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. Darkening

    Darkening Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    If you have 2 guitarists and each one DOUBLES his part, that is DOUBLE TRACKING.

    If it WERE QUAD tracking (like Metaltastic is saying) then how would you even achieve Double Tracking if you wanted to?!

    One take per guitarist would be double-tracking if what Metaltastic is saying is true... and that just isnt true.
     
  2. Darkening

    Darkening Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    I've done it myself.

    4 tracks of the EXACT same thing (chorus rhythm)

    and then 2-4 tracks of a harmonizing/2nd guitar part

    I don't know HOW doubling a part became QUAD TRACKING just because there is a second guitar player who doubles their part?

    If both guitarists are playing the exact same thing, then it WOULD be QUAD TRACKING, but that usually doesn't happen.
     
  3. Machinated

    Machinated Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2005
    Messages:
    4,230
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Milton Keynes, UK
    I get each guitarist to sort out what they are going to play on the recording, as it usually is different from what they play live. For example, on a chorus, one guitarist plays some octaves while the other plays chords. I will have 4 tracks of chords, and then one or 2 of octaves on top. In pretty much all parts of the song there will be 4 rhythm tracks (2 from each guitarist), and most of what they play will be similar (but not the same, taking into account harmonies etc).

    Quad tracking takes long enough, recording 8 tracks is a time waster. If you need 8 rhythm tracks, something has gone wrong....
     
  4. Darkening

    Darkening Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Goddamm internet! :kickass:

    Haha, above is what I do. 4 tracks of chords (QUAD-TRACKING) and then 2 tracks of octaves/melody (DOUBLE-TRACKING). So the rhythm is QUAD TRACKED and the octaves/melody is DOUBLE TRACKED.

    I never said 8 tracks of rhythm. That's OCTO-TRACKING. FUCK THAT.

    And MOST of the time, I don't even QUAD-TRACK the rhythms... just DOUBLE-TRACK both guitarists.

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

    So yeah. I'm gonna have a beer now (10:11 AM).

    CHEERS GUYS!
     
  5. GhostUnholy

    GhostUnholy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Metaltastic: That is what Lamb of God has been doing the last few albums right? double tracking but splitting to three amps each i think

    Machinated: I agree with you because I tried doing 8 tracks (4 each) last night and that was just a massive waste of fucking time... i mean we got them all sounding tight after a LOT of effort but way more effort than could be expected day in day out

    my main question i guess really pertained to what darkening is talking about, is quad tracking 2 each or 4 each? seems to me like the reason we can't agree is that its situational depending on what the two guitar parts in question are

    EDIT: also metaltastic, i listened to a bunch of songs from different bands whos sound im going for and your right it seems to be for the most part 1 guitar left and 1 right with certain parts on both sides I guess depending whats conisidered a "lead"... thanks for pointing that out or i'd be setting everything up the wrong way!
     
  6. JJO

    JJO Dutch Metalist

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Holland
    Darkening.... that's wut i thought :p I would probably not do quad-tracking for a long while since i only did one recording of a band now :p But maybe it'll get to quad tracking some time when i got tight enough guitarists i guess....

    Anyway like Darkening said. 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. Which i would personally pan like this:
    (did it wrong in the previous post :p)

    amp1: Line 1 @ L 100
    amp1: Line 2 @ R 100
    amp2: Line 1 @ R 80
    amp2: Line 2 @ L 80
     
  7. grywolf627

    grywolf627 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Uggh. I really mean no offense to anyone, but this thread has gotten too complicated for something so simple and common place. How about instead of arguing over terminology, just do what you think sounds good in the end, and keep several guidelines in mind:

    - Listen to other CD's that you like, and REALLY pay attention to the production and hear how it's arranged.
    - Copy/pasting is a no-no and will serve little benefit unless you're planning on doing some sort of parallel processing on the copied track.
    - Splitting a signal and running to 2 or 3 amps at once is not multi-tracking either (and just begs for phase issues...although CAN work nicely at times for interesting sounds)
    - The more doubled, quad, or whatever to the nth degree of tracks you stack means more chances for mud...and the more exact every part must be played. Having 4 tracks playing identical parts is hard enough, anything beyond that is basically overkill (but yes, I've heard some pieces with one guitarist stacking 6 tracks...though EQ'd differently for layers of sound).

    Just my 2 cents...and with current inflation...that makes it worth about .5 cents I guess, so take it for what it's worth. :)
     
  8. JJO

    JJO Dutch Metalist

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Holland
    Hell i'm just listening to I,voyager from nevermore(one of the bands metaltastic called). That's definatly not 1 guitar per side ;) Look at the intro for brighter idea. I hear 2 guitar lines per side. Dunno what they panned for real.
     
  9. Darkening

    Darkening Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    + what greywolf said.

    this beer good!!!
     
  10. GhostUnholy

    GhostUnholy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    This is unfortunately the problem that always arises when you let me think. :p
     
  11. Melodeath

    Melodeath Moonbow

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    3,046
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Northern VA
    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.
     
  12. grywolf627

    grywolf627 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Be sure you're listening to the Sneap remix and not that *cough* other producer's disaster...I mean...umm...mix. It's the only version allowed here in this forum. :lol: :headbang:
     
  13. grywolf627

    grywolf627 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    You and me both...which is why I try to refrain from it as much as possible. :lol:
     
  14. Machinated

    Machinated Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2005
    Messages:
    4,230
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Milton Keynes, UK
    Sorry. my post wasn't meant to be aimed at anyone! Just general things that I think about this. This thread is flying fast...
     
  15. JJO

    JJO Dutch Metalist

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Holland
    Whahaha damnit :p just downloaded it from their website :OMG: guess it's not huh? Have to listen to more of andy's work anyway so :oops:
     
  16. grywolf627

    grywolf627 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Just teasin' you. :) I'm sure you got the right version...otherwise you wouldn't be able to tolerate it.

    It's my lunch time here, so let's all just go grab a beer :kickass: It's on me. :)
     
  17. Metaltastic

    Metaltastic Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    19,931
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    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.
     
  18. nwright

    nwright Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,096
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    New Castle, Indiana
    hahahahaha. this is hilarious.

    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
     
  19. SocialNumb

    SocialNumb Damn Christians!

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    8,020
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Boyton, WPB, FL
    Yes, this thread is now over. 2+2=4
     
  20. grywolf627

    grywolf627 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    :lol: It's quantum mixing, where the rules of time/space are bent. :lol:

    NWright...you just earned yourself a beer. (or beverage of choice) :kickass:
     

Share This Page