Midi recording now Vs old professional recording studios

[jcm2016]

I'm curious, how comparable is the midi recorder on the SX900 to the professional recording studios of years gone by?  There are so many voices and effects available, it makes me think how primitive things were decades ago.  I was watching an interview with Brian May of Queen about how they recorded Bohemian Rhapsody and the tricks they used.  How crazy is it to say that from a pure sound production perspective, they could have recorded that today on an SX900? 

I'm continuing to open my eyes to how powerful the SX900 really is.

Thanks

[vadesriux]

Do you own this keyboard ?

[hans1966]

I'm curious, how comparable is the midi recorder on the SX900 to the professional recording studios of years gone by?  There are so many voices and effects available, it makes me think how primitive things were decades ago.  I was watching an interview with Brian May of Queen about how they recorded Bohemian Rhapsody and the tricks they used.  How crazy is it to say that from a pure sound production perspective, they could have recorded that today on an SX900? 

I'm continuing to open my eyes to how powerful the SX900 really is.

Thanks

Hello, very good question.

I have to tell you that although the sx900 is an excellent machine for performing live, and creating more or less decent MIDI sequences, it will never outperform actual recording of musicians in the studio.

I am a happy owner of the sx900 and can attest that it is an excellent arrangement keyboard designed especially for performing live, whether it is a concert, or for personal enjoyment.

It is not recommended for music production, as it lacks professional MIDI and AUDIO editing tools.

Hope this helps you clear things up a bit

Cheers

Hans

[jcm2016]

Thanks for the response.  I was more thinking of the SX900 compared to history.  Sort of like people saying there is more power in an iPhone than the computers that were used in the Apollo moon missions.  I'm just curious.

Yes, I do own an SX900

I've never been in a recording studio.  My music background is performing in orchestras and concert bands live (not on keyboard), never recording.  I've been working on my piano skills alongside having fun with the SX900.  It's my first glimpse into recording, mixing etc.

[J. Larry]

It would be interesting to hear a comparison recording of live studio players vs a Yamaha arranger on the same song, style, tempo, etc., where the arranger was played by a top-flight professional, with studio mastering of the result.  How many folks could tell the difference, or might prefer one version over the other?

[Enildo]

Certainly an arranger keyboard will never (I never like to say "never", lol) will replace a band's work, and the sound quality won't be the same as real instruments being played by real people.
But I can say with certainty that with my PSR I do a better job than many bands in my region and I go further, I do the work of many different types of bands (rock, samba, pop, forró, country, dance, acoustic) which it would be almost impossible for just one band to be able to play all these styles.
My keyboard is not only a band, but an entire orchestra.

And yes, a well-rehearsed song, often with the help of regional samples, can compete with several bands and depending on, do an even better job.

My 2 cents contribution (lol)
Enildo

[andyg]

A trained pair of ears will always hear a difference between an arranger's backing styles (however expertly played) and real musicians.

If you take the MIDI file from an arranger and then do some serious work on it in a DAW like Cubase and then get Cubase to play it back using the keyboard as a sound source. Then record each track as audio and do some more work in Cubase, you'll get much nearer to what musicians would be playing live in studio.

But for a lot of listeners, an arranger's output, live or multi-tracked and in good hands, will be very convincing.

[mikf]

A style, never ..... but like Andy says a well made and processed midi track might well match even outperform some 1950s recordings. Top level recordings using full live orchestras for vocalists like Sinatra and Tony Bennet were very good even in the fifties. But that was expensive and took many top musicians.
By  the late 60s early 70s the production quality from studios generally was excellent, but it took a lot of equipment and skill. Now people with the know how and talent can almost match it in their back room with an arranger or synth and a few bits of electronics.
So I think you could say that what is available now arrangers, and home recording is better than was available in the 50s, and matches what was available even in best studios in 70s, maybe even 80s, and at much lower cost, easier to use and way more compact.
But you still need the skills and talent, and it's hard to match that compared to professionals.
Mike

[jcm2016]

Thanks everyone, really interesting responses.

[Amwilburn]

It would be interesting to hear a comparison recording of live studio players vs a Yamaha arranger on the same song, style, tempo, etc., where the arranger was played by a top-flight professional, with studio mastering of the result.  How many folks could tell the difference, or might prefer one version over the other?

Not *that* close for 1 person playing everything live: (My live take on Bohemian Rhapsody on a CVP709, essentially the same as Tyros 5)

https://youtu.be/jlS6Hbs6aKA

But then again, I'm no Freddie Mercury /Farrokh  Bulsara.

But if you were doing it in multiple passes into a multitrack recorder, and recording the mic in multi-track passes rather than using the vocal harmonizer? A better singer (and a condenser mic or a high dynamic mic like an SM7b or Super55... I was using an SM58, essentially a Karaoke mic, without proper compression) could get pretty close, but the nuances of the guitar solos still aren't there.

But if your recording sticks to piano, e.piano, woodwind, brass, strings, drums, bass, and even rhythm guitar? yeah you could get pretty close.

Mark

[victorsp]

Very good Amwilburn.
The harmony of the voice With what device do you perform it?
Greetings and thanks for sharing.

[Amwilburn]

I used to built in vocal harmony of the CVP709 (same basic chipset as the Tyros 5)

Mark

[Amwilburn]

It took me a while, but I finally got around to using Vocal Remover (as recommended by Casper ckobu) and added Freddie's vocals to a midi file rendered on the Genos - The Show Must Go On

https://drive.google.com/file/d/129eYkfuN0glsVpcHFfnDJupGCgdJMaNX/view?usp=sharing


Yes, I could've used synth strings closer to the original (which is what I do on the T1 to T3 versions) but I just thought the Kinostrings sounded good (I would've preferred the original used orchestral strings rather than synth strings)

So, if you have professional vocal recoding tools (condenser studio mic, compressor) and used a Genos/CVP809 as your backing, you can get close. This would be even closer if I could play the guitar well enough/ used a professional guitarist; the background is 100% Genos.



Mark

[Toril S]

I have been considering paying a professional studio to help me get a couple of my songs up to CD quality. I haven't asked them for the price yet, or even if they are willing to do it. Maybe it will be difficult, as I must use my Genos. They would maybe first have to adjust the settings on my Genos to acceptable EQ and compression levels for the studio, and then mix the different tracks to get the crisp sound that I am after. It will probably cost me a fortune anyway. As others have said here, the Genos makes good MIDI and audio, but not as clear and crisp as on for instance a CD recording done in a studio.

[pjd]

My spouse and I recorded a few demos using (only or mostly) Genos:

http://sandsoftwaresound.net/what-did-you-do-in-self-isolation/

Genos has one more recording feature than SX900: Audio multi-recording. I used it quite a bit while making the demos, even recording voice directly to Genos.

Audio multi-record is like Les Paul's sound on sound technique on steroids -- without noise. It's not as flexible as 4 track (mid-Beatles), but it is darned flexible. It can export to WAV, a feature that let me export a basic recording to Cubase.

I also made use of MIDI multi-record which is available on SX900.

With a little planning, these tools still beat the pants off early Les Paul technique. The digital ability to bounce without noise or loss is way beyond the old studios.

Just two pennies -- pj

[Joe H]

Actually MIDI has no sounds, so it depends on the instrument sounds and how well the musician articulates the Voices used.  In other words the quality of the MIDI sequence is primarily dependent on the player.  If it is poor player, then if he or she makes a so called "professional recording" it may not sound so good either.



Joe H