Do pro's do 2 takes?

  • Thread starter Thread starter chamelious
  • Start date Start date
Greg_L said:
And you can follow that philosophy balls deep when you become a pro or do your own recordings at home. Until then, you're gonna have to work it out some other way.
Click to expand...

of course it's different when you're paying for studio time....;)
 
dintymoore said:
In a perfect world we'd do everything in 1 take...

I did a CD a few years ago when a friend was staying at my house. We recorded and mixed it in 30 days, completely done, which compared to other projects I've done was fast.

I noticed that the less time from beginning to end the better the songs went together and it felt like a cohesive project.

When the recording goes over several weeks and that turns into months and everything is pieced together it can end up having an uncomfortable feel to it.
Click to expand...

Tell That to the Eagles!:D
 
Terry Wetzel said:
Tell That to the Eagles!:D
Click to expand...

Yes that's true!

And yet another example how there's no rules in music except no rules.

My favorite John Lennon song is "Free as a Bird". He recorded it with a cheap cassette in the early 80's (guessing) and 15 years later they put the rest of the Beatles on it and released it.

So for every "rule" you make in music, you'll find cases where the opposite is true, and maybe that's why we don't tire of it - 'cause you can never put your finger on it.
 
dintymoore said:
Yes, I am a drummer and I do exactly that - when I play live (as opposed to dead) I get the best possibly sound I can possibly get! I use 50's Istanbul K. Zildjians, calf heads that I have to tweak, vintage drums (50's & 60's Gretsch, Ludwig and Slingerland) and every moment I try to get the best sound I can get. Really, I do, and that's part of why I don't understand the whole road recording went down where a person hones his craft on stage night after night for years and when he goes into the studio on go the headphones and duct tape.

In a way, it's always comes off as incredibly disrespectful - what, you'd record a bassoonist and say "no, use this reed, it sounds better, and can you hold that thing further out?". That would be rude.

When you play "live", you play in a room. When you record, you play in a room. I've never seen the difference.
Click to expand...

Dinty - I feel your pain. I'm a drummer (who has spent years leraning how to properly tune my drums)....I'm also spend a lot of time as an engineer and/or producer. As a drummer, I've been in studios where the engineer tried to put sooooooo much treatment on my drums that I could barely find a place to actually hit the head (often, without even hearing what the drums sounded like on tape (or digital media:D). Those same enginners could not grasp the fact that drums are meant to resonate and that the resonance will not be siginicantly noticed in the body of a recording.

On the other hand.....as an engineer, I've had drummers come in with such crapry sounding drums with pitted heads....that the only hope of trying to get a workable sound was to treat the hell out of the drums and hope to give the track some life with effects............but I always at least let the drummer try to go with his "sound" before trying to change it.

Regarding the orignal post......most of the large budget sessions involve multiple takes with the drums, and also include triggering samples, etc....whatever it takes to make the tracks shine. As mentioned by someone else....some tracks may include laying down one drum at a time - snare, then hi-hat, etc. (as a drummer, I've had to overdub just cymbals, or just a snare)......it don't feel like making music......but if the end product shines....I guess the ends justifies the means.

I'm 56 and old school.....I beleive you need to know how to play your ax.......but having been involved in recording for the last 3 decades, I've accepted the fact that studio magic allows many people the ability to make good sounding recordings......even if they can't really can't play well.

If someone wants to spend money to sound good....rather than spending the time to develop chops.......so be it........I just try not to get involed with those project if I can avoid it.
 
dintymoore said:
Sorry about that - I don't mean to offend.

I too love playing in the studio, but consider that live too, 'cause if you're not alive, how could you play at all?
Click to expand...

No worries, man. ;)

For me, it's because I enjoy both aspects of it - I can pick up my guitar and noodle away in my bedroom for the hell of it, and enjoy every second of it. You put me on a stage, and it's that much more fun. I just love playing.

However, I also enjoy the part that only comes with recording yourself in a studio - the focus on arrangements, on getting tones to work well with each other or fit together, on trying to find ways to make instruments blend well, on layering track after track to add dimension to a piece, etc. It's just fun, in ways that are totally unlike the way it's also a blast to get up on stage and wail away. :)
 
I can spend as much time as I want recording my tracks. I still try like hell to get em all down in one take. Not the first take, but one take. It just sounds better.
 
End Result Matters The Most. I Understand your poor. But I didnt spend 4 grand On Equipment To Not Get The Best Sound In The End.... If you get where Im Coming From.

Spend a little more money for a better end result. But of course like everyone else says..... Never go into the studio unrehearsed.... Or Not ready.. thats just stupid and a waste of your time... the engineer doesnt care... he gets paid by the hour and won't take you as seriously.

- :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top