Gear won't get you a record deal

[David Polich]

Now and then I get harshly reminded that better gear won't improve your songs. I spent the last two weeks trying to find out which EQ's and compressors would work the proper "magic" with a track I was working on. I finally got a track that worked by changing the arrangement. It had nothing to do with EQ's or compressors. The parts are all simple and spare - one guitar, bassline, drums, three synth parts, vocals.

You can make a hit record with an old OS9 version of DP. You can make one using a standalone Roland recorder. You don't need an SSL plug-in to make it work. You can do it all with what you already own. You don't need anymore synths or drum sounds. You don't need a Mac Pro.

At the end of the day, it is always back to your creative ideas, not your gear. I don't use three-quarters of the softsynths I own. I don't use three of the hardware synths I own. My best writing tool is still my piano.

I agree that certain genres are production oriented (electronic, dance, hip-hop, well, basically anything other than pop-rock and country) and you can't do music in those genres without the technology at hand. But it's still what you're doing with the tech, not the tech itself. If you can't get things happening with Reaktor, you sure won't get them happening with Rapture.

I'm not sure why I keep getting myself mired in this concern for the ultimate set of plug-ins or mastering tools or synths or whatever. It's too easy to do. I'll happily trade 20 grand worth of hardware or software for one great song idea.

[HCMarkus]

I've got some pretty good song ideas. Could use a little gear. Wanna' trade?

[James Steele]

I think Frodo said one of the most insightful things I've seen on the subject, and that was to let the music dictate the gear purchase... at least I'm paraphrasing it. Sort of like some people go buy gear in search of a song... where as you should perhaps work on the song and then let that dictate the gear.

Another way to put it is don't go out and buy "XYZ synth" and then search for ways to shoehorn it in to your next songs, but rather be working on a song and then we you reach a point where you say "I really need ____ sound... how can I get it?"-- you then go ask around, find out what tool you need, and THEN get it.

At least that was how I read it. Any way, gotta go record some guitar tracks right now... with the pre-amp I have. I almost rationalized why I ought to borrow friend's guitar cab first, or drive across town to buy a used preamp I saw in the paper first, but maybe I'll just follow Frank Zappa's legendary advice: "Shut up and play yer guitar!"

[Resonant Alien]

Yeah, but good gear can make a crappy song sound like a hit (JUST KIDDING!)

The conclusion I keep coming back to after all these debates is that it really takes an adequate amount of each - gear and talent. What "adequate" means is defined by the artist and the music they are trying to create.

[arth]

Another way to put it is don't go out and buy "XYZ synth" and then search for ways to shoehorn it in to your next songs, but rather be working on a song and then we you reach a point where you say "I really need ____ sound... how can I get it?"-- you then go ask around, find out what tool you need, and THEN get it.

Yeah, I agree, but too often I feel I really need something and I just can't afford it. So I have to make do with what I can afford. :-/
I have this interlude that really calls for a grand piano, but buying one is out of the question, and even buying enough recording equipment to capture it with any justice is likewise not something my wallet agrees on, so instead I'm doing with a free soundfont for now, until I can afford a better software alternative.

Also, sometimes you have to buy the instruments first. It takes years and years of practice to become halfway proficient at many instruments, and it's a little late to start learning to play the fiddle once you have the tune jotted down... Similar, to a lesser extent, with a synth. Even when changing synths, it will take at least weeks and probably months before you're comfortable enough with the new synth to do it any kind of justice.

[Frodo]

I think Frodo said one of the most insightful things I've seen on the subject, and that was to let the music dictate the gear purchase... at least I'm paraphrasing it. Sort of like some people go buy gear in search of a song... where as you should perhaps work on the song and then let that dictate the gear.

Another way to put it is don't go out and buy "XYZ synth" and then search for ways to shoehorn it in to your next songs, but rather be working on a song and then we you reach a point where you say "I really need ____ sound... how can I get it?"-- you then go ask around, find out what tool you need, and THEN get it.

At least that was how I read it. Any way, gotta go record some guitar tracks right now... with the pre-amp I have. I almost rationalized why I ought to borrow friend's guitar cab first, or drive across town to buy a used preamp I saw in the paper first, but maybe I'll just follow Frank Zappa's legendary advice: "Shut up and play yer guitar!"

Aw-- Jimbo's quoting hobbits! How flattering!

Yeah, man. As long as the music comes first-- what to get in the way of gear starts to make more sense. Someone wanting to play in their own guitar tracks might run out and buy a Gretsch with a Vox amp. That's fine, but what they might really be looking to add to their tracks is a Strat with a Fender.

I used that example because there was a day I wanted to emulate the guitar solo on the Beatles' "Nowhere Man". I had no idea just how many different brands of guitars and amps they'd used in the studio because they were seen with relatively few in public. It took a real guitarist to explain that it was a Strat through a Fender amp-- of course, it was obvious after the fact, but it was one of those small epiphanies at the time.

It's a matter of having a clear and well defined vision of the results that serve the music best. That's how I've always tried to approach it.

Yeah, I agree, but too often I feel I really need something and I just can't afford it. So I have to make do with what I can afford. :-/

The nice thing is that these days that doesn't spell the compromise it once did... there are lots of things out there in the way of VIs and plugins that will more than get the job done.

I have this interlude that really calls for a grand piano, but buying one is out of the question, and even buying enough recording equipment to capture it with any justice is likewise not something my wallet agrees on, so instead I'm doing with a free soundfont for now, until I can afford a better software alternative.

Happily, it's easier to save up $300 to buy Ivory than it is to try to lay aside 100 times that much for a world class instrument.

Also, sometimes you have to buy the instruments first. It takes years and years of practice to become halfway proficient at many instruments,

Clearly, if one didn't play the piano or guitar well, it wouldn't make a lot of sense to buy these instruments for quick study to be on top of a session to take place a couple weeks down the pike. A virtual instrument, however, can be mastered inside two weeks-- and they are good enough now to fool the ear if enough imagination is applied.

and it's a little late to start learning to play the fiddle once you have the tune jotted down...

LOL!! Can you imagine? One of my favorite quotes from Dickens:

In came a fiddler with a music-book... tuned like fifty stomach-aches.

Nope. It takes years and lots of money (not to mention determination and natural talent in proper measure) to master any instrument.... and recordings do not lie!

Similar, to a lesser extent, with a synth. Even when changing synths, it will take at least weeks and probably months before you're comfortable enough with the new synth to do it any kind of justice.

Agreed-- and the same can be said of going from one DAW to the next. If it's fluency with an instrument or a piece of software or a bit of hardware that is the goal, ya gotta pay some dues.

A while back someone groaned when I suggested that it takes a couple hours a day studying the manual to nail down DP's features first time out. Their complaint was that the manual was a boring read. Of course it's easier to log on here to start a thread on what the space bar does rather than to do a bit of homework. Every time I pick up the manual-- after all these years-- I find something new and useful.

But-- you've got to remind yourself how much you love your music-- how much your creative efforts are worth the price of a piece of gear and worth the time it takes to learn to bend that gear to your musical will.

But our goals should always be loftier than reality is. It keeps us reaching higher-- and such effort by itself always yields a better result than if mediocrity is settled for. You may not have your coveted Neve comp, but if you are clear on its sound, any effort you make with MW Comp will be all the better for it.

And if MW Comp doesn't cut it-- it becomes a good excuse to look under the sofa cushions more often to snarf up every green penny for the sake of buying that one piece of dream gear.

These manfacturers have us by the apricots, don't they?

[Shooshie]

It's a bit of a chicken and egg story, isn't it? If we're talking about real instruments, then having a great instrument--top of the line--can open doors for you if your technique is ready for that. Once you learn the technical edge that a great instrument gives you, it's often even possible to step down to a shoddy instrument and pull off some things that you couldn't do before, but always it will feel better to play the great instrument.

From a compositional standpoint, it's no coincidence that Beethoven's sonatas lay so well under the fingers. He was master of the instrument. The knowledge of what an instrument can do, or what is hard on the instrument, makes you a far better composer for the instrument. It can also "box you in" if you let it take over. Bach, for instance, laughed at the people he called "knights of the keyboard," for they let their idiomatic finger exercises dictate their compositions. Lots of showy runs or ornaments, but not much substance. He wrote in his head, but you can be sure that he was also checking those fingerings to see if what he was writing was playable. He played lots of instruments, and it becomes evident that his writing was enhanced by his doubles. He could not have written the Partitas and Sonatas for Solo Violin if he had not been a violinist. They are examples of technique taken to the extreme. He wrote four-voice fugues for the violin, only two of whose four strings were playable at once. (and no, they didn't play more strings with a loose bow, as is commonly asserted; he intended those extra notes to be played as broken chords, which becomes evident when you study them. I don't think they could have been played at all with a loose bow.)

So, great ideas and great technique feed off of each other. It's probably not a good idea to try to segregate them into separate camps. Nevertheless, I'm a believer in making do with what you've got. It's always a challenge to try to push your meager holdings to sound like something more, and there is where great ideas make it all work.

Years ago I had a duo--soprano sax and clarinet--that became one of the most popular musical groups in the Dallas••”Fort Worth area. No, DFW is not that hard-up. We were just very good. We didn't set out to do this. It just evolved. We played for friends at dinner parties and everyone loved it. One day a quintet had to cancel at an important event. My partner, the clarinettist, told the organizers that they should try our duo, that he thought it would be appropriate for the setting. It was a benefit for the Dallas Symphony! And it was held in the presitigious Kimbell Art Museum, and was hosted by the Van Cliburn Foundation. Let me tell you, there are no 3 organizations in Texas bigger than those three when it comes to the arts. So, a lot was riding on this. I bought a ton of music, and arranged a ton more for us. We had to sight-read most of it, but we were the kind of players who could do that and pull it off as if we'd been playing it all our lives. I have to say that it was a huge reward to see Van Cliburn (whom musicians feared) waltzing with an officer of the Dallas Symphony League across the floor of the Kimbell Art Museum as my partner and I played waltzes the way WE liked to hear them. He came by afterwards, gushing praise, tipping us each a couple hundred bucks. He was well known for making musicians feel like crap. Nobody could please him. But he loved us!

The point that I'm getting at is that by knowing our abilities and limitations, I was able to arrange music that made two single-voices sound like a larger ensemble, to transcend those limitations and take it to another level. One thing stayed at the core of everything that I did: was it fun? As long as we were having fun, the people listening were, too.

If I had sat down one day and said, "I'm going to start a professional duo using sax and clarinet, and I'm going to arrange stuff that only we can play, and people are going to love it!" Well, you can imagine... that just wouldn't have happened. It worked only because we were already doing it--just for fun--and circumstances pushed us to take it farther and utilize every trick in the book to make two instruments sound like more. For years after that, we played all the most prestigious events, and kept getting called back for more. By the time we quit, when my duo partner moved to San Francisco, we had hundreds of works in our repertoire, covering over fifty composers, including most of the moderns.

That experience remains today at the heart of what I do. When I approach anything with my limited setup, I ask "What can I do to enable this setup to do the job?" There is always an answer. You just have to trust yourself, trust your ears, and try. One's love for music will nearly always save the day.

Shooshie

[Frodo]

...come to think of it-- great music won't get you a record deal, either! It's a combo of who you know, when you met them, how much they like you, and how badly they need what you have to offer.

Add to that the apparent requirement these days to have flawless facial features and a body that looks great half dressed--- and perhaps a bod that is between the ages of 18-25.

Shooshie got a lot of compliments for his duo's musicianship and a pair of Franklins out of his experience-- but a record deal?

In that regard, I must agree that gear won't get you a record deal.

Now, if that gear includes Botox, strategically placed bodily implants, lyposuction, a set of Universal weights, dental laminants, and a $5000 nappy weave, then you've probably upped your chances a bit...

[Shooshie]

Even with the above add-ons, I don't think we ever stood a chance for a record deal! Nope, even fine music won't get you that! Somehow, I don't think the world outside of the arts is ready for a sax/clarinet classical duo.

Shooshie

[Jim]

...come to think of it-- great music won't get you a record deal, either! It's a combo of who you know, when you met them, how much they like you, and how badly they need what you have to offer.

Add to that the apparent requirement these days to have flawless facial features and a body that looks great half dressed--- and perhaps a bod that is between the ages of 18-25.

Shooshie got a lot of compliments for his duo's musicianship and a pair of Franklins out of his experience-- but a record deal?

In that regard, I must agree that gear won't get you a record deal.

Now, if that gear includes Botox, strategically placed bodily implants, lyposuction, a set of Universal weights, dental laminants, and a $5000 nappy weave, then you've probably upped your chances a bit...

Right on, Frodo. You neglected to mention that you have to sound just like everybody else who currently has record deals, and you have to choreograph your bodily movements to look like the other hitmakers at your live shows. You may not have a woodwind player in your band. You may not play in any other meter than 4/4. You may not exceed the chord maximum of three. You may not have a vocal range exceeding five semitones (women excepted). And so on.

[monkey man]

Please don't stop, guys.

I've attempted several posts, but they all ruined the vibe.
I wonder how much the transcript will cost?
MM

[Spikey Horse]

The other sort of 'gear' won't get you a record deal either ......

[arth]

The other sort of 'gear' won't get you a record deal either ......

(Youtube link removed from quote)

Let's respect copyrights and not put up links to illegally copied materials.

[twistedtom]

I read that out of every 100 persons wanting to make a living from music 1 dose, out of every 4 bands that get signed 1 breaks even. To me music is just a part of life and a part of me, I like the way it makes me feel.
I respect any one with enough talent and perseverance to make it in the music business.
I remember a few years back some woman made a hit CD with a boom box around a camp fire, I can not remember her name.

[HCMarkus]

I'd rather record using great, well-maintained gear, but my motto is "make the most of what you've got."

The following probably just make recording more fun, with maybe a smidge of impact on the actual sound:
Latest high-end preamp with solid feel whenever it is touched. Gleams nicely in studio lighting.
Latest AD converters with cast metal knobs and platinim finish. Gleams warmly in dimmed studio lighting.
Vintage 60-pound compressor with 55dB S/N ratio. Gleams powerfully in studio spot lighting and candles. Visible from vocal booth through spotless window.

The following make a very real difference in the vibe and end result:
Scratchy pots.
Intermittant cables and mixer channels.
Half-dead monitor speakers.
Blown mic diaphagms.
Broken keyboard keys.
Guitars that don't tune up and amps that rattle.
Old cracked reeds and drum heads dented beyond playability.
Crashing computers.