8 track order of operations

[nate_dennis]

Ok, I am researching ways to effectively use an eight track recording unit . . . something like the Tascam 388. I was wondering if the following order of doing things would work . . . (track numbers don't really matter, they're just for refferece.

Track 1 - Record click track.
Tracks 2-6 - Record guitars and/or piano and vocals.

get a good stereo mix of these (excluding the click) and bounce them to tracks 7 and 8.

keeping the click on track 1
Tracks 2-6 record drums
recording over the click put bass on track 1.

This would let me have seprate controll over the bass, the kick, the snare and everything else when I mix down to a computer or whatever. What do you think? Am I making this more difficult than it has to be or is this pretty effective? Thanks for your input.

Nate

[KineticSound]

You can certainly do that, yes. However, I might recommend you do drums first, bounce that submix, and then record your other tracks.

[nate_dennis]

Why is that? To me, in the way that I think, it makes more sense to lay down the "leading tracks" the ones that determine the arrangment first so that the drums/drummer can respond to whats happening. Maybe I'm thinking backwards. I'm just trying to learn. Thanks for the answer.

[KineticSound]

In terms of sub-mixing the tracks, it's a lot easier to sub-mix drums by themselves than the other way around. I couldn't imagine having to create what is essentially a final mix of guitars, bass, vocals, etc. without the drums.

Another option may be to use a separate mixer to create a sub-mix of the drums and go straight to two tracks. That would allow you to preserve everything else on it's own track.

Just curious, but why go the 388 route? Those are great machines and very reliable if you can find one in good shape, but very limited (comparitively speaking) in capability versus a good digital setup.

[MCI2424]

Originally Posted by nate_dennis

Why is that? To me, in the way that I think, it makes more sense to lay down the "leading tracks" the ones that determine the arrangment first so that the drums/drummer can respond to whats happening. Maybe I'm thinking backwards. I'm just trying to learn. Thanks for the answer.

Laying down the main song to a click track is better for the drummer as he/she can hear the song and add different fills etc. If the drummer knows exactly what he/she wants, record the drumd first. I always record the drums and a guitar scratch track at the same time both live. I then formally record the guitar tracks later and may change them (like the drummer could if he/she had the guitar track available at the tracking stage).

[nate_dennis]

great thoughts, thank you!!!

I've done digital and I'm really interested in trying something different. I know it's more limited but that's part of the allure for me. I'll mix digital, but I thought I'd try the other way too.

[KineticSound]

Hey - go for it. I'm not trying to step on toes, but keep in mind that you're going completely analog. The 388 has a built-in analog desk (so you're mixing analog, too) that has some great old-school eq.

I would strongly recommend that if you're going to buy a console like a 388, that you: (1) Do some homework on the console itself so you know what to expect; e.g. how to align & clean tape heads, how to calibrate the machine, etc. and (2) Find a good local technician who knows how to make repairs on such a device. The 388 is a monster, but will need some TLC to keep it tip-top.

Good luck!

[NewAgeMuttLange]

Drums in recorder man(plus a close snare) on 1-4.
Click on 7.
Scratch Guitar (Rhythm Only) on 8.
Come Back with the Bass on 5 and the Guitar (Rhythm) on 6.
2nd Guitar (if any) on 7
Vox on 8.

That's how I'd do it if I were you. And when you come recording the guitar and bass you could either pan the scratch to the left and put the recording track on the right, or just lose the scratch track completely...

My .02,
Paul