James Posted June 11, 2008 Author Share Posted June 11, 2008 Which is more important? I think the music is more important, you can make anything out of virtually nothing, who cares if you have a crap microphone, it gives a better grungier sound to me. What about you? Studiio - All-In-One Radio Communication Platform SMS | Phone Calls | Social Media | Content Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Which is more important? I think the music is more important, you can make anything out of virtually nothing, who cares if you have a crap microphone, it gives a better grungier sound to me. What about you? Studiio - All-In-One Radio Communication Platform SMS | Phone Calls | Social Media | Content Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlwelden Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Yes, that's absolutely true! Some of the greatest artist recorded timeless classics long before the advent of high definition digital audio thingamabobs. (See, I'm not always a microphone snob) I've heard that Mark E. Smith used nothing but SM57's on almost thirty studio engineered albums and as many if not more live albums. I'm inclined to believe it. If the material is brilliant, who cares what tools you use to preserve it. Having a record is what matters most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBVoice Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 Music is more important in my opinion. However, if you have the money...good equipment is nice. I think good equipment is MOST important for talk radio though. These are my thoughts. -JB Jon Bova "Successful people have libraries. The rest have big screen TVs. - Jim Rohn" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlwelden Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 I suppose in keeping with that, consider that we are working in an audio-only format. The end result of our efforts (the music/content/etc.) is what we are putting out there. The public will never see the mechanical components you are using, but they will perceive whatever sounds good or bad to them. You put a rotten singer in front of a Neumann U87, you get a superb recording of rotten singing that no amount of pitch-correction software is worth throwing at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clairedodin Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 You put a rotten singer in front of a Neumann U87, you get a superb recording of rotten singing that no amount of pitch-correction software is worth throwing at. You'd be amazed at what you can do with a good software. For fun I made a friend of mine hit and hold very high notes that he could never do in real, and it sounds awesome! That said, I'm all for using a great singer with a great mic! Otherwise it's cheating (and many many pop stars do....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlwelden Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Otherwise it's cheating (and many many pop stars do....) Hey Claire, I guess I'm taking it from the vantage point in keeping with the VO artist's motto: Don't put anything on your demo that you can't reproduce live. I fully acknowledge that amazing software exists and would love to try such an experiment just for kicks. However, somewhere I have a fear lurking that the future generations of talent will come to rely on software as a creative crutch. Heck, folks today use speed-dial instead of learning actual phone numbers. Software found no errors with the following: "Pro grahams suck ass spill Czech r know butter four hell ping mi reed oar right, ewe sea? ((((Programs such as Spell Check are no better for helping me read or write, you see?)))) Okay, I'm done with my soapbox for the moment. Liking the discussion though, THANKS JAMES! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WayneOwens Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Honestly the music is the most important part over the gear, granted you could have gear that's made of gold that you would treat better than the music, but hey we work in radio, listeners tune in for the music not the voices behind the mic, well not always, sometimes the other way around, in fact our studio is getting upgraded in the next 3-5 days with a new automation software to keep the music flowing constantly, a new mic, shockmount, and boom, so we will be up and running full force, with more power than ever, a new PC with custom build specs, and the whole nine yards. By the way if anyone's looking for an ElectroVoice RE20, Ebay is the best place to look I just purchased one today with the shockmount and the boom for less than $500, great buy if you ask me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjkoning Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 Music is much more important, but to run a professional station, you can not forget about sound quality as well. What you will find with lower quality, or less-than-perfect sound, you'll have listeners stop listening, not consciously knowing why. It is a little different for internet streams, as people are more willing to listen to lower quality on a computer, but as time progresses, listeners will get use to higher quality audio (and video), just like moving from AM to FM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.