Rethinking quad-tracking. A different approach?

[crillemannen]

First of all i want to say that i never quadtrack, it is to time consuming and these day its more of a budget issue. But I always use 2microphones, that give me the stereo field i want and I always go for 100/80. I think it glues things together nicely, but the two mic's that are 80/80 are usually 4dbs lower. 100/100 Always sounds to separated and weird to me.

 

[Fredrik-Ablaze]

Wasnt that the best thing about the haunted's "revolver" record, that they proved quadtracking totally unnecessary?
I never quadtrack.

 

[Igor Samurovic]

I have to say that I disagree with this entirely.

I don't know which part you're disagreeing with - but it depends largely on how apart your monitors are when mixing and how much you listen to music on headphones. At least where I live, most people listen to music on headphones, but I am still very interested in this part of the discussion - there are arguments on both sides of the spectrum. The trick that I utilize is using a master reverb channel and mixing guitars in very slightly, it is not really noticable on speakers, but it is very noticable on headphones, it sounds much better especially when only one guitar is playing or guitars are playing different lines.

 

[Mattayus]

Wasnt that the best thing about the haunted's "revolver" record, that they proved quadtracking totally unnecessary?
I never quadtrack.

I don't think anything in production is ever rendered entirely unnecessary. It's all par for the course, and if said course doesn't require *that* sound then don't use it.

I get what you mean though, sure. More and more albums are being produced with just 2 rhythm tracks, and with much better results than could have been achieved doing metal albums 20 or so years ago. I suppose the sterile clarity of digital has helped a lot with that, and since that is a desired sound with a lot of metal now, then not quad tracking really helps hammer that home.

But for a thick, punishing, aggressive wall of guitars, quad tracking has its advantages for sure.

 

[Deranged Tapir]

I'll admit that when I started out I defaulted to the whole '1/2 100% LR, 3/4 80% LR -3 db' thing, but I started hard panning as soon as I tried it and found the clarity I had been looking for.

Now, I really tend toward L/C/R, not out of any dogma, but because I'm fucking with my stereo separation enough as it is. I don't need to start panning things in. When dealing with melodic elements, I'd much rather send something to an opposite-panned delay than pan in. It has some of the same effect of bringing it toward the illusionary center, but I've found it adds to the sense of space, instead of subtracting from it.