Double Tracking, Anyone?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BroKen_H
  • Start date Start date
Well the whole idea is to "offset the time" as you put it well,thats what gives you the thick natural chorused effect. And remember,you can put one of the tracks as low as you need to ......experiment with the levels for sure ;)

Lennon didn't use chorused effects, he use flanging. It is quite interesting how they achieved this. It involved the use of three tape machines, recording the original vocal on two synchronized machines and then while mixing to the third machine the engineer careful placed his finger on the real of one of the original two machines and slowed it down about 20 microseconds causing an out of phase or comb effect. Doing this repeatedly between the two original tape machines made John Lennon's iconic sound.
 
That's partly true. It's not so much that he hated having to double everything, just that he liked the effect but looked for ways to make it easier, hence, Ken Townsend in EMI's maintennance dept came up with artificial double tracking or ADT for short, during the "Revolver" sessions in 1966. It's all well documented.

You'd think that logically, double tracking bass would result in muddiness.
But it doesn't.
I know on some Beatle songs like "Piggies", "While my guitar gently weeps" and "Glass onion", the 4 string bass was doubled with a 6 string bass. According to Ken Scott, it was never via overdubs ~ they were always played simultaneously.
Not only that, some record an ADT of sorts by miking the amp and going DI at the same time. Sometimes I record the miked amp, the amp line out and DI simultaneously and then combine all three signals to my taste. It's never muddy. Dependent of course on control settings on bass and amp and EQ.
It even works with drums. I've done it a few times over the years. Sometimes it's too obvious and adds nothing to the sound and is awful. Other times it sounds wicked.

I would lay odds that Ken Scott was talking about a baritone guitar. This was a very common practice on country tracks. It really makes the bass part pop on am speakers. And I'm sorry - there is no way in the world that tracking the bass twice has to result in a muddy or indistinct sound. A competent bass player should EASILY be able to double a part on a bari guitar. None of that part is directed at you grim.
 
Are you facepalming me or someone else - cause I don't think anything I said is facepalmy...

I believe he's facepalming your comment about Ken Scott possibly talking about a baritone guitar rather than doubling the bass. I too have read somewhere in an interview or something of the sorts that they really did double the bass part with a 4 string and 6 string, so I do not think it was a baritone guitar.
 
Lennon didn't use chorused effects, he use flanging. It is quite interesting how they achieved this. It involved the use of three tape machines, recording the original vocal on two synchronized machines and then while mixing to the third machine the engineer careful placed his finger on the real of one of the original two machines and slowed it down about 20 microseconds causing an out of phase or comb effect. Doing this repeatedly between the two original tape machines made John Lennon's iconic sound.

That wasnt the case all of the time and in fact maybe only a few times at all......he loved just plain ole double tracking his voice:laughings:
 
I believe he's facepalming your comment about Ken Scott possibly talking about a baritone guitar rather than doubling the bass. I too have read somewhere in an interview or something of the sorts that they really did double the bass part with a 4 string and 6 string, so I do not think it was a baritone guitar.

Hey - I said I would lay odds. I'm not unprepared to lose. Still don't think anything I've said is facepalmy. As far as the other stupid shit I said - doubling with a bari was common, it does make it pop on am radio speakers and a competent bass player should be able to double a part no problem. In the context of some other stuff said on this thread I just don't think that's all that facepalmishworthylike. To each his own.
 
I would lay odds that Ken Scott was talking about a baritone guitar. This was a very common practice on country tracks.
You know, I think when referring to "Tic tac" bass {he calls it tic toc !} in country music, he thought it was bass guitar and double bass but he may be mistaken as it would appear the baritone guitar is the bass doubler in question. But on the Beatle tracks, he's adamant about the 4 and 6 string bass. Whereas George would play standard 4 string if he played bass, John would use a 6 string bass. I think some of the early ones were tuned as a guitar {EADGBE} but an octave lower so they were generally easy for guitarists to play. When Noel Redding first played with Jimi Hendrix, I think he used one because he was a guitarist.

Are you facepalming me or someone else - cause I don't think anything I said is facepalmy...
I don't think anything you said was facepalmy, facepalmable or facepalmesque.

Lennon didn't use chorused effects, he use flanging. It is quite interesting how they achieved this. It involved the use of three tape machines, recording the original vocal on two synchronized machines and then while mixing to the third machine the engineer careful placed his finger on the real of one of the original two machines and slowed it down about 20 microseconds causing an out of phase or comb effect. Doing this repeatedly between the two original tape machines made John Lennon's iconic sound.

That wasnt the case all of the time and in fact maybe only a few times at all......he loved just plain ole double tracking his voice:laughings:
He was a regular double tracker up to "Revolver" in 1966. Then the ADT thing came in. It was still pretty basic by todays press button and instant karma standards but revolutionary at the time.
What I've long found interesting about artificial double tracking is that it doesn't appear to have caught on. It seems that even in the 60s, artists preferred to manually double track. Having said that, I used to have this cheap Zoom effects unit and it had so many settings for each effect. I noticed that one of the reverb settings could be set to produce a kind of ADT. It wasn't chorus but I never liked it. You couldn't alter the volume of either of the voices.

To each his own.
Is layering not a form of double tracking ? If I'm going to play electric mandolin, I quad or quintuple track it but each individual mandolin track sounds way different. Some distorted, some DI, some clean, some through a sitar emulator or whatever. But instead of panning them I crunch the lot together and EQ madly to make one big unique sound.
The Beatles (with Martin producing) are exceptions to most rules!
The more I read about the ways artists have recorded their albums over the years, the more I realize this is true. It was a long time before you had the vast amount of detail about what went on in the studio and the way specific songs and albums were recorded. And because the Beatles were seen to have changed so much about recording, it was their sessions that people tended to write and talk about. So I grew up with the twin principles of randomness and experimentation in my head, which still serves me well.
They were like big kids in a way, when it came to their recordings. They got bored once they'd done something and would move on to try some other technique which partially explains their progress and innovation through each album and early on, single.
 
Thanks, Grim. You brought back so really great memories from the 80s in the studio. I remember quite well working with a DI (I still own it) that went to the board and to my amp with a pair of mics on the cab to get a really great (slightly delayed) sound on some of our tracks. Two mics (one on the floor!, and the other at 45 to the 10). That really did sound great, crisp and wonderful even if it did chew up three tracks on the bass. Come to think of it, it was only done on two songs that had no background vocals...only had 16 track tape!

Maybe you guys should listen to Bad Case Of Loving You by Robert facePalmer!
 
I've been messing about with double tracking for a while trying to imitate to original method, finger on the tape reel then add a touch of slap-back delay, I started by just duplicating a vocal track and then slightly slowing down one track then adding a little delay, it works but its not what I was looking, now I record a vocal with two mics, a Beyer M300 and a condenser, two totally different mics, onto two tracks, slow one track down almost by nano seconds and then add delay, this is closer but still not quite there, I will keep experimenting and I will post again when or If the idea becomes viable.
 
I prefer to do it when I think it could sound ok. I don't care for layered vocals that are identical. Most of the time it's harmonies or octaves.


I sang the pre chorus and the chorus on this little guy. Really went for some layers on the chorus and kept it somewhat on it's own for the pre chorus stuff.

SoundClick artist: The Nerol Proj - Metal Hardcore Rock
 
I read some time ago Lennon Hated having to double everything, and that was why chorus was invented. Anyway, ti's pretty common practice. Double tracking a guitar part, each on each side, is a good device..

That's partly correct, but it was not the Chorus effect. Automatic Double tracking (ADT) was invented at Abbey Road while working with the Beatles, and it became the signature sound of John Lennon's vocals. (Instant Karma is an obvious example) It was simply a very short tape delay. It thickens the vocals and became very popular on about everything in the pop/rock world of the 70's and 80's. Everyone used ADT or did the vocal track twice.

Singing along with yourself is most effective and natural sounding without sounding like an obvious effect.

If anyone ever wonders why their vocals and other instruments sound so thin and lifeless compared to classic rock/pop, its partly because they are not doubling. And some groups like Boston and ABBA layered everything several times. But everyone did to some degree.
 
I have had lots of success "double tracking" vocals. It just works better than chorus for me. Does anyone do guitar/bass/drums the same way? I have not tried, but am interested in some feedback before trying it in studio.

I do sometimes with stereo micing a guitar amp. m+s and x+y
 
I do sometimes with stereo micing a guitar amp. m+s and x+y

That's not double tracking. That's dual micing.
It's also not really stereo, unless you're getting some kind of image from the room reflections.
 
tracking is recording on a take. overdubbing is tracking a part more than once.
dual or double tracking is tracking a part across multiple channels. this could be one or serveral amp cabs simultaneously.

or has this change since I was told that 20 years ago.
 
tracking is recording on a take. overdubbing is tracking a part more than once.
dual or double tracking is tracking a part across multiple channels. this could be one or serveral amp cabs simultaneously.

or has this change since I was told that 20 years ago.
20 years ago, someone may have sold you a pup......
 
tracking is recording on a take. overdubbing is tracking a part more than once.
dual or double tracking is tracking a part across multiple channels. this could be one or serveral amp cabs simultaneously.

or has this change since I was told that 20 years ago.

Traditionally, double tracking is recording the same part twice.
Not two mics or two cabs, but two separate performances of the same part.

Of course you can switch up your cabs, pickups, etc, but the crucial part is that you perform the part twice.
The subtle differences between the two performances are what makes this different from any dual mic/cab setup.
 
Back
Top