After many years of recording [and designing] studios I’ve found that every room has some acoustic quirk, engineer one quirk out, more show up. An engineer gets used to working around the acoustic “character” of the room. This is why every recording from any studio has a “sound.”

Musicians lose their spontaneity when the red light goes on. They are on the clock so they get conservative, safe, you know… boring… I’ve always liked live recordings because they have energy!

Those cool looking, acoustically engineered rooms cost BIG bucks so you are going to pay big bucks to use them. For a demo, doesn’t it make sense to record what you actually do live? Recording a performance is a great way of getting something out without a brain-wrenching - let's go in the studio and spend the family fortune - effort.

Do you want to know what you REALLY sound like live. [You should.] Is that new material as good as you think it is? Hey, if it is you're that much closer to a release.

Bandstand sales are where the majority of independent release CD's are sold, make more money at every gig!

The public doesn't care about your win/loss record, it does care how many records you've made and how recently. The more you publish, the better your chances of success.

So what's wrong "board" mixes? [Mixes taken from the Sound Reinforcement mixer, you know the "PA"] Those mixes are Sound Reinforcement mixes. The softest sources on stage will be the loudest sounds in the mix. That is why board mixes are voice and drum heavy [or worse, drum weak]. They sound nothing like the audience heard. To fix that problem and make a recording that sounds more like the performance requires a different approach and a lot of experience…