Tracking guitars...observations and your opinions?

nwright

Member
Apr 19, 2005
3,096
0
36
New Castle, Indiana
www.myspace.com
After working on a couple projects and starting to get a feel for how things go in the recording world, I'm wondering what your thoughts are on tracking guitars. For me, I'm finding there seems to be a balance that must be struck between a few points to make solid guitars tracks without blowing a ton of cash on studio time and a bunch of headaches. As for the balance, I find myself trying to balance these 4 main things, and remember these relate to high gain metal, so YMMV:

Tightness - it seems like what works the best is using the player who is the tightest rhythm player and have them do all the tracking. This may vary in 2 guitar bands depending on the song (and if one or the other guitar wrote the parts). But, in 2 guitar bands, one or the other is usually stronger at different aspects of playing the guitar and utilizing one and only one of them yields tighter rhythm tracks with less time and stress.

Consistency - I'm finding that using one guitar is paramount to cuttin out problems as far as tuning and setup go. On the few projects I've done, you can sometimes tell when 2 guitars used as they will both be off to certain degree in relation to tuning or intonation. For me, it gets irritating to say the least

Texture - This seems to flow from consistency. For some songs and music, 2 guitars that drift in and out of a tune or intonation can sometimes work for the song. But, for me, I find texture to be more interesting when using multiple amps rather than multiple instruments to add additional sonic color.

Tone - Obvious, I know. But, sometimes I've found myself struggling for the right tone in the midst of trying to balance the other 3 things I've listed. As for the tone, this encompasses the amp/cab used as well as the miking technique and what not. What is more important, solid playing at the expense of stellar tone, or stellar tone at the expense of a well intonated guitar, etc.

This may be a dumb post, but these things so far are the biggest hurdles- for me - in trying to get solid metal guitar tracks.

Anyone have any additional thoughts as to what makes good guitar tracks, or anything to add to the discussion?

I know this isn't a purely technical thread, more of a philosophical
discussion in relation to AE's and their methods.
 
Well, I agree with you when you see it usually a one man job per song in regards to guitar. The problem is telling the other guitar player that he just does not cut it.

I also agree that one guitar is a must for the rhythms. It makes a huge diffrence in the consitency department.
 
I big problem I find tracking guitarists is that they usually want to use their own gear, and their own gear usually sucks. I don't think I've ever recorded someone elses guitar that's had correct intonation, and that then gives the issue you mentioned where you have to use the same guitar for all the tracks. It'd be much nicer if you had two correctly set up axes that you could mix, but it rarely happens! I guess guitarists are too attached to their gear, like its their pride and joy, that they're offended if you suggest they don't use it on their recording...
 
what do you guys use for amp settings?

im using a 5150 2, well actually 6505+ but whatever

when i first started recording i would always hear people telling me to back down the gain and double or quad track, this somewhat worked but never really sounded that full

then for one project we did the generic scooped mids high presence high gain and it sounded pretty kickass... and i also asked colin what settings he used in one of his threads and he said

Here is the Bullet guitar chain ESP guitar with EMG 81 into a Maxon overdrive then into Andy's 5150, cab wise a Mesa Boogie with slanted front , Mic's 57 and 421 into Neve 1073 mic pre's with no EQ
Peavey 5150 settings
Rhythm channel
pre amp 6.5
Bass 6
mid 2
treble 5.5
post gain 3
resonance 7
presense 8
Cheers guy's.


which is a HELL of a lot of gain, pre at 6.5 with a tube screamer? thats more than i would even use playing live, but the results speak for themselves. what is you guys' opinion on amp settings while tracking?
 
which is a HELL of a lot of gain, pre at 6.5 with a tube screamer? thats more than i would even use playing live, but the results speak for themselves.

It seems like it but maybe the pickups were passive and the guitarist played softly....another possibility -- don't forget you can use the OD to get rid of muddiness by turning down the level knob, and obviously you are going to have to crank up the gain to make up for that lost signal.
 
To get a fat-bastard-wall-of-meat type of sound, do what Colin says! :kickass:

Gotta love it!

Of course it doesn't work live, but in a controlled enviroment (studio?)... Blast away! You like it, you use it. Simple as that.
 
Guys, guys... You're missing one KEY thing about those settings Colin gave.


RHYTHM CHANNEL! 6.5 is just fine on that channel. You're thinking 6.5 on the Lead channel.



damn i cant believe i missed that, ill have to try the rhythm channel like that sometime
 
Never ever ever use lead channel for rhythm guitars on any amp :lol: On all amps I have tried (quite a bit), the lead channel (provided it is not the only high gain channel) is always made for smooth leads, ie. a lot of gain vs. a rhythm-oriented channel. Using the lead channel on rhythm guitars only adds the annoying background *FZZZZZZZZZZZ* (not amp hiss, but a different, light white noise type of hiss that follows the guitar lines played) sound to the tracks. That sound is always there behind the main "frontal" sound. It makes the rhythm guitars sound weaker, especially if it's even the slightest bit more technical than straight slow-change power chords.
 
Never ever ever use lead channel for rhythm guitars on any amp :lol: On all amps I have tried (quite a bit), the lead channel (provided it is not the only high gain channel) is always made for smooth leads, ie. a lot of gain vs. a rhythm-oriented channel. Using the lead channel on rhythm guitars only adds the annoying background *FZZZZZZZZZZZ* (not amp hiss, but a different, light white noise type of hiss that follows the guitar lines played) sound to the tracks. That sound is always there behind the main "frontal" sound. It makes the rhythm guitars sound weaker, especially if it's even the slightest bit more technical than straight slow-change power chords.

Dude have you ever played out of a 5150?
 
I agree that using one guitarist for the parts CAN get you where you want quickly, but if you really want to get it right, you need to be a taskmaster and make them play their shit correctly.

playback the raw tracks, whoever is slacking will know it and head back to the woodshed. If they dont know it tell them.
I'd rather be told I needed to keep tracking until we get THE TAKE, then I am not good enough to play my own song.

when its all said and done they will be glad you were a dick and made them step up.

proper setup is crucial and they need to do it. out of tune guitars sound like shit. If they cant spend $20 to get their guitar intonated or 20 minute doing it themselves they have no business in the studio.

As far as bringing in a rig that sounds like shit, let them use it if they want to, take a DI for all the tracks and reamp them through something nice.

production is a fine line between knowing when to be an asshole and when to make sure their comfortable.
 
I hope you don't mind my cutting for the purpose of direct responses:

Tightness - it seems like what works the best is using the player who is the tightest rhythm player and have them do all the tracking. This may vary in 2 guitar bands depending on the song (and if one or the other guitar wrote the parts). But, in 2 guitar bands, one or the other is usually stronger at different aspects of playing the guitar and utilizing one and only one of them yields tighter rhythm tracks with less time and stress.

I can confirm that one - I just got the Slaughter Of The Soul with the bonus DVD, which included a Making Of type thing, and there was a brief discussion about how one guitarist handled straight eights tightly but couldn't sustain gallop-like rhythms long enough, and the other did the gallop rhythm more consistently, so they'd switch off for those parts on the record. I've also heard that even Meshuggah will just track one guitarist for all of the parts to keep things tight. It's also a lot cheaper to make coffee (and/or procure other... performance enhancements) for one guitarist to go take after take and nail th

Consistency - I'm finding that using one guitar is paramount to cuttin out problems as far as tuning and setup go. On the few projects I've done, you can sometimes tell when 2 guitars used as they will both be off to certain degree in relation to tuning or intonation. For me, it gets irritating to say the least

Another solution is to get proper setups - very few people can hear the differences between different guitars with the tiny intonation difference that would be left over from a setup by a competent (or obsessive-compulsive) tech.

Texture - This seems to flow from consistency. For some songs and music, 2 guitars that drift in and out of a tune or intonation can sometimes work for the song. But, for me, I find texture to be more interesting when using multiple amps rather than multiple instruments to add additional sonic color.

Again, proper setup gets rid of that problem, and I'd confirm that multiple amps (or even tone types - my 6-string has a powerful bridge pickup and a medium-output neck pickup, and the two are wired out of phase with each other so a lot of the bass and low harmonics are cancelled out and I'm left with an even 'bridgier' sound) work well. That said, though, there's a ton of other stuff you can add for 'texture' and I'd probably place Devin Townsend at the top of the texture list. He noted on the special edition of his Terria album that he would spend weeks listening to that material and just throwing in odd little things here and there... on top of that, he's a phenomenal producer and nails big sounds, period.

Tone - Obvious, I know. But, sometimes I've found myself struggling for the right tone in the midst of trying to balance the other 3 things I've listed. As for the tone, this encompasses the amp/cab used as well as the miking technique and what not. What is more important, solid playing at the expense of stellar tone, or stellar tone at the expense of a well intonated guitar, etc.

Solid rhythm chops should encompass pounding strings enough to get a solid downstroke tone, in my opinion, so I'd put in the part of playing that tone requires as 'solid playing'. I again object to anyone - anyone with a budget above $30 for a record - complaining about intonation, so get them a thicker set of strings and a setup job that doesn't suck. It doesn't seem to me that these are real problems for people who can actually have any sort of power in making demands - like visiting Guitar Center before a session, which people should already be used to (for spare heads, sticks, backup strings, picks, new gizmos, whatever) - and if I had a studio to work in I'd just turn people right out of the door if they didn't tune or pay attention to intonation. Of course, I'm an elitist bastard who happens to be obsessive about tuning and timing, and on top of that I'm not exactly a friendly type, so I'm not getting the most business in town, but I'd rather not deal with the headaches of wishing that a guitar player knew how to adjust a single fucking saddle.

Jeff
 
Thanks for the nice explanations JBroll!

I still can't figure out how anyone who digs the guitar enough to get into a band, write their own songs, play shows, etc. can know absolutely nothing about their instrument. To me, being able to really work on my guitar for proper setup and intonation is just part of the process of being a "guitar player".
 
Thanks for the nice explanations JBroll!

I still can't figure out how anyone who digs the guitar enough to get into a band, write their own songs, play shows, etc. can know absolutely nothing about their instrument. To me, being able to really work on my guitar for proper setup and intonation is just part of the process of being a "guitar player".

I didn't start giving a shit about understanding my instrument until I started trying to record myself. I always thought those guys talking about "technique" and "intonation" were crazy, overanalyzing everything. To me, it was all about the riff.
 
Nope :p But from the majority of live bands with 5150 (real life, not reamped studio live albums) and studio albums too, it is the worst fizzler of them all :D

KSSCHHHSHSHCCHCHCHCCHCHZZZZZZ *CHUG CHUG* KSCHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHSHHH

The 5150 can be percectly thick, heavy, and entirely clear with the right settings and player. It's an incredible amp. And if you're talking about noise when the guitar player isn't playing...that's what the noise gate is for, which as far as I know, practically every metal guitarist uses anyhow.
 
Tbh I've played through a few 5150s, and I know exactly what the guy's talking about. In fact, all the peavey amps I've tried have buzzy/fizzy lead channels, but decent crunch/rhythm ones IMO.
 
I do, too. The rhythm channel is nice and chunky, a tad darker, IMO, but the lead channel sounds better. Stock tubes sound like ass to me, but with 9th gen. chinese pre's and JJ power tubes, it sounds nice and aggressive.