digital doubling guitar tracks......

B

bryank

New member
how is this done properly? do i start out with a mono guitar track, and then copy it to another track and then just add some delay ( like 16 ms.) and pann them both hard left and right?

does the original guitar track need to be in mono, or is a stereo track ok?

and what is a good millisecond setting that works well with most PROS and such?
 
The best way to do it is to play it twice. But if you insist on doing it digitally, you have to move one of the guitar tracks 1 or more milliseconds back or forward. Otherwise you're not getting a stereo track at all, just a louder mono track.

But, recording it twice is best.
 
like rammi said, it's best to track it twice. you will get some natural differences in timing and sound that way, which sounds much better than just copying a track and delaying it. also, if you do two tracks, you can change the guitar tone on one of the tracks which will make the end result more interesting. i know, yadda, yadda.......i got the same response a long time ago when i asked this same question. after trying both ways, i'd never copy/delay a guitar track again.
 
metalhead28 said:
Resist the temptation to be a lazy ass. :D
Click to expand...

Seriously
Doubling by copying and shifting/processing will NOT get you the sound you want. Record it twice, you'll thank yourself once you hear the added thickness and dimension not possible with copying
 
I agree with all posts above. If you want it done right, do it twice...or many more. When I first started recording, I wanted to use the easy way out as well. Plain and simple, it didn't get the sound I was looking for.
 
Copying tracks like that and adding delay puts the tracks slightly out of pahse and you can't just switch the phase to correct it. As suggested, record it twice.
 
I go a little further. I record guitar rhythm tracks twice with two different guitars. One is strictly acoustic, recorded with a mic. The other is an acoustic guitar with a pickup that plugs directly to the audio interface. Makes quite a full sound. The differences in the two guitar's unique sounds keep the two tracks from fighting each other in the mix. Less tweaking during mixing. :)
 
RAMI said:
The best way to do it is to play it twice. But if you insist on doing it digitally, you have to move one of the guitar tracks 1 or more milliseconds back or forward. Otherwise you're not getting a stereo track at all, just a louder mono track.

But, recording it twice is best.
Click to expand...

I always add the panning effect. It's not so much delay as it is taking the 2 slightly offset tracks and sending one slightly left, the other slightly right. You are also afforded some flexibility in manipulating where in the sound field you want that guitar to sit. Think of it as a 3D control in a 2D sound field. Instead of just increasing left or right volumes, you can also affect the degree of panning - giving favor to the offset track or the original take.

Typically I track with multiple takes as well, and there really is no substitue - but using the pan/offset technique has given my home recordings a degree of depth they seriously lacked doing simple multitracking. This is strictly a post production technique to enhance your ability to mix the guiatrs in. It shouldn't be used solely to make a single rhythm guitar sound big by itself.
 
like everyone else, i prefer to record it twice. but if for some reason i decide not to, i will go into the audio editor and zoom in as far as i have to so that i can manually line the two tracks up to be in phase with each other.
 
Bryank,
2 guitars, 2 sounds, 2 effects, 2 octaves, 2 tones, 2 approaches, 2 EQ settings, 2 rhythms, 2 phrasings, 2 mics...
Whatever you do do it again but different.
Digital doubling, even with effects or delay added still sounds like digital doubling.
It's the interaction of you replaying - the spontaneous errors, improvements, variations & nuances that make doubling worthwhile.
It's just HARDER, that's all.
"Do it again..." Matthew Sweet.
Cheers
rayC
 
I've had good results using the line out on my acoustic into my effects box (GT6) AND sticking a mic in front of the guitar. The electric and acoustic tracks blend nicely if they aren't panned too radically. That being said, it still sounds better if you record twice, better if you record twice, etc. :D Dave
 
I've never understood why copy? Its not like recording it a second time takes that much work. I don't think I've ever used digital doubling in my life. I guess cos I love playing guitar I'll take any excuse to 'play it again' though. :)
 
yes, you are all right.....i should not be a lazy ass and just record it again!

however......i did some messing around and found that by NOT using a delay plug-in, and just 'nudgeing" the copyed track over by 17 milliseconds,and panning the tracks at 9:00 and 3:00 sounds pretty darn good! it didnt have much of a phaseing sound to it,.................................. but still wasnt as "fat" as if i were to just record another separate track.

you guys are great....thanks for setting me on the right path!
 
I have a live recording of my band from a few months back. Only one mic on one guitar. I don't want to overdub another guitar because its a live performance... what's a good way to fatten up the single track and add some stereo depth? Is this the type of situation where you resort to the stereo enhancement plug-ins? I've thought about trying to re-amp it as well... any ideas?
 
I'd still suggest playing another track over it, even if you are only playing over a stereo mix. (Almost every "live" album has studio overdubs, unfortunately).

Your next best bet, in my opinion would be re-amping.
 
I'll say what's been said - play it twice. I usually double it with a different amp with different tone. Usually one with the mids scooped out, and the other with more mids. Gives a nice contrast in texture/tone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top