Keira WitherKay wrote
well if you can muster the funds for a good PC and software and one descent microphone ...in 2009 you can record a cd to the quality that took a million dollar studio 10 -15 years back.....
You could. Pink Floyd couldn't. Linda Thompson, who is a great singer but not much of an instrumentalist, couldn't.
Well you could if you wanted to just build up layers one by one. But if you wanted the spark of musicians working together in real time then you need a studio.
Continuing using the Thompson's as examples, Richard Thompson's 2005 release was quite literally recorded in his garage. Mostly just him on acoustic guitar and vocals, with a couple of overdubs. But the albums either side of that were done in the studio and, as far as possible, "live" with the band all playing at the same time. Again some overdubs later, but the basic tracks were "live in studio".
So it depends on what you are aiming for. Once you have other musicians and you have to pay them and want to use the time you are paying for productively then things can get more complicated.
Keira WitherKay wrote
i believe we have reached the point that the "home" recording is ...or rather can be of professional studio quality if the correct amount of research and lets be honest hands on experience in recording ( cos the more you do it the better the results) is there.
Agreed... to a point. Though there can be a price to pay. When you listen to Kate Walsh's album you can hear seagulls screeching on a couple of tracks. She recorded at a home in Brighton - where they have lots of seagulls. In a studio she would have had a sonically cleaner environment.
Another counter to the argument was that there was a time of great sounding studios, where you used the ambience of the studio as part of the recorded sound. But that seems to be largely gone now, many studios are deliberately dead as regards ambience and the "ambience" is added later with effects.
But yes... it can be done. And the record companies won't like it. They'd rather have you in debt to them for recording time, for the producer they had to pay, for the costs of the supporting tour etc etc....
And it's not only financial independence we're talking about here, but artistic control as well. Richard Thompson owns all his albums since about 2002 lock, stock, barrel and tapes. He controls them absolutely. The recordings he cut prior to that can be reused at any time, included in compilations, sold on to other companies etc whether he likes it or not.
