I was going to post this in BM Bland's interesting topic (pointers).
I thought I went too far off topic, yet I have questions I would like to pose to those in the music industry or anyone for that matter that would like to share their insights.

It started off as a question to BM Bland and ended up to what the industries expectations are for quality.
I know this is a more traditional, professional forum.

But if somone wanted to market a recording through complete crap for equipment, which has been done, is anyone still doing that?

Not that I ever intend on marketing anything like that.
I want to eventually make the most nice to the ears recordings I can.
But I wonder how many have that basement mentality with technology, or lack of better playing for that matter and have stuck by it?

Here's my original points and questions-------------------------

"BM Bland:

I read through and noticed that you deal in the rock genre too.
I don't know if anything I am doing would conform to any type of genre outside of some type of alt, pop rock.
And also if someone could do a home production off of a cubase or MIDI or even non-conventional means could be adequate.
I know with state of the art mixing consoles that a sub-standard recording can be very messy. .

All I recall from the me generation and the time of the old mp3.com, is that no matter how one thinks their relative skils stink, they had to say the other guy stinks when told they do, stand behind what they do, and pretend that something from them is grand even if it's the lousiest recording. That's experience to some.
Unfortunately, the arrogant more often gets noteriety than the humble that is honest of their shortcomings.
Especially with racous music.

Music in many ways over the last 40 years has had more to do with schtick and attitude than talent.
It's hard to believe what some consider marketable.
I heard a foul song on a site not long ago. Played over a rythmn sample and 2 notes, with gutteral language sungspoke.
And there were people that seemed to love it.
I used to be a natural with that. Except I tried to do lyrics in a more intellectual, MC5 type vein.
The entire version of quality seems to have been sub-standardized.
I think people use the net as a convienient catalyst for the diminished quality.
I could definately handle the first Iggy & The Stooges album and MC5. And now that anyone can put noise to a sound card, there would seem to be a case for blaming the computer for diminished quality.
But just like with what disco did for rock, it made those rockers try harder to be legitimate.
And there are tons of musicians on the net that can come out with outstanding recordings through their own conventions.
I would like to be a realist and learn how to record and play instead of pretend or use shock and obscenities.
I have been trying to learn to develop by playing the instrument through a sound card off and on for the last 3 years and just purchased a TASCAM. And am looking to master cubase and MIDI before I get to a marketable, LP lengthed production.

But I don't know why plush, consumate recordings are looked for so much.
The only groundbreakers are the ones that the consumates and A & R people never would have given a chance to.
Even alt rock was'nt accepted by the majors until the music was accepted finally by more than a cult audience.

I have copywritten my recordings.
My goal is to do orchastral type music on synth and guitar based on a concept.
Much like film music meets Pink Floyd (They can be rather synomonous, at least to me).

When I learn more about playing and songwriting, and get the proper recording equipment for that production, what steps then would I have to take?
I don't know about the publishing end yet, but from your posts it sounds like the recordings don't have to be studio made but adequate.

Thanks for your informative thread."

Matt

http://www.f3music.com/444