Log in
Log in

or
Create an account

or

Thread What's better: a somewhat live room or completely dead room?

  • 1 comment
  • 2 participants
  • 599 views
  • 0 follower
1 What's better: a somewhat live room or completely dead room?
O.K. now I'm confused. I've read different articles on this subject. Some articles say that for home recording you should use a recording space that offers the best natural reverb. But other articles suggest to use a dead space. i.e. pad the room to absorb the sound. Is one of these approaches more correct than the other?

My situation is that I have an o.k. room in terms of carrying the sound. But its not an ideal sound room. Should I try to work with it or try to pad it for a dry recording and add effects later? Please share your experiences.
2
the answer is always the same: it depends.

let,s say you have a low-pitch singer, and you can't get a sparkle out of his voice. get him to sing near a glass window so some high end will be heard. a dead room can't do that.
in another case, if you have a boomy room, you will certainly not track some drums in there.

in my experience, total dead rooms never give great results on track. recordings come with no "space".
you should just treat the room so that it does not create unwanted reverbs or stationary waves, so school yourself on bass traps, wall absorbers and wall hangers.