Question For the Forum -You think most Record Lable bands record 4 Rythym Parts
- Thread starter MondoLikeMetal
- Start date
Jevil
Pro Evolution Fucker
Most of the metal albums ever produced are 2 guitars.
And by metal I mean M.E.T.A.L, not what young US guys call "metal", if that helps.
And by metal I mean M.E.T.A.L, not what young US guys call "metal", if that helps.
Actually, Dave Mustaine has used at least 3 rhythm tracks on every Megadeth record. He does 1 Left and 1 Right, and has the second guitarist do 1 right up the middle to fill it out. This goes all the way back to at least "Peace Sells..." and Megadeth were not the only band to use more than 2 rhythm tracks. Hell, I read somewhere a long time ago that "...And Justice For All" had 3-per-side for the whole record, plus the extras. Doing 3 or more total rhythms in metal is not a "new" practice guys. Sorry.
What people aren't getting is where to use it, and where to keep it simple. I have the tighter guitarist track at least 2 rhythm-per-side for the whole song, but I don't use all of it. The advantages are that I can get very picky about which 2 tracks I'm using at any given time, and that the bigger/heavier riffs get bigger/heavier with those extra tracks.
Bottom line: Do what you want, and worry about getting good at doing it YOUR way. But don't try to justify your methods to others by making vague references and shitting on tried/true recording practices.
What people aren't getting is where to use it, and where to keep it simple. I have the tighter guitarist track at least 2 rhythm-per-side for the whole song, but I don't use all of it. The advantages are that I can get very picky about which 2 tracks I'm using at any given time, and that the bigger/heavier riffs get bigger/heavier with those extra tracks.
Bottom line: Do what you want, and worry about getting good at doing it YOUR way. But don't try to justify your methods to others by making vague references and shitting on tried/true recording practices.
ahjteam
Anssi Tenhunen
I always thought quad-tracking was overrated...if you need to thicken your guitar and have it be more full/present then do some tone tweaking, mix amps/equipment, and up your guitar playing. Accenting and dynamics are huge when recording, if you don't have those attributes as a player then you need to practice a little more before recording. I've probably only heard a few amateur guys on here pull off the quad-tracking but in most cases, the people who attempt it just make their mix sound like a bucket of slop.
We should make some distictions here - Are talking about the same guitar part with the same guitar/amp/chords? I think that quad tracking for that situation it's a waste of time. If you're doing a Les Paul (balls) track on 100% L/R and Strat (clarity) track 70% L/R, and then mix the two tonalities to taste, that makes more sense.
The differences in the tones are the BONUS to quad-tracking. They are not the REASON you do it. The subtle differences in the guitarists playing on each of the 4 tracks are what makes it thicker. And you will NOT get that same effect from ANY amount of eq-ing or "tweaking". The tracks are either there... or they are not there. Period.
ahjteam
Anssi Tenhunen
Code:
Gtr player / variant
-------------------------------
Type | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
-------------------------------
Single | 1 | - | - | - |
Dual | 1 | 1 | - | - |
Dual | 1 | 2 | - | - |
Quad | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
Quad | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
-------------------------------
Josh Burgess
Member
Similar threads
