Anyone see these services via Guitar Center?

6 posts / 0 new
Last post

OMG... $300bucks for an acoustic track? Extra $150, for vocals.

Anyway, to me, IMO -- don't hear the "pro" in it compared to many "here", FAWM. And, that includes, compared to a few almost famous friends, tracks done in "Nashville" studios, oh boy ; )

-- So, just conversationally wondering, posting this here... wondering the reaction.

We have local indies in the area, NJ, who will do stuff, far cheaper... pending their down time, $50 a song, -- beats $0. Business is not booming in the music industry : ) Lots of indies in NJ producing tracks. I know every CR at one gets hammered with offers to "record" your stuff : )

Lets see, 50 songs x $300 x 2000 FAWM folks ... good money if you can get it : )

The "after" tracks were slicker, more professional sounding. But they also felt generic. It felt like good players in a good studio churning out something mostly safe in 2 or 3 takes. $450 for a song is a lot of money to me. That's just 2 guitar tracks, a vocalist, and light percussion. And a country singer. I wonder what the local rate in my area would be to do something like that? I wonder how long it would take me to get to that level of playing. I wouldn't mind getting $150 for an hour of studio work Smile

Hey iveg, that's exactly what I was thinking.

Actually, many here, are "there". The few suttle adjustments to equipment, etc., is an art, to be sure, but, not rocket science.

-- Anyway, in comparison, of here, it's strikingly a low value purchase.


My "friends", admit, no matter what they were told by others, until they hired a named producer, and cut tracks in Nashville, well, they felt they had to pay, to hear/believe the very same advice they had been getting free, which got them to where they were. Ironic. Look at "CBGBs" history too.

Yes, auto tune, quantization, formula, all, is a generic killer. Imagine filtering Hendrix, BBKing, Joni Mitchell (with her vocals and rhythm : ) -- these folks, et al. would never have existed, let alone be "greats".

Folks want to "make" it, -- get a million hits on YouTube ... , even then, one, per std contracts pay for it all anyway, sans upfront money, if it goes bust. It's pay to play at its worst.

Hence, the Indie movement killing the record deal paradigm.

-- Bit of a rabbit trail there, but, not discussed much, or enough, imo : ) , reality check

Interesting, thanks.

My thoughts: Back in the early 90's my friends (band) paid thousands of dollars to record in a pro recording studio over two or three years. I sat through the recording, mixing, and vocal sessions on several of those tracks. Yes, I got to play too even though I had no money. The results were good. However, they never sold a record that I know of, and later they had made a deal with a publisher who couldn't get anybody to buy any of the songs. To this day it still sounds good but nobody cares.

I just want to add some off topic thoughts now. I actually am moving away from full demos. In fact, most commercial music annoys me. I know what they are doing under the hood to get a pro sound, and I'm mostly not impressed. The truth is it is fricken noise. Yes, I mean the drums, electric guitars, and especially reverb. I like clean recordings that sound good without added production. Yes, I'm very guilty of producing demos with a full arrangement of midi, real instruments, and with singing. That production may have sounded good but it was the singer (myself) and the playing (typical guitar strums) that ruined most of my demos. They always sound better when I sing it live with just me and my guitar. Note that I said better, not The truth is that I can't sing higher than C4 and most of my vocals end up in the same sonic space as my guitar. I know this because I frequently study converting audio to midi. This is a problem. It shows up on nearly all of my demos (going back to the beginning). Changing the octave of my guitar may help but mostly does not because the guitar sounds too high. Changing the key gives me the same problem in a different Thanks.

I like trying to make full demos. I know they're flawed. I like the challenge of trying to make several tracks work with each other.

If it's voice + 1 instrument, they've got to have really good vocals to hold my interest. On Songfight, Holly Furlone has demos she recorded in her car on a phone. Her voice sounds like she's singing from a cave 100 yards away. But her vocals are so good, and her songs are so strong that she consistently beats everyone else.

I've heard Jake Shimabukuro several times. He's probably the world's best ukulele player, and he's a nice person, too. But he "can't sing", and he used to not talk between songs.

So if I had $450 to improve my recordings, I think I'd probably see the best return by investing in vocal training Smile Or hiring someone else to sing vocals for me.

I remember an interview with Deep Purples Keyboard player... OMG, I loved putting a little Casio through a Marshall head... such an emotional sound... Anyway, -- he comments he does, if remember correctly, 3 takes, esp for a solo, maybe 4, then leaves for the day. He likes the feel of "fresh", it can't be beat. And, on released tracks, many have "mistakes", but it's not that fresh-raw feel that is a soul of musical sonnerism. I agree.

It kills me : ) but, often when I set sound levels and do a song, I record while I do it, -- *that's the best track, because?, I really don't care! ..., so to speak. What a lesson in getting lost in yourself and letting others enjoy that, -- you, to facilitate their "loosing" it, so to speak. : ) (why else are we there?).

I think I read some bands of the real rock era : ) ... varied in BPM 10 - 15bpm..., all together. I am sure, correcting those dynamics, (mistakes?), would diminish the track. Well, IMO.