Conclusion

This work has been a huge undertaking, and because of this it is perhaps best to recap on what this works outcome goal is from the introduction, for starters the work wants to uncover which out of commercial and home studios are more effective and in what situation the studios are best utilized.

The answer to this question will definitely be much more complicated than anticipated, at least for the first half of the outcome goal. As both are effective for different reasons and offer different aspects due their functionality.

Commercial Studios are generally better for their acoustic treatment, room dimensions and general space which allows them to be better listening environments, have better operational structure and workflow. (Interview section; Studio Session section; Acoustics section; Bell, 2014; Camilleri, 2010; Theberge, 2004)

It was discovered throughout the work that the acoustic treatment within the space is important to properly critically listen, and to achieve good treat can be difficult and expensive, but if the studio owners knows what they are doing they can achieve good acoustic treatment even within a smaller environment; of course within limitations, as bad room modal issues will be present depending on the rooms dimensions not whether the acoustic treatment is effective or not, the acoustic treatment is there to treat those issues but if the issues are too severe then it will only reduce them rather than remove them. (Interview section; Acoustic section; Robair, 2012; Long, 2013; Everest, 2014; Newell, 2017; Yeary, 2014; Thomazelli & Bertoli, 2019)

An example from the acoustic section being my room, as the length and width have the same dimensions resulting in the length and width axial mode stacking on top each other which makes the modal issues even more exaggerated. (Everest, 2014; Newell, 2017)

But despite these issues smaller rooms and uncontrolled room dimensions have, they can still be used to their full potential; as it was discovered in the interview section that it does not matter what the room is as if the individual is knowledgeable enough then they can find a way to treat or reduce these issues to manageable standard, which the caveat of needing to compromise within their space, where this being acknowledging the modal issues and keeping them in mind when recording, mixing and mastering; or reducing the rooms size or aesthetic to treat an issue within the space. But as Karl stated in the interview section, it does not matter as long as the sessions are creative, and everyone is vibing. (Interview section; Acoustic section; Robair, 2012; Long, 2013; Everest, 2014; Newell, 2017; Yeary, 2014; Thomazelli & Bertoli, 2019)

In terms of operational structure and workflow, it is an interesting one as commercial studios do have the better operational structure as discovered in the studio sessions section as since there is generally more room and spaces to use, everything is separated within those section which maxes out their capabilities as if the live room as all the equipment generally used in the live room then everything is streamlined, and nothing is out of arms reach. Same goes for the control as if everything necessary to the control room is within it then it is simply more straight forward. (Studio Session section; Interview section; Camilleri, 2010; Bell, 2014)

It is also worth mentioning that this means commercial studios does not get over crowded with cables and equipment as everything is in the right environment, for example the live room may become a sea of cables when everything is set up, but the control room will be clear allowing the engineers and producer to use the room without any hindrance of walking around equipment or being careful not to trip. And despite the live room being more occupied with equipment and cables, with proper care it can be a clear space and having the right amount of space to do that is very effective for operational structure as it makes it easier to navigate the room and to add additional pieces of equipment for recording within the room without needing to remove or move other bits of equipment. (Studio Session section; Interview section; Camilleri, 2010; Bell, 2014)

A home studio however has a more difficult operational structure as it is almost in opposite to a commercial studio as generally home studios are a one room type of situation, and it was discovered in the studio session section that trying to record within one space can be awkward and make you have to make sacrifices in order to achieve a high quality recording. (Walzer, 2016; Burgess, 2008; Wilson, 2011; Studio Session section)

As when recording Ellie in the edit suite it was immediately littered in cables and even with proper cable management it was hard to move around comfortably, we booked a couple of different microphones for flavour and for the option of having different microphones so it would have been possible to record vocals and guitar at the same time but due to the space it would have very awkward to properly place the microphones and stands without boxing in Ellie and making her restricted in her movements. So we had to record the guitar and vocals separately, which is not a bad method of recording the elements of a track as it allows for both the guitar and vocals to be completely focused on by Ellie; and Ellie wanted to record like this anyways which was fine as we did not have much of a choice. But therein lies the issue, as we did not have a choice on how we wanted to record and if the musician were instead adamant on recording the guitar and vocals at the same time it would have resulted in a poorer experience for the musician and thus poor recordings and since the pressures of studio work are high, if the musician does not like the session then it could potentially worsen or destroy their reputation as an engineer or producer, which could be devastating for their career. (Lefford & Thompson, 2018; Bell, 2014; Camilleri, 2010; Iverson, 2017; Shepherd, 2011; Studio Session section; Walzer, 2016; Burgess, 2008; Wilson, 2011)

But despite this the workflow of the edit suite was still effective as despite having to work around the rooms limited space it allowed for Ellie to be apart of the every aspect of the session which allowed her to feel more involved and allowed her to be more critical. And when it came to Ellie’s commercial studio session she mentioned that it made her feel a lot more disconnected and even intimidated due to her doing her performances within the vocal booth which made her feel like she needed to perform perfectly. This kind of pressure can ruin any performances to come from the musician so despite the edit suite being worse for operational structure it allowed Ellie to be more comfortable and perform better, which is one of the goals of the studio and producer to get the best performances out of the musician(s). (Studio Session section; Interview section; Lefford & Thompson, 2018; Bell, 2014; Camilleri, 2010; Iverson, 2017; Shepherd, 2011)

However, the commercial studio having better operational structure meant it also had a better workflow and had maximum potential, resulting in an overall improvement in these areas compared to the edit suite session. But let it be known that both session produce high quality music, but a big factor on to why the edit suite session produced high quality music was because of Ellie, as she wanted to record the instruments separately and enjoyed the edit suite session more for feeling involved but due to the edit suites size and lack of freedom we did not have a choice so if someone wanted to record the elements at the same time would have had a worse time. (Studio Session section; Interview section; Lefford & Thompson, 2018; Bell, 2014; Camilleri, 2010; Iverson, 2017; Shepherd, 2011)

​

An impact home studio design has had on commercial studios is the use of DAW and software equipment as the participants in the studio survey, the interviewees, the ethnographic study, and the research shows that hardware equipment are being made redundant by more practical software equipment that can be more precise in its parameters and can even offer the producer the same timbre as its hardware counterparts without the cost, and maintenance issues. (Ethnographic section, Interview Section, Survey: Studios section, Bell, 2014; Hidalgo, 2013; Watson, 2013; Burgess, 2008; Long, 2013; Robair, 2012; Walzer, 2016; Wilson, 2011; Herbst & Albrecht, 2018; Hagan, 2016; Lau, 2012; Woszczyk & Leonard, 2012).

The ethnographic study discovered something interesting, perhaps the future of recording studios. As HQstudios is all software based recording studio with a focus on practicality and ease of use, even their main microphone is the slate microphone and preamp combination that allows them to change the timbre and tonality of the microphone to fit the musician instead of having multiple different microphones. The HQstudio is merge of methodologies between commercial and home studios. (Lefford & Thompson, 2018; Bell, 2014; Camilleri, 2010; Iverson, 2017; Shepherd, 2011; Walzer, 2016; Burgess, 2008; Wilson, 2011)

Lastly the studio design section is the accumulation of all the sections within the work and other bits of research. The design was a success but more interestingly adopted more commercial studio elements than home studio elements; a big contributing factor was the HQstudio design and what was discovered during the interview and survey: studio section as the practicality of the HQstudio was very effective in making the session have excellent workflow and operational structure and this was carried into the studio design as it was one of the main goals to ensure an effective workflow and operational structure, but also from the interview section is have some hardware equipment as it is known to offer the studio some marketability due to hardware being known for having a unique timbre and adding colour to the recordings, despite software being capable of this. It is also worth noting that despite home studio being cheaper to build than commercials studios, the hybrid studio costs less than what both types of studios an estimated to cost. (Lefford & Thompson, 2018; Bell, 2014; Camilleri, 2010; Iverson, 2017; Shepherd, 2011; Walzer, 2016; Burgess, 2008; Wilson, 2011; Hagan, 2016; Lau, 2012; Recordingconnection, 2021)

Also Long (2013) article was a big contributing factor into the design of the hybrid studio, one element the hybrid studio was built upon was making it as accommodating to any recording situation as possible, as it despite HQstudios impressive studio design, it is mor accommodating for urban genres of music and single or small groups of musicians, it is worth noting that this in on purpose being that the studio is also a record label for those types of music and musicians so it is effective that their studio is built around those genres and musicians but in order for the studio design to max out its potential for work and making money it was decided upon to make it useable for any type of musician and genre of music. (Long, 2013; Ethnographic section; Interview section; Survey: Studios section; Lefford & Thompson, 2018; Bell, 2014; Camilleri, 2010; Iverson, 2017; Shepherd, 2011; Walzer, 2016; Burgess, 2008; Wilson, 2011; Hagan, 2016; Lau, 2012)

Both studio types of effective, for different reasons and it is clear that they influence each other; home studios being more influential. But commercial studios are more effective in terms of offering an effective listening environment that has better operational structure, workflow and is far more accommodating than home studios. This does not mean home studios are ineffective and the gap between effectiveness is more a huge amount. It’s a case of commercial studios being able to do what home studios do but more effectively and offering more as well. (Long, 2013; Ethnographic section; Interview section; Acoustics section; Studio Session section; Studio Design section; Survey: Studios section; Lefford & Thompson, 2018; Bell, 2014; Camilleri, 2010; Iverson, 2017; Shepherd, 2011; Walzer, 2016; Burgess, 2008; Wilson, 2011; Hagan, 2016; Lau, 2012; Thompson & Lashua, 2014; Harrison, 2014; Hidalgo, 2013; Watson, 2013; Robair, 2012; Herbst & Albrecht, 2018).

Commercials studios are more effective for accommodating many different types of musicians, being better listening environments, more efficient operational structure, and workflow. (Lefford & Thompson, 2018; Bell, 2014; Camilleri, 2010; Iverson, 2017; Shepherd, 2011)

Home studios are more effective for more welcoming environments, despite it being discovered the engineers and producers influence how welcoming the session can be, being tailored for a certain type of music makes them very effective at producing that type of music and being not as intimidating. (Supper, 2018; Taylor, 2015; Bell, 2014; Herbst and Albrecht, 2018; Watson, 2013; Burgess, 2008; Hagan, 2016; Theberge, 2004).

Based on the research within this work, studios will eventually follow down a similar path to the HQstudio design, hardware will still be applicable but with software being able to properly emulate hardware gear and not break over time means studios will become more software based over time with hardware being mainly used as a unique selling point. (Long, 2013; Ethnographic section; Interview section; Acoustics section; Studio Session section; Studio Design section; Survey: Studios section; Lefford & Thompson, 2018; Bell, 2014; Camilleri, 2010; Iverson, 2017; Shepherd, 2011; Walzer, 2016; Burgess, 2008; Wilson, 2011; Hagan, 2016; Lau, 2012; Thompson & Lashua, 2014; Harrison, 2014; Hidalgo, 2013; Watson, 2013; Robair, 2012; Herbst & Albrecht, 2018).

If this work were to be continued or down again, more time would be ideal to complete every section with an appropriate amount of time as sections had to be removed due to time constraints. More of a focus on the ethnographic study would also be done as only one studio was studied for the ethnographic section due to lack of responses and time constraints.

Also if a budget was involved, then apart of that budget would be used to buy the acoustic treatment discussed in the acoustic guide section to discover their true absorption coefficients.