I found this thing on Pinterest but the jpg is too small to read. I really like how they laid out the information here, but I can’t find a legible copy…I might even call these guys tomorrow and see if I could get a hold of one for this site if anyone else thinks it would be helpful to noobs 
(you have to click on the picture, then click on it again)
Have you got as link to the site. I can probably get hold of the full size image if you have (Hacking 101)
#11… a bucket full of cash!
Sure…the link’s at the bottom of the picture 
Man I don’t know about this. REAPER isn’t even on there and it’s like the cheapest one. And personally I don’t think it should be any beginner’s goal to “set up a home studio.” It should be more results driven, like “I want to be able to make beats,” or, “I want to be able to record my guitar and vocals.” It helps you figure out what you actually need to get started.
Hey Christina…thanks a ton for your thoughts. I agree, and those wouldn’t have been my choices of gear. I was curious about the thoughts of the layout
But yes, technically speaking Reaper wouldn’t be on there because its $60, when the entry level category is $150 I think lol. They should have made a $0 free - $150 category probably lol.
Oh I had thought that the $150 - $500 was for all of the gear combined, in that tier. So the cheaper the DAW, the more you have to spend on the other stuff.
The layout is very nice in my opinion, from a design perspective. However, I guess I am against the entire premise that someone who is legit ready to “build their own home recording studio” should need a guide like this. Maybe it’s a nice jumping off point to do more research.
For most music recording applications, I see nothing wrong with Reaper. It lacks features for film, gaming, post, and broadcast, but those aren’t the majority markets for a DAW anyway. I almost always recommend reaper to students and local home studio guys unless they’re planning on going to school for recording. Then they need to be on Pro Tools. If they’re planning on a crap ton of MIDI, I’d probably say Cubase or Logic. But for the majority of stuff, you can’t beat Reaper at the price.
This seems more like clickbait style information. I know if I was trying to help someone get started, I wouldn’t point them at this. If they said “I want to record some music. I have nothing and know nothing,” I would tell them just to get some basic recording package at guitar center. Most interfaces come with a lite version of some DAW.
A DAW, an interface, a mic and some headphones are all you really need to record stuff. From there, it’s too dependent on what you want to record to say budgetX = XGear. A guy recording himself playing guitar and singing is way different from a guy making beats and rapping, which is completely different from a guy wanting to record his band in his garage.
I just don’t see budget as the determining factor on what to get. I think needs are far more important.
OK. Gotchya. I see the problem…Would it have worked if there were four or five of those charts…say one for guitar+vocals then a breakdown of relevant gear by pricing their, then rap+beats then another chart or relevant gear?
I’m sure it is. When I saw this chart on Pinterest, I thought about how many times on RR someone spit out a hypothetical budget, didn’t talk about their needs, then we went upwards of 50 replies, long after the original poster stopped responding lol?
I know its debatable how useful that little chart thing was. I personally don’t have anything against click-bait if it would actually provide meaningful information to the ‘clicker’ lol. I thought about drumming up something like that to see if it would potentially drive traffic to the site.
Yeah, that’s a pretty good plan. Send them to Sweetwater or Vintage King instead. They’re a little less stupid than GC. Haha…I think I’d send someone to GC if I wanted to sabotage their studio.
I may have phrased that poorly. I meant that the less money you spend on the DAW, the more budget you have remaining to spend on other stuff; not that you’ll need to spend more to make up for what the DAW lacks. I use REAPER and I think it’s awesome. 
oh man. I forgot that people ask the opinions of the salesman when they go to guitar center. In that case, you are right, but I don’t think I trust the sweetwater guys any more than GC guys. And vintage kind would just try to sell them an expensive mic pre.
Ah, I see. This is quite tricky. Graphics that drive traffic walk a very fine line between offering information that is only semi-useful, but seems useful enough to both beginners and experienced people.
That “frequency range of different instruments” chart is a prime example. In reality, the information in that chart has absolutely no practical use at all, but people eat it up. Beginners will see it and think it’s useful information, and midlevel people will see it and think it’s worth passing on, even though nobody in their right mind would actually be able to glean any usable information from it.
How do you create a graphic or information that can be easily passed along in a way that experienced people want to pass it along? Maybe make something super specific, like “The vocal EQ guide” and show frequency ranges and their terms? (warmth, honk, ess, air, etc.) and make a chart for each instrument.
Or a “choosing a microphone” graphic. I don’t know, I have a thing against half information type things, so I’m probably not the right person to be giving ideas on the subject.
I guess I should probably change my tone a bit, because I’m coming off more critical than I mean to sound. I think making a click-baity graphic is fine, but it can’t stand on its own. It needs to lead to some source of actual information that clarifies everything in the graphic. If it’s going to do that, then it can be as ridiculous and incomplete as you want. In fact, it’s probably best to make gaping holes so that you can’t just use the graphic as any sort of reference material.
What really drew my attention was the sheer amount of times this chart actually WAS passed around. And did I mention this chart is not even legible? You can’t even read the text!!
Here’s my thinking.
Data comparison chart (with accurate data) -> no one reads it
Colorful data comparison chart with graphics -> gets thousands of views in a week
So maybe?..
Colorful data comparison chart with graphics (with accurate data) -> drive traffic to this website?
It’s definitely worth a shot. Do we want to brainstorm what the graphic should be, or just wing it and see if something works? The good thing about this kind of advertising is that if something sucks, nobody sees it an nobody knows, so you can just toss out a million different graphics and see which one works.
How about a colourful photo of the top 10 producers on this site (i.e. max number of posts) with the caption: “Don’t believe the shit they try to make you believe on <enter name of site> , just ask the guys at Indie Recording Depot. They started out just like you and will answer all your questions”
(LOL)
Sure. I’m no graphics guy though…I intrigued (more like amused) by the fact that even ~bad~ graphics like this one get noticed like this. I’m certain that’s whats making this thing circulate, because you can’t even read the text! I’d have to fumble around with the software to get a graphic going, but I could give it a shot.
If we want to make genera specific or goal specific clickbait as @Cristina mentioned, I imagine you’d have to change the color scheme and style for a rap-r/b-hiphop thing opposed to a general one.
Lets give it a shot. I’ll move it to another thread.
