Anyone making any money ?

PaulBrewer

I was looking at a few studio website and see that advertised prices seem extremely low.

I recall seeing a mix for €75 somewhere.

A mix, to me, for a 'standard' rock track is at least 2 days ( plus the likely revisions).

So that's 37.50 a day - If one agrees that a 'mix' takes the 2 plus I suggest.

No one can make a living wage and cover expenses at that level.



Is charging those sort of prices fair and in the interests of music or desctructive and leading to reduced quality ?


What do you charge ?

fitz

It's interesting.
I'm not doing it commercially, but just produced/recorded a band at the weekend.
We set up on Friday night, got a rough headphone monitor mix going so we could track live guides first thing Saturday morning. We spent two days tracking the one song. I spent Monday and Tuesday evening editing, and did a first mix last night. Listening this morning, there's some things to be tweaked. I think you're estimate of 2 full days + for a good mix is pretty accurate. Less than that and I'd be feeling rushed tbh. So, at least 5 days work will have gone into this track by the end of the week.

Now, I'm doing this free of charge, because I want to get into more producing, and because I really dig this bands material.
If I wasn't in to the music, I wouldn't be doing it. The song is great, and I want to make it sounds the best I can. If you're taking on paying clients for as little as €75, when there's a good chance you might not be that interested in the music, you've got to wonder whether you'll be motivated enough to go that extra mile for so little. You might as well be doing it for free, but you don't necessarily have the selectivity to work on what you like because your doing it for the cash.

You'd wonder what the guys charging that amount would say if you asked why they charge that little?
If they're doing it to try to attract clients, they may be better served looking at why they're not attracting clients in the first place, or what they can do to actively go a get clients. Complex issue...

PaulBrewer

Doing it as a hobby for free is a perfectly worthwhile admirable venture.

It's when you charge things change - you're being paid to perform and all the responsibilities that go with that.

You expect and they expect.

But what can you rightly expect for 75 , 100 , 150 a day ?

Not much I'd suggest - hence the 'problem' ...

Radiosurfer

There's a dissertation in this topic, that's for sure. Seems like simple economics to me: If you go to the end of the process and see what people are willing to pay for the product and what the demand is (i.e. number of units) then you quickly see why the arse has fallen out of the studio end of things.
People are willing to pay less and less to own (or increasingly just to have access to) a song. They are also buying smaller and smaller quantities. Therefore any input costs at the beginning (i.e. artist development and studio costs) are pretty much written off. You're simply not going to get that money back from the sale of the product. So where are you going to make the money? Nobody seems quite sure but the longer artists and record companies see no return on the investment then the less likely they are to make that investment.
Add the affordibility of home studio set ups and you have a perfect storm. I'm amazed that any studios are breaking even. Would it be accurate to say that more and more of them are moving into education/training?

fitz

I'd say some of us would consider it beyond "hobby" status, but your point remains...regardless of what level you're doing it at (your free work could be better than some people's commercial efforts), things definitely change when you start charging.

There'll always be demand for a well located, hi-end studio that provides rooms and equipment that people are willing to pay for. Pricing gets more or less standardised at that level. The tricky thing is when you get into the "project studio" realm. There's a vast difference in the spec, setup, experience and skills in that category, so where to pitch yourself based on these factors in the context of what the other guys in the space are doing gets challenging. Your pricing indicates where you think you fit on the project studio scale, so if you think your offering is only worth €75, what is that saying to your clients?

Tbh, I think a lot of guys at the lower end of the project studio category that are trying to make a living out of it are on a hiding to nothing. Having some gear doesn't mean you have a "studio". Without the same variety of rooms/equipment/etc to attract clients like the bigger studios do, you need to have a unique selling point, or at least a smaller scale setup of very high quality. If you're trying to attract clients based on lower prices because you're offering isn't attractive enough as it is, you should be focusing on improving that offering. Operating at lower prices means you need to operate at higher volumes for it to be commercially viable, and that just isn't feasible without something being compromised. Also, if you've pitched yourself as a bottom level service in terms of cost, is there really enough demand for that level of service to provide you with those volumes? It's counter-productive.

Tough market, but I'd question whether the guys operating like this are harming anyone but themselves...I don't think it really has much of an impact on the higher end places. Cheaper access to high end gear for the home user has a far greater role in the challenges faced by the big studios I'd expect.

fitz

Radiosurfer wrote: »

There's a dissertation in this topic, that's for sure. Seems like simple economics to me: If you go to the end of the process and see what people are willing to pay for the product and what the demand is (i.e. number of units) then you quickly see why the arse has fallen out of the studio end of things.
People are willing to pay less and less to own (or increasingly just to have access to) a song. They are also buying smaller and smaller quantities. Therefore any input costs at the beginning (i.e. artist development and studio costs) are pretty much written off. You're simply not going to get that money back from the sale of the product. So where are you going to make the money? Nobody seems quite sure but the longer artists and record companies see no return on the investment then the less likely they are to make that investment.
Add the affordibility of home studio set ups and you have a perfect storm. I'm amazed that any studios are breaking even. Would it be accurate to say that more and more of them are moving into education/training?

Great post.
This is just another example of a part of the music industry doing things they should have been doing years ago.
It's the same as labels not having bothered moving away from their traditional revenue streams and looking at what else they could do to make money with the resources they have available.

PaulBrewer

No disrespect Fitz - just giving the non-paid the tag 'hobby'

Good post Radiosurfer.

What you say is true but there's also the opposite side i.e. if you don't pay much you can't really expect much - that too is a law of economics (maybe??)

I've recently been doing some stuff in the UK and while it's clear that budgets have dropped over there - the quality of work hasn't.

No-one is working for 37.50 a day either.

madtheory

Radiosurfer wrote: »

They are also buying smaller and smaller quantities.

Well yes, smaller compared to the massive peak at the beginning of the nineties created by consumers replacing LPs with CDs. But not smaller than almost any other time in the history of recorded music. It's still a billion euro industry, consumers still buy music, and composers still make a good living.

But you're right about the move into education! This is a good thing, and I think there are a few reasons for that.

It's hard to quantify, but I think there are a lot more "bands" and a lot more "studios" because the technology is becoming a lot cheaper, and so reliable that you don't need to be an electronics engineer any more. Without much skill it's possible to get fairly good sounding results. That's mostly populated by fantasists though- the worst example of which is that documentary about Irish rap. So the guy advertising for €75 shouldn't be taken seriously, IMO.

The job of "sound engineer" is going the same way as the job of the blacksmith. There is a big market though, for music. So if you can compose, are a competent recordist, and know how to do business, you can do quite well. Those kinds of skills work for computer games music, advertising, radio production, ring tones (still a billion euro industry actually) etc. etc. not just for doing hit songs or big film soundtracks.

Some people are autodidacts, but more people benefit from the guidance of an education.

fitz

PaulBrewer wrote: »

No disrespect Fitz - just giving the non-paid the tag 'hobby'

Good post Radiosurfer.

What you say is true but there's also the opposite side i.e. if you don't pay much you can't really expect much - that too is a law of economics (maybe??)

I've recently been doing some stuff in the UK and while it's clear that budgets have dropped over there - the quality of work hasn't.

No-one is working for 37.50 a day either.

Sorry Paul, I didn't take any offense, which I realise my response might have inferred. Just find the "hobby" tag a bit clunky.

Much bigger market in the UK, perhaps that makes studio businesses more sustainable?

i57dwun4yb1pt8

you know , its a strange experiment that is occuring with the internet .

Everyones secrets and methods are being placed out there
musicians are learning all the secret and advanced techniques , that 20 years ago you would never been able to access .
Musical technqiue is hitting levels never seen before in anyone from little kids upwards.
loads and loads fo fantasticly able musicians are appearing now.

people are able to buy decent enough gear and knowledge to learn how to recrord and produce at home.

sound quality expectiaions has dropped ( mp3 / ear buds )

so the effect is - a huge surge in very capable musicians . engineers ,, looking to create and work in a shrinking
ideas spectrum ( only so many notes / patterns there to be created ) , in a lowering of audio expections , in a lowering financial return market.

the basic summary is - the internet is making the rich ( in terms of knowledge and return on it ) alot poorer they have to now work alot harder longer and do more projects and its making the poor richer- they dont need to go to expensive lessons , buy expensive gear
etc -.

i guess we meet somekind of balance point.

its not just in music either - the web is turning into the great equaliser in many ways.

i guess the next step will be to turn it off ( or down to protect the interests .

krd

PaulBrewer wrote: »

I recall seeing a mix for €75 somewhere.

A mix, to me, for a 'standard' rock track is at least 2 days ( plus the likely revisions).

That's you.

There have been quite a few people around offering very low prices mixes on the internet for a while now.

It really could just be a guy with a laptop and some monitors. And you might only be getting a few hours at the most.

PaulBrewer

But sure couldn't you do that yourself and spend no money ?

The last track I did for a band called j90 from Cork took 4 days. 3 of which was editing.

jtsuited

quick question.....does anybody know anybody earning a decent living (as in make 60k+ a year) being a recording engineer outside of broadcasting? Excluding studio owners. Genuinely curious.

krd

PaulBrewer wrote: »

But sure couldn't you do that yourself and spend no money ?

If you're looking for a second pair of ears. A 70 quid mix. As long as it isn't a chancer, and it's someone who knows what they're doing they might be able to fix big boo boos that are getting by your ears.

I know with dance music, record companies have gotten used to asking for a whole remix (that's not just a mix - that the whole creative rebuilding of a track) in time frames as short as a day or two. And that's everything start to finish.

The last track I did for a band called j90 from Cork took 4 days. 3 of which was editing.

You get what you pay for. A 70 quid mixer is probably not going to do any editing.


I have seen more than once, people offering $10 mixes on the internet.

PMI

PaulBrewer wrote: »

But sure couldn't you do that yourself and spend no money ?

The last track I did for a band called j90 from Cork took 4 days. 3 of which was editing.

What do expect !! that track needed re-doing really !!! but i digress.... not my prob anymore

I wouldnt call myself a mix engineer but I would expect 250-3 a day myself from outsiders, maybe within a band situation I would bend the rules being within the band etc...

I would expect anyone else to be 500+ I would just expect to pay that?!?

PaulBrewer

It did come out good though !

off.the.walls

I've been working out of a shed that i converted for the past two years, as im not a huge studio i charge 75 a day simply because its not a huge comercial studio, if i had one of those with the access to all of the amazing equipment out there i would definitally charge more than that, fact is i've had to do all of this on a budget also while paying for car, college, social activities all the usual stuff, so that 75 quid a day is a godsend sometimes. Bands like it to for the fact that theres plenty of room for everyone and their not paying 400+for a day

Dontron

Radiosurfer wrote: »

There's a dissertation in this topic, that's for sure. Seems like simple economics to me: If you go to the end of the process and see what people are willing to pay for the product and what the demand is (i.e. number of units) then you quickly see why the arse has fallen out of the studio end of things.
People are willing to pay less and less to own (or increasingly just to have access to) a song. They are also buying smaller and smaller quantities. Therefore any input costs at the beginning (i.e. artist development and studio costs) are pretty much written off. You're simply not going to get that money back from the sale of the product. So where are you going to make the money? Nobody seems quite sure but the longer artists and record companies see no return on the investment then the less likely they are to make that investment.
Add the affordibility of home studio set ups and you have a perfect storm. I'm amazed that any studios are breaking even. Would it be accurate to say that more and more of them are moving into education/training?

Seems like the money is in teaching look at pulse

off.the.walls

This is true but with so little work alot of interest is going to be lost in courses like that with no jobs waiting at the end of the course.

Dontron

Way more students then there are jobs most people doing music tech type stuff will never get behind a mixing desk and make a career out of what they have been taught.

krd

Dontron wrote: »

Way more students then there are jobs most people doing music tech type stuff will never get behind a mixing desk and make a career out of what they have been taught.

When I was a kid... These courses were virtually non existent - now there's way too many of them.

Niall - Dahlia

PaulBrewer wrote: »

I was looking at a few studio website and see that advertised prices seem extremely low.

I recall seeing a mix for €75 somewhere.

A mix, to me, for a 'standard' rock track is at least 2 days ( plus the likely revisions).

So that's 37.50 a day - If one agrees that a 'mix' takes the 2 plus I suggest.

No one can make a living wage and cover expenses at that level.



Is charging those sort of prices fair and in the interests of music or desctructive and leading to reduced quality ?

Maybe you saw my site, I charge €75 for a mix.

€75 is a starting point for me. I don't think you can instinctively link a low cost service to a poor quality product, or as being "destructive" to music. Nobody I've mixed for has had a problem with the finished product. Low quality music begins well before record is pressed or the first compressor is inserted!

The studio I work in has dropped to on average 2 days a week, so I mix at home on the side, so to speak. €75 might mean nothing to you Paul, but with an extra mix or two a week to me it's the difference between keeping at this or packing it in for a 9-5. I work from home so have no significant extra expenses associated with my mixing.

I've done simple acoustic/vocal mixes that take 2 hours for €75. I've done edits that take 20 minutes or less. It's not "37.50" a day. Combined with the studio it keeps me going. Which is far better than being on the dole regardless. I'm not interested in counting the hours invested in a project and dividing it into the total cost. If you're happy with your hours and wage, and the client is happy with the result, that's all that matters really. You can't worry about what another engineer is charging per hour. Whatever you charge Paul, there is probably an engineer somewhere who would laugh and wonder how you can feed yourself...

I've always thought my mixing is **** anyway, because for years I would get bands coming in to the studio for 2/3 days that would leave you 2 hours at the end to "mix". That's frustrating because I want the end-product to sound good and be representative of my work. And as a engineer and not the studio owner I'd have no leeway in putting extra time into something I thought was worthwhile, even if I wanted to.

At least now anything that comes my way as a mixing engineer I can take my time with if it's worthwhile, and actually learn something. It also means I've made a start on owning some decent equipment, which I can hopefully expand upon in the future.

PaulBrewer

I'm not sure whose site I saw it on .

What do mean by 'starting point' Niall ? 75 up ?

75 yoyos does count to me too believe me !

krd

PaulBrewer wrote: »

It did come out good though !

And what about all the stuff above 5Khz?


Can you post a link?....if you can?

Niall - Dahlia

PaulBrewer wrote: »

What do mean by 'starting point' Niall ? 75 up ?

No, as in I hope in the near future to be able to increase my rate, and not stay at €75 forever!

I have to be realistic. Taking into account 1. My lack of experience as a purely mix engineer, 2. What other guys with more experience are charging, 3. What I know bands expect to pay for a mix (however warped that is), and 4. The fact it's a purely online service...I think €75 is a fair starting point. As those factors increase I'll try to increase my price.

jtsuited

Dontron wrote: »

Way more students then there are jobs most people doing music tech type stuff will never get behind a mixing desk and make a career out of what they have been taught.

It's been that way for at least 15 years at this stage.

PaulBrewer

krd wrote: »

And what about all the stuff above 5Khz?


Can you post a link?....if you can?

I will do if I get their permission.

It was a track that they recorded a while ago and, as I understand, had been repeatedly revisited - so there was a mish-mash of ideas and sounds - some good some less so.

However a bit of pruning left what I thought was an interesting song.

I'm glad they persisted.

shayleon

these days I make most of my income outside the studio, while the studio is at around €40 per hour.

a few days ago I quoted a guy €200 for 5 tracks with backing tracks and he went "whoo! ****! and you are not even in Galway!"

I lost a lot of business due my 'high' price, but now that I am not dependent on this, I am glad that I don't have to bend backwards and if I see that someone is only after a cheap price, I advice them to go elsewhere.

some don't realise though that a cheap hourly rate does not necessarily mean a cheaper price for the end product, but that's their problem.