Quad tracking: what's the point?

[Bob Savage]

In my experience, it does not achieve the same effect that multiple discreet tracks does and frankly, I don't like the way it sounds, but if it works for you, great! Certainly less time consuming...

Steve

I've played with delays, chorus, etc. using copied tracks and have also included moving the track very, very slightly to supposedly get the same effect as double tracking. No dice for me. That's not to say some of the results playing with tracks like that aren't good because you can get some interesting fx out of it, but mostly you can just run a single track through aux busses and manipulate there instead of adding/copying a bunch of tracks.

Also, unless somebody has a "canned" copy/paste/fx approach, I'll bet it's no faster than just playing a second (or more) time.

 

[Bob Savage]

Why take the shortcut? You're presumably recording your stuff in your own studio, so you've got the time.

I perceive that you've got opinions of your own. Why not share your experience? Would be interesting to compare notes. Just don't divide by zero.

 

[offa]

Interesting tricks in this thread..

I think the consensus is that for metal and hard rock the more tracks that can be pulled off the better.. With more than four tracks things get messy real quick..

On a separate but related note, I know a bassist who double tracks on bass with two different basses.. sounds mad, but he has a killer sound!

 

[axemeaquestion]

Why take the shortcut? You're presumably recording your stuff in your own studio, so you've got the time.

I perceive that you've got opinions of your own. Why not share your experience? Would be interesting to compare notes. Just don't divide by zero.

It would appear that our approaches are the same: play the same part twice, or 4x. Don't do the copy and paste and delay trick.

 

[Bob Savage]

It would appear that our approaches are the same: play the same part twice, or 4x. Don't do the copy and paste and delay trick.

Agreed on that.

What are your thoughts of the differences/similarities of double, triple and quad tracking?

 

[fearhk213]

One of these is quad tracked, one is double tracked, which is which?

https://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=10025728

So which one is which? I'm guessing the quad is the first one since the second one seems a little more defined and focused, but then again the guitars seem louder in the second one too (like the highs pop out a little more)

 

[axemeaquestion]

It would appear that our approaches are the same: play the same part twice, or 4x. Don't do the copy and paste and delay trick.

Agreed on that.

What are your thoughts of the differences/similarities of double, triple and quad tracking?

In that clip of Jake's, I could not tell the difference between 2 and 4.

That being said, I will probably try a quad track. I know my engineer uses the same amp settings, so maybe I'll use two different gits or something. Dunno, but will definitely try the quad tracking.

 

[Bob Savage]

One of these is quad tracked, one is double tracked, which is which?

https://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=10025728

So which one is which? I'm guessing the quad is the first one since the second one seems a little more defined and focused, but then again the guitars seem louder in the second one too (like the highs pop out a little more)

My guess is opposite. I think the clarity in the first one says double track. Either that or some single notes don't sound like they're being played the same in the clips because the little trill thingie sounds like two guitars in harmony in the first and like barre chords in the second.

 

[Bob Savage]

I'm actually going to go one further and say I like the first of the two way better. There's a depth (don't mistake for "fatness") in the first track that is not present in the second, which to me sounds "fatter" but not as deep. The throatiness of the amp is more apparent to me in the first track.

Will be interesting to see if I'm right.

 

[Anonymous]

In my experience, it does not achieve the same effect that multiple discreet tracks does and frankly, I don't like the way it sounds, but if it works for you, great! Certainly less time consuming...

Steve

I've played with delays, chorus, etc. using copied tracks and have also included moving the track very, very slightly to supposedly get the same effect as double tracking. No dice for me. That's not to say some of the results playing with tracks like that aren't good because you can get some interesting fx out of it, but mostly you can just run a single track through aux busses and manipulate there instead of adding/copying a bunch of tracks.

Also, unless somebody has a "canned" copy/paste/fx approach, I'll bet it's no faster than just playing a second (or more) time.

Yeah, yeah, I was talking about the "copy the track move it a few samples" approach. I often use multiple aux busses with delays, pitchshifting, etc to make my guitar tracks sound cool, but that to me is not the same effect as multi-tracking the parts...

Steve

 

[Bob Savage]

but that to me is not the same effect as multi-tracking the parts...

Steve

Agree completely. Multi-tracking is stacked performances that seem to fill in quite nicely when the player knows and can play the tune tightly. I think somebody already said that if you don't have the tune DOWN you'll end up with a quadtastic mess. I agree completely.

 

[Anonymous]

when the player knows and can play the tune tightly.

Fu............. I knew I was doing something wrong...

Steve

 

[Bob Savage]

when the player knows and can play the tune tightly.

Fu............. I knew I was doing something wrong...

Steve

It's always got to be something, doesn't it?

 

[JakeAC5253]

Minimum 3 tracks. I always do a mid heavy lower gain in the center , and two slightly different voiced higher gain on each side panned as far as possible. That usually gives me the girth I need for rhythm trax... Here is a clip : http://soundcloud.com/audioninja/screamingplex

Huge rhythm tone dude, great job. Is that a Bogner Shiva Center, Mark V L, VH4 R?

 

[axemeaquestion]

Minimum 3 tracks. I always do a mid heavy lower gain in the center , and two slightly different voiced higher gain on each side panned as far as possible. That usually gives me the girth I need for rhythm trax... Here is a clip : http://soundcloud.com/audioninja/screamingplex

Huge rhythm tone dude, great job. Is that a Bogner Shiva Center, Mark V L, VH4 R?

It does sound very good.

Are you going to enlighten us as to which of your parts was doubled vs quadded?

 

[Ancient Alien]

Steve Morse does a lot of quad tracking on all his recordings.
But, what he does is record two tracks of his dirty tracks on most leads and rhythms, then adds an exact track with a totally clean guitar, then another on an acoustic.
When mixed properly, you almost can't hear the clean and acoustic, but you do hear the sonic effect of it

 

[axemeaquestion]

All stock axe fx presets, Screaming Plexi (which is I guess what its name implies it to be) in the center. Recto 1 on the left and Recto 2 on the right. Played with a Custom 22 PRS straight into Logic Studio. no post juice on anything.

Sounds good for a 5 year old technology box that will soon be supplanted by something far superior.

 

[drucifer]

With copy/paste/chorus/reamp, etc., the results can be more uniform, which may or may not be undesirable. Personally I prefer seperate performances, gives the combined tracks a bit of "life". I agree that quad tracking has more of a certain type of depth than dual, in much the same way as a doubled vocal vs. a single-tracked. There's really no wrong way to do it though.

 

[HeimBrent]

But putting a slight delay between those two, or four, tracks would make the sound fatter, and be a certain way of ensuring that the final result is tight. It's a shortcut, but I'd say it's one worth taking.

Why take the shortcut? You're presumably recording your stuff in your own studio, so you've got the time.

But putting a slight delay between those two, or four, tracks would make the sound fatter, and be a certain way of ensuring that the final result is tight. It's a shortcut, but I'd say it's one worth taking.

In my experience, it does not achieve the same effect that multiple discreet tracks does and frankly, I don't like the way it sounds, but if it works for you, great! Certainly less time consuming...

Steve

I think I should point out, once again, that this is something I read about in a magazine. Not something I've ever tried myself.

 

[Heritage Softail]

Steve Morse does a lot of quad tracking on all his recordings.
But, what he does is record two tracks of his dirty tracks on most leads and rhythms, then adds an exact track with a totally clean guitar, then another on an acoustic.
When mixed properly, you almost can't hear the clean and acoustic, but you do hear the sonic effect of it

Steve Morse is on a different level. That is some music I will listen to at times to just be amazed and appreciate. No aspirations to be able to play it correctly. And if you could play the guitar parts, then finding everyone else that could play other parts would be impossible.