Does anyone prefer dual tracked rather then quad?

[JonWormwood]

While quad tracking sounds like a wall of doom, having one main rhythm on each side and then adding those fills when needed is the way to go IMO. It retains the tight attack and let's you add character to the playing without it sounding chaotic if that makes sense.

 

[PostMortem1666]

i almost always double track rather than quad track. quad tracking is just too much imo. i do think though that some genres of music sound better quad tracked.

 

[Metaltastic]

I'm all for double tracking in anything, personally - I know I've gotten tones plenty heavy with double tracking, and the tuning and tightness required for quad-tracking is SO not worth the effort given how little of a benefit I feel it gives.

 

[Torniojaws]

If the music is fast and busy, quad tracking will only serve to mush up the full mix. You need all the space you can get for every instrument. However, in slower and/or less dense music, quad tracking is more worth it for a wall of sound kind of thing.

Just one example from my music: I've quad tracked all three of my full length releases with Vortech, and in the end I never used all four tracks. They never worked out when there's lots of double kicks, lots of cymbal trickery, electronics, synths, growling vocals and octave tricks on the bass guitar.

 

[gorath23]

I guess this is sort of on-topic, but I would assume that this is even more important when dual-micing? How does a single take each side but dual mic'ed differ to quad-tracked in terms of thickness/ tightness etc? I'd like to know people's opinions as I want to start trying out the Fredman technique.

 

[Torniojaws]

With the Fredman technique, you should consider the two mic tracks as one single recording that just happens to be on two different audio tracks.

 

[gorath23]

With the Fredman technique, you should consider the two mic tracks as one single recording that just happens to be on two different audio tracks.

Ok cool, I'll just have to give it a go and see how it turns out.

 

[deanbailey]

I prefer both, but the music i play is a little too tech to double up.

Despised Icon's album wasn't double tracked though and it sounds pretty big.

 

[ExDown]

I actually preffered a choise Fredman told me about. So simple, but just haven't thought about it.

Split your signal from the guitar into two amps, (my favourite 6506+ and ENGL Savage) then out to one ENGL cab with V30 and the other is Marshall with Gt75's. Mic each of the cabs with SM57's. This gives the guitars a fuller and wider stereo image.

And no, I don't like quad tracking So meaningless and boring, hehe. You can get a full and nice sound without it.

www.myspace.com/etherealdeathmetal

 

[Ermz]

I think it depends on the circumstances. Some bands benefit from it, others simply wouldn't be able to quad-track tight to save their lives, and for the rest it's usually overkill.

 

[Aaron Smith]

Interesting thread. Despite all the extensive quad-tracking talk I've read on here over the last couple years, I have never actually done it in the "standard" 100% L / 80%L /100% R / 80% R way. I've found a few places in songs with my band where it was nice to double two different guitar parts or something (and was definitely beneficial to the recording), but it always has just sounded like such a huge pain in the arse to full-on quad-track EVERYTHING. I've been able to achieve some pretty satisfying tones with just two takes! I think the next time around with my band, I'm definitely going to play around with quad tracking a little more, as I know I'm capable, but in the end, I don't know if it will really be worth all the hassle. "The End of Heartache" is still one of my favorite guitar tones ever, and I remember reading an article with Adam D. where he talks about how they "killed themselves" trying to get that tone (quad-tracking everything), and how he would never want to go through that again. I also know that on "As Daylight Dies" they did very little quad-tracking, and those tones are still pretty fatty and awesome too, so...

I would love to hear Andy's opinion in slightly greater detail on the subject, because I know he prefers to quad-track when there's enough time.

 

[Metaltastic]

Also, I think we should just clarify that when we say "quad-tracking" we mean four performances; no matter how many times you split your signal and how many amps and cabs you may run your takes through, if there are only two simultaneous performances, it's still double-tracking

 

[fearmythoughts]

LAMB OF GOD for example do only double tracking,and it sounds so tight and fat

 

[whitedamp]

I doubletrack mainly because my sloppy guitar playing technique. If you are not tight when quadtracking things get messy and distant. Anyway, if I could play tight I would quadtrack with little gain.

 

[Ben Johnson]

Double is enough for most of what I do.

 

[53Crëw]

Double here, too. I tried quad-tracking rhythms a few times, but it just seems to muddy things up for me.

 

[Where She Wept]

I like quad tracking, the more complicated the riff the harder it is to quad track it but it's worth it. you have to be a tight to click to do it though.

 

[Jackal_Strain]

I often settle for doubletracking, but i usually use two mics and/or reamp with another tone that i layer beneath the original. Other times I quad track.

 

[if6was9]

Interesting thread. I've read so much about quad tracking but I've very little recording experience so far myself- from reading here i just assumed that it was pretty much always done and the few albums I read about that haven't done it recently were going against the grain.

Right now I just finished( tonight!) tracking guitars for my own bands recording- 2 guitar players and each doubled (sometimes tripled) our parts. I've done a few test mixes as we've been going along and noticed a huge loss in clarity and separation of the whole mix when everything is playing- even with some eqing and panning. The drums sound, imo fantastic for the most part by themselves and even with just bass and vocals but when everything is going they really don't jump out at all and its hard to make out whats going on- I guess by the time i've mixed it i'll have a better idea of whether i prefer quad tracking or not!

 

[VH100R]

besides being tight, you need to lower the gain when quad tracking. that's what makes it to sound like a wall of sound and not a wall of mush.

One thing I'm trying now is to quad track but having the 80L/R a few dBs lower, thickening the hard panned takes and making room for the rest of the mix.

Panning Hard L/R and using another take in the center doesn't work for me.