Q: Why do I have to record acoustic guitar twice?
How to pan an acoustic piano
Solid State Logic Introduces X-Rack Stereo Dynamics Module
Finally, Pro Tools gets new pan laws!
What level of background noise is acceptable in a recording?
Do you have to be creative to impress?
Would you record vocals like this?
A brief introduction to mastering in the home recording studio
Do plug-ins sound like the analog equipment they emulate?
How to find the best tempo (BPM) for your recording
Sounds too good to be true, but it isn't. OK, you do have to have the money in the first place, and you have to be prepared to leave it invested in your studio for all the time you record in it. Ultimately however, you could spend $40,000 building a studio and lose it all. Or you could get that money back. Which would you prefer?
Here's a scenario. You want the perfect environment to record in. You already have the equipment, you just need the building. So you build a shed in your garden. (OK, so you might not have a garden yet, but you will one day).
You erect the shed, and inside you build a massive block work interior shell, which becomes your soundproof room. This is what costs all the money. Eventually after you have put in the acoustic treatment, you have the ideal place to record.
But after a while, you have to move house. Out of curiosity, you ask your real estate agent or broker how much value your studio adds to the property. "Almost none", he replies. Sheds and outbuildings do not add value in a potential purchaser's eyes.
Now, if you had built your studio as an extension to your house rather than as an outbuilding, then it becomes a room. Now rooms do add value to your house. And as houses tend to increase in value over the years, you will probably get back more than your original investment when you come to sell.
Of course you'll have to build your studio all over again, but at least you'll have the money to do it.