Giving up quading?

[abt]

I've been having a mix of these excellent tracks posted by Ola:

http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/.../558996-mixing-time-song2-di-midi-inside.html

http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/...mas-gift-you-guize-full-song-ready-mixed.html

(yes, I'm very late) Anyway I was mixing these and thinking "why am I quad tracking all my guitar parts again?" it's so hard to get them to sound good especially in the really fast sections. So I'm thinking of giving them up. Has anyone gone back to the old one guitar left one guitar right method? Pitfalls? Opinions? General debate?

 

[Zento]

My band is recording an EP at the moment and getting John Mitchell to mix it, and he requested we only dual track, which is what Architects did in Hollow Crown. Had to listen to the guy!

 

[Mago]

i only do quad if it's necessary.

 

[gabriel g.]

I did quad-tracking all the time!!!!
But lately I find myself bringind down the faders on the doubles all the time because it sounds cleaner and more balanced IMO

So on the next projects I´m going to do, I´ll track classic:

One guitar L
One guitar R
leads in the middle

 

[Harry Hughes]

Quad tracking is neither a necessity, nor is it something you'd need to suddenly give up one day either.
Why?
Because it has its uses in some contexts, so embrace it when need be

 

[The Front Studio]

Using quad track on every recording isn't necessary...
Like Harry Hughes said, use it when you think it's useful!

 

[mburton21]

I used it on all 11 songs of my bands new CD.

Combined with drop A# and the dual-micing technique I have 8 tracks of rhythm guitars (although the tracks that are the centered mic are 8dB lower than the off axis) and why?

Because of the tone. The thick, sexy tone.

It isn't that time consuming nor hard by any means if you can play the guitar even half decent.
If you don't like it, don't use it.

 

[professorlamp]

meh i use it too beef up the sound if there feels like there a 'gap' somewhere in the song

 

[abt]

Thanks everyone for the replies

My band is recording an EP at the moment and getting John Mitchell to mix it, and he requested we only dual track, which is what Architects did in Hollow Crown. Had to listen to the guy!

I look forward to hearing this.
Dual track - Is that two tracks for each guitar part or do you have two guitarists?

I did quad-tracking all the time!!!!
But lately I find myself bringind down the faders on the doubles all the time because it sounds cleaner and more balanced IMO

Bringing the doubles down is a good idea, the best of both worlds I guess.

So on the next projects I´m going to do, I´ll track classic:

One guitar L
One guitar R
leads in the middle

I look forward to hearing it.

Quad tracking is neither a necessity, nor is it something you'd need to suddenly give up one day either.
Why?
Because it has its uses in some contexts, so embrace it when need be

I guess saying I was giving up quading was a bit over the top, but you get the idea. It's easy to draw the conclusion that you have to quad in order to get a good sound because there are a lot of posts around that say that's what you should do. I've had success with quad tracking before but for the really technical stuff I'm finding that it is almost impossible to get good definition without quantising everynote perfectly on to the grid which then makes it sound fake.

Perhaps I should go cold turkey for a while!

 

[TheWinterSnow]

In music that has more than just your basic band piece going on, you won't find quad beneficial (like having a keys and large amounts vocal melodies/overdubs) as guitars take up so much space. Quads are generally good if your mix is lacking in size and you need something to fill without killing volume. With quads you loose clarity and gain a far amount of fizz as the fizz frequencies are exaggerated due to phase issues that arise in the fundamental frequencies.

I am seeing the census on guitar recording is to turn down the gain on the amp, not use some sort of OD pedal and quad track to compensate for the lack of gain. But adding more tracks will not increase gain or give you a saturated tone, the only way to get a tight but saturated tone is turn up the gain on your amp (use an OD to keep the amp tight) and dual track. Since you are cranking the gain on the amp, you won't need more than two tracks but since you used a boost, the amp is still tight. You get the thickness of quads but the clarity of dual.

 

[Charlie E.]

I had never quad tracked before but am considering doing it now to get a more personal tone for my next album since there are so many blending options.

Of course I'll prolly just reamp the second tone so I guess it technically won't be quad tracked haha

 

[raybrochill]

I only quad in parts I feel need it... like in a chorus, a breakdown, or a really heavy part that I want to stick out. Hardly ever a full song, though

 

[Dexter_prog]

I had never quad tracked before but am considering doing it now to get a more personal tone for my next album since there are so many blending options.

Of course I'll prolly just reamp the second tone so I guess it technically won't be quad tracked haha

that's not a good idea

 

[jval]

So I'm thinking of giving them up. Has anyone gone back to the old one guitar left one guitar right method? Pitfalls? Opinions? General debate?

Quad tracking is not the norm. One L-R is the standard. On most commercial releases there is not the time (read: budget) to quad track. I for one would give up being an engineer if I had to quad track everything... recording guitar makes me crazy enough as it is.

 

[ttrentt]

Quad tracking is not the norm. One L-R is the standard. On most commercial releases there is not the time (read: budget) to quad track. I for one would give up being an engineer if I had to quad track everything... recording guitar makes me crazy enough as it is.

IMO Your advice means a lot. Thanks.

 

[mburton21]

I didn't know there was so much quad hate

If you're a good player it doesn't take much more time. I'm not trying to ride quad tracking, I'm just saying that it's produced the best tones for me with the least amount of effort. I on/off axis mic, so I don't need to piss around with boost pedals (due to the phase building up the appropriate frequencies already) and I have basically no EQ on my guitars other than a hi/low pass and a slight dip at 2.5KHz resulting in less time screwing around with guitars in the mixing stage.

In my experience it's worked and has been more efficient in the end as far as time restraints are concerned; for others however, I wouldn't go out of the way if what you have currently is working for you since the results are not always night and day.

 

[mrbean667]

I only quad to emphasise certain parts, like choruses, big buildups, climaxes, and 'chugga chugga stop chugga stop chug chug chugga stop chug'.

 

[Ermz]

Depends on the budget, time, ability of the players and the scope of the project. Most of the time I'll just dual track and quad the choruses or other important parts of the song. I hate automation, so building the song to change dynamics by itself is pretty big on my agenda.

 

[Pipsymbol]

for me it's quad all the way.
i tend to use two different amps to get that magic fullness so the quad is the only way to go...

 

[abt]

Thanks for all the replies. It's been invaluable to hear everyone's ideas and methods to quading guitars. I've decided I won't be giving up quad tracking but instead I will use it more sporadically, for things like big choruses etc, when it's needed basically.