Recording studios banning outside tracks

[Tom Wolverton]

Have any of you encounted a recording studio that refuses to take in outside tracks for a project? So, for example, steel tracks recorded at another studio and brought into a particular project? I guess they want the income from recording all the tracks themselves. But with remote recording becoming so commonplace, this seems like a dumb policy for a studio to try to enforce.

Anyone run into this? I know of 2 studios in California that appear to refuse outside tracks.

[Joey Ace]

Never heard of it!
I know several pro studios that encourage it.

One owner told me that he's seen an increase in business due to home studio owners wanting to add to their tracks.

An hourly rate is an hourly rate.

If the studio is so busy that they are turning away customers I could understand the policy. I don't know any studios in that position.

[Johan Jansen]

Never heard of that. Most studio's appreciate it when I work at home with my own gear, own ideas and own time.....
JJ

[Tom Wolverton]

Thanks for the input. Let's hope this isn't a new trend. Seems like a short-sighted business model.

[John Macy]

Never heard of it. either....

[Tony Prior]

It seems kinda bizarre ! Sounds like a good way to lose business ! You must record everything here or we won't book your session..!

Well ok..

"I was thinking I needed to book around 100 hours but use one track done remotely..ok, I'll go somewhere else"

[Howard Parker]

Is it possible that the studio has a client that is demanding everyone track a project at the same facility and/or use the same engineer?

That happens from time to time.

h

[Dennis Russell]

This is somewhat surprising, though in a way it can make sense.
Is it a "high-profile" studio? Do they provide their own well-known engineer? Do they charge by the project vs. by the hour? Do they oversee the project from tracking to final mix or mastering?
I could see them insisting on all tracks being recorded at their facility, given the above circumstances, to keep people from recording most of their tracks at home or in a lesser studio. Having all tracks recorded at their studio maintains quality control from projects crediting their studio as the recording location.
I have recorded songs with musicians recording from various studios and "emailing in" or "drop boxing" tracks. Sometimes it works well, other times it took a lot of protools editing/EQing/sonic processing/etc. to get these tracks to work together. Though most of the tracks will be processed in some way, recording at the same facility with the same engineers on the same equipment should contribute to some cohesion and perhaps a speedier mixing/mastering process.
But, so far I have not personally run across this policy at any studios.

[Clete Ritta]

No.

[Tom Wolverton]

After some more discussions with one of these studios, I'm good to go. With them, it was not about loss of revenue, but quality of the tracks I was giving them. Too noisy. I got that fixed. I guess they were concerned about the project have their name on it, and for the product being sub-standard. I get that.

[Tony Prior]

After some more discussions with one of these studios, I'm good to go. With them, it was not about loss of revenue, but quality of the tracks I was giving them. Too noisy. I got that fixed. I guess they were concerned about the project have their name on it, and for the product being sub-standard. I get that.

I think we all would get that..

wouldn't it have been easier for them to say..your outside track can'be used, it's too noisy ?

[Tom Wolverton]

Yes, a bit frustrating at times. BTW. Guess what fixed the problem? Dumping my cheapo ART preamp and getting a Sarno V-8. Much cleaner.

[John Macy]

Now that's the way to fix the problem...

[Tom Wolverton]

night and day difference. And to think all this time........I could've had a V-8