Is 16 Tracks Enough?

[CriticalFix]

Hello All,

Sorry, I'm new to recording and this forum....GREAT site!

Is 16 tracks enough to record most vocalist and bands or is upwards of 34 recomended?

Second question....does it take 2 tracks to record stereo or can you accomplish that with one track alone? I have heard sometimes where a guitar will start out on like the left channel and then vocals and other insts. will come in stereo.

Thanks!

[zekthedeadcow]

...well lets just add up the likely possibilities

drums:
1 snare
1 kick
2 overhead
3 toms

lead guitar 1
rythem guitar 1
bass 1

vocals 1
backup 2

keyboard 1

....that puts it at 14 tracks

I usually end up with 24-28 but that includes a 6 track scratch track... plus my PC starts really choking at 24 tracks

[Track Rat]

Just my humble opinion but 16 is more than enough. I run a 24 track system and for most bands that I record, 16 is adequate for sure.

[CriticalFix]

How about the stereo stuff...is that accomplished with like fading? And do you think it is better to go with seperate pieces or an all-in-one machine like the Tascam Sx-1 LE?

[manning1]

gold hits were done on 3 track machines once.
so yes , 16 is enough. be carefull of over producing a song.
several of my songs at soundclick.com/bmanning were done
using only 8 tracks. interestingly the ones ive done with fewer tracks like "Raise the flag" , and "Woohoo" have had tons more play than the songs that i used 24 to 32 tracks on.
some have even gone number 1 in their genre like "Hi tech man".
done on 8 tracks with home made mic preamps.
if you force yourself to get good drum mixes up front to a stereo track, you will find you can save a lot. but it takes preparotary effort. "Take my love" - a popular song of mine with lots of plays was done on pro 2 inch 16 track. so yes - 16 tracks is enough.

[TexRoadkill]

Stereo effects are accomplished by either micing a source with two mics and recording them to seperate tracks and panning them hard L/R during the mixdown or panning a mono track during the mixdown (that's what the pan knob is for).

That is just a very basic definition and there are other ways of getting a stereo effect but those are the two ways that would cause you to either use up 1 or 2 tracks.

[grinder]

No matter how many tracks you have, there will always be a time when you wish you had more.16 is pretty descent amount for home recording.

[Bulls Hit]

For recording, 16 tracks would be plenty. Mixing is a different story, I wouldn't like to be constrained to only 16.

For stereo recording, most multitracking software packages give you the option of recording a track in either mono or stereo. So for a basic 2 input sound card you'd have the option of recording each input to its own track - mono, or recording both inputs to the same track - stereo. Mono recording to seperate tracks is the only way I've ever done it, as you can then pan each track and so have total control of the position of each track in the final stereo image

[CriticalFix]

That answers alot thank you all. I think that the reason i'm having a difficult time making a decision is because the Tascam mentioned above is strictly limited to only 16 tracks and it uses the Tascam software as opposed to Pro Tools or something like that.

I'm afraid that if I get that board (with max 16 tracks) that I would be getting something that might be limiting in the area of tracks and I wouldn't get to know ProTools like I would like to.

Tough decisions

[manning1]

criticalfix....
if you want more than 16 tracks. i would suggest you look at the following multitrack software on a PC. powertracks at pgmusic.com will do 48 tracks. even 24 bit if your computer can handle it. its49 bucks. plus it has boatloads of effects.
and magix audio studio from magix.de. costs around the same.
loads of tracks and effects and eq and compressor/limitors plus a great automatable mixer built into the software that records mixer moves. alone this is very usefull in mixdowns. i used both these packages to do a number of my soundclick songs, and as a songwriter, i wouldnt give them up for anything. both also include midi sequencers. magix you can do 256 midi tracks if i remember, but i have no needfor it.
also check out N track at fasoft.com, another excellent multitracker with unlimited tracks. but a caveat. i would suggest you use a pretty powerfull 2 ghz pc so that you can run a lot of effects.
hth and regards.

[Prizmaxic]

I think 16 is more than enough. Unless you have amazing gear, the more tracks you add the more "mudd" you add to your sound.

[CriticalFix]

That sounds great...so I can do unlimited tracks using software. I like that but the Tascam unit uses it's own software and i'm unsure if I can plug it right into (and use it in conjunction) with other software....does anyone know if that is possible?

Also, the guy at the music center suggested a pre-amp unit because he stated that you can plug right into the board, but going through a preamp will make it sound increadibly better. Any suggestions on those?

(Sorry about all the questions...just very new to all of this )

[manning1]

the advantage of the pc criticalfox is imho the flexibility.
while the sx is a all in one standalone solution.
its up to you. but as an example comparison an amd 2ghz system plus the multitrack software , and a decent sound card plus a few microphones and a few decent standalone mic pre's like the dmp3 is probably a 2500 dollar investment in comparison.
but you get the flexibility of all the vst and directx plug in effects , a ton that are free like the SIR reverb everyone likes.
i do all my mixdowns in the multitrack software on the PC.
some people are getting 100 tracks with fast hard drives on amd systems. not that you need it.
today 2500 dollars buys you a pretty decent project studio capable of putting out airplay quality records. ive had airplay with much less. i want to impress on you several key points in getting good sound.....
1. the quality of the sound card eg : audiophile are good.
2. ditto for mics and preamps.
3. how you engineer each session. this takes time and experience.