smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | Mike Nicholson <mnick@nc.rr.com> |
| Subject | Re: Owsley/recording budgets.. |
| Date | Thu, 20 Feb 2003 14:08:18 -0500 |
[Part 1 text/plain us-ascii (1.6 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
> when talking $$$ what is the breakdown between recording and mixing?
It
> seems to me that with all the technological breakthroughs that
getting a
> decent sound reproduction isn't tough -- but figuring out how to
make it all
> come together is the real challenge.
Depends on what you record and how good the performances are and
the actual sounds going on to tape.
For example... I record a whole lotta hip hop and the time is usually
spent mostly on getting the flow (ie vocals) and the producer usually
brings in the track on some sort of workstation or sampler (or even a
pre-mixed CD or loop). Most sounds in this genre are from digital
sources and they all tend to occupy their own sonic space so there is
is less signal processing to achieve a balance. I have done a whole
hip hop CD from stem to stern in a weekend.
On the flipside this weeks I'm mixing a live recording of a trad music
group that I didn't do the tracking on and it's taking about 2 to 3
hours per song. There's 19 songs so it's gonna add up. Since I didn't
track it there's all kinds of surprises and silliness that rears up
from time to time.
When I budget to record somewhere else I generally can figure on two
hours a song... and that is kicking serious booty.
I know someone who had Andy Wallace mix some of his stuff for the big
boys and it took 3 months to do a full length release and cost upwards
of $200k.
Mixing records for the majors is BIG BUCKS for a very small number of
guys (Wallace, Puig, Lord-Alge's, etc.) Ridiculous, if ya ask me.
Mick
http://www.stratocruisermusic.com
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.