This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

Welcome to Our Community

Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.

Stupid Question About Quadtracking

Discussion in 'F.O.H.' started by GhostUnholy, Jul 24, 2008.

  1. GhostUnholy

    GhostUnholy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    So I keep reading that a lot of you quad track your mixes and pan 2 tracks hard L/R and two 80% L/R... but I need clarification on something, I apologize if this is a very stupid question.

    Assuming two guitarists, does each guitarist perform his part 4 times? and then each guitarists' parts are panned as mentioned? giving a total of 8 performances?

    or does each guitarist perform his part two times, then those tracks can be copied onto other mono tracks and panned as mentioned about, giving a total of 4 performances? or is this double tracking?
     
  2. Unavailable

    Unavailable Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2006
    Messages:
    1,840
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    I prefer having one guitarist record all four takes. But if both guitarists can play consistently with each other, then just record 2 takes from each, which you will pan to one side.

    Oh, and don't copy and paste tracks.
     
  3. Torniojaws

    Torniojaws They call me Juha

    Joined:
    May 15, 2005
    Messages:
    3,068
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Espoo, Finland
    If you copy tracks, it is not 4 performances. It's two performances only. The collective Sneap forum voice: Do not copypaste.
     
  4. GhostUnholy

    GhostUnholy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear what I meant.

    Does quad tracking mean, 4 performances per guitarist, or 4 total?

    By copy/paste I meant, if there are 8 performances (4 each) you could pan two tracks from each guitarist 100% L/R and 2 tracks from each guitarist 80% L/R.

    If there are 4 performances, 2 each, you could duplicate all the tracks so that theres 4 performances but 8 tracks, so you could then pan two from each guitarist hard L/R and 2 more tracks from each guitarist 80% L/R

    Or do you simply have 2 performances per guitarist, with one guitarist's two tracks panned hard LR and the other guitarist panned 80%LR? The reason I ask is i think this way might strange with harmonized riffs and stuff. Maybe pan both guitarists 100% LR?
     
  5. grywolf627

    grywolf627 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    You're over thinking this. :) Again, stating in the collective Sneap forum voice: Do not copy/paste. This is not multi-tracking. 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. Now, whether you pan all performances from one guitarist to the left and the other to the right, or mix them up...that's a whole other debate. I personally favor each guitarist on his own side to keep things tighter.
     
  6. Darkening

    Darkening Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    What up bro,

    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 each guitarist records 4 takes of the same thing, etc... then you have quadtracking. Guitarist 1 goes 100/100 (all 4 tracks) and Guitarist 2 goes 80/80 (all 4 tracks)

    I think quadtracking works better for the rhythm. I don't like quadtracking leads, or even the "2nd guitarist" part (i.e. harmonizing with the rhythm). But then, I've never had Randy Rhoads in my studio either...

    If it sounds good double-tracked, no reason not to leave it at that! It takes a very good player who has his parts DOWN to quadtrack and make it worth the time and effort.
     
  7. GhostUnholy

    GhostUnholy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Thanks for the quick answer.

    If you put one on each side, and say they're playing parts harmonized in thirds, don't you think it would sound strange especially for people listening on headphones to have one ear playing a third higher than the other ear?
     
  8. GhostUnholy

    GhostUnholy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    This it the answer I was looking for. Thanks man! :headbang:

    EDIT: On that note, do you just single track your leads and stick them right in the center?
     
  9. Metaltastic

    Metaltastic Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    19,931
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Wait...no. I mean, it's all a matter of opinion, but for quad-tracking (if I ever were to do it), I'd still have one guitarist L100/L80, and the other R100/R80 - if you have both guitarists on both sides, then you lose any kind of stereo image, which just sounds mono and boring. And listen to...christ, I don't know, Behemoth's "Mysterium Coniunctis: Hermanubis" off of Demigod (totally random example, one of bajillions), and you'll hear that there's often two different riffs going on, one on each side.

    Double tracking, though, definitely do NOT have one guitarist at L100/R100 and the other at L80/R80, as I think Darkening was suggesting - L100/R100 is the same as Center, and I don't know what L80/R80 is, but it's just as bad. Double tracking, one guitarist L100, one guitarist R100. Very simple.
     
  10. beyond dead

    beyond dead heavy metal dad \m/

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    peterborough, ontario, canada
    i prefer one guitarist on both sides, different amps per side :heh:
    anyone wanna tell my other guitar player that for me? :lol:
     
  11. Metaltastic

    Metaltastic Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    19,931
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Yep, I HATE the sound of doubled leads (and that includes Randy Rhoads, but that's a whole 'nother can of worms :)) - if they're trading solos, though, I usually pan one around L25 and the other around R25, so the contrast between the two is heightened (while still having them mostly in the center). Also, if they're going on with vocals, then I'll offset 'em a bit.
     
  12. Darkening

    Darkening Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Well, I don't think it is the same as center if they are different takes... If one take were copy-pasted it would sound centered... I mean what would you do if the band only has 1 guitarist and 1 part (no lead/harmonizing riffs) ??? You're gonna have to pan 100/100... there is no other guitarist to put on the other side. As long as the takes are unique, the stereo image is fine.

    I like different amps on each side too.

    Someone else correct me too if i'm spouting noob-ness, but I'm pretty sure I'm not.

    :p
     
  13. JJO

    JJO Dutch Metalist

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Holland
    Huh? l100 r100 center? If you would copy paste, you would get the center indeed but 1 track on l100 and one on r100 wouldn't give you a center idea right? i've recently done my first my band recording and definatly don't like putting each guitarist on one side. I double tracked with two amps one going l 100 and r100 both guitarists and one amp on 80/80 both guitarists. So you would get:

    amp1: Line 1 @ L 100
    amp1: Line 2 @ R 100
    amp2: Line 1 @ L 80
    amp2: Line 2 @ R 80

    Definatly prefer this over:

    amp1: Line 1 @ L 100
    amp1: Line 1 @ L 100
    amp2: Line 2 @ R 100
    amp2: Line 2 @ R 100
     
  14. Metaltastic

    Metaltastic Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    19,931
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Then you quad-tracked dude, not double-tracked, if I understand you correctly. Either that, or you reamped/split the signal, which is still double-tracking - but to use two guitarists, each going through two amps, you had to have guitarist 1 play through Amp 1 and then Amp 2, and guitarist 2 play through Amp 1 and Amp 2.

    In short, this is what I prefer, and what I think is the most common:

    Two guitarists (each one playing a different part)

    Double track - Guitarist 1 L100, Guitarist 2 R100
    Quad Track - Guitarist 1 L100 and L80 (or L100 as well), Guitarist 2 at R100 and R80 (or R100 as well).

    In short, regardless of how many tracks, each guitar part gets its own side. This is how almost every recording I can think of does it (the above Behemoth example, Iron Maiden harmonies, Job for a Cowboy's Genesis, Nevermore, jesus christ, EVERYTHING), cuz having each part on both sides sounds, as I said, boring and mono.
     
  15. GhostUnholy

    GhostUnholy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    What darkening suggested is what I had been doing, putting both guitarists on both sides, half their takes on each side... it definitely sounds different to me than if I were to leave all the tracks in the center... Though I'll try putting one guitarist on one side and one on the other when i get home from work today and see what it sounds like though

    I'll pay more attention to where stuff is panned too when im listening to cds i guess, see what other bands have going

    Thanks for your replies guys!
     
  16. beyond dead

    beyond dead heavy metal dad \m/

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    peterborough, ontario, canada
    yeah, this stuff is pretty common knowledge
     
  17. GhostUnholy

    GhostUnholy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Wait now I'm confused... from what darkening said i thought i understood that quad tracking meant 4 tracks per part so i guess 4 per guitarist... but having 2 per guitarist is what im hearing now? or is this assuming that both are playing the same thing?
     
  18. Metaltastic

    Metaltastic Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    19,931
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Yeah, two per guitarist, absolutely - jesus christ, if you had 4 per guitarist, that'd be 8 takes playing total! :puke: Mud-city, as far as I know this has NEVER been done (except for special effect), and with good reason

    HOWEVER, it's important to clarify that if you have one performance, and split the signal or reamp through like 3 different amps, even though you now have 3 tracks per guitarist, that's still double-tracking, cuz there are only two performances
     
  19. Darkening

    Darkening Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    No.

    the DEFINITION of QUAD is FOUR...

    And there are a SHITLOAD of modern albums with 8+ tracks of guitar. Maybe not in techy/fast metal, but in hard rock/metal, yeah... you better believe it. Seriously. I've seen it with my own eyes. Even up to 6 takes of the SAME THING (3 per side) for choruses.

    One take = tracking
    Two takes = double-tracking
    Three takes = triple-tracking
    Four Takes = quad tracking

    It isn't that complicated....

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

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


    1, 2, 3, 4, etc...

    A, B, C, D... uh... E?

    :puke:
     
  20. Jarkko Mattheiszen

    Jarkko Mattheiszen The FU guy.

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    Messages:
    6,524
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Lappeenranta, Finland
    Darkening must be recording some pretty damn convincing guitarists if they can manage to play eight tracks total and still keep it tight ;)

    Quad-tracking is definitely what Metaltastic said, at least for me and the people I have discussed guitar tracking.

    EDIT: By saying "manage to play eight tracks total" I naturally don't include the 'spice' tracks, leads over rhythm guitars etc. I often put small effect-like licks here and there on their separate tracks, but I'm not calling it n^2 -tracking :)
     

Share This Page