recording source effects vs adding after in the mix

  • Thread starter Thread starter steppingonmars
  • Start date Start date
S

steppingonmars

Member
Hi there

I've got a band coming in to record this weekend. The one guitar player I think would like to use his delay pedal as opposed to me adding delay in the mix. What issues am I going to run into here with compression etc? I know the one drawback will be the mono delay. I'm recording this band live and I have only 8 channels so re-amping is not an option. Here's a sample of their stuff, the guitar players delay seem like a signature of their sound

Thanks

http://www.box.net/shared/ffhjl3ac3d
 
steppingonmars said:
Hi there

I've got a band coming in to record this weekend. The one guitar player I think would like to use his delay pedal as opposed to me adding delay in the mix. What issues am I going to run into here with compression etc? I know the one drawback will be the mono delay. I'm recording this band live and I have only 8 channels so re-amping is not an option. Here's a sample of their stuff, the guitar players delay seem like a signature of their sound

Thanks

http://www.box.net/shared/ffhjl3ac3d
Click to expand...

(Standard stereo delay is his signature sound? Uh, ok, never mind.)

Perhaps you should discuss it intelligently with him. Explain that effects tend to become more apparent (or almost exaggerated) when recording and especially when compressing. If he still insists then try a few trial runs so you can scrutinize the playback on different systems. Worst case is he may have to lessen the effect and record it all again.

BTW, you can always re-amp the recorded track after the session to add the effect.

Good luck with it.
 
steppingonmars said:
Hi there

I've got a band coming in to record this weekend. The one guitar player I think would like to use his delay pedal as opposed to me adding delay in the mix. What issues am I going to run into here with compression etc? I know the one drawback will be the mono delay. I'm recording this band live and I have only 8 channels so re-amping is not an option. Here's a sample of their stuff, the guitar players delay seem like a signature of their sound

Thanks

http://www.box.net/shared/ffhjl3ac3d
Click to expand...
Don't mess with the man's sound. If he plays with delay, record with delay. That's like asking a keyboard player to lay it down with a piano patch and telling him you'll send the midi data to a synth organ patch at mix time.
 
Chibi Nappa said:
Don't mess with the man's sound. If he plays with delay, record with delay. That's like asking a keyboard player to lay it down with a piano patch and telling him you'll send the midi data to a synth organ patch at mix time.
Click to expand...


Yes - often a player's performance is influenced by the effect that he is using. I will predict that if you record him dry we will likely add in extra notes (by accident) to fill in the gaps.
 
Well I recorded them with efx, it came out good. I'll post it later if the band lets me
 
Yeah, delay is one of those things that can become part of not only the sound, but the performance as well. So, if it's integral to the performance and is not used for "sweetening", then you should record with it.
 
You could always create a split at the source, and record the delay/FX to a seperate track...that way, you have both options later on.
 
IF you can, sure, but usually all those pedals come in front of the amp.. Then if you split first you aren't getting his amp either. Guitarists are picky about their sound, esp. if they have a nice amp, then you re-amp em or whatever, that's not gonna fly... I'm a fan of adding fx later, but apply that mainly for vox. The few bands I've recorded, I record the guitarist playing thru whatever fx he wants so it's on the raw track.
 
Could have moved the delay into the FX loop and used the spit there.. Delays and Time Based effects reeeally should come after the pre-amp anyways.

Then you could record the dry/pre-amp out and a wet/speaker sound..

That way you still have the guitarist's amp sound, which like Suprstar said.. they can be picky about if they have a good amp.

-Paul
 
miroslav said:
You could always create a split at the source, and record the delay/FX to a seperate track...that way, you have both options later on.
Click to expand...


NewAgeMuttLange said:
Could have moved the delay into the FX loop and used the spit there.. Delays and Time Based effects reeeally should come after the pre-amp anyways.

Then you could record the dry/pre-amp out and a wet/speaker sound..
Click to expand...
Either of these would work, but why would you?

Either the delay sound works for the guitar part and you record it, or the delay doesn't work so you figure out why, change it, and then record it.

Why rig it so you can change the delay later on? If anything it makes the production unfocused. Is that delay going to stay there or not? Do I record the next instrument taking that delay into account or can I start eating up that space with something else?
 
Chibi Nappa said:
Either of these would work, but why would you?

Either the delay sound works for the guitar part and you record it, or the delay doesn't work so you figure out why, change it, and then record it.

Why rig it so you can change the delay later on? If anything it makes the production unfocused. Is that delay going to stay there or not? Do I record the next instrument taking that delay into account or can I start eating up that space with something else?
Click to expand...

Couple of reasons. One, this would allow you to vary the mix of the repeats to dry signal after the fact - if the original was "too wet," it's a simple matter of lowering the repeat track in the mix after the fact. Two, this frees you to EQ the repeats differently from the main performance - say, hi-passing them to keep the low end clear. Three, in draconian instances, it frees you to not use the amp'd delay track at all, but replace it with a plugin in the mix - if on mixdown it becomes apparent that the tempo-timing wasn't quite right, or if while mixing you decide an 8th note pulse would sound better than a quarter, whatever... You're not tied to the original settings.
 
Chibi Nappa said:
Either of these would work, but why would you?
Click to expand...

Well, it would depend on the situation..

If this is a local band that has never recorded before I'd be leary of letting the guitarist record the take with the f/x on, I'd rather him just have the effects on his monitor feed and then add them to the track post.. that way you can dial in the proper dry/wet mix for the recorded song.. I mean we all know things never sound quite the same on tape as they do in the room.. at least not at the low-budget-square-rooms-in-the-basement level which is basically where alot of us are at..

BUT on the other hand if this was John Petrucci or (insert a favorite recording guitarist here) recording in the studio.. by all means let him record with the damned delay.

-Paul
--my 2cents
 
Chibi hit it.

I've yet to meet a guitarist (except for me..he he) that's not a tone bone freakziod.
He probably doesn't feel that he can get the proper performance without that delay in there. So, let him have it.
Chances are that nobody else will notice the difference.
remember that if you are offering a service, you need to give the customer what they want. Even if it sounds crappy to you.
You might even get a few extra bucks for a second (or third) guitar take:p
 
As a guitar player that uses delay, I would have to say it all depends on how you are using the delay. If your just playing lead licks and want a 100ms delay then I don't think it matters. If you have some real mojo on the pedalboard like a good analog delay or better yet a tape delay there ain't gonna be a plug in that will stand a chance to it. But for sterile repeats from your run-of-the-mill digital delay, I don't think it will matter. If the guy is playing longer delay times then he may need to hear those while tracking.
 
Final Conclusion:

Situation dependent.. i.e. is this a guitarist or a guy playing a guitar..

-Paul
 
Why can't you record his guitar dry, and send him back his dry guitar signal with
a similar delay (that he uses) to his cans? He gets the sound in his headphones,
you get a dry take that you can manipulate later.
 
yea... i say let him do it his way... it doesn't have to be a perfect and i think the chaos of the delay is better left uncontrolled. good things happen when you don't control everything. that's my take, anyways.

s
 
matttheaxe said:
You might even get a few extra bucks for a second (or third) guitar take:p
Click to expand...

Exactly. :D If you're being paid to record em, then record em, let em do it their way, good bad or ugly.. OTOH, if you're being paid to produce em, then it's on you use your expertise to guide them, so they don't have to do a bunch of takes later. It's understood that you can change procedure, record it your way, have input on song arrangement, etc.. Your role should be defined up front. So the question is, how deep are you supposed to be in this band's production?
 
Since the OP already came back and said he recorded the Guitar wet and it came out great I guess I'm a little late to the party but I'll chime in anyway

I've been thinking a lot about this kind of stuff lately and simplifying my process.
If I wanted a distorted/delayed/chorused whatever sound on my guitar why would I record it dry?
If I do that I have to go through all the hassel of reamping and re recording or setting up an amp sim after the fact etc. and if I'm not confident in my ability to get it right in tracking what makes me think I'll be more successful in the mixing stage?
If I have an amp/effects set up I like or an amp sim set up that I worked on for this song that I can just throw on the input bus and record wet why not?
Options are nice after the fact but if as the writer, performer and producer I don't know what I want the song to sound like at the tracking stage, then I'm really not to the point where I should be tracking yet.
I should already know what I want when I'm at the point of recording. Giving myself more options later on in the production process leads, in my case, to a much greater chance that I will end up with a lack of clarity/focus in the finished product because I have too many options that I'm continually tweaking.
I'm finding mixing is simpler too. I work harder on getting the source right because I know there is less opportunity to tweak, so the source is better to start with, and in the mixing phase all I have to worry about is getting things to play right together and not a whole bunch of well what if i did this questions that just end up sidetracking me.
Of course the down side is if something really does need a change it requires a retake, although even that is not, in the end, bad. I find I play (and sing) very different with different effects and If I just have a dry track and decide I didn't want distorion after all and change up the effects later, the guitar part doesn't sound quite right. I played it as if it was going to be using distorion/delay whatever and if I decide to use chorus and clean gain instead it sounds off. Same with vox, If I track vox through a compressor I give a slightly different performance than if I record dry and tweak later. Plus if I recorded the vox assuming they were going to be accomanied by distorted guitars and it ends up being over sparkly quiet, chorussed, clean sounds the vox may sond wierd/oversung or just wrong.

Man I wish I'd figured this out much earlier rather than at the point when I'm getting ready to start tracking my third group/colllection of songs. Unlimited options after tracking are not always a great thing, at least for my situation
 
Last edited:
Bristol Posse said:
Options are nice after the fact but if as the writer, performer and producer I don't know what I want the song to sound like at the tracking stage, then I'm really not to the point where I should be tracking yet.
I should already know what I want when I'm at the point of recording. Giving myself more options later on in the production process leads, in my case, to a much greater chance that I will end up with a lack of clarity/focus in the finished product
Click to expand...

That's it right there. Make choices early and stick with 'em. Much easier to lay future overdubs on to a bed you know will not change. Let's you set the overdub tone with confidence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top