Forum Closed
The forum is now to new posts. All the historical content is still available to browse.
if you are looking for musicians to play with, please view the Bands Seeking Musicians list, or use the Musicians Directory
You can use our pages on social media to connect:
where to record?
| Message Board > General Chitchat > where to record? |
| johny howard User Info... | are there any good studios in this city that people have used and enjoyed and liked the finish product and didn't spend the rest of their waking hours paying off? please help. - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 10:54am | ||
| no fresh air, coke smoke only User Info... | $15/h too much for u? - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:25am | ||
| jackass | http://www.rec-age.net in Vancouver is pretty decent Jesse Gander from Operation Makeout (ex d.b.s) he's done recording for lots of bands: Three Inches of Blood S.T.R.E.E.T.S Billy The Kid and The Lost Boys Witness Protection Program New Town Animals and more - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:54am | ||
| more truth | most of the studios in this city will suck the your wallet and most of you familys wallet dry. ranging from 30-100 bucks per hour. i heard sea of shit is cheap but not sure of the quality, i only heard some rough punk bands recordings. or if its you first time recording ya may want to rent some digital gear and do it your self. ask the guy from Big Muffin that works at L&M i hear they did there album really cheap. i could slag the shit out of a certain studio, but i will save that for anotherday. just try and keep your feet on the ground. - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 12:02pm | ||
| Mike Bloomberg | Electric Mountain - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 12:20pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Zero Gravity is a nice studio, but kind of expensive. Probably the nicest studio in town though. Great production facility and now they offer some video service as well. They are running an analog SSL system with protools and just purchased a PowerMac G4 Dual Gig with 2 Gig's of RAM and a 17 inch cinematic flat screen . Since Ive been in there Ive seen HBO, Andromeda and some other TV show send actors there for voice overs to video synch. Again, its an expensive studio, but the production capability there is very pro. http://www.mp3.com/meatlockerseven , we have 2 songs recorded there. They are unamstered and compressed to mp3 so that robs it of alot of audio quality, but still sounds good. - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 12:20pm | ||
| John Nash | i know a guy and his name is travis..... - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 1:07pm | ||
| Rockbar User Info... | I know a Travis too. Did a wicked job for us - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 3:14pm | ||
| Jo Fancy User Info... | Sea of Shit does the better part of the Dayglo Abortions recordings, all of which are about as prestine a quality a local outfit recording their first album could hopefor & he (Scott Henderson) runs you some 30 bux an hour. Brainless also does a lot of the Dayglos shit, for about 5 bux an hour cheaper. Both guys can do cheap recordings if need be. The guality really depends on how much time you have to give to mixing, mastering & extra tracks, etc. But I really don't know shit from good chocolate. - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 3:40pm | ||
| Johny Howard User Info... | holy shit. thanks y'all. - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 5:46pm | ||
| Scott Laming User Info... | See everyone ... we can answer someones question without a fight =) wasn't that nice *laugh* =) Sorry I couldn't resist that one. - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 6:29pm | ||
| no fresh air, coke smoke only User Info... | fuck you guys - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 7:11pm | ||
| RAZOR | sea of shit also recorded the enchanted faries and pangea, who, by the way, kick the rampants azz's in battle of the bands.HA. - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 7:49pm | ||
| gbrainless User Info... | CHECK OUT THE RATSNEST YOU FAGGOTS - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 9:57pm | ||
| Anonymous | holiday courts the best place to record the bounty hunters are back in town do you remember the holiday - Wed, 23 Oct 2002 10:25pm | ||
| KING BONG | We did our thing at South Island Studios, with a cat named Lonny Koch, great recording, cool guy. Sticky Kola - Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:50am | ||
| RSBF | i wish more bands would record at Zero Gravity (preferably of the hot single male type *wink*) so my new office pal and i could have some dynamic scenery to look at ; ) - Thu, 24 Oct 2002 11:07pm | ||
| jay brown User Info... | If you all need more names. Both the rats nest and sea of shit have done a whole bunch of no means no recordings. The list of bands recorded between the two of them is astronomical. For anyone who thinks they dont do good work just look on their walls at how many of those recordings are in record stores right across the world. It is true that some of the punk bands that have gone in dont sound that great, but these are people who book ten hours to record and mix an album. If your willing to sit in the studio for a few days you'll get a graet recording out of either of them, and it's a seriously comfotrable enviroment. I dont think you could drink a beer and have a smoke in some of the spiffy studios in town. - Thu, 24 Oct 2002 11:28pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Zero Gravity is pretty spiffy, but we dont have a problem with the recreational aspect of recording when we are there.. - Sun, 27 Oct 2002 1:08am | ||
| Yankee | I've bee to Zero Gravity several times, i agree its probably the best looking studio on the 'island' , it cost somewhere near a million dollars to build( most of that is the cost of the building itself). They want to charge you a thousand dollars a day or a hundred $ per hour. but the guy who runs it lacks production experience. he can run most of the gear but doesn't have a clue about some of the gear he owns and is very slow to get things going(smoke breaks every 15 minutes). you will need a producer that knows his way around a studio.and a boat load of cash. besides there are serveral studios that can produce much better quality for far less. - Sun, 27 Oct 2002 2:26am | ||
| Mr. Hell User Info... | On Vancouver Island, to get Zero G quality, you would need to pay Zero G price and then some (and the quality is there if you go in with a plan). Over the past few years, the owner has become more familiar with all of his gear and I'll say that we are more than pleased with the results so far. He doesn't charge you for the smoke breaks, and it gets him through the sessions smoothly. Plus, some people are put off by his brutal honesty...but if his opinion is offensive, believe me, there are much worse people in the industry who will offend you (we like the brutal honesty...it makes us better). As far as better quality than Zero G or any "high end" analog studios around Van Island, I have yet to hear anything from here that is staggeringly good. So whatever works for you, do it. - Sun, 27 Oct 2002 5:32am | ||
| ML7Mike | Ive watched Robb work. He is pretty quick on that board if you ask me. He has a good ear too. The secret of a studio like that is time. Most bands with a full bank account spend at least a few months in the studio, maybe even a year.. It adds up when a studio is that expensive. You think ZG is expensive? try The Armory, Vancouver, at $1500 per day. Spend 2 weeks in there and thats $21000! But you'll probably need a month to get it all done, and if its a full production, maybe 2 or 3 months. Top notch recordings cost $100 000's for a reason. They take that long to produce. Trouble with ZG is alot of people go in there with a few 1000 dollars expecting top notch production to get done in a few weeks because of the gear. But its not going to happen that way. You may realistically track everything in a week if you are very tight, but to mix everything in a week is crazy. Spend a few days tracking each song and a week mixing each song, your going to have a better quality recording than the average day per song for both, which is most unsigned bands budget. Robb is doing a good job mixing my band's album. You can hear ultra compressed unmastered mixes on mp3.com (note: mp3's on there are 128 kb, very low quality compared to CD ) - Sun, 27 Oct 2002 4:58pm | ||
| ? | So what are you paying for your time ML7, you guys must have assfull of cash to record in a place like that. even at a cut rate its gotta be way up in the thousands. most bands in this town are doing full cd's for under a thousand. i still think if your shit is tight and your tunes rock, you don't need to spend thousands on a cd. - Mon, 28 Oct 2002 2:55am | ||
| ML7Mike | Well ML7 has always been a poorboy band and without outside influence we would have gone to S.O.S. and had actually already chatted with Scott about it. Obviously decent recordings can be had for alot less, and Ive heard some ok stuff coming out of Rats Nest, SOS, etc. But "decent" is about it. Nothing top notch will ever come out of there, they just dont have the facility. ( sorry, Scott and Gary are both great guys and good engineers) My point is if a band is on a big or medium sized label, more often than not the label is springing $10 000 - $50 000 minimum on a first time recording. SYL for instance were just in the Armory for around 3 weeks doing a DIGITAL recording. Multiply that by $1500 per day, and you can see that Century Media has not held back. But CM is a label that needs to adhere to "industry standards" in todays demand for quality produced metal. Protools time alone can add up into the $1000's. Since ML7 arent signed, and probably never will be signed to a major metal label, we'll stay independant and would have taken the same route as every other band in our shoes and gone for the garage demo album. In metal these days though a demo quality recording barely cuts it when you have to compete against such top notch production that has become modern metal sound. Im sure not saying other bands can just go and jump into Zero Gravity and pay their rates, because that would be ludichris and obviously without backing you may as well spend the money on merch or new gear. A local band with little money will get more from a smaller studio that is able to put more time into mixing for less money. But if a band has the money, and can spend the time with Robb, he WILL make it sound good. One thing about Victoria too is that it has always been a hotbed of punk rock, and Scott and Gary are the kings. Now, could you see, say, the Dayglos going into a major label recording studio somewhere and putting out a super quality industry topping recording? It would spoil it for alot of people I think. I know that one thing I love about punk is the typical middle of the road or less production that they use. Add too much production and they become Green Day or Sum41 or similar. But in metal, add production, and if you are LUCKY ( not the lager ) you will have a product that MIGHT gain some recognition in the metal industry on an independant level. Metal has become very demanding of production in the new millenium, and even alot of black metal bands, many of whom once shunned any form of production, are now going for high end recordings, and as a result bands like Emperor etc. are getting more popular worldwide. On a final note Id like to say ML7 have been VERY lucky with our current endevour, and one thing I can say about Robb at ZG is that he LOVES metal, and he is really enjoying his work, and think that this is also very important to the life span of our recording time. You get that boys heart into something and he goes full out. He knows darn well that budget recordings coming out of his studio are not sufficient. You go in there with $3000 and your not coming out with a product that should ever leave a studio of that calibre. People listen later and say "well geez, at those rates this sounds shitty.." and that is because you need to go there with $10 000 instead of $3000. Robb records some guy out of NYC every few months, that bring in Stratovarious's and even a standup bass insured at 1 million dollars that was built by Strats' teacher. He has had guys from Wu Tang Clan, UB42 and Shaggy tour his studio. Last week he was doing voice overs for Andromeda, had one of the stars in there. Then the same company sent him more work, some other new series from the states and their star came in. A few months back he did the infamous HBO main event voice "This Saturday night, Dont Miss Tyson and Lewis! blah blah blah" you know the voice? Well it was recorded in Robbs studio and fed Ex'd to HBO in NYC for all you pay per viewers to listen to while ordering the package. He regularly does work for guys on Battle Axe Records the label run by Swollen Members. He had an client get into the top 10 Canada country charts with one of his recordings. he has done work for Discovery Channel, TLC and similar.. Dont underestimate this studio or Robbs ability. Robb is a blunt individual and has offended many people in this city with his opinion. Like Mr Hell said, if you cant take it from a producer/engineer, than you are in the wrong industry! if anyone wants a copy of the book I just wrote for you, too bad. :) - Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:51am | ||
| Cunt Breed | i heard meatlocker was getting a freebee, just what i heard. also i heard if it wasn't for Rob's millionair father, who paid for the studio, Rob would be the janitor of a mcdonalds. i also heard there where a few pornos shot there aswell. would like to see them. - Mon, 28 Oct 2002 9:05pm | ||
| Mr. Hell User Info... | Whoever told you it's a freebie should give us back all the money and time we've put into this project. Nothing is free and we've paid our bills and dues. Thanks for the anonymous musing anyhow. - Mon, 28 Oct 2002 9:21pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Free? not likely. We be shelling out a fair amount of cake, but he is giving us alot of time too. As for how Robb got the money, who cares? Everyone has to get money from somewhere. Hard to just GET that kind of dough unless you either win it or inherit it. Where'd you get your million? As for pornos, the whole upstairs of the building gets rented out, and I think there was a "Modeling Agency" in there for awhile a few years ago. - Tue, 29 Oct 2002 3:00am | ||
| Laprider User Info... | wow this recording thing really gets people riled up....I'm sorry but everyone is missing the boat....studio smoodio....if you can't play you will sound like shit...if you can a fancy SSL board which is actually a TV broadcast board by the way! will simply not give you a better recording....I know from experience...all this talk about studio's and not a single person brings up PRODUCERS...well thats how you get a pro album, sorry there are no ifs ands or buts about it...as for ZG being the only place to get a pro recording...well check out Joby Bakers studio...his Tube preamps slay anything in Victoria he is a REAL professional and he has the credits to back it up...also he is quite possibly faster at pro tools then any one on the westcoast.. my two cents as always! Having said that I did my CD with Scott...its an independent release and thats all it will every be, I have no illusions,,,but having said that if you think the average listener that makes up 90% of the market can tell any different you are simply WRONG! - Wed, 30 Oct 2002 12:32pm | ||
| been der done dat | haha some of this was so fucking funny to read. ya the pornos may have been upstairs , but that doesn't mean rob wasn't watching. also mike ml7 you sound like rob talking, it's like he put the words in your mouth it's so fucking funny , i havn't seen him or been there in years and its the same flunking story over there. advice to anyone considering to use zero gravity, use you own engineer he'll charge you the same anyways. and if you have the money to do all that. go to vancouver, seriously. the guy has been a tool since highschool and that will never change. ask him if he can even play a musical instrument other than the beer bottle. hahahahaha. - Wed, 30 Oct 2002 12:38pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Been der. Why be anonymous? Do you have to hide behind an alias to speak your mind? C'mon. Your opinion = nothing without an identity. For all I know you are just another local wannabe producer/musician with a grudge. We've just finished recording an album at ZG, and its been a good experience, everything important has gone as planned for the most part. There is a VERY strong likelyhood we will use his services again next year. Robb has been a good engineer and producer. He has brought some excellent ideas to the fold, has a decent ear for metal recording, and as a fellow guitarist it has been a treat to work with him. Been der, Robb is actually quite a good guitarist, and has shown me a trick or two. Also his USA Jackson and Charvell collection is nice to play with. His Marshall head was used on my guitar sound. Laprider. I dont think I ever said anything about it being the ony place to get a pro recording. Alexanders Electric Mountain is a pretty damn nice studio too, and I know for a fact there are guys on this island and the gulf islands with similar setups. As for the SSL being a TV Broadcasting board. Well, somebody else had brought up that point and so I went looking into the situation. It makes little difference in board. An SSL is an SSL, albiet there are older $100 000 models and newer $750 000 models. Ultimately they achieve the same purpose, ( eq's, gates , compression on each channel etc. ) Laprider, I agree fully, studio isnt the key. Talent , tightness and ability are. Alot of untalented music comes out of some damn nice studios on this planet, and it still sounds like shite to me ( 'tho not to the radio industry evidently ) But, take a talented band or artist and add on the extra quality of recording, and you have something special. As for engineer or producer being tough to work with, well, thats an individual thing. We personally get along well with Robb and so we have a positive work ethic and the energy is good. I remember going to Scott Hendersons back in the earlier days to watch my friends band record. ML7 were getting ready to drop $3000 onto a new album (Corrode ) Scott gave us flat out attitude when we told him we were metal. He said "I dont do metal. period." We smoked some joints, helped the other band setup, Our old drummer teched for theirs, etc. Everything was peachy, but his attitude stayed the same. Now, he does do metal, which is nice, but it still reflects on the personality of the producer. Robb Toth on the other hand is an old school metal guitarist. We have some very similar views on sound, mix, etc. Now, for a country band to have to work with a metal/rock minded guy is going to be a much different situation. I've heard of people getting into yelling matches with Toth over production differences. ( they want Solid State guitar tone, he wants Tube, etc. ) But we've let him go to town and be creative and it has worked very well in our favor. And , at least he isnt like a Ross Robinson who will come in and spit in or punch the face of a musician who isn't getting his tracks right (sic) Another point Id like to make. We havent even mastered our material and yet we are getting very positive feedback on the recording quality. Im not talking about from friends either. ML7 has a very aggresive online promoting approach. We utilize major metal magazine and label bulletin boards to spread our news. For the most part, such boards are a venting outlet for people who hate everything, especially unsigned bands. Yet even when the dogs are looking for some meat to chew ( pardon the pun ) we get complimented on the production, and its only 128kb mp3. Our song Systemic sits at #3 on the thrash/speed metal charts at mp3.com today, after only 6 weeks up. We are side by side with major signed metal acts on the list. And you know how much mp3's crush production. CBC Radio 2 has picked up Systemic ( mp3, unmastered ) and will debut it on Halloween night. Another station in Kamloops has been bugging me for a pre-release .wav burn so they can play it on their metal show. I cant get into detail, but our mp3 of Systemic has already garnered us some interest from The Zone for BOTM. A local videographer walked into the studio, had one listen to a half mixed version on Systemic, and promptly offered us his services, his Final Cut expertise is amazing and he packs a pretty expensive digital wide angle camera. He flat out told us, that if he hadnt liked the song production the first time he heard it, he wouldnt have done our project. So look for our video of Systemic on MUCH as soon as we have mastered the audio. Bad mouth ZG and Robb all ye like,( hey, we used to as well ) but I'm speakin from first hand experience. He is good, IF he likes you. And he still gets the industry pro clients coming there for some reason.. you know, the type that aren't too sensitive ( like most Victorians ) Check out the production at http://www.mp3.com/meatlockerseven Not bad considering we are really just a bunch of hick/hack/weed junkies from nowhere BC. wow.. that took 10 minutes.. Late, gotta go. - Wed, 30 Oct 2002 2:40pm | ||
| Mr. Hell User Info... | In short, go and attempt to do better somewhere else then. :} - Wed, 30 Oct 2002 7:20pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Just as I thought. Been Der = BIG mouth, no guts. pretty easy to hide behind a screen when you have nothing good to say. :) - Fri, 1 Nov 2002 1:34pm | ||
| more truth | who cares anyways, 99% of the bands in this city can't afford the place (zg) anyways. and if you are thinking about spending that much on a recording vancouver is 2 hours away and your options are plenty the rest of you poor rockers/punks go rent some gear and practice. two bands that come to mind with cheap debut albums that launched hugh carreers. nirvana-bleach $600us violent femmes-violent femmes $500us recorded live in the studio over two days. sales now in the millions. i know there is tonnes more but cant think of them right now. - Fri, 1 Nov 2002 2:33pm | ||
| Jeff Allenby | Definately a good point. Different types of music thrive on different tyes of recordings. Punk rock can excel with cheap recordings, other forms of rock excel with great recordings, it all comes down to how much time do you want to spend. Dont forget if you travel to record it costs money too. if you are going to record for a few months then it can get expensive. Nirvana slapping together an album in 2 weeks is possible. Dream Theatre putting an album together in 2 weeks is not. Most radio music isnt very complex and is recorded easily anyways, not unlike punk. But how long do you think it took Pink Floyd to record The Wall? Alot of very well known bands spend up to a year in the studio at a cost of millions. Nirvana, it's basic, sounds good raw. Most metal you hear nowadays on the radio is very well produced. Metal bands are spending alot of money these days to get that sound. - Fri, 1 Nov 2002 7:35pm | ||
| The Onion | uhh I'm just gonna' be cheap and make my basement a studio. I'll buy the equipment, set it up, get the acoustics in that room and just make a proffesional recording studio (or close enough to do a good recording job)I'll probably be doing that for alot cheaper cause' i won't have a time limit and can record anytime i want. I figure it's just the better way. - Tue, 5 Nov 2002 11:50pm | ||
| FYI | The Eurythmics first album cost them $800US and most of it was recorded on a FOUR TRACK. FYI - Wed, 6 Nov 2002 6:21pm | ||
| RSBF | well, i work upstairs in the building and there ain't no pornos being shot around here! ....... well not yet, we have the recording equipment though - just need some men! (or do we?) ; ) all i can say is i've sat in some of Rob's sessions and he's great at what he does (at least i think so) and the equipment in there is stellar. ML7 does a lot for Rob and vice versa so it shouldn't be an issue to talk of $$. talking trash about someone due to their supposed past is weak and unfounded. if ML7 is happy with what they are getting then that's all that matters....... - Wed, 6 Nov 2002 7:45pm | ||
| Anonymous | I use Cakewalk ProAudio Studio 9.... it doesn't need a fast computer to run, and the quality is great, even with 13 tracks plus.... It's a gooood alternative.... - Wed, 6 Nov 2002 10:22pm | ||
| Anonymous | thats right you can turn your computer into a recording studio and you can get all your programs free from file transfering programs.pro tools,cakewalk,cubase,sounforge, and many more. lots of these programs have built in effects banks. p.s. unless you think you can sell 50000 copies of your album stay out of exspensive places like zero g, you'll only be broke. - Thu, 7 Nov 2002 12:01pm | ||
| FUNNY PEOPLE | Everyone and their dog are recording on their computers these days. And the recordings reflect it. Good for a demo. Go to mp3.com and you will find 1000's of such bands. Bands like the Eurythmics. Nirvana etc were also putting out cheap recordings at first. Gauranteed, after these bands were signed that their recordings were upwards of $50 000 US. Places like Zero Gravity offer equipment that can get you ANALOG sound at about half the rate of a similar studio in Vancouver. Call any 2" ANALOG studio in Vancouver and ask their daily rate. If you provide your OWN tracks, they will charge you upwards of $1000 per day to bring in your own mix master and use their gear. If you want one of their engineers, up goes the price. Obviously nobody in Victoria has the money for a studio like Zero Gravity, which is why that studio caters to mostly out of town American country bands, American Hip Hop, classical bands with financial backing and movie/tv scores. HBO plugs arent exactly to be scoffed at, and Andromeda is a really popular show, that studio should be proud to be getting to work on such projects. What kind of video gear do they use down there I am wondering? Another point somebody above made is that in today's music market production is EVERYTHING. just listen to the crap being pumped out o the radio. Gone are the days when Led Zep could pop out a home recording and go multi platinum. Todays industry takes talentless crap and tacks on high production, resulting in a saturation of bad music on the air that is very well produced. Unfortunately now the bands with talent have to keep up or they get swept under the rug so to speak. - Thu, 7 Nov 2002 12:50pm | ||
| RSBF | i have to say that was well said. - Thu, 7 Nov 2002 1:42pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Yes, it is kind of neat to have a Tyson/Lewis HBO boxing party and know that HBO voice was recorded in the studio we are in. Also was neat to see unreleased Andromeda footage, not that I really care because I dont like the show or Kevin Zorbo. For any video work the studio has 1 PowerMAc G4 Dual 1 gig with 2 gigs ram, 1 PowerMac G4 Dual 1.25 gig with 512 ram, an Apple 17" Digital Flatscreen (not LCD crap). And for backup, and since ProTools isnt out yet for Mac OSX, a PowerMac 400 with the Protools console. Soon as Protools is available for the new OS they will switch. As well there is access to a HD digital wide camera which comes in handy for any video synch needed. Of course it is all done on Final Cut. ML7 guitarist Tony does a whole bunch of recording at home on Cubase and Cakewalk. Sounds ok, but doesnt even come close to the 2". - Thu, 7 Nov 2002 2:33pm | ||
| Infinity Studios | Digital multitrack recording at $15 an hour. Email me for samples. I would consider it close to pro quality. (sorry I can't bother to read over this entire thread) - Thu, 7 Nov 2002 3:46pm | ||
| g.x | We recorded at Electric Mountain AND Zero Gravity. The recordings at Electric Mountain sounded better, for less dollars. Zander is a killer bass player also. - Thu, 7 Nov 2002 4:53pm | ||
| Anonymous | well, which studio were you in first? if it was zero gravity I would bet that the second round sounded better because you were tighter on your music and you had a better idea of what you wanted in your sound and production. - Thu, 7 Nov 2002 7:29pm | ||
| Laprider User Info... | OK this all way too much irrelavent talk now....see the new thred I start. - Thu, 7 Nov 2002 7:59pm | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | Actually, for the record, I charge $25/ hr for the sea of shit, and it used to be cheaper. Given my druthers I would use analog for all the heavy music I do, and in fact almost bought a 2 inch deck but the fact of the matter is that almost none of my clients could afford just the tape. I haven't had a $1000 recording come out of here for almost a year now; Bronze did a whole CD for $250 that sounds great because they were prepared to the yin yang and all their gear worked. I routinely spend at least 25% of my sessions either doing the back-up vocals, fixing out of whack guitars, or waiting for essential "special guest" artists to get their shit together. The analog vs. digital argument is just so much smoke; digital sounds the way it sounds because there is LESS distortion in it; analog has that nice even ordered harmonic distortion that also makes your Marshall stack sound so nice. I simply add some using a variety of tube gear and careful compression to (try to) mimic the sound of analog tape being hit hard. I've lost count of the number of people that have complimented me for my "analog" recordings. The things you want in a studio are good mics, good preamps and good monitoring. Fancy boards like the SSL are fine but will you really need a compressor and gate on every channell. I wouldn't mix a record on an SSL for all the tea in china; they sound odd to me. If you forget about convenience you can save a titful of money and spend it on important things like mics and good speakers. And if the engineer has no ears then all the gear in the world will do you no good. If the studio has no CD's lying around to listen to to compare stuff with, beware. Also if they have Yamaha NS 10 speakers to monitor on (and a staggering number of studios do) make sure you put shit tickets over the tweeters or you'll get a recording with no top end in it. If they monitor at really loud levels all the time, run away screaming. And if they can't mic up a drum set and have a sound in a couple of hours top, then ask why. It's your dough. - Sat, 7 Dec 2002 3:59am | ||
| Plastic Man | From what I understand, all the high end studios use NS-10's for a reason. That reason is that the NS-10's are actually very cheaply made, and if it sounds good on the NS-10's then it'll sound good anywhere. What high end studio uses ONLY NS-10's? Even Zero Gravity has 2 small Genelec monitors and two of the big $20 000 Genelec monitors as well. Ive been to many studios where everything is mixed on the good monitors and then they go to the NS-10's for a final dirty listen to tweak out anything the high end monitors might sweeten up.. - Sat, 7 Dec 2002 1:21pm | ||
| Tommy | "The analog vs. digital argument is just so much smoke; digital sounds the way it sounds because there is LESS distortion in it;" Not only that, the sampling rates on a 2" deck are over double that of current 24/96 khz technology. Any well recorded 2" recording will blow away a well recorded digital recording. Period. - Sat, 7 Dec 2002 3:07pm | ||
| Jam Cow | The digital kids always cry better, the analog fogies always cry better, bottom line is 2" analog has a warmth that no digital recording can acheive. Also in regards to the SSL mention, of who needs a gate and compressor on each track??.. hello! that is how PROFESSIONALS record, something Victoria seems to be lacking, or at least in the few studios Ive heard about here.. forgive me if Im wrong, Im new to town. SSL's tend to start at about $200 000 used and are about $800 000 brand new, so no wonder you dont like them, its worth more then every studio in this city put together. - Sat, 7 Dec 2002 6:11pm | ||
| well sir | not every studio. - Sat, 7 Dec 2002 6:30pm | ||
| yes sir | yes sir - Sat, 7 Dec 2002 6:30pm | ||
| Tommy | I'm a programmer in my 20's (Java, C++) and basically the public at large got duped into believing that digital means 'better'. Shows how easy it is for engineers and corporations to throw the wool over the publics' eyes (that's where the smokescreen is). 2" is better for reasons other than just the usual cliche, 'cuz it sounds warmer'......the inaccuracy of digital and the limitations of digital are known by those who understand it. - Sat, 7 Dec 2002 8:17pm | ||
| Dancing Girl | zippgunn said: If the studio has no CD's lying around to listen to to compare stuff with, beware. so true so true. make sure you listen to their stuff before you spend. certain studio's in this land will make it seem like you have to be good enough for them, no its the other way around. i went to zero gravity to check out recording one song. they made it sound like it was used by so many important people. yet when i asked to hear so stuff recorded there, they gave me all sorts of reasons why they had nothing to hear. then proceeded to turn the question on me and ask to hear my demo's before i record. then the thousand dollar a day or hundred dollars an hour price came out of the beautiful woodwork. and the women who was the manager seemed so pushy. she was bragging about being dizzy's manager (had a good laugh about that later) my advice, listen to your music honestly and decided for your self the quality of recording you will need. - Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:16pm | ||
| Slow Burn | If you feel that you need to spend0 $1000 per day on recording, go to mushroom studios in Van. They are proven, they have wicked engineers and they liase with some of the best producers in the business. But, if you're not inherently rich, or signed by Sony, why don't you check out some of the smaller studios; you might be surprised at what someone who charges $20 an hour can do for you. If you suck, your recording will suck. And although the whole tracking process is important, the real difference (good or bad) is going to be made by whoever masters the project. Don't be so naive as to think bigger is better. - Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:03am | ||
| ML7Mike | Well, for the record, ZG is doing one hell of a job for us. Its kinda neat seein some of the people that go through there.. like last week I got to meet the lady who does Sailor Moon's voice, and Lydia from the Beetlejuice cartoon. She had a neat voice :) - Tue, 10 Dec 2002 2:00am | ||
| big who-ha | Do any bands record there. (zg) You mentioned people coming in for spoken work, in other postings in this thread. That is television stuff your taliking about. (television=money) we talk about music here. Names some bands that recorded there. - Wed, 11 Dec 2002 7:37pm | ||
| big who-ha | P.S. mushroom studio charge 2000/day i think also they have a have a huge list of clients on there web page. - Wed, 11 Dec 2002 7:41pm | ||
| big who-ha | just re reading this very interesting thread. ml7mike say's, don't expect to go into a studio like that (zg)with $3000 and get quality work. expect to pay something like $10000. so you saying what there exactly. the amount you spend determines the quality of music produced there. does one song cost $10000 or does an entire album cost $10000 including mastering and duplication? i just rented digital 8track studio for $250 and i think my product i turned out is pretty dam fine. in fact i put it to the volume/sound quality test against pro recordings and with out it being mastered its pretty close. i will probably spend twice to three times that to get it mastered, but the recording rips. it's all i can do. i dont have the money ML7 does to record in a place like that, or even SOS. - Wed, 11 Dec 2002 7:45pm | ||
| Anonymous | Hey rsbf, I was just wondering if you liked using the word "stellar", you seem to throw it around alot. Can't think of another word to use or what. It's getting boring. - Wed, 11 Dec 2002 8:07pm | ||
| Slow Burn | Mushroom will quote you $1500 per day, but I bet you could get it for closer to $1000 if you do block rate. - Wed, 11 Dec 2002 8:48pm | ||
| ML7Mike | ZG has recorded alot of bands over the years. ML7 has no money, but the studio owner likes our style. Typically though ZG is between $750 - $1000 per day. Maybe we suck, but it took us about 2-5 days to track each song live off the floor, then another 2 weeks or so to get all the vocal tracks down. Thats 17 days, at $1000 per day, well you do the math. Anyhow, there are a couple of unmastered mp3's on mp3.com. - Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:47pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Oh Yah, but multiply the 2-5 days per song by 10 songs, then add on mixing time, and next thing ya know you owe the sydicate big bucks and some gangster kicks in your studio door and plugs you. - Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:56pm | ||
| Infinity Studios | Hey all, I'm still working on the website, but here are some some clips of some music I've recorded over the last year or so. $20 an hour starting January 1st. Email me or call for Adam at 595-6982. Armchair Cynics: http://www.armchaircynics.com/infinity/dronesclip01.mp3 http://www.armchaircynics.com/infinity/capitalizeclip01.mp3 Numbulust: http://www.armchaircynics.com/infinity/sexappealclip01.mp3 One Divided (solo stuff): http://www.armchaircynics.com/infinity/conditionedclip01.mp3 - Thu, 12 Dec 2002 2:28am | ||
| BOO | Those songs all sound the same, they suck - Thu, 12 Dec 2002 2:41am | ||
| big who-ha | hey infinity, thats what i was talking about . for twenty bucks an hour they sound great. you don't need to spend $17000 like the ML7 guys. for that kind of cash i could package my album buy a van , book a cross canada tour,stay in hotels,sell a few cd per shows, expose my music good or not to hundreds even thousands of people, and even if i didn't get paid for the shows i would still come home with enough cash to pay my rent. for $250 we recorded 9 songs in two days, we took the whole weekend and locked oursevles in with some food, no liqour a few whacky smokes and some inspiration. we practiced like hell before we rented the gear. if someday some record lable wants to sign us we let them spend the big cash. - Thu, 12 Dec 2002 2:09pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Big Who-Ha we spent almost nothing. As I said, the studio owner likes our style, and took us in on that alone. In fact, up until his gratuitous offer, we were already speaking to Scott H. about our $1000 budget. - Thu, 12 Dec 2002 2:28pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Something Ive wondered about. If a low budget studio can easily get as good a recording as a high budget studio, as seems to be the arguement here from various engineers, then why is it that all the medium to large labels spend 10's of thousands in high budget studios? I would think that budget concious labels, especially those gambling on a newer band, would be more inclined to save 20 grand and go to a studio where they could get the same quality for $2000. But instead they pay the big bucks, and go for the so called "pro sound" . I mean, take a band like Strapping Young Lad. Popular band sure enough, but there isnt a single member of that band who is living it up in riches. Yet, their label Century Media puts them in The Armory at about $1500 per day. Now SYL isnt a band who is going to be recording a song per day, as its very complex, layered music. Devin is a studio wizard himself, and alot of his lower budget solo albums sound quite well done. Yet the label still chooses to drop a huge sum of cash on the recording, instead of perhaps outfitting the guys with some new gear, or a nicer tour van, or promotions for that matter. Wouldnt a label like Century Media, want to save all that cash instead of blowing it ll in a world class studio like The Armory? Bottom line is... - Thu, 12 Dec 2002 2:31pm | ||
| Mr. Hell User Info... | And off topic, their touring van is not too fancy. They have to warm it up for 15 minutes before they drive off. So you'd think the label would get them a better running one, but no. The tour van budget gets swallowed up by recording time. But hey, if you are happy with what you get for cheaper, power to ya! - Thu, 12 Dec 2002 2:47pm | ||
| Frank Ash | I think the answer to you Mike is obvious really. The big lables send their bands to expensive high end studios because they get better results and better quality sound. Dont forget, 80% of a recording's production is the room it is recorded in. You can have all the gear in the world, but if your resonance is bad your product will reflect that. Most expensive studios have very nice rooms, and the result is very warm, clean tracks that give a producer more room to mix. Another important factor is the engineer or whomever is mixing. They need to have a very good grasp of the mastering process, so that the mix comes out correctly in the end. An amatuer will almost always mix until it sounds perfect, then send it off to mastering, leaving that facility at a loss as to how to tweak up the audio, or maybe not at a loss , but with way less options. An experienced engineer will mix accordingly, all the time looking forward to the mastering process, and what it is going to reflect in the mix. IE: Mix with too little low end, and there isnt enough for the mastering engineer to use in case he wants some. Leave a little extra low end, well it is simple enough for the mastering engineer to pull some low out.. alot easier than adding it. An inexperienced mixing engineer will listen to a mix, feel ( and rightously so ) that there is too much low end, and he may dial it out for his own listening pleasure. But then in the mastering process, they may feel it needs a slight low end tweak, but there is none to work with. This is a very common mistake in the music industry. Of course, no matter how much momey you spend, talent goes along way, always, but yes, ultimately there is a reason why lables avoid cheaper studios. Also, any audiophile worth his rice is going to be able to pick out a good recording from an excellent recording, and most experienced sound engineers can pinpoint the tricks and techniques used in another engineers mix, things that the generally ignorant end listener will never even notice, it'll just be another aspect of the song. - Fri, 13 Dec 2002 4:48pm | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | I think you are dead wrong.I always mix with an eye to giving the mastering engineer as little to do as possible. A good one will leave a good mix alone, or make very subtle changes and a smart engineer will cultivate a relationship with a mastering guy he knows he can trust. I've had recordings leave the studio sounding great on everything I played it on; studio monitors, car decks, radios, home systems, Grado headphones, even my kids' blaster. One went to a guy on the mainland who was a pal of the band who leaned so hard on the bass ( and then compressed a twice compressed mix) that it is one of the only CD's in my collection that I have to roll off huge amounts of bass on my home system just to get it in the ballpark with the rest of the world. Another went to one of the bandmember's computer where he had a "mastering program" that was so bad than when I heard it I offered them a freebee if the original DAT mixes sounded anywhere near as bad. A third had such a weird EQ curve imposed on it that it seemed to double all the reverb on it. Again, a quick listen to the original mixes revealed a different record. Yet another went to a big budget studio to be mastered. After painstakingly getting stereo guitar sounds on it (from the stereo guitar amps the band used) I was choked to discover that the "mastering engineer" had folded the stereo mix almost into mono because he said it made it "sound tighter". Beware the mastering engineer that wants to become the project's "producer". For that matter beware the "producer" who solicits work without any hard facts about his/her "credits". I call these "teasers".Most artists don't even need a "producer". - Sun, 15 Dec 2002 1:51am | ||
| josh User Info... | Dropping alot of money to use the most expensive gear is pointless if you don't have someone around with good ears, especially for an unsigned band. The bottom line is not always the gear you use, it's the people doing the work that make the most difference. Me and tyson([email protected]) from moneyshot will record your band for very reasonable prices, and help you out on the production side to get the sound you're after. Check out http://www.mp3.com/moneyshotcanada anything from the 'amped' ep for an example of the recording quality you could expect to get. It was self produced, mixed and mastered by me and tyson. feel free to email us for more info - Sun, 15 Dec 2002 6:04am | ||
| josh User Info... | Another thing worth mentioning is some facts about analog vs digital. As an electrical engineer, I can't leave it alone. There was some mention of the 'sampling rate' of analog tape. Analog tape does not have a 'sampling rate'. The head converts an electric field into a pattern of magnetization on magnetic particels on the tape. A high frequency biasing signal, usually 100-200khz is used to excite the tape's magnetic particles to lower coercivity, i'm not sure if tommy is confusing this with sampling rate. The fact about analog tape is that it's frequency response is a function of a whole whack of variables including tape speed and track width. For a given tape speed and track width, the bias needs to be aligned, which amounts to a trade off between frequncy response and non linear distortion. This distortion is a big part of the analog "sound" The more tracks and higher tape speed you have on an analog tape, the worse the range of frequency response will be. (2" sixteen track tape at 15 ips has frequncy response from 20 to about 24,000hz, 24 track is worse) and a shitload of non linearities in that range. Digital quality depends on the bit resolution, sampling rate and more importantly, the type and quality of analog to digital converters used; succesive aproximation, flash, etc. Generally though, 24 bit digital at 96khz can reproduce a larger frequency range, 0 to over 40khz, with less overall distortion than analog tape. Each type of recording comes with it's own set of virtues and trade offs . There are many thousands of other variables that make up the overall sound quality of a recording. Boiling it down to an arguement of 'analog vs digital' is drastically oversimplifying. - Sun, 15 Dec 2002 6:35am | ||
| Tommy | A good 2" deck will record, 'sample' frequencies in a range over double that of current 24bit 96khz technology. And the 'rate' of digital sampling needs to be radically higher in order to replicate the fullness and accuracy of sound of 2" analog. The space between data samples becomes more apparant as digital degradation occurs, and the 'sound' falls apart. 2" sound is held together like glue. In essence, as a storage medium, digital is fantastic, but it's methods for calculating and capturing sound, and the hardware that processes that data, need to massively improve because it can compare to a great 2" recording. Studios like Electric Mountain and Zero Gravity (and all high end studios) are equipped with both technologies...ask them what they prefer. - Sun, 15 Dec 2002 2:00pm | ||
| josh | that's simply not true, man analog does not sample, thats the definition of analog. It has a frequncy and voltage resolution during recording and playback based on the size of the magnetic particles on the tape and the speed that the tape is being run by the head. Even properly biased 2" 8track has higher signal to noise, more nonlinearitites, and a smaller range of frequency response than 24/96 digital on a good a/d converter. And i'm not even saying that one sounds better than another, thats just the facts of the two mediums. - Sun, 15 Dec 2002 6:04pm | ||
| Tommy | a smaller range of frequency response Wrong. A good deck can record frequencies above 192kHz. The inaudible frequencies that digital currently strips (or is incapable of processing) are critical to the square waves that require infinitely high frequencies. That translates to....those frequencies are really important to getting a big fat fuckin' drum and guitar sound, (with cymbals that actually sound like cymbals). 2" just slams the wave onto tape (no math needed). If you are so sure about it, show me one example of well recorded digital drums/guitars that is even remotely close to a well recorded 2" recording. - Sun, 15 Dec 2002 9:26pm | ||
| Mr. Hell User Info... | Technicalities aside, analog stomps all over digital. We have experienced both and there is no comparison. - Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:15pm | ||
| Ike | Apparently that Moby album "Play" was recorded digitally. I don't particularily like the guy's music, but it does sound pretty fat. I think digital works great for many of us home enthusiasts because of it's relative ease to set up. Out of curiosity, does anyone know what the cost difference is between setting up a digital or analoq project studio? Here is a good article on the importance of Mastering http://www.prorec.com/prorec/articles.nsf/articles/8A133F52D0FD71AB86256C2E005DAF1C - Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:18pm | ||
| Ike | Here is the article without all the fancy pictures. Over the Limit Ceiling Limited Rip Rowan Editor Related Articles � You're Not the Master, Grasshopper Suggested Reading How to Become a Record Producer by David Mellor I�m a big Rush fan. Yeah, I know. Me and 50 million other drummers. I�ve been listening to this band since they showed up on my radar in the late 1970s, and have always followed their tours and new albums. I admit that I fall into the camp of wistful fans who yearn for a return to the art-rock glory days of the band (which pretty much makes me an old burnout) but I still like to hear the new stuff and see what these dudes are up to. And, Rush�s return to a more guitar-oriented (and acoustic-drum-oriented) sound has reignited some of my interest in their performances. Rock music is all about the guitar, and few people are as interesting to listen to as Alex Lifeson. And don�t even get me started about Neil Peart. The other interest I have in this band is that they have always been at or near the forefront of recording technology. They were one of the first bands to jump into digital recording, where they definitely learned some tough lessons, but the engineering work done on their CDs has usually been top-notch. I can almost always learn something about engineering from listening to the production of a Rush CD. So you can guess that it was with much anticipation that I awaited my first real listen to the band�s newest CD, �Vapor Trails�. Reviews heralded this album as one of the hardest-rocking Rush albums in some time, with a strong focus on guitars, powerful drumming, excellent bass work, and some of the best songwriting to come from the band in years. And, in listening to the CD, I found all of these things to be true. This is easily my favorite collection of Rush songs in years, maybe decades. It�s incredible work and I earnestly hope it reflects a new and sustainable direction for this great band. However there was one fact that the reviewers had all left out: this CD sounds like dogshit. Perhaps you think I�m being a little strong. I think not. This is without prefix or suffix the worst sounding Rush CD ever made. In fact it is so bad that I cannot listen to more than a few songs before I just have to turn it off. What�s the cause of this sonic catastrophe? There�s no secret here: loudness. Vapor Trails is just the latest CD to fall victim to the current craze of LOUDER IS BETTER production. Rush is not alone. Most of the current crop of rock CDs have been punished by the LOUDER IS BETTER process, and I know I am not alone when I say, once and for all, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Where the damage was done on the Vapor Trails CD is impossible to say for sure. Usually, LOUDER IS BETTER is inflicted by the mastering engineer. It is relatively evident from an investigation of the audio on Vapor Trails that the problems arose in mixing or mastering, not in tracking. However the audio on this disk is so bad that had I been the record label, I would have sued the responsible party for malpractice. Unfortunately, I know all too well that the record label is almost certainly the culprit in this crime, and the band and its fans the victims. The Label is the Culprit Record labels have never really understood what makes a record �sound good� and frankly, few even care. Many of the people who sign artists don�t understand their music at all. Instead, they are able to pick up on musical trends, and replicate those trends across the ranks of their artists. Artists that fit into the trend are fed, the rest are starved. Over the past few years, record labels have increasingly attempted to dictate to the artist and producer the target volume level of the CD. For some reason, record labels have it in their head that �LOUD� equals good, and therefore, �LOUDER� equals better. Not caring to understand even the basics of audio, these morons simply demand more volume (typically from the mastering engineer) and really don�t understand � or care � about the consequences of their demands. Mastering engineers are caught in a Catch-22. If they do not deliver a product that is appropriately LOUD, then they are consdered inept by the labels and are shunned. If they refuse to destroy the artist�s music, then they aren�t being �team players� and quickly fall out of favor. But if they provide what the customer demands (and remember, the label, not the band, is the customer) then they ruin a perfectly good piece of music, and they know that sooner or later, people are going to figure out why the sound is so horrible, and then the mastering engineer will be blacklisted for having followed orders. Having said all that I really don�t know what I would do in their shoes. If someone offered YOU the opportunity to master a Rush CD, and then told you that you would have to destroy the sound quality in order to get the job, how would you respond? It isn�t a clear or easy choice. However what is clear as day is that this CD sounds like dogshit. I cannot say this enough. My God, this thing sounds terrible. It is hands-down the worst sounding CD I own. Perhaps a brief education about the history of the problem is in order. A Little History Lesson Everyone has heard the CD That Is Too Quiet. This is usually your (or your buddy�s) first demo. You pop it in and you can barely hear the music. There are many reasons for the CD That Is Too Quiet, and it isn�t my intention here to go into them all. But we�ve all heard (or made) the CD That Is Too Quiet and regretted it. Professional engineers, particularly the ones working with digital in the early days of that medium, made some CDs That Were Too Quiet. Usually, these guys had lots of skill and great intent. You get the whole CD laid out in the DAW, and you�ve been careful with your gain structure, and there�s lots of headroom. In one or two places, there�s a freak transient that comes close to 0 dB, but overall the peaks are hitting near �9 or lower, and there�s tons of dynamic range. In general these professional CDs sound pretty good � sometimes excellent - but the average level of the audio is relatively low. Most older recordings tracked and mixed to analog didn�t suffer these problems. The reason was that traditionally engineers would saturate the analog tape by running it hot, essentally using the tape as a peak limiter at every stage of the process. As a result there are usually no errant peaks in an analog rock recording, and for this reason most rock records are still recorded to analog tape. The problem with the CD That Is Too Quiet is this: when you put the CD into the CD changer, it�s YOUR music that nobody hears. Well, folks, if you�re a record label exec, that�s the ONE problem that you know just cannot be allowed to stand. Quiet CDs became synonymous with Amateur Recordings, and Loud CDs became synonymous with Professional Recordings. Understandably, nobody wants to have the quietest CD in the CD changer. Nobody wants to have the one CD that doesn�t get heard. The problem with the LOUDER IS BETTER approach is simply that with any medium � digital or analog � there is only so much signal that will fit in the space provided. Beyond a point, you cannot gain anything without losing something. Why Be Normal? The idea behind peak limiting of digital audio started simply enough. Before people got the idea to use a peak limiter on their digital audio, the process of normalizing was used. Normalizing is a strange word that simply means �increase the volume of the signal by whatever amount is needed to bring the highest peak up to 0 dB, full-scale. Normalizing audio during a CD transfer is simply an easy way to get the audio as loud as it can be without changing the dynamics whatsoever. From an audiophile point of view it is the proper technique to get the hottest signal on CD with no distortion of the signal at all. However, as we�ve discussed, if you have just one transient that jumps out of the signal, then you really can�t get much extra volume out of the signal. Here�s where limiting comes into play: if we just tame the small number of peaks that are eating up the dynamic range of the signal, then we can get the entire signal hotter. Used properly, this results in an imperceptible change to a small number of peaks in the signal and the whole signal can be made louder, sometimes considerably so. This approach achieves the maximum volume while still preserving virtually all of the original signal. People discovered that with modern limiter technology, you could pretty much ride ALL of the peaks, and squeeze another few dB of gain out of the signal. This approach definitely changes the sonics of the signal because the peaks are being limited throughout the song. However, depending on the source material and your personal taste, this approach to limiting can sound pretty good as long as it is kept in the range of reasonableness. A lot of CDs have been mastered using this approach to limiting, and most of them still sound pretty good. However, the latest trend is LOUDER IS BETTER. This approach basically ignores any distortion caused by limiting and seeks to make the audio as loud as possible. The idea is to peg the meters and keep them pegged. As a result the signal is just ruined. WHY IS THE LOUDER IS BETTER APPROACH THE WRONG APPROACH? BECAUSE WHEN ALL OF THE SIGNAL IS AT THE MAXIMUM LEVEL, THEN THERE IS NO WAY FOR THE SIGNAL TO HAVE ANY PUNCH. THE WHOLE THING COMES SCREAMING AT YOU LIKE A MESSAGE IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. AS WE ALL KNOW, WHEN YOU TYPE IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS THERE ARE NO CUES TO HELP THE BRAIN MAKE SENSE OF THE SIGNAL, AND THE MIND TIRES QUICKLY OF TRYING TO PROCESS WHAT IS, BASICALLY, WHITE NOISE. LIKEWISE, A SIGNAL THAT JUST PEGS THE METERS CAUSES THE BRAIN TO REACT AS THOUGH IT IS BEING FED WHITE NOISE. WE SIMPLY FILTER IT OUT AND QUIT TRYING TO PROCESS IT. I bet you couldn�t even finish reading that paragraph. Get the idea? If louder was really better, then all print media would be printed like the above paragraph. Editor's note: immediately after printing this article, Senior Editor Bill Park mentioned in a Discussion Forum thread that one point that had not been made in this article was the psychological effect of LOUDER IS BETTER on the listener - that people tend to either turn the music off, tune the music out, or get away from it. Of course, that is precisely the point of the paragraph above in all caps. Bill had actually fallen victim to the point he was trying to make - the all-caps paragraph was so overwhelming to his brain that he either couldn't stand to read the whole thing, or his brain failed to process the message. The irony of this is just amazing, and clearly proves the point that Bill was trying to make: LOUDER IS BETTER means that people actually fail to even hear the music. Case Study I went back through some of my collection of Rush CDs to see if my theories held true. What I found was pretty shocking, but not surprising. It turns out that Rush is just a microcosm of what has been going on in music for the last five or so years. Here is a side-by-side picture showing a sample of audio from five different Rush CDs. On the top is the latest CD, Vapor Trails (2002). Below that, going back a few years, is a sample from the Counterparts CD (1993). Going back a year is a sample from the Roll The Bones CD (1992). Next is 1985�s Power Windows, the first Rush CD to be recorded entirely digitally. On the bottom is a sample from the Grace Under Pressure CD (1984) which immediately preceded Power Windows and was recorded to analog. A numerical analysis of these tracks offers more insight into the same information: Peak Amplitude # Clipped Samples RMS (average) Power Vapor Trails 0 dBFS 110 -9.5 dB Counterparts 0 dBFS 5 -14 dB Roll the Bones 0 dBFS 5 -17 dB Power Windows -.3 dBFS 0 -18.5 dB Grace Under Pressure -.3 dBFS 0 -18.5 dB a 10-second representative sample was used from each CD in computing these statistics Power Windows and Grace Under Pressure are classic examples of the Normalization approach to CD transfer (note: I have no earthly idea how any of the CDs were actually mastered, but they still serve as excellent examples of the various approaches to mastering I will discuss). Both Power Windows and Grace Under Pressure show no signs of brickwall peak limiting. Most of the peaks fall well below 0 dBFS, but each one had one peak that hit -.3 dBFS. In the mid-eighties, -.3 dBFS was considered the loudest signal that was safe to put on a CD, since some CD players at the time would treat a 0 dBFS sample as an error. It seems apparent that these two CDs were normalized immediately before transfer to CD master and were not processed with a brickwall limiter. Roll the Bones shows some signs of peak limiting, but the limiting was a very safe approach. Most of the peaks are just a little below 0 dBFS, but several of them do hit 0 dBFS. However, investigating those samples shows that most of the transient is preserved, leading me to believe that the limiter was used primarily as a safety device, rather than with a deliberate attempt to knock the peaks off of the transients. A little gain was achieved vis-a-vis the older songs: the Roll the Bones sample is 1.5 dB louder than the samples from Power Windows and Grace Under Pressure. Counterparts is indicitive of an aggressive approach to limiting that still seeks to preserve as much fidelity as possible in the signal. Here it is pretty clear that the limiter was used to shave off a few dB from most of the peaks. Although the analysis software reported that the Counterparts sample and the Roll the Bones sample both had 5 "clipped" samples, investigation of the peaks shows a more consistently limited signal on the Counterparts CD. Not surprisingly, this CD is noticeably louder than the older three samples used in this test. Counterparts is 3 dB louder than Roll the Bones and 4.5 dB louder than Power Windows and Grace Under Pressure. As you probably know, that means that you will perceive Counterparts to be twice as loud as those older CDs. And, while the trained ear will recognize the sound of Counterparts as having been processed with a limiter, the sound is still relatively open and more-or-less unmolested. Audiophiles will probably disagree with me here, but in the world of rock music, a little bit of peak limiting doesn't necessarily ruin the sound. But what is going on with Vapor Trails? The numbers quickly report the truth we were hearing with our ears. The average volume is a whopping 4.5 dB louder than Counterparts. But where Counterparts was able to achieve a 4.5 dB volume boost with almost no increase in audible distortion, in the Vapor Trails sample almost every peak is clipped, many of them severely so. And, as we shall see, the limiting is so severe that the songs have no punch, and just slam out of the speakers like a loud blast of white noise. What Price Volume? Have a look at this and tell me what you see: One of thousands of ruined kick drum transients from the Vapor Trails CD What you are looking at is a serious square wave. Note in the top swing of the clipped wave how the high-frequency harmonics have had all of their peaks shaved off? This is why clipping sounds harsh. Now note how in the lower portion of that wave the bottom is just perfectly squared off? That's a pulse of white noise. Now note how all of the peaks in this signal are all hitting the top of the scale? This is why the CD has no punch. A powerful blast of the kick drum should be louder than the rest of the signal and should have a sharp transient on the front of the wave. In the case of this song, however, it just produces a quick blast of distortion and a dull thudding sensation. If there was one or two places on the CD that had been tortured like this, it would be one thing. But that's not the case. Every peak on the whole album is wrecked. In fact I didn't have to try to find an ugly picture to illustrate the damage: the question was "which one do I choose?" You're probably thinking, "You've got to be kidding!" But I'm not. These are just a few of the thousands of examples of the trashed audio on the Vapor Trails CD. Now, anybody with any experience in audio should be able to look at these examples and immediately know, "That won't sound good." And, it doesn't. So the question is, why is this CD wrecked, and by whom? Notice how, when the signal clips, the whole signal is being destroyed? If this had been caused by an error during tracking (say, the kick drum track was too hot) then there would still be detail left in the signal. Therefore, we know this distortion was caused either during mixdown or during mastering. I'd be willing to bet that it was caused during the mastering process. At least I hope it was during the mastering process. At least that way there's some chance that one day I'll be able to buy a remastered copy of Vapor Trails that's worth listening to. But before you think I'm accusing the mastering engineer of incompetence, remember my earlier discussion. I doubt very seriously if any engineer actually wanted to do this to the music. No, only the decision of a record label executive could destroy music like this. What a shame. What a crying shame. Solutions I can sit here and rant all day long. The real question is: what can be done about it? The good news is that LOUDER IS BETTER is definitely a self-correcting problem. Because this stuff just plain sounds bad, and sooner or later (hopefully sooner) people are going to realize that the music doesn't "rock more" or "cut through better" but that it's just plain annoying. Because the simple truth is that audio such as this does NOT cut through better. In fact, in all probability this song will be QUIETER on the radio than, say, Roll the Bones! How, you may ask, could this be possible? The answer lies in the simple fact that the radio station uses compressors and limiters as well. The station's signal processors are also designed to get the hottest signal on the air. As such, they expect a certain amount of peaks in the signal. A broadcast processor that can't "see" any peaks is simply going to clamp down on the whole signal. In the end, the song is no louder (and maybe quieter) than other, more dynamic material - AND it is further penalized because it has no punch and is very harsh. So to you record executives who think you have identified the magic way to ensure that your song is louder on the radio, think again. It just isn't so. And as far as being the loudest CD in the CD changer, has it ever occurred to anyone just exactly how annoying that is? Let me tell you, you won't catch me loading Vapor Trails into MY changer with a bunch of older Rush CDs. It sticks out like a sore, bleeding thumb. As I have said before, Rush is not the only band to fall victim to LOUDER IS BETTER. As a matter of fact I have had some of the CDs which I have engineered fall victim to LOUDER IS BETTER. I don't mean to pick on Rush, one of my favorite bands of all time. However, let's look at some facts. More than most other bands, Rush has proved itself capable of consistently delivering music that pleases the fans. Rush's success has not come through a string of chart-topping hits, clever marketing, or sex appeal. Rush's success comes from its close alliance with its fans. I wonder what would happen if Rush fans complained about the sound of this record? To my mind, the only thing that the record company mooks will pay attention to is audience disapproval. So I encourage you to write to your favorite bands and tell them that you will quit buying their CDs if they insist on trying to make them the loudest CDs you own. - Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:24pm | ||
| josh | http://www.otari.com/literature/litsheets/21091.pdf frequency response of an otari mtr90 mkIII 30hz to 20khz at 15ips http://www.endino.com/graphs/ more popular analog recorder frequncy responses - all to about 20khz digital degredation? do you understand nyquist rate or how converters work? no offence, but it doesn't really sound like you know much about signal processing, analog or digital. where, exactly in a music signal do you expect to find a square wave? An analog signal, by definition, is continuous with a finite rise time. Good 24/96 digital has a lower signal to noise ratio, lower noise floor, better frequncy response, and less distortion than analog. Period. You want an example of good drum, guitar sounds on digital, listen to ANYTHING from nashville for the last 10 years. Brooks and Dunn off the top of my head. The drum sounds kick the crap out of almost every analog rock recording i've heard, and i can't even stand the music. Everything in country rock is recorded digitally. Want to know why? cuz country music sells, and the studios can afford to make the switch from older analog based platforms. still, the bottom line, (good analog gear vs good digital gear) is the skill of the engineer, musicians, and the producer on the project. not the gear - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 2:02am | ||
| Anonymous | Da Room Boss Da Room! - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 3:21am | ||
| Tycho Brahe | It seems to me that every new band in town is advertising their "studios". I'm curious about credentials. Perhaps we should leave it up to the pros and stop pretending to be something we're not. - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 3:55am | ||
| Tommy | Everything in country rock is recorded digitally. Want to know why? cuz country music sells, and the studios can afford to make the switch from older analog based platforms. Do you not think System of a Down, Filter, Pantera, Slayer, Limp Bizkit, Metallica, Aerosmith, Nickelback , and 99.9% of all rock/metal can afford to make the switch? I'm not an audio engineer, so I'm not on here with an agenda. And I'm not here to try and educate someone on the cost of a brand new Studer 2" deck. I've recorded both ways, so I know the difference. If you haven't..........the proof is in the sound. - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:55pm | ||
| Anonymous | Alot of bands can't afford the 'pros' for a project that is going to be payed for by the band members, but still would like to sound decent. So these band members have taken the time to learn to do it themselves. what is it that qualifies someone as a pro? a 9 month diploma from trebas? haha. or simply owning the gear? you talk about band members starting studios, how do you think these 'pros' started out. - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 1:15pm | ||
| laprider User Info... | OK my last input on this....analog vs. digital they both have plus and negative things. The fact is most stuff recorded on analog ends up being dumped to pro tools, there is not a recent major release out there that didn't go through pro tools, now unless they have released an anolog pro tools well hmmmm? AS to studios I think the room makes a big difference but can be compensated for. AS for studios, well I've recorded at Mushroom, little mountain, the armoury, metal works etccc...now I do most of my recording with either Scott or Joby Baker why? I know scott, I like him, he knows what he REALLY is doing and I always have a great time in his studio. He has a load of funky instruments etc..and still in my opinion is the only engineer with street credibility. He also is very open minded, I just produced a pure pop CD for someone there and although not his style he treated like any other project. Zero gravity, well sure they have gear, but I distrust anyone who went to a school like trebas. As well the person who books the studio is clueless. I called there about a year ago when I was doing some recording with Holly Mcnarland. She talked down to me, told me a thousand a day, and when I stated I would be using my own engineer got quite upset. I told her that the producer etc was Joe Chicarreli and she asked who's that. Well I can book Mushroom for 750 a day so guess where we went. I am eager to hear ML7 as I have yet to hear any music that has come from ZG.just my opinion� Electric Mountain, sound like really nice guys, great outboard gear, but no real references.. I'm sure I will do a project there at some point but again have nothing to base my decision on. Any one now days can build a good studio for not much dough...it takes years to run it properly...Scott at SOS without a doubt has proven his abilities therfore he is usually my first choice. He is also open, if you insist on a big drum room, well talk to him he can use the school to record. Working with Scott is laid back which means you will perfrom better. I have seen a lot of people choke in fancy looking wood walled oppresive studio'S, Ask to hear their product and make your decision based on that. - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 1:53pm | ||
| josh | nicleback recorded at warehouse studios in van, a protools based studio. tracked, mixed and mastered digitally the new aerosmith was recorded in joe perrys basement on a pro tools based system even the new metallica (the most digital friendly band in the world) is all tracked digitally except the drums, which are tracked on 2" analog and converted to digital for editing just the ones i bothered to look up even the big name analog recorder companies like studer and otari are putting their current research and development into development of new digital recorders - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 3:22pm | ||
| Tommy | Warehouse Studios is Pro Tools based? I guess you forget to look at their equipment list because all 3 of their studios have STUDER A800 Mark III Analog 24 Tracks. At the top of the list. They have an edit suite which has pro-tools, but (unless I missed it), their is no other mention of pro-tools. And you are saying Nickelback tracked digitally...where did you get that information? Using country music as a yardstick for drum sounds is a poor one, imo. If you have never recorded 2", you are not really in a position to discuss it's strengths and weaknesses. And if you can't realize it's still the industry standard recording medium in rock/metal.....well, that's your agenda. Warehousestudio - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 6:58pm | ||
| josh User Info... | man, i went to school for five years to get a degree for this shit, what sort of position does that put me in? what's your frame of reference? i have no agenda at all, just a guy in a band who wants to help other bands get a decent sound without paying an arm and a leg. Recording is just a hobby, nothing more. i'm gonna end whats becoming a stupid pissing match wasting everyone elses time reading through, so it's the last you'll hear from me on this. - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 7:33pm | ||
| Anonymous | wharehouse studios tape machines: - STUDER A800 Mark III Analog 24 Track - SONY PCM 3348U Digital Multitrack (48 Trk) - SONY PCM-800 DA-88 Digital 8 Track - T/C sounds like they're going digital too - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 7:50pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Laprider, Your talking about Rania who isnt around much anymore, although it was her that talked Robb into taking us on. As for Robbs Trebas training, we too were very wary. In fact I remember the first few years he was running that studio, it was obvious he was somewhat lost. But over the last 8 years he has learned alot. And that brings us to another point. You can have all the knowledge and training and gear in the world, but as with many things, without hands on experience, trial and error etc. you probably wont have what it takes. I watch Robb on that consol now, and he is amazing. He hears things nobody else does until he points them out, and he really seems to have a good grasp on mixing. He just needs time. I dont know that he is the best engineer if you have a deadline, but if he has his own schedule without pressure, he is very competant. As for the analog to Protools dump.. isnt that why there are analog mastering studios? I know the analog mastering studios are usually more expensive though.. Whats the difference between an Analog mastering facility and a digital one? - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 8:03pm | ||
| Anonymous | PS: Laprider, we have 2 songs on mp3.com that Robb mixed.. they're unmastered, and of course compressed to 128kbs mp3 format which really mushes an unmastered song, but they arent horrible ML7 MP3.com page On another note.. Rania talked down to someone? Wow.. I didnt think she was capable. She is one of those bubbly happy spinny girls. - Mon, 16 Dec 2002 8:21pm | ||
| Zipp Gunn User Info... | I too am anxious to hear the ML7 disc as I've been hearing about it for what seems like a year now. It's true that ML7 talked to me about recording at SOS, but I don't remember saying that I didn't like metal (I like some metal, mostly of the Coalesce/ Dillinger math variety). What I probably said was that I hate SHITTY metal. Plus I've done Withing a Vision, Allfather etc. so... I'll bet the ML7 record shreds, mainly because good gear plus an enthusiastic engineer is pretty hard to beat. However a year is forever in the music business. And why is it still not mastered? I thought Rob mastered in house. Tell us, fellows, just how long did this record take to make and how much did it actually cost in real money? Sorry to be so nosy but it would help to clarify this rather distended thread. - Tue, 17 Dec 2002 2:20am | ||
| ML7Mike | Heya Scott.. cool to see ya on the board.. Actually all we had to buy was the tape which was most of the $1000. However, as a result of this deal, we have had to step aside numerous times while paying clients came in and utilized the studio. That and the usual technical difficulties along the way have resulted in a lenghty mix to say the least. But its been really nice to work with Robb, as his desire to produce a metal band is very strong. He enjoys the music alot, and I think that has meant alot. When we first went in we were planning only to track with him and were talking to Devin Townsend about doing the mix. However as time went on we realized that Robb had all the tools at his fingertips, and all the desire, so we stuck it out in there, and saved a bit of money at the same time. We wont be mastering there, and are shopping for a facility now.. - Tue, 17 Dec 2002 2:43am | ||
| Zander | I am an engineer at Electric Mountain Studios, and have a friend in Boston who knows Joe and Steven from Aerosmith. Their new album was not entirely done on Pro Tools, as Josh had said. The drums were tracked at Longview Farm Studios on a Studer A800 MKIII 2" machine (suprise suprise). The tapes were taken to Joe's house where he has his own Studer A800. The album was tracked through a Neve Analog Console and mixed on an analog SSL 9000J. The assembly was done in Pro Tools with Apogee converters. The album was mastered to 1/2" analog. We use both 24/192khz digital technology as well as 2" analog. When clients bring Cd's they have done at other digital based studios to compare, they hear how thin they sound next to music off the 2" machine. Cheers - Tue, 17 Dec 2002 2:44pm | ||
| Anonymous | must be nice to get a freebee! the truth finally comes out - Tue, 17 Dec 2002 3:54pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Well the band isnt exactly invisible in this city, and anyone who knows anything about us knows we are all a bunch of uneducated ex-welfare bums with no future. Did you seriosly think we came up with over $20 000 and didnt bother to buy a tour van? hehe.. Last 2 tours we've done were in an old diesel pickup truck with a camper on the back. Cmon.. someone lend us a van! Who knows what will happen when it comes time to reduplicate this cd. Could be another year! - Tue, 17 Dec 2002 3:57pm | ||
| josh | hehe, as far as aerosmith goes, i definately didn't spend alot of time researching my sources. I was just curious so I looked it up and thats what I found. From what I was reading though, all guitars and vox were tracked digitally through tube pre's and apogee converters. Some select parts of the vocal tracks were actually then dumped onto half inch 2 track to compress/warm up and converted back into digital before assembly I guess it goes to show, both formats do have their place. - Tue, 17 Dec 2002 4:22pm | ||
| Tommy | I was just curious so I looked it up and thats what I found Oh really...perhaps the same source that claimed, 'Warehouse Studios was Pro Tools based? , and that nickeleback tracked all Pro-Tools? Perhaps you would like to share that source with us.... ;). - Tue, 17 Dec 2002 5:55pm | ||
| Mr. Hell User Info... | I hate to nickel and dime this to death, but Mike overlooked a few items in our expenditures...probably on purpose. We also did pay out some extra cash to Rob. What that amount is is between him and us. It ain't a total freebie. Gotta pay for hydro and all the extra shite that comes with doing an album! - Tue, 17 Dec 2002 6:44pm | ||
| josh | sources, sure.... two stories about aerosmith doing the entire album in digital http://www.audiomedia.com/archive/features/us-0501/us-0501-mikeshipley/us-0501-mikeshipley.htm http://mixonline.com/ar/audio_aero_smith/ - Tue, 17 Dec 2002 9:14pm | ||
| josh | Even the drums were tracked digitally, apparantly "When it finally came time to record the drums, they went out to Longview Farm, a highly regarded studio in rural Brookfield, Mass., where the band had worked before. �It's a really cool vibe and a big room and a Neve to track to,� Caruso says. �We wanted to get a drum sound that had a lot of ambience.� The team bypassed the studio's tape multitrack tape recorders in favor of Pro Tools. Then Tom Hamilton's bass part was interwoven with what was in essence a finished track." - Tue, 17 Dec 2002 9:30pm | ||
| Tommy | �We used the Cranesong HEDD 192 modified by Dave Hill, which emulates the harmonics you get from tape that you don't get from digital. The good news is there are ways of putting things recorded in Pro Tools through gear that makes it seem more full." In the case of the Cranesong HEDD 192 (along with the Neve), yea, that would account for some of the fullness. Very musical unlike a lot of digital sounds. And the only studio on the island with the Cranesong HEDD 192, is Electric Mountain, I believe. It is a killer unit. - Wed, 18 Dec 2002 2:40am | ||
| Zipp Gunn | What a terrific tempest in a teapot! It always amuses me to note that the two main groups of analog snobbery are metal types and trad jazzbos. Strangely both of these groups are also the most demonstrably conservative in their opinions, and I don't just mean in audio. The fact of the matter is, you can call up all the numbers and stats that you want, but the primary advantage of analog is that you have a potentially great compressor on each track with 2" tape. An experienced engineer can hit the tape with varying degrees of intensity to effect varying degrees of tape compression; there is no better compressor than a 2" 16 track Studer tape deck. Unfortunately a 2" Studer is also a nightmare to keep running to spec, is REALLY difficult to punch in on (in my considerable experience with working with these glorious antiques), and if you spend too much time farting around overdubbing etc. you actually wear out the tape and subsequently start losing your high end. 24/96 digital absolutely beats the crap out of the best analog on a scope or other test gear, and is also demonstrably the most accurate recording format available to the industry today. Don't believe me? then you can digest this tidbit of information. Not a single one of the major classical record labels in the world will touch even the most high end analog gear with a ten foot cattle prod. Not Deutche Grammophon, Phillips, Decca, Teldec, Telarc, London, Argo... not a one. Why? Because analog "colours" the sound of an orchestra or chamber ensemble. For a metal band this "colour" is usually a good thing because all loud music needs quality compression and benefits from even ordered harmonic distortion (just like my beloved Hiwatt amp). But please kids, lets stop all this nonsense about analog being a "better" way to reproduce sound. Analog is about tapped out as a medium; it can't get very much better given the current technology. With digital, the sky's the limit; within 5 years we could have 96 bit 1 million sample rate digital gear, if the powers that be allow it. It is a lot like digital photography; as it stands now a digital camera is nowhere near as good as a regular "analog" camera. You are probably better off scanning an "analog" photo on a good scanner than taking a picture on a cheap digital camera (I could be wrong here as I don't pretend to be an expert on this, but my friends in the know tell me this). But it's just a matter of time before the prossessing technology catches up with the need for higher resolution etc. - Wed, 18 Dec 2002 2:46am | ||
| josh User Info... | http://www.apogeedigital.com/pdf/psxbitsplit.pdf http://www.apogeedigital.com/users/users_warehouse.html some stuff about warehouse studios preference for mixing to digital http://www.livedaily.citysearch.com/news/3738.html an interview that talks about nickelback recording to digital in pro tools - Wed, 18 Dec 2002 3:12am | ||
| The Mad Subwoofer User Info... | Woah....this be one long-winded thread. IMO; you're better off paying for the set of ears than you are the fancy gear. All the best Pro Tools programs and fancy analog what-not can easily amount to very little unless the user is well versed in how to apply it all. Given the proper time frame, SOS is capable of producing remarkable examples of ones art this due largely in fact to ZippGun's skills as an engineer, his knowledge of how to get the most from his paticular set of gear and his ability to encourage the best from his subjects. Gear is almost irrelevant...it's the ear that matters. Only have lemons..so make lemonade. - Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:11am | ||
| ML7Mike | Not a particularly conservative band here Scott, even for a metal band. Bottom line is, as far as we are concerned as musicians, we'd record anywhere, any method, we dont care, we just want a recording. If it weren't for the particular situation, you can bet we'd be in a digital room somewhere. I can say this much, the Zero G experience we are having is probably a once in a lifetime experience for us, (I certainly could never justify spending 10's of thousands on a recording out of my own pocket). But what an experience its been. Funny you should mention the classical band angle Scott. One of the groups we had to make way for was a classical ensemble from NYC who brought up a million dollar stand up bass that was built by the guy who taught Stratovarious. This particular group will record in two rooms in North America, one in NYC and Zero Gravity. Its the maple walls and ceiling that gives a certain warmth to the instruments. Oh, and the rock bottom Canadian dollar doesnt hurt. Also, me and Dave Askins came into your studio with Dog Zero years ago. Dave was there to TRY and help tech Chris Cuntlips $100 drum kit. We were at that time searching for a studio, and we hung out all afternoon in yours, mentioned it to you, and you flat out said to us "I Dont do metal, never have, never will" 2 months later we were in The Mine doing Corrode ( digitally ). Not that this matters, just saying what I remember. We had just come in 3rd of 50 in the battle of the bands ( whoopie ) so I guess we weren't 'bad metal'. by the way, if anyone wants to look, I did up a newer quicky website for Zero Gravity, its at Zero Gravity Studio.com - Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:24am | ||
| Zander | Josh... The Nicklback album was obviously recorded both to 2 inch and to Pro Tools. It is not clear at what point they decided to go straight to Pro Tools. As far as the magazine article about Aerosmith, well, companies like Digidesign work closely with magazines to endorse certain products. The fact is the drums WERE recorded to 2 inch before going into Pro Tools. At Electric Mountain Studios we offer both analog and digital recording including the Crane Song Hedd 192 that was used with Aerosmith. Josh, you seem to be going out of your way to create a false impression that 2 inch analog is not commonly used anymore. This is not the case. Most commercial hard rock and metal is tracked to 2 inch especially drums, and later edited in Pro Tools. Josh, I'd be happy to show you around the studio here if you would like to come by and check us out. Bring your own mixes as well to compare, we have some great outboard for warming up digital mixes. Cheers Zander - Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:45pm | ||
| josh | You mention digital, you get dumped on. You're gonna have to let it go sooner or later. The industry is switching over. The article about nickleback says they ditched the 2 inch altogether in favor of digital tracking, the aerosmith article, well, i've found at least 10 others that talk about it, and they all say the same thing. No analog tracking AT ALL. I'm not going out of my way to create a false impression about anything. I've recorded using both. Analog is still widely used, but the fact of the matter is, the industry is in the process of switching to digital based formats, because technology has advanced digital to the point that it has become a more attractive medium to record on. As far as warming it up, you can digitally emulate the distortion and compression of a tape getting hit hard, and i bet you even the analog dinosaurs couldn't tell the difference. As a working musician, I get really tired of bands getting the message spewed to them that they need to drop a grand on a reel of 2 inch tape in order to have a decent sounding recording. NOT TRUE. Good digital is comparable, and with the punching and editing options, digital will make most bands sound better than tracking on analog. Once again though, the bottom line in having a good sounding recording is still the quality of the people producing and engineering, not just the gear. - Wed, 18 Dec 2002 1:25pm | ||
| Recordplayer | actually the tape is only a few hundred per roll .. 15 mins per roll. - Wed, 18 Dec 2002 2:17pm | ||
| Zander | Like I said before we use both. We use the best analog to digital converters on the island if you wanna get down to it. And the industry has been in transition to digital for over twenty years... As far as tape goes, I do not charge clients for tape unless they want to keep it. Tape can be bought from 190.00 and can run for 30 minutes at 15IPS. My rates are also very competitive. If someone wants to record digitally here I'm more than happy to. My clients tend to be hard rock metal bands who require the sound and impact of 2 inch for there music to compete with signed metal acts, but don't want to pay the high rates associated with recording 2 inch at the more famous studios in Vancouver. This is also the standard I prefer for my music. Cheers..........Zander - Wed, 18 Dec 2002 3:26pm | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | So Mr. Zander, if you want to run at half speed (and sound like the "Bleach" album by Nirvana) and don't mind used tape (and how used it is, you'll never know) you can go with analog for less than a fortune, which would be like recording 14 bit 32 khz digital. Don't get me wrong; I LOVE analog tape. But it has to be 16 track 2" 30 ips and preferably on a Studer or Otari deck to make it really worth your while. And you need brand new tape. I participated in the recording of the new (as yet unreleased) Ford Pier record on a 2" 16 track Studer at Lemon Loaf in Van, using ever so slightly used tape (John Mann tracked his drums on it then dumped it onto a Radar system). The tape first had to be run through on the 16 track head block to erase it and then passed through on the 24 track head block to make sure there was no print through from the old session. So by the time we actually got down to tracking we had tape that had been run through at least a dozen times. By the time we dumped it to a Radar system for producer Phillip Michael Wojehoda (sp?) to continue the project in Toronto the tape was just about done. It would have been unthinkable to finish the project on that tape, especially considering all the work that was yet to be done (millions of other musicians, tracks etc.). However it worked for our purposes, except that punch ins were a nightmare (even at 30 ips I need a discernable gap to get anywhere near a smooth punch in), and the studio took an hour to calibrate the Studer (on Ford's dime, I might add) before we could do anything. The "warmth" of the analog transfered nicely to the Radar, and the tape only cost $300 for 4 reels because John was a sweetheart. At $190 a pop for 15 minutes for virgin tape working in 24 track analog is roughly SIXTY TIMES AS EXPENSIVE as my shitty digital system. That is the main reason I went digital. - Wed, 18 Dec 2002 7:43pm | ||
| Zander | Both speeds have their advantages particularly in the low frequency response of 15IPS. 30IPS is a little quieter. I know engineers who prefer 15IPS with SR to 30 IPS. I first found out about this while recording bass in Ali Campbell of UB40's studio in Birmingham England. The engineers prefered the bass response at 15 IPS for recording bass heavy music. I run 30IPS often, but also get great results at 15IPS. I use Quantegy GP9. This tape will out last any other and stays lively for a while. People are happy with the results. Cheers Zander - Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:23pm | ||
| Wayne | blah blah blah. so i heard the other night at band practice that there was this big discusion about recording on livevic. We since we RadiantLeader recorded tracks at both zero gravity and Electric mountain on 2" for our up coming CD. I'll give you a little insight into both places. ZeroG is a beautiful facility and it was quite cool to record in a place like that. There gear is awesome and Rob is a fun guy to hang out with and drink beers and talk shop. But the seventy dollar/hour rate. was getting way to much for the work he provided. Also i don't think rob liked our style of music and didn't put alot of effort in to our recordings and mixes. don't get me wrong we had fun there, to much fun some times. but the work just didn't seem to get done. we would go in for a five hour stint and after two hours we wouldn't be working anymore just sitting around listen to music that rob would want us to hear and drinking to much beer. and at the end of the night rob would say he would only charge for two hours not five cause we were just sitting around. that all fine but i came in to do five hours work not two and now my entire night is wasted, it took me an hour to drive there five hours of sitting around and an hour drive home to get two hours work done. after this happened a few times i got fed up and stop the project, and started to search for a new facilty with a 2" tape machine. Plus the fact that rob talked down to us, made us feel that he was honoring us with his studio and that we were lucky to be there.(what he didn't realize is i have money and he's lucky to get a peice of it.) and called me stupid for buying certain audio equiptment or instrements. I came across Electric Mountain. We did 70% of our recording there. Zander price was excellent. i won't say in case he charges more now. but we did spend thousands there. During the recording sessions Zander was all work, we saw more of the back of his head than his face cause he was always working on the board mixing while recording. We would go out and drink later not during the sessions. Zander offered to do some bass tracks for us as well , he's a talented bass player and did some cool stuff for us. he was much easier to work with and listened to us and didn't tell us how it was. his studio isn't worth anywhere near a million dollars but the gear he does have is all you need to provide and excelent recording. If you would like to hear samples of our work go to http://www.mp3.com/Radiant_Leader listen to: drivin'song. (live demo) Ground Zero CD. I recorded this with a digital four track no compressors or effects. Drivin'song. Studio Outakes 2, this was recorded and mixed at zero gravity. Flirty. was recorded and mixed at ElectricMountain. These are unmastered mp3's P.S. i would also would like to know who this other band is that said above, Quote "g.x - We recorded at Electric Mountain AND Zero Gravity. The recordings at Electric Mountain sounded better, for less dollars. Zander is a killer bass player also. - Thu, 7 Nov 2:53pm" nobody in my band wrote this and i don't know of any other bands that used both studios, sounds like some little bitch wants to be punched in the face. i have a pretty good idea who wrote that. and when you least expect it POW! Oh Ya have a Merry Xmas - Thu, 19 Dec 2002 2:12pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Wayne, I can see ya there on the times worked.. happens to us too.. but after we leave, Rob sits up sometimes till 5am mixing. As for the talking down part.. I dont know what happened to you guys with him, but I do know this.. he pushed us and pushed us, and it was mostly me and Tony who were a couple of glue high wankers and couldnt get anything tight, and he was pushing us, and our drummer was freaking out thinking it was his fault ( it wasnt ) And Robb was honest. He'd say things like "You guys pre-produced? you sound like amateurs" ( we are tho ) or he'd say "Shall we hire a studio guitarist to come in and do that part then? " Or he'd flat out say "That sucks, you suck, get back in there and try it another 50 times till its right!" And goddamnit we were NOT in a very good mood for a few songs in there, stress levels were high, and there's this skinny little fuck sitting in the control room barking at us through the headphones "Again" .. "Noo.. again" .. "sigh.. again" "Ok take 5, you suck right now" And let me tell you this.. our first live show after tracking sessions, people were coming up and saying "Holy fuck you guys are really tight these days.." after opening for SYL in Vancouver we were getting the same response from strangers .. as in "You guys are extremely tight.." I still dont think we are tight enough, but the studio sessions and Robbs attitude really kicked us in the arse, and opened our eyes. Wayne, I KNOW you guys have improved over the last couple of years in a big way.. Your vocals have gotten alot better, and you guys really seem to connect onstage. Look at a producer like Ross Robinson.. that guy is reputed to punch and spit in the faces of mostly guitar players who aren't playing up to par. Rick Rubin is reputed to be no angel either. Obviously its a different level.. more money involved there, but it comes down to the fact that a GOOD producer hears your weaknesses and has no qualms about setting you straight. If ya cant take the heat, the you are in the wrong business, because gauranteed the producer isnt trying to insult the musician as much as get the lazy pothead to wake the fuck up and do the part properly! - Thu, 19 Dec 2002 3:09pm | ||
| ML7Mike | The new Strapping Young Lad recorded at The Armory was done digitally by the way. But with all the layering that Dev uses, and the fact that Dev was also doing solo projects at the same time there, Byron said as much as they'd prefer 2" it would have taken them ALOT of tape, and they didnt have the budget. - Thu, 19 Dec 2002 3:23pm | ||
| Anonymous | Yea, and like someone said, everybody's got a computer nowadays, 24bit blah blah..but unless you have a ton of analog gear to warm the sound up, digital will sound brittle, thin, not even close to 2". Anyone who says otherwise is either lying, or they are misinformed. Go to MP3.com for the proof. - Thu, 19 Dec 2002 3:45pm | ||
| ML7Mike | BTW, ML7's second album, which was being recorded with Quin on vocals at Cutting Edge Studio in Cowichan Bay, fell apart mostly because our drummer was so sloppy it was unrecordable. When the producer Lloyd mentioned that we could achieve alot more, quicker with a studio drummer, our drummer Chris got VERY offended, felt that Lloyd was pinpointing him etc. The resulting animosity pretty much killed the project. Even as we tried to let Chris know it wasnt personal, just fact, he still felt rejected ( he is so sensitive that boy ) But, Chris grew as a drummer in a big way after that, and coming into this project he was so prepared he ended up getting mad at us dogfuck guitarists.. it was a nice change of pace.. also helps that neither me nor Tony care what people say about us. Point is, sometimes criticism in the studio can be constructive. - Thu, 19 Dec 2002 4:00pm | ||
| Wayne | it wasn't all bad. but for the time we spending we felt enough good use of time. and there are several ways of motivating people, insulting and blunt are two of the ways. but it gets you down and you don't want to be there,Lazy pothead or not. In alot of ways Rob is an amature like the rest of us, he is still learning his craft,he's spent more years in the music business than me thats for sure,but untill he gets a record deal he is in no way better than anyone else in this business.For the record we like it more for the fun parts than the business parts. because you are the engineer of recording studio doesn't make you above someone else who is only trying to acheive a good representation of our music like it or not. If the guitar player doesn't want to be there because the engineer you are paying to track your songs calls him stupid, and you better keep that track cause you guys are not any getting better than that.It makes you want to fire his ass on the spot.But you just want to finish the project so you keep going. We are in now way Pro musicians. Zander incouraged us and helped us work with our limited talent and the whole mood was so much better there. And is so much more open minded to a paying client's requests.i'm sure i 'll run into rob someday at the studio since i know his tenents up stairs, and i'll have to here about this . but this shouldn't become a battle of the studio's. just lending some insight in to our experiences. like you would a venue or music store. there are several affordable options for every one out there. i bought a 8 track years ago and recorded alot of songs but always had problems getting good drum sounds, so we looked into a pro studio to in initialy just to get some drum tracks laid down. but one thing led to another and a member of our band went to high school with rob, so we checked out his studio. ended up doing more than just drums there because it is a good place to record. - Thu, 19 Dec 2002 4:26pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Zander has a very nice studio too. Havent been there, but have seen the pics.. I think WAV and ERD are both going there. Well one positive note, studio discussion has become the hottest topic ever on livevic.com I think. Better than the soap operas that carry on and on. Although it still peeves me when people post anonymously with nothing good to say. If ya dont have the balls to say it to your face, dont say it, I say. - Thu, 19 Dec 2002 5:10pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Wayne, I dont think Robb comes to Livevic. - Thu, 19 Dec 2002 5:18pm | ||
| MethodAir | A little taste of what's to come at Electric Mountain, and a pretty fat drum sound Zander got (if I say so myself...) on 2" inch in a really lame room we were recording at in England. Flash 6 required. MethodAir Electric Mountain - Thu, 19 Dec 2002 5:50pm | ||
| Josh | That Radiant Leader track from electric mountain sounds really good, very full, nice production work. Nice work guys - Thu, 19 Dec 2002 6:06pm | ||
| Mr. Hell User Info... | For the record, nothing took me more than two takes. hahaha Slackers. - Thu, 19 Dec 2002 6:46pm | ||
| Zander | Rates at Electric Mountain Recording Studios vary between $30-$60 per hour depending on the project or amount of time booked. Radiant Leader decided to record gradually over a few months and were charged $30 per hour. Cheers - Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:29am | ||
| Anonymous | does Victoria have a thriving music scene? By the looks of this thred it certainly does - Scott Henderson should receive the order of Canada for his work - cant wait to see the Governer General present a medal to the owner of SOS!! - Sat, 18 Jan 2003 11:31pm | ||
| steve User Info... | Scott produces excellent quality work-the most you could ever expect from his setup all at affordable prices. He is also known to exceed any limitations present by his years of experience and just plain insight. And he is second to none in selecting the finest european beer!-Steve - Sun, 19 Jan 2003 3:05am | ||
| Ronnie | just like with any production, Ive heard some pretty horrible material coming out of SOS. Guess it all comes down to budget no meatter what way you look at it. - Sun, 19 Jan 2003 2:20pm | ||
| shittfork | Here's where NOT to fuckn record.. Zero Grav - Looks nice but they're on smack Discovery Studios- nice guys, weak mixes Roen Sound - dumbasses Ambient Wave - bigger dumbass Nomad - weak gear and a strong connection to Zero Grav (same stoners, only you'll have them on Saltspring...whoops!) - Mon, 20 Jan 2003 4:03am | ||
| steve User Info... | The thing is, Scott will give bands an opportunity to record when many of the afore-mentioned studios will not due to pride and financial constraints. It can humbling to hear what you actually sound like!Steve - Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:41am | ||
| ML7Mike | Zero Gravity have the ability to make excellent recordings. Never seen any smack around there. They also have a wicked brand new Pro Tools system which they bought last week, so are going to be doing more digital stuff on the side, and the video production abilities in there are really fine.. check out ML7's video for the song Systemic ( recorded at ZG ) should be on Much within the next month! - Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:17am | ||
| ML7M ike | "its humbling to hear what you sound like!" You got that right dude! When we were first laying tracks onto 2" we had to rework alot of stuff.. that tape doesnt lie and is not very forgiving! - Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:20am | ||
| ML7mike ( again!! ) | BTW Shitfork ( nice nick, seems fitting ) methinks every studio you mention ( except ZG ) is no longer in existence.. I could be wrong, but I think Im right.. ( again? ) - Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:23am | ||
| johnny | Ml7 mike are you getting a commission from this joint, or you ass kissing cause you got to record there for free. Protools is an awesome program, but it takes years to learn how to use it. You can�t just purchase it and expect to know how to use it. Recording television audio is nothing like recording music, unless you are talking about movie sound. Most television audio is mastered to sound good through a TV speaker. Not a $4000 car audio system. There may not be smack going around in that studio, but the governments drug of choice is well used ( liquor ) and I can�t stand businesses that drink while they work. - Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:34pm | ||
| Mr. Hell User Info... | Hey bozo. Nothing is free. I wish it was totally free. That cash we put in could have gone towards other expenses very easily. Don't get confused on what is going on here. If Mike is getting a commission, I want in on it too! And alcohol is fine when used in moderation...although sometimes moderation becomes intoxication. Don't like it, go elsewhere. And no, recording TV audio is nothing like recording music. My question is what does that have to do with anything? Thanks. - Tue, 21 Jan 2003 1:23pm | ||
| ticklefish | I wouldn't mind throwing a few thoughts in here: have worked with the guys at Discovery: they are indeed nice. Whether they are still in business I don't know, but if their mixes were weak, tell me why Puentes Bros CD won a JUNO? If you play heavy music, then, yeah, you'll find their mixes weak because they like to work with subtlety. Sometimes it is about the match between the player and the producer. Even teh greatest producers have their shtick and can't "do it all". I haven't heard any Bob Rock big band stuff, and I haven't heard any Rick Rubin folk music, and I haven't heard Daniel Lanois metal, but every one of those guys are amazing at what they do. So don't go dissing producers if they don't work for you, respect that they have their strengths. As for an older thread that was running inside this one about loudness, it seems that one of the critical elements between comparing the difference between Digital vs. Analog is about the skills used in the limiting/compression phase. I am no hot producer and likely never will be, but I have a decent home setup with Sonar 2.1 XL, and what it can capture blows me away, and I also have spent 6 months reeducating myself on limiting/compression/normalization basics to get the best sound I can. Too often people like to just shit on a particular type (analog is old, digital sucks) without bothering to learn what they are about. The biggest issue I think regarding digital is that because it is more accessible (you can get a setup of equal quality for far less money using a PC and good software), it has opened the doors for more people to get into it (like me), and those people don't have the years of experience like most with analog gear have (just by necessity, it takes a long time to build a good analog setup due to cost of all teh pieces). Always weigh the experience of the engineer/producer against what they are using. I live for my digital setup, and the only analog piece of gear I own is an acoustic guitar , but I have full respect for anyone who is skilled at analog recording. I never will have the $$$ to own all those preamps, mics, synths, compressors, limiters etc etc etc, but I can afford a powerhouse PC, some high end software, good amp and mic modelling, and compared to someone with the same level of experience in recording I have (limited), I know I can bring out better sound quality with my gear than someone with an analog set up. But there NEVER is a substitute for skill in what you are playing and good writing. - Tue, 21 Jan 2003 1:50pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Johnny.. the studio has had Pro Tools for years, but with the upgrade to Mac OSX a Pro Tools upgrade was also needed. Unfortunately the old Pro Tools doesnt run on anything above Mac 9.2, and the new Pro Tools doesnt run on anything less than Mac 9.2.2 , Pro Tools for Max OSX just came out at the NAM convention in LA a couple of days ago, so one of Robbs tenants ( a plug-ins programmer for some big company, I forget who.. ) was at the convention and managed to get Robb an advance copy of Pro Tools for Mac OSX. Point was, the man is capable of keeping up with the technology that he needs, even though nobody in this city can afford his rates. Got any doubts about the product? keep your eyes on Much Music's LOUD. And yes, the audio for the vid was mastered on Pro Tools two days ago. The actual video gets run through the system down at the NEW VI before it gets sent off, so its all up to standard. Nice that Robbs OTHER tenant is one of VI's main camera slingers ( and also has a decent history in the TV for musicians industry ) As for the liquor in the control room theory.. ALL the tracking was done clean and sober by everyone involved, the beer didnt start to flow until after we were done working. During mixdown though we enjoyed many a fine draft. I personally wouldnt have had it any other way, and since we were supplying the booze, I guess it doesnt matter. - Tue, 21 Jan 2003 4:00pm | ||
| ML7Mike | Also, Protools itself I beleive is free, or very inexpensive.. what ZG picked up was a brand new Digdesign Mini Console which replaces his old Digidesign rack console that unfortuantely will not work in OSX or on the new Pro Tools version. Either way, it isnt exactly a tool we've needed, but if anyone wants a straight digital recording in a phenomenal room, there it is. - Tue, 21 Jan 2003 4:10pm | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | Booze and bongs; some studios can get by with them and some can't. My usual rule of thumb is that a beer or two is fine as long as the work is getting done properly. I discourage drummers and vocalists from drinking at all, and pot makes a lot of people forgetful. When you get into the high priced studios I think you can expect a sober engineer if you want one. Hard drugs of any description have no place anywhere near a recording studio; you will just get high and think you are a god until you hear everything the next day and it sounds like (usually super trebly) poop. Most of all people should have the ability to RELAX in a studio without being uptight about smoking or drinking. Oh yes, no drinks ever in the control room is also a good idea ( if you MUST have them a good rule of thumb is to always have them on the floor). Your board will thank you. Thanks for the nice words too, you guys. - Thu, 23 Jan 2003 2:17am | ||
| Driven | some interesting comments, i know that 50% of our recording time was wasted cause the engineer was to drunk to work. I'm glad to hear you ml7 guys kept your engineer sober. Drinking is not a big deal, i drink my self. but it will be a factor on how we choose the next studio. cigarette smoke breaks are another huge waste of studio time. it sucks when you are trying to pull off a decent take and the engineer is a chain smoker and has to go out for a 15 minute smoke break every twenty minutes.in fact smokers them selves are a waste of time, if your paying 8 bucks a pack to kill your self then your no different than a heroin addict. i know its only rock and roll, but when comes to spending all your money on a recording then you want an engineer that works like a machine, not a redneck cig smoking drunk. - Thu, 23 Jan 2003 1:02pm | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | Hey Ronnie, I'm dying to know what came out of SOS that you think is horrible. And I'm not being a smartass; I always like to hear any criticism about my work. Sometimes the band can't play, sometimes the gear doesn't work, sometime the people are such fuckwads that I just want them gone (rare). Often it's a matter of time; I just spent 65 hours MIXING a record which for me is an eternity. As an example the Dizzy CD was recorded AND mixed in THREE DAYS. Most studios can't get a drum sound in a full day. I had to laugh when I read the reference to Dog Zero, the band that, I have to say although regretfully,was the ABSOLUTE WORST BAND I HAVE EVER RECORDED and that's saying something. Every drum fill was a complete adventure, the guitarist wanked on his wah pedal throughout, his ex videotaping the whole thing for posterity when not gossipping on the phone directly behind my head. The singer was terrific but the poor drummer doomed the entire project to abject failure. I'll bet that the horrible stuff you refer to was also done quite a while ago. Don't forget that last September was the TWENTIETH anniversary of my first recording hitting the shops (prizes for who can tell me the artist/title). As for the "battle of the studios" angle I suggest blindfolds and U-87's at 10 paces. - Thu, 23 Jan 2003 2:08pm | ||
| ML7Mike | hehe Scott, that was my reference.. not that I was judging you on them or their sound.. but that was back when we first met, and when we were shopping for a studio.. maybe us being with them was our demise? :) As for chain smoking engineers.. dont go there, as Johnny can attest. - Thu, 23 Jan 2003 2:20pm | ||
| brad | ok..im probably gonna be way way off here...but i seem to recall someone saying that m.o.c was your first. please correct me ..id love to know! - Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:41am | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | Ho ho, MOC weren't even on my first recoding rig. They were, however, the first band I ever did on my Tascam 388 7 ips 8 track "porta"studio and also the first time I ever used a digital reverb (hence all the gated verb). The 388 replaced my ancient half inch 4 track Tascam series 70 monsterosity which was used for the very first Red Tide sessions and the Day Glos Metropole stuff. The first band I ever did that showed up in the shops was the Neo's 2nd E.P. which was recorded in Sept. 82 at Hole in the Wall (which boasted a real live hole in the wall). That was on the half inch four track. - Fri, 24 Jan 2003 4:10am | ||
| Zippgunn User Info... | And speaking of analog half inch machines I just got a call from a friend who's selling his half inch 8 track Tascam deck complete with dbx, all for quite cheap (prob abt $1000 or so) any takers? I have no room/use for it but it's in great shape. - Wed, 29 Jan 2003 2:23pm | ||
|
|||
Not logged in
Log In / Register (optional)
Featured Events
Featured Historical Events
Featured Article
Newest Profiles
Haute Curations
We sell original giclee canvas art prints to businesses
Victoria BC
Open / Operational
Arts On View Society
The Arts On View Society continues to operate Hermann's Jazz...
753 View Street Victoria BC
Open / Operational
