Stupid Question About Quadtracking

[Metaltastic]

BUT i still stand by the fact that having 2 guitarists both double-track their parts does NOT equal QUAD TRACKING.

Yes it does.

Yes, this thread is now over. 2+2=4

 

[006]

Holy fuck this thread is ridiculous. We need to get Jeff in here to straighten the math out.

~006

 

[ahjteam]

I was recording some vocals today at Finnvox for Major Label (www.myspace.com/majorlabelband), and I watched the tracklist and was like wtf... 12 tracks of guitars, even tho the band is only a trio! I first thought he had done multiple trackings on the guitars, but Arto (the Finnvox engineer and the bands guitarist) said it was only two takes taken with 6 microphones! I am their FOH-engineer so my opinion might be a bit skewed, but I really have to say that the guitar sounded wicked and massive compared to the previous album eventho we were only at the recording stage.

But Arto also seems to like to overmic and overtake everything a bit, for example we took over 30 takes for the lead vocals, 16 tracks of single take vocal harmonies on a track which I think was called "Porcelain" (I also triple track growled some ambient demonic siren stuff in it), the kick drum was miced with three mics (Sennheiser e901 for the snap, MD421 for the body and U87 for the room sound) and stuff like that.

 

[Darkening]

NO!

QUADTRACKING is when 2 guitarists play 1/2 of each part 7 times on 3 different amps SPLIT into a QUAD CABINET WITH 4 MICS ON IT.

LOZL!!!! HHAHEA K!L!

 

[Metaltastic]

Oy, I think even us mere mortals can put 2+2 together without the guiding light of our patron saint JBroll, Mike. I'll make a quick summary:

QUADTRACKING = 4 seperate performances PER PART

If each guitarist records 2 takes of the same thing, and you pan guitarist 1 to 100/100 and guitarist 2 to 80/80, then it will sound fine. It will NOT be "quadtracked" it will be "double-tracked".

If you have 2 guitarists and each one DOUBLES his part, that is DOUBLE TRACKING.

Just Double Tracking the lines means one guitarist plays 2 of his lines(through different amps maybe) and a second one to do 2 takes of his own lines(through different amps maybe). Making a total of 4 tracks.

Wrong.

Either record 1 guitarist 4 times...panned 100/80/80/100 (but this is not a hard and fast law...open up to 100/100/100/100 if you like)... or record 2 guitarists (if they can play tight and consistently), two performances from each guitarist, and pan as above.

double tracks is 2 guitarists, 1 performance each. L100 R100 - which is not center, since there will be differences between the two takes

quad-tracking is 2 takes per guitarist.

Regardless of how many dudes play the damn guitar, 4 performances/takes/tracks of the same guitar riff/solo/melody/whatever is quad tracking.

1 guitarist, 4 takes - quad tracking
2 guitarists, 2 takes a piece = 4 tracks = quadtracking
4 guitarists, 1 take a piece = 4 tracks = quad tracking
3 guitarists, 3 takes for one, 1 for the other = 4 tracks = quad tracking.


Seriously, it's 4 TRACKS. Nothing more, nothing less.

How can 2 guitar players tracking the same thing 2 times each NOT equal 4? Unless there's some new type of math where 2+2 does not equal 4.

srsly

Right.

This should be stickied!

 

[Darkening]

Yes it is - one guitarist plays his part one time on the left, the other his part one time on the right. Done many times on many albums, and sounds great.

And no, I can't think of any specifics, I just know they're out there.

Ok. If they play THE SAME THING, then YEAH it is doubletracking.

If they play anything different, then NO IT IS NOT.


How is 1 track per guitarist (completely different parts) doubling anything when there is only a SINGLE track of each part?

And if both guitarists are playing the same thing, then that's faggy. Kick one of them out, because all he's doing is copying the other guy.

:zombie:

 

[Metaltastic]

And just to be clear, when I say "wrong" and "right," I'm making judgements on the use of the terminology, not whether one or the other sounds better.

 

[Metaltastic]

Ok. If they play THE SAME THING, then YEAH it is doubletracking.

If they play anything different, then NO IT IS NOT.


How is 1 track per guitarist (completely different parts) doubling anything when there is only a SINGLE track of each part?

And if both guitarists are playing the same thing, then that's faggy. Kick one of them out, because all he's doing is copying the other guy.

:zombie:

OK, now I see where the confusion is - your thinking double-tracking is synonymous with "doubling," which it isn't - double-tracking just means two tracks playing simultaneously, doubling is playing the same part twice, I can see how that'd be confusing.

 

[Jarkko Mattheiszen]

This thread is getting to the Harmony Central level of ultimate hilariousness! QUAD DAMAGE!

 

[GhostUnholy]

This thread is getting to the Harmony Central level of ultimate hilariousness! QUAD DAMAGE!

I hang out on HCAF a lot so I guess I've brought the stupidity to your doorstep.

but regarding all that about quad tracking = 4 being self explanatory sure but the issue was about terminology whether you guys mean 4 total tracks or 4 per unique guitar part.

 

[Darkening]

Well it makes no sense to me to call 2 seperate guitar parts tracked twice QUADTRACKED...

I say "both the guitar parts are DOUBLETRACKED" and people always understand what I mean, so I see no reason to change dammit!

If I have a song, let's say it's a FOLK ROCK tune in G!

And in this song I have 2 seperate guitarists - one plays rhythm and one plays lead. And I have both of them track their part twice... are you then calling my FOLK ROCK G song a QUADTRACKED song???

Because that has been happening forEVER.... and I thought this QUADTRACK terminology was a new-ish thing for that (UBER) thick metal rhythms. I've never heard it before about any kind of music 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's...

I don't know why I'm still arguing over potatoEs... Semantics can be fun!!!

BETTER QUESTION!!! Who was the first person to say QUADTRACK??? Who coined the term? Because calling a guitar part that has been DOUBLED "double-tracking" has been DE FACTO in my experience for a loooong time. Let's ask that dude.

 

[AdamWathan]

Yep, the general consensus is that quad tracking is 2 tracks total per side. Whether the guitarists are playing harmonies or whatever is not important. 4 total tracks of RHYTHM guitar, regardless of whether the rhythm parts are 100% identical or not, is quad tracking, end of story. When you are adding leads and sustained octave chords and shit over top of stuff, no, that is separate from the 4 guitar tracks, but 4 tracks of riffing is quad.

 

[Darkening]

My quads are buff n' stuff.

 

[AdamWathan]

My quads are buff n' stuff.

Because they're actually octs in disguise!

 

[Darkening]

QUAD TRACKING:

 

[Tommy Gun]

If you have 2 guitarists with two takes each that is DOUBLE TRACKING.

I don't know why there is such confusion over this.

2+2=4 dude.

2 on the left... 2 on the right... 4 tracks... <- Quad-tracked.

It's pretty simple really. And it's a term that has been in use for decades.

 

[Metaltastic]

Because calling a guitar part that has been DOUBLED "double-tracking" has been DE FACTO in my experience for a loooong time.

You know, I'm glad to see there's been something of a consensus reached here, and that pic of the chick with the quad was absolutely golden - but I really have to interject here. I thought I remembered seeing you involved in this debate before, and after a quick search, look what I dug up:

No. 4 seperate takes is 4 seperate takes. Quadtracking means track 4 times. Period. Quad - 4. If you use 2 takes, you will have Doubletracked guitars. If you reamp them through a different amp, then you still have Doubletracked guitars with two amps that can be blended.

From this thread.

So when did you change your mind? Cuz clearly this hasn't, in fact, been your way of thinking for a "loooong time..."

 

[Darkening]

You know, I'm glad to see there's been something of a consensus reached here, and that pic of the chick with the quad was absolutely golden - but I really have to interject here. I thought I remembered seeing you involved in this debate before, and after a quick search, look what I dug up:



From this thread.

So when did you change your mind? Cuz clearly this hasn't, in fact, been your way of thinking for a "loooong time..."

I meant the same thing then, too.

What I consider quad tracking is 4 of the exact same thing. That's all. You guys consider having 4 tracks of guitar in a song quad tracking. That's all. It's cool, we can still coexist. Terminology doesn't matter, we all agree that 4 of the exact same thing is usually overkill, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE PLAYING A RIFF THAT ACTUALLY KICKS ASS!

4 (or more) of the exact same part became very popular with all the nu-metal bands and their simple simon single string riffs. 0-2-0-2-0-2-0-2, etc.

Anyway whatever! I'm a light-hearted dude and you guys are all cool and I know a lot of you are very knowledgeable. My first post does say "if i'm wrong, someone correct me" If we were in the same room we'd be drunk by now and bashing out some riffage!

 

[grywolf627]

...we all agree that 4 of the exact same thing is usually overkill, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE PLAYING A RIFF THAT ACTUALLY KICKS ASS!

4 (or more) of the exact same part became very popular with all the nu-metal bands

God, I hate to drag this rediculous thread out any longer...however...Where did "we all agree" to this? If this statement is correct...then a vast majority of us on this board, including the founding member, Mr. Sneap, are guilty of "overkill" and are nu-metal simpletons.....and I hardly think that is the case.

Playing the EXACT same part...either with same guitar/amp/mic setup...or changing things around and mixing things up...is what many of us have been doing for yeeeears. Including many of the clips you hear around this forum. But maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. I've only been playing guitar and messing around with recording since before some of the people on this forum were even born. But then again, you think two guitarist playing the exact same part is "faggy" as well. So...there ya go.

Ignorance is a disease that needs to be eradicated.

Cheers mate.

 

[Jarkko Mattheiszen]

I consider touching myself is having sex with with Swedish twins on a beach.