Double tracking quad tracking

shredhead7

New Metal Member
May 9, 2006
19
0
1
Hey all, I've been browsing for a while and thought it was time I asked for some help. I'm in the middle of recording my bands demo and am frustrated with the results. We play technical death metal, but lean towards the melodic side (seems like every one here haha).

Right now I have two rhythm tracks per song, left and right, usually harmonizing each other. I've recorded the tracks using two mic's as discussed in the "that clayman sound" thread. While we're trying our hardest to get it super tight, there are parts that are a little off. Perhaps the average listen can't tell and I'm being overly picky. As far as adding another layer of tracks, one more left and right using two mics, will this help to smooth that out or only enhance it? I've been trying to listen to various things, Arch Enemy and Nevermore, etc...and it seems at least on the Arch Enemy recordings they are having similar issues doing 200bpm 16ths on a low B string tuned guitar, where it gets muddy.

When quad tracking, are your tracks dead on, to the point that you can't tell it's two guitars if you solo'd them? I know that this is obviously the goal, but is it possible on really technical stuff?

It's strange for me because solo's ala Yngwie, I can double no problem, but riffs like Darkane, ugh!

Also, does any one have any raw tracks up, so I can gauge how my amps are tracking? I hear a lot of really cool things, but they are usually tweaked a little before being posted here. Just want to know if it's my mixing or tracking... Thanks for the help!
 
Personally I think there is to much hype going around about the clayman techniques. That is just one way to do it and it happened to work on that one moment. Have you ever tried using 1 mic dead on.
 
Thanks for the replies...I have been listening to the mixing comp thread, and yes you can polish some crappy tracks, which makes me happy. Unfortunately, I'm a noob and my mixing skills suck. :( Any thoughts on the quad tracking though?
 
Quad tracking is superior to double tracking. I used to just double track my songs for the longest time, but then I tested out quad tracking... Having four tracks simply adds a whole lot more body to the guitar sound there's no reason to go with just two guitar tracks anymore :p

And yes, you can quad track even the most technical stuff just fine - you just need to be very tight and disciplined.
 
Torniojaws said:
Quad tracking is superior to double tracking. I used to just double track my songs for the longest time, but then I tested out quad tracking... Having four tracks simply adds a whole lot more body to the guitar sound there's no reason to go with just two guitar tracks anymore :p

And yes, you can quad track even the most technical stuff just fine - you just need to be very tight and disciplined.

Whoa, I'm the exact opposite. I went from an entire wall of guitars to just double tracking and I think it's superior.

I like to hear little nuances in the guitar playing, and quad tracking seems to smash all the tracks together into one big...thing. Double tracking sounds like two individual players, which I like.

Oh well. Variety!
 
I think it's pretty obvious that both techniques can be superior in the right circumstances. One technique won't work for every band/song whatever.
 
cobhc said:
i guess you try 2 tracks first, then track another 2 if it doesnt work out, right andy?
I'd track all 4 first, then if the sound and vibe isn't right, I'd go with the two best. The most powerful tool in mixing is the mute button.
 
Once again, thanks to everyones input. I will probably do a test run on four tracks, to see what it sounds like. After hearing the "contest" thread, I'm sure that what I have now is probably sufficient, but my mixing skills are but a mere pebble in a mountain of knowledge...thanks to everyone for at least helping with my first steps!
 
Sinister Mephisto said:
I think it's pretty obvious that both techniques can be superior in the right circumstances. One technique won't work for every band/song whatever.

+ 1 on that. Some Pantera´s songs don´t even have a rythmn guitar under the lead... amazing...

Dimebag + Chuck Schuldiner = Both of my heroes are dead...
 
theblackmoon said:
+ 1 on that. Some Pantera´s songs don´t even have a rythmn guitar under the lead... amazing...

^This^

If you listen to Rage Against The Machine's first album, there's parts where it sounds like there's hundreds of rhythm tracks (I'm pretty sure he overdubbed octaves in some places to), then you get to a solo and there's just one track - it's weird, but it works.

Steve
 
dunno if this helps but i use quad tracking when it's needed dynamicaly and use two diferent amps.... the best combination of which i've found to be TS+5150 and dezil.... i find it gives that "fills in the gaps" sound

but yeah if you parts are not tight layering more up will prolly just mush things up!

the other HYPER sneeky thing you could do if you've recorded to click & you have access to multitrack beat detectve is split the signal with some kind of reamp or transformer iso splitter..... record your two mics AND the clean reamp signal..... and using the clean signal apply beat detective to the three tracks...... depends on your riffs but i have seen this work wonders!

C