Does anyone prefer dual tracked rather then quad?

[aramism]

i think it depends on the situation, the player, and the producer.


like arch enemy sounded great quad tracked because it opened up production and made it sound HUGE but at the same time amotts are REALLY good. same thing with james hetfield, he is one of the tightest players ever. when you are talking about players of this caliber and then trying to quad track and EP for an up and coming metal band you may not get favorable results. i think if someone can play on a professional level of tightness then quad tracking for certain styles will make it sound bigger especially when using differnt amps and settings and whatnot however certain styles of music like lamb of god for instance which is counter-intuitive from the traditional metal recoding double may work better for.

double tracking has been around since multitrack recording. for classic rock if you listen to like led zep III or the stones a lot of time it made it seem wider because different part would be played on both sides. it sounded cool. a recent cd i was listening to that i picked up on that was the black crowes. a lot of songs notable their popular ones are double tracked but like one side will play a more steady rhythm the other side will have a more accented "rhythmic" picking and it makes the stereo field super wide and funky. so it comes back to what a few people along with myself have said so far that it really just depends on the genre, players, and overall situation.

 

[C_F_H_13]

I always get the guitar player to quad it up, but come mix time...I do often drop it down to 2.

I do like having the options, and for slower, sludge-ier stuff it's awesome to have the extra layers.

 

[Nebulous]

i think it depends on the situation, the player, and the producer.

Agreed. Annihilation of the Wicked, anyone?

 

[JeffTD]

Do you guys actually use the -100/-80/80/100 method? I switched to -100/-100/100/100 a while back because I found my mixes to be much muddier with those 2 tracks panned inward.

I've been heavily considering just doubletracking things and going for a fatter guitar tone, though... still gotta experiment more.

 

[deanbailey]

I just think it really depends if the guitarist can do it or not. I've had a lot of instances with clients nailing their part perfect, then struggling to do it again.

Anyone know how Behemoth Panned their guitars, seeing that they used 3 amps per side (Hex tracking so to speak).
Their guitar riffs aren't that hard so i see how 3 guitars per side was a good idea.

 

[LSD-Studio]

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.

that's what I'm usualy doing

 

[deanbailey]

I just think it really depends if the guitarist can do it or not. I've had a lot of instances with clients nailing their part perfect, then struggling to do it again.

Actually i take this back...It's up to the 'editing engineer' if he likes to spend alot of his time audio warping to the grid.

 

[Metaltastic]

Anyone know how Behemoth Panned their guitars, seeing that they used 3 amps per side (Hex tracking so to speak).
Their guitar riffs aren't that hard so i see how 3 guitars per side was a good idea.

Oh I highly doubt Behemoth has 6 simultaneous takes, that would just be ridiculous - don't forget, splitting the signal to different amps (or reamping) is NOT multi-tracking if it's only one take, and I'd say some of their riffs are hard and fast enough to warrant double tracking (Christgrinding Avenue's main riff, for example)

 

[deanbailey]

Oh I highly doubt Behemoth has 6 simultaneous takes, that would just be ridiculous - don't forget, splitting the signal to different amps (or reamping) is NOT multi-tracking if it's only one take, and I'd say some of their riffs are hard and fast enough to warrant double tracking (Christgrinding Avenue's main riff, for example)

Yeah I've understand what it means

In Their studio video journal: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=wxlsZo82nuo[/ame]

Nergal says he uses three amps, and later on you can see him switching from first to the second amp (i just assumed he does the same for the third amp) during tracking. "Thats how new quality is made"

 

[Genius Gone Insane]

I quad track whenever possible (= if the riffs are simple = not often).

 

[26]

I switched to -100/-100/100/100 a while back because I found my mixes to be much muddier with those 2 tracks panned inward.

same here. sounds thicker and leaves room.

 

[poidaobi]

I do 100/60 now...

I just find it thicker and fills out the speakers more. I'll be back to 100/80 though...then probably 100/100

 

[greyskull]

depends on the band.
generally just double; but in my band, we're normally playing something completley different between the guitar players, so we both double track; but with different parts.

 

[slaesh]

if the riffs have harmonies in em then?? do you play one of each "riff" or 2 of each?

 

[Daunt]

If I'm doing the tracking, I never quad track. It's much more beneficial to use the time on vocals.

 

[Metaltastic]

This is double tracked. Case closed.

 

[abyssofdreams]

that's what I'm usualy doing

how much do you keep the inward tracks lower?
I've found that -3db to -5db lower than the 100/100 tracks works best for me.

 

[fearmythoughts]

Oh I highly doubt Behemoth has 6 simultaneous takes, that would just be ridiculous - don't forget, splitting the signal to different amps (or reamping) is NOT multi-tracking if it's only one take, and I'd say some of their riffs are hard and fast enough to warrant double tracking (Christgrinding Avenue's main riff, for example)

in this studio report nergal says,that they record 2 guitars on each side

 

[El_Gato]

Double for me

 

[Glenn Fricker]

Quad tracks here.