to my older musician brother. When my mom asked what I was going to do in high school I said, “Surf and play drums.” She suggested I have a backup plan. I found out that I could get a degree in Audio and I was sold. Eventually moved to Austin to finish my RTF degree and I was playing drums on a recording session and asked the owner of the studio if he needed an intern and he said “Yes” . . . thirty years later still rocking and recording.

p.219

(GS): I started out as a hobbyist. I made a conscious decision not to pursue recording. I was afraid that if I recorded for a living, I would ruin something I love. It was later on down the road where I found myself in a position to pursue it professionally without that fear. I recorded a lot of bands for free or cheap. I had a studio in my house. My wife had to put up with it. Once I decided to make it my living, I invested some more money and quit doing things for free. It was pretty simple. I had an internship at a very nice studio right after college. It turned out to be a worthless experience. I don’t think I was a very good intern. I didn’t like the music they were doing. I kind of wasted the opportunity. But, at that age, I wasted a lot of opportunities. I had no idea where my life was going. I’m pretty happy about the way it’s turned now, so far.

(CJ): I actually began recording at a young age. I used portable cassette recorders to create “shows” as if I was in charge of Foley, or special FX, or general ADR (I think that is the term), by enlisting the help of all the neighborhood kids. We’d add sound to all the pages of our favorite comic books using different voices, sound effects, and musical scores. I sang in the church choir until I thought it wasn’t cool. Then later in high school I guess I felt that being able to sing was cool again. I convinced some friends to let me play in their cover band. I programmed with sequencers for some of the set. My bandmate and I began to record our original song ideas with a four-track around that time and on into college.

Having to look at something two-dimensional and imagine what it should sound like, or having to reverse engineer musical structures was incredibly fun for me. I also built model airplanes as a kid too . . . so joining things together from small parts just seemed to be part of my nature. Plus I loved music as a kid – not because I wanted to be in a rock band – just because it seemed so amazingly interesting. So it all fits together when I look back.

Somewhere in my twenties, I decided to learn how to record and mix my own band because I wasn’t very interested in what the industry was doing. I have to give credit to Fugazi and Steve Albini for helping me tie my musicianship in with my engineering skills as a way to maintain creativity. Knowing what I know and owning the gear I own simply feels empowering. And helping other musicians record is obviously fun for me if you read the first couple sentences.

So I guess I started recording folks for money by first taking all of my equipment to a remote location, recording them, then mixing at my house. Eventually I began recording out of my house much like Tim [Dittmar]. Then I began looking at local rooms/studios. Eventually I found the space I am in right now. And over the past few years I’ve expanded and enhanced.

So I’ve been recording over twenty years and I’ve been recording for money about three-fourths of that time. But I think I really “got started” about ten years ago when I began multi-track recording using Tascam DA38s, then DAWs with twelve or more ins and outs, then finally a real analog two-inch multi-track machine. That’s when bands began to seek me out. So maybe that’s what I consider my start. Multi-track was key. . . Having sixteen to twenty-four live simultaneously recorded tracks all sounding good is challenging.

p.220

How Do I Get My Foot in the Door?

(MP): You start by recording anyone you can. You record your band, a friend’s band, your neighbor’s band, someone you saw play a gig, anyone. You keep recording and recording whenever you can. This will give you valuable experience, and your friends will recommend you to their friends, which will give you even more recording opportunities.

(TD): Skill, drive, persistence, and luck.

(GS): Well, you either build your own door, or just keep trying to get into any studio you can. Offer to work for free. Don’t be above any job. Always be enthusiastic, and positive. Watch and learn. Ask questions. Figure out what needs to be done and do it before you are asked . . . even if that means taking out the trash or cleaning the toilet. If you want to build your own door, then get together as much recording gear as you can. Record a few bands for free. If those come out good, then you can start to charge a little. Put all the money into more gear. Whichever way you do it, you’ll have to support yourself while you are getting things going. There are very few jobs in recording, that I know of, that pay at the entry level.

(CS): Be nice, humble, quiet, and eager to do menial tasks while learning the studio’s preferred way of tracking, overdubbing, and mixing. Pay attention and listen and show respect to all the musicians you work for and never place yourself above the artist.

(MR): Dedicate yourself to learning as much as possible, and make yourself indispensable to someone. Be the first one there and the last to leave, learn everyone’s job, be a good communicator who is pleasant to be around, learn the etiquette, be humble, have a good attitude, and work hard.

(TK): It’s all about getting to know the right people. Get involved in your local music scene. Go see shows, strike up conversations with bands, get to know the sound guy/gal, find out where people are recording. The industry is a lot smaller than you’d think and interpersonal skills are your most powerful asset when getting started. It’s also a plus if you know what the hell you are doing but that usually comes later.

(HJ): Patience is extremely essential as well as not expecting to be handed over a dream job on a plate just because you want it. This is an extremely competitive field and it takes a confident, intelligent, technically minded person who can also be willing to take a step back and not be pushy. Listening to what your prospective employer needs is essential.

(RS): Be thirsty for knowledge and don’t be a jerk.

(RL): Stay humble and keep perfecting your craft. That way you will be prepared when opportunity presents itself.

(JH): Try to get an internship at a busy studio. Learn as much about recording on your own as possible. Get a small recording setup and practice. Build your resume by recording for people for free if necessary.

p.221

(CM): DJ Khaled told me to take the hinges off the door and put it in “they’s hand.”

(ME): Get friendly with some bands and go to a session with them and tune their guitars or something. It doesn’t matter what it is, but if you show that you are useful, pleasant to be around, and smart, eventually somebody will ask you to do something more substantial. If you have a recording setup, record people for free, and try to only record interesting people! Mainly, get noticed. Realize that whatever you do, it has to be truly good. You can’t just coast, you have to be exceptional.

Are There Jobs Available in the Recording Industry?

(MP): There are very few jobs in recording that you can get in the traditional sense of going to an interview and landing a job.

(CS): There is work but I can’t speak to jobs. Recording is about sessions and “gigs” and work comes to you based on your reputation and vibe more than your space and equipment. More and more we have to go to the work and provide our talent in non-traditional spaces so it is not so much a “job” as an occupational lifestyle.

(RS): There are always jobs in the music industry. You just have to make one for yourself.

(ME): Not really, in music, anyway. I suppose broadcast may still be somewhat like the old days of actual commercial activity. This is all becoming a fancy, popular hobby. You definitely can’t knock on the door of a recording studio and get hired. They are mostly closing down. This is most unfortunate! Individual “star” recording people are doing OK and they may hire assistants occasionally, usually people who have already become very good at all this through their own experiences. There are jobs for hotshot editors, who can fix drum tracks, etc., on a per-song basis. Same for low-cost mastering.

(CJ): Yes, if you are passionate and you serve musicians fearlessly – you will stay employed.

(TK): Indeed there are, but don’t limit yourself to just music production. The video game and film markets are just as big if not bigger.

(CM): Plenty of jobs . . . you just have to create the job for yourself more times than not.

(TD): Definitely, but you have to be extremely driven and motivated. You will also need to be creative and have other skills (booking, web design, guitar instructor, sandwich artist, etc.) that you can utilize if you don’t have a lot of steady recording session work.

(GS): The best job in recording is the job you create for yourself. Sure, there are internships and the hope of landing some sort of recording gig, and I suppose some people take that route, but for me it’s all about controlling my own destiny. Even if it’s not true, I believe that I am in charge of my own destiny and I can say “no” if I don’t want to work on a project.

p.222

(JH): It is difficult to get a job at a recording studio. The number of recording schools has increased in the last twenty years, so there are many graduates looking for jobs. Simultaneously, the number of large commercial studios has decreased due to sluggish CD sales and increased competition from smaller studios that are staffed only by the studio owner. It is possible to create your own job by working as a freelance engineer or starting a small studio business yourself. This is more difficult than collecting a steady paycheck from a larger company, and it requires a great deal of motivation and perseverance to succeed.

(AM): Yes, but not in the traditional sense of working for someone or a business. Studios don’t employ engineers – engineers are freelance agents. So it’s a position wherein you need to find your own work.

(MR): Yes, everywhere and in all kind of unexpected ways.

(RL): I think there are still jobs in the industry. Maybe not the conventional jobs folks are used to. This is the era of the home studio. A lot of guys have either left the bigger studios for smaller ones or work out of their home studio. With technology, computers and plug-ins, one can provide quality work at an affordable price. I read an article that mastering engineer Glenn Schick is mastering in headphones now!

(HJ): There are always jobs in recording. The amount of pay is the catch. No matter how much experience you have, you will always be tempted to work for free. Unless they are signed, decent bands usually have no money. It’s still fairly easy to get an unpaid internship in a bigger recording studio and work your way up but it can take time. There are no quick paths to making your dream happen. But enjoy the work you do and do your best at all times. This is what opens up future possibilities of better pay.

How Much Money Should I Expect to Make?

(MR): You can make hundreds of dollars a year doing this crap! But seriously, it’s highly variable, depending on the situation.

(CS): Hopefully enough to support your gear habit and keep the bill collectors satisfied. Beyond that, just working making music and recording is a reward in of itself.

(CJ): More than me I hope. Figure out what you are good at – what you do differently than other engineers/producers – then strive to be the best in that area. There’s room at the top. And the old farts are going to go deaf or retire eventually. Make good artists shine and bad artists happy and you will make money.

(RS): Don’t expect to make money. Do it for the love of music and everything else will follow.

(MP): I’d love to be able to say you get rich recording, but you don’t. If your goal is to get rich, you need to move on to another line of work and record as a hobby.

p.223

(TK): This totally depends on your track record and the clients you choose to work with. Obviously corporate events and large festivals will pay much more than your usual club gig or home studio overdub session. The important thing is that you present yourself in the most professional way possible and do your homework. Once you break into that sort of tier, the folks involved will expect you to understand your role without having to tell you explicitly.

(ME): None, unless you get famous with something people really like. If you record a band who get noticed, other people will want you to record them, and you might be able to shake a little money out of the situation. Really, the money is a tiny fraction of what it was twenty years ago. Very few bands are making money, so they can’t pay much, indie labels are usually tiny, etc. Money is only available when a lot of people know who you are and think you will really make great records. Good people do get noticed!

(CM): Don’t worry about the money . . . life has an interesting way of making sure things take care of themselves.

(TD): You may work for free a lot. You will find that most really good bands, unless they already have backing, don’t have any money. If you want to work with such a band you will often weigh how much you really want to work on the record versus how much money you will take at a minimum. This happens all the time! Don’t go into audio engineering because you want to be rich! Like any profession, the better you are the more likely you are to get paid for your talents.

(AM): Not a lot, especially at first.

(RL): I’d say be realistic about your skill level and marketing campaign. For example, if you’ve been mixing for six months and people don’t know you exist, you probably won’t make any money at all. If you’ve been mixing for a couple of years at a super affordable hourly rate and really try to get your name out there, you may be able to pay a few bills.

(JH): Making records is generally a low-paying job, so you have to want to do this type of work for reasons other than making lots of money. There are some engineers who are paid more than the industry average because they have already made many commercially successful records. These people are in the minority of working recording engineers, and it took them years of hard work to get there.

(HJ): This depends on where you live and what you want to do. You could land a paid internship at a post house and be able to pay your rent, or you could get an unpaid internship at a local recording studio and do that for a year or two.

(GS): Depends what you want to record. I think there are people out there making a lot of money and they believe they are making important recordings. For me, it’s about working on projects that are satisfying to me personally. I feel like I’ve spent more on recording than I’ve made . . . that’s not true, but if you own your own studio it can be very expensive. Freelancing can work out if you can build up a client base and/or your reputation. Look on the Internet at studio rates. This might give you a sense of what you can make. These rates will change over time and they vary from studio to studio.

p.224

What Do You Think the Future of Recording Will Be?

(MP): I think the future of recording will be the same as it is right now . . . Trying to capture the essence of someone’s art with an ever-changing array of tools and media.

(TK): There will always be a place for high-end studios in the music industry, but as the big record labels continue to consolidate, you will continue to see a rise in the home/project studio. I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand, the technology has gotten to the point to where with a laptop and a small collection of outboard gear, you can get some really amazing results. On the other hand, folks with little to no knowledge of fundamentals and mixing experience think that just having some good gear will get you all the way there. Also, as broadband Internet speeds get faster, cloud collaboration I believe will become a huge option. You can have users in multiple studios working together on a single project. For instance, you can have your drums recorded in a room that has a particular sound while tracking vocals in a studio that’s known for its outstanding mic collection.

(AM): I have no idea. . .

(ME): Hard to say! I miss the world of high-quality, expensive rock records by obscure but good artists! There will probably always be a small “pro” scene for megastars and everybody else will be recording on home setups and getting variable results. It’s sort of like professional photo portraits giving way to snapshots. Of course, smart people will do good things no matter what the situation is. But I lament the decline of a world of music recording experts who make a decent living and have tremendous experience and expertise.

(CS): Hopefully we will see higher bit-depth digital recording, perhaps a better algorithm than PCM [pulse code modulation] encode/decode and recognizing that being able to reproduce frequencies above 20 k actually matters.

(CM): A bunch of people using only laptops and plug-ins at random locations around the world.

(RL): Recording itself probably won’t change much. You’ll probably still have a microphone and preamp for many years. Mixing, however, will probably head toward touchscreen dragging and dropping in the near future. After that it may end up being a virtual-reality 3D mixing environment.

(MR): It will be as varied, creative and marvelous as the musicians and music that we serve.

(TD): It will probably be an extension of what it is today, constantly recombining old and new technologies. People will continue to be creative using Apple iPads, four-track cassettes, laptops, and whatever inspires, is affordable, and is available to that particular person. Having experienced VR at this year’s AES [Audio Engineering Society], it makes me conclude that the VR world will be part of the studio experience in the near future.

p.225

(JH): Computer recording systems will become more powerful and hopefully improve in sound quality. I think the number of very large commercial studios will continue to decrease as computers improve. There will always be people who want to get together in the same room and record the music that they create.

(RS): A bunch of laptops and everyone will be doing it.

(HJ): The future of recording is unknown. With the push toward lesser-quality, compressed files, it’s our responsibility as audio people to insist on better standards; that’s as far into the future as I can see.

(GS): Recording technology continually becomes more attainable for the average musician. Lots of bands are recording themselves. Many artists use the computer as part of their creative process . . . recording what they need and composing in the box. I see more of this in the future, but the recording studio will never go away. There will always be people who want someone else to engineer and produce for them. There will always be people who are more inclined to record and produce than write and perform music. It’s a natural partnership.

(CJ): Awesome. I believe digital’s role is to catch up to analog. And since analog is still amazing, the future will be more of the same for those of us who can hear the difference. Sadly, when digital finally comes around . . . only the analog recordings of days past will be able to make the conversion. You can’t upconvert an MP3. You can’t upconvert a CD, or even a DVD. I don’t get the trend right now. When you go to a movie and you hear the music and sound FX are so rich and full with so much information for your brain to enjoy . . . how can you go home and put on an MP3? And if you are a musician . . . how could you put up with the quality of your music being destroyed . . . why have ears?

Yes, current digital technology makes editing easier. But PCM technology doesn’t sound good. Do some research. Trust your ears. But computers are really a joke. Two-dimensional representation of the real-world experience is just silly. Let’s design a computer and DAW that can maintain the fidelity of analog and place the engineer or musician into a 3D space – instead of ones that force us to propagate antiquated technology born out of a savvy R&D division of a consumer electronics company.

I am optimistic that eventually computers will be so powerful that digital file compression is unnecessary. Then artists will be deciding how their music will be delivered. They will also choose the extent of low end and top end in their recordings. It won’t be decided by Sony, Philips or Apple. Theaters have gone to 70 mm, IMAX, IMAX 3D and now the home theater systems are following. But we still can’t find files better than MP3 quality on portable devices, or even in our cars. It’s just digital information. Stop controlling it. And stop letting them control it.

p.226

I want to hear something that can’t be reproduced on vinyl, CD, DVD, or Blu-ray. Something that literally breaks the sonic mold. I can’t wait till the day when the only way you can hear a certain album is when the artist allows you to do it. And the experience is so unique and mind-blowing that people travel great distances to hear it. I hear music like this in my dreams. And I am sure others do as well. Who cares if you can have 40,000 songs on your iPhone if you can’t make it to that once-in-a-lifetime musical event?

That is exciting. Maybe the new technology will surpass analog pathways as well: laser microphones, magnetic resonance imaging, who knows. But even in that future, you still need a good room and a good engineer AT THE BEGINNING to get those sounds into the new medium. A good room makes the source sound cooler. A good engineer – like a good photographer – can artistically frame the shot, set the tone, and make the subject “larger than life.”

The future of recording is forever loud and clear.

IT TAKES TIME BUT IT’S WORTH IT!

It will take many years of hard work and dedication to succeed in the extremely competitive field of audio engineering. The rewards will be many. I love it when I finally get a copy of a CD or record that I put my heart and soul into. To me, I get way more satisfaction having completed and been part of a music recording than from getting paid. The money helps pay the bills but the tangible product of what I accomplished is much greater.

Although you can make a decent living as an audio engineer you shouldn’t enter the field expecting to make large sums of cash right away. Experience means a lot with music production. So go get some. Learn as much as you can any way you can. Record with whatever you have at your disposal. Take into account, you will need to be very determined and patient at the same time. Audio engineering can be a fun hobby or one of the coolest jobs you could ever imagine!