Always quad-track guitars..?? also Panning...

plague_rider

Coffee
Nov 13, 2008
1,841
4
38
Newcastle
Call me a n00b but i had to ask, do many of you guys still quad track if the band have two guitarists?? is it not too much??

also, what are everyones feelings on panning the guitars??
 
this topic has been discussed quite a few times, perhaps the search function will help you...

short resume:
about half the people here quad track most of the time, the other half sticks to double tracking.

when quad tracking almost everyone pans one amp 100-100 and the other amp 80-80, some guts do 100-100 and 100-100 (more open), some do 100-100 and 75-75 (more dense, wall of sound)
most people put the inner amp about 3 db's lower in level than the outer amp.

hope this helps you.
 
Quad = gay.

~006
that's funny Mike, you sure seem to like my mixes enough, you make a point normally to tell me so.... and you know perfectly well that all of them except the Dope mixes are quad tracked on guitar.

:loco:

you really mean that the bands you track aren't usually up for doing it, at least not tightly enough, i'd guess.... because i KNOW from chatting with you about the subject that you'd do it if you could get bands to pull it off. but a big part of that is down to you... some of the guitarists i track aren't really up to it at first.... if you really want the quad tracked sound you have to be able to pull it out of them. it's called producing. ;)
 
Pwned! Haha

Other than the fact that the clients I usually get not being able to handle doing two takes per side for whatever reason, lol, so far quad tracking doesn't have the clarity that I like. When I do it. You know I love your work, but if it's 90% quad tracked then I love it even more. It's always clear and tight, no cloudiness or anything. Maybe if I got some people that could play in time with themselves a couple times over then I may like quad tracking...so far I've been unlucky though :lol:

Sometimes I hear double-tracked sounds bigger than quad...sometimes the other way around. I guess it comes down to preference and if the player can pull it off mainly...as stated above if I got players that could do it I would most likely try it more often.

~006
 
My feeling on quad-tracking is that the improvements over double-tracking don't justify the COLOSSAL effort to get it tight enough...
 
My feeling on quad-tracking is that the improvements over double-tracking don't justify the COLOSSAL effort to get it tight enough...
well, as already stated, quad vs. double tracked guitars is a preference, not an argument.. but it really should not in any way be a "COLOSSAL" effort to get it done if that's the sound you want. if it is i'd refer you back to and elaborate on my previous post.... either the player is just not a tight player, and therefore it's probably a colossal effort to even just double-track him tightly, or you are ignoring that a big part of getting that performance, double or quad, is down to you... some of the guitarists i track aren't really up to it at first, but it's often a mental block really, because if they can double themselves then they can quad themselves.... if you really want the quad tracked sound you have to be able to pull it out of them. it's called producing... ;)... and it's really not that hard to do with a half-decent player.
 
Well I'm really only talking about my own recording, and I'd consider myself a pretty tight player - I'm just saying I'm really happy with the tones I get from double-tracking, so I don't see a reason to make the effort to quad-track cuz I don't feel the sounds are that much better when I do.
 
...ADT rather than bleeding a stone for the quad takes?? (i apologise if that offends anyone in the forum)

also, could you guys recommend any guitar/bass pre-amps from low to mid budget??

thanks for all your input so far...
 
quad tracking goes with the genre for me. If you're tracking some speed metal up I dont see quads helping your mix, on the other hand if the plan is chug, im in! Horses for courses see, and even if the guitar player in question can hit four tracks bang on, that sound still might not be preferable anyway when it comes to your final mix.
 
Depends on the band's budget, ability and ambitions. Most of the time if it's feasible to quad track, I'll talk the band into doing it. As well as giving a denser sound, it also gives you an opportunity to work with blending unique guitar tones, rather than sticking to one amp. I know you can signal split to multiple amps and cabs, but that approach has too many inherent phase coherency issues that I'd rather not deal with if it can be avoided. Anyhow, at the very least I will try to coax quad-tracked choruses out of an artist, particularly if it's a commercial rock outfit. It's worth noting that having a mix varying in density is arguably even more important these days than dynamic variance since most mixes will get brickwalled to the shithouse. Splitting your song structures up so that you've got the cliche sparse verse (all room verb, 2 guitars, lower gain, back off drum compression) dense chorus (kick in the lexicon, 4 to 8 guitars, start redlining the 1176) can help, and doing more than 2 rhythm guitar takes can certainly help with varying density. That's just my take on it.
 
...ADT rather than bleeding a stone for the quad takes?? (i apologise if that offends anyone in the forum)
thanks for all your input so far...
ADT?

i guess i'm just alone in that i've never really have an issue getting guitarists to adequately quad track, and with a good attitude about it, when i feel the material needs it.
 

Automatic double tracking (ADT) was an analogue recording technique designed to enhance the sound of voices or instruments during the recording process. It used tape delay to create a delayed copy of an audio signal which was then combined with the original.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_double_tracking


I've always dicked with virtual ADT to some degree with delay and all sorts of shit, but it never sounds like two different takes.
 
ok yeah.. for some reason didn't snap to that... i've tried that way back with the band Artension (their guitarist flat out refused to double track)... it absolutely sucks. don't do it.
 
Dimebag used the mxr flanger/doubler (an ADT unit, one could say) and it worked perfectly for Pantera's style, but then again, used in other bands it may not work. For example, one of my guitar players owns it and I can tell you that if you are into complex riffing this thing will cloud your playing (even if you are uber-tight).

That being said, I usually prefer quad tracking. If dual, most of the times I’ll add a room mic to compensate.
 
I quadtrack exclusively and I have found lately that panning two takes L/R and two 30L/30R gives me the fullest sound for what I do.
 
ok yeah.. for some reason didn't snap to that... i've tried that way back with the band Artension (their guitarist flat out refused to double track)... it absolutely sucks. don't do it.


Point noted...

thanks for your help guys...

for this project, i don't think i'll go as far as quad-tracking, as its unpaid work and time is short and not as available as i'd like...