For me it sounds heavier but a little muddy, even when the parts are both played well. Do you mix the second track in lower? Pan it different?
Do you guys double track guitars?
- Thread starter aml4
- Start date
Jaymz
Stymphalian Productions
Audiosprite
ok
Mattayus
Sir Groove-A-Lot
For my own band's music I always quad track. 100% L/R and 80% L/R. The 80% tracks are -3db lower in the mix. I don't quit tracking til they're tight as fuck!
For clients, however, depending on what their playing is like, what their music is like, and what the time constraints are, I will do a mix of quad and double tracking. I may, for example, double track a song for the most part, but throw in two more tracks on bits that call for a beefier sound. I automate the rhythm guitar bus to drop 1-2db when the other two tracks come in, so the guitars don't become "louder", just "thicker".
For clients, however, depending on what their playing is like, what their music is like, and what the time constraints are, I will do a mix of quad and double tracking. I may, for example, double track a song for the most part, but throw in two more tracks on bits that call for a beefier sound. I automate the rhythm guitar bus to drop 1-2db when the other two tracks come in, so the guitars don't become "louder", just "thicker".
Derpsicle
Member
Forgive my ignorance but by "double tracking" do you mean there is one rhythm guitar track in each channel? And "quad" would mean two rhythm guitar tracks in each channel?
Jaymz
Stymphalian Productions
HCL
Holy Crap! Lions!
I find 88-92% to work really well with double tracking a lot of the time, depends on the mix.
Audiosprite
ok
that's the right idea but you wouldn't pan them that way. instead of all four tracks being split 100% L/R you'd put two of them in between somewhere, also symmetrically.
Axell Strad
Member
- Dec 25, 2009
- 126
- 0
- 16
And I'm not friends with the quad. What am I doing wrong? It sounds like flanger or similar effect or maybe as if the mic is too far away. Too much space and it sounds unnatural
Skaldir
formerly known as Unicorn
Empathy
Bulging Member
When dual tracking you can get away with little nuances in both playing and recording technique, but if you're going to quad track, everything needs to be tighter than a nun's cunt.
Mutant
I hate that supercow !
Just to make sure:
Quad tracking means recording it 4 times, not recording 1 track and then copypasting the audio to 4 different tracks
mikeydavies
Member
depends on how tight the guitarists are, if they are only gonna squeeze 2 tight ones out i have to double track (you get them, its a pain), but when i demo with my band etc, our guitarist is really tight and well rehearsed so quadtracking just makes it sound so thick and beefy!
quadtracking is by far the best sounding imo, but it really depends what it is too
quadtracking is by far the best sounding imo, but it really depends what it is too
dan weapon
Planet Smasher
crillemannen
Member
Pash
Member
Quad Track and dip around 4k a hair on the 2nd pair of geets. 2 Sets Panned HR/HL IMO. Gets some definition and overall to me, it sounds huge.
Oh yeah...
More important than ANYTHING.
Oh yeah...
More important than ANYTHING.
Trevoire520
Member
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
If you mean use 2 mics to record 1 take of guitars then no.
If you mean play it 2 times, then yes.
Recording 1 take, then copying that onto another track just makes it louder and the Haas effect (delaying that exact copy on the copied track) sounds like shit.
When people say quad track, they mean they play the guitar part 4 times. You will not find anyone who is serious about this doing any sort of short cuts because they just don't work. The effort is necessary to get it there.
