Double tracking rythm parts. Tips needed please

Swirly · #1 09-01-2003, 08:15 PM

Hi there.Ive got a vamp2 and i use it for home recordings. The thing is ive started double tracking my rythm guitar parts as it really beefs it up. Yet ive got some difficultie in getting the parts exact so when i play it back one is usually out (i pan then both left and right so its even more obvious if theres mistakes). Is there any tips anyone can give on getting rythm parts in time and down together. I think a big problem is the fact that i can only hear the guitar part im doing, so if im recording the doubled version i cant hear the orginal.

Im using cool edit pro so ill have a fiddle and see if i can maybe alter the voulme on one and then just bring it back up once the recordings done,

Any other tips would be good.

cheers

Two hands31 · #2 09-01-2003, 10:18 PM

Play along to a click if possible, or a drum track, something to keep the rhythm other than the other guitar part. If you're already doing that, then I have no other suggestions lol Except maybe better monitoring of some sort.

Kev Brigden · #3 09-06-2003, 04:24 PM

>An audio click track

>Solo the part, BELIEVE me this makes it a hell of a lot easier.

>Get a decent set of head phones, doesnt have to be studio quality... perhaps a decent set of Kenwoods or something. Just enough so that you can loose your self in your music...

>Get someone else to pilot the PC, and if possible, go out of the room. Try to stand away from distractions, (ever wondered why recording studio live rooms are usually quite dull?)

hope these ideas help (none of them are REAL studio solutions, just something that came off of the top of my head)

kev brigden

glynn · #4 09-17-2003, 08:26 PM

You could also track 3 guitars, pan one hard left, one hard right, and then one right down the center. mix the pan'd tracks about 3db low. The differences will blend better.

rikkbeatty · #5 09-19-2003, 02:02 PM

Here is a cool trick used by many (as well as me).

Record the original track. Then on your mixing console go out of the "Direct out" straight into your amps input. Then record your amp to another channel. If you want "MEGA DISTORTION" record the original track in distortion that way it adds distortion again to that signal. If you want regular distortion, record the original track in clean. Then the clean tone goes into your amp (just like your guitar normally would have) and what comes out is a distorted track. You can do it OVER and OVER and each time it will be in PERFECT sync!

bduersch · #6 09-19-2003, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rikkbeatty

Here is a cool trick used by many (as well as me).

That's a cool trick, but it takes all the challenge out of it!

I like it, though. I tend to "double up" my rhythm parts using 2 different guitars, 2 different distortion tones. That'd be an easy way to do it. What I'd really love to try is 3 tracks like glynn mentioned... pan one left with one distortion tone, pan one right with a different distortion tone, and pan one center with a cleaner tone. Meaty!

--B

rikkbeatty · #7 09-19-2003, 02:52 PM

The panning thing is a MUST to do so it has some seperation and does not sound like mud when you have a ton of rhythm tracks playing the same thing. It does take the challenge out of it but when most people come in to record and they are paying $65 an hour.... they want less challenge and more bang for their buck! lol

PLUS the more layers you add the more PERFECT each track has to be recorded. Any delay here or there will add a chorus effect with a few instruments out of sync and will sound like total mud hell with allot of layers.

But yeah, record the first track in clean. Pop it through a Marshall and record it to track 2. Pan it 9:00 left then use the clean track again out to a Fender to track 3. Pan it 3:00 right. Then use the clean track again through a VOX or anything else and pan it straight up. Then you can record 2 more tracks the same way an pan them hard left and hard right. Now you have a 100% sync'ed 100 foot tall brick wall of solid guitar tone!!! MWA HA HA HA HA

bduersch · #8 09-19-2003, 03:09 PM

Rikk--

When you do that, do you just run the guitar straight in to the console or do you mic a clean amp to get the "master" guitar track? (How do you keep the signal relatively flat so that the amp's EQ on the main track doesn't interfere with the EQ on the second/third tracks?) I think it would be hard to get the feel right on some distorted parts when you have to play it clean. (on second thought, I guess the guitar signal could be split... run one side into the clean amp to record, run the other side into a J-station or something with distortion into headphones to help get the feel right)

What's this Fender & Marshall stuff? :P I'm thinking more like running track 1 through the LD1 red channel on the Triaxis, then run track 2 through the LD2 red channel, then track 3 through the LD1 yellow channel, then ....

Seriously, I'm looking forward to trying this. It's gonna be scary!

--B

rikkbeatty · #9 09-19-2003, 05:11 PM

lol I was just saying for completely different distortion tones I go with Fender, Marshall, Vox, my 2101 and Eventide... If I use too many high gain distortions all at once it really does not "layer" to get a good thick tone. It just sounds like a bunch of high gain amps played at one time. Not that its a bad thing, just its not the tone I am looking for in each tune!! lol

Yeah I run the signal into the board and go direct out of the channel as I am recording it back into a processor into another channel (that is not going to tape) so I can hear it in distortion and not the clean tone. I run the clean through a tube pre amp and keep the EQ flat so I get a "pure" signal from the amp that is being mic'd while my mixing board is now "playing" guitar for me! lol

Its an awesome trick I learned from the infamous Steve Lawson from Bad Animals recording studio (he engineers only major label bands and movie sound tracks. The guy knows every trick in the book!) $5,000 an hour to record there!!! That place is unreal. Studio "X" is amazing. millions of dollars in gear in that place.... It took an hour to wipe up all the drool on the floor after the tour he gave me the last time I was up there!!! lol

l8r g8r · #10 09-19-2003, 11:32 PM

If you're using CEP, like me, why don't you just copy and paste? I copy the original track and paste it into a new track. I pan one hard left and one hard right. Both tracks have no choice but to be perfectly in sync since they are identical. I will add a little chorus or delay to one track just to add some depth.

Keep in mind, however, that I completely suck at home recording. :P

7 Dying Trees · #11 09-25-2003, 03:44 PM

Record one to a click, then record the other. If your playing is tight, then it should be no problem, but this should show you how exact you are in timekeeping. Just keep going untill it's all kosher

, oh, a loud click is usefull, and concentrater on that

If you are demoing stuff, play the part 2 or 3 times in succession, then pick the best of 2 or 3 out and paste it

, cheat? yes

rikkbeatty · #12 09-25-2003, 03:51 PM

I should also say that using your direct out into various amps is an AWESOME way to thicken your lead guitar track as well. Everyone always worries about thickening the rythm tracks but when you do instrumental music you would like to have the lead track just as BIG sounding right? Playing a lead part on an entire song note for note over the original track with all the fills and tricks and vibrato can be allot more challenging than playing the rhythm part. Not to say it cant be done but.... why put yourself through it? This way your lead melody can go through various amps and setups and you only have to play it once! You can cut and paste on the computer but the pre/amp plug ins will only give you so much. The direct outs on a board going through the individual amplifiers is the real deal!

Or go into your computer, use the direct out of the computer back into an amp again.... same deal as using the board.

JESTER700 · #13 09-25-2003, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rikkbeatty

I should also say that using your direct out into various amps is an AWESOME way to thicken your lead guitar track as well. Everyone always worries about thickening the rythm tracks but when you do instrumental music you would like to have the lead track just as BIG sounding right? Playing a lead part on an entire song note for note over the original track with all the fills and tricks and vibrato can be allot more challenging than playing the rhythm part. Not to say it cant be done but.... why put yourself through it? This way your lead melody can go through various amps and setups and you only have to play it once! You can cut and paste on the computer but the pre/amp plug ins will only give you so much. The direct outs on a board going through the individual amplifiers is the real deal!

Or go into your computer, use the direct out of the computer back into an amp again.... same deal as using the board.

Actually playing it again still sounds better, if it's tight.

rikkbeatty · #14 09-25-2003, 09:33 PM

It only sounds better if you like a "slight" chorus effect of playing the same track twice (even a virtuoso would have a hard time playing a full 5 minute lead line 100% perfect). Other than that it just sounds a bit messy. Thats why you always see numerous cabs lined up with mics in front of them when a major label band records in a studio. When they want 15 tracks of the lead guitar to make it "BIG" sounding they dont have the artist record his lead 15 different times through 15 different setups....

JESTER700 · #15 09-25-2003, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rikkbeatty

It only sounds better if you like a "slight" chorus effect of playing the same track twice (even a virtuoso would have a hard time playing a full 5 minute lead line 100% perfect). Other than that it just sounds a bit messy. Thats why you always see numerous cabs lined up with mics in front of them when a major label band records in a studio. When they want 15 tracks of the lead guitar to make it "BIG" sounding they dont have the artist record his lead 15 different times through 15 different setups....

Yeesh. The word "overkill" comes to mind. I thought we were talking about doubling (maybe tripling, ala Randy Rhoads). And yeah, I was thinking short solo break or riff - it changes with you instrumental guys, and I missed that you were specifically talking about that. My bad.

I don't remember this always being the case when I'd read about recordings, but then I haven't been into the guitar rags for a while. I imagine it'd be nice to have a lot of choice to mix a couple/few together, but too much and wouldn't there be all kinds of phase issues? But then, excess always was the rock n' roll way...