Double tracking vs Stereo guitar

  • Thread starter Thread starter ex351d
  • Start date Start date
E

ex351d

Member
Is recording stereo electric guitar by recording the same performance with 2 different amps (a Marshall and a Fender) going to give me a better sound in a mix than 2 performances with the same amp (double tracking)?

Similarly, what is your experience with recording a spaced pair of on acoustic guitars against 1 mic and double track the acoustic guitar for a full stereo Image.
 
For starters...the only true *stereo* recording in all you scenarios is when using the spaced pair of mics.

None of the other combinations = true stereo, as stereo recording is about using more than one mic, in one of the known stereo configurations...and not about two amps or double tracking.

That aside....which will give you the better sound in a mix...?
That depends on the mix and what sound you're going for.

The absolute best advice I can give you is to try out a variety of combinations, and then pick the one the sounds best for your needs. :)
 
Like Miro suggests, there is no "right" answer. It's all in what works for YOUR sound and style. For myself 'stereo' acoustic guitar recording (I use one mic at 12th fret, another on the lower bout, rather than x-y) is good when the song is mostly acoustic guitar. the minute I put drums, bass, electric guitar (lead), and/or keys on the song, the advantage of the 2-mic sound disappears. I've found that as long as I get a good sound from a single mic on the acoustic guitar, it makes it much easier to blend into the mix. As to double tracking the acoustic - a lot of times it doesn't work that well for me because I can get what perceives to be a phase issue because of slightly different strumming on each track. Switching guitars doesn't seem to make that much of a difference to combat this problem, but maybe because off my 6-strings are dreadnoughts.
 
ex351d said:
Is recording stereo electric guitar by recording the same performance with 2 different amps (a Marshall and a Fender) going to give me a better sound in a mix than 2 performances with the same amp (double tracking)?
Click to expand...

Try it for yourself and see.
 
^^ What Greg said. It's not that hard an exercise to do . . . and then you can decide for yourself instead of relying on someone else's opinion.
 
Send me the Marshall and the Fender and I'll try it out for ya! :)
 
Two mics on one performance is not the same thing as two performances on one mic. They both have their uses, and sometimes both are used together.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
Two mics on one performance is not the same thing as two performances on one mic. They both have their uses, and sometimes both are used together.
Click to expand...

Two mics on one performance: I used this last night for a quick guitar solo. Being the same performance, it simply makes it louder, whereby I didn't need to automate the volume for the solo. Bonus.

two performances on one mic: I used this, as well, on the same song. For the hard panned rhythm guitars.

just an example for the OP.
 
When I started buying guitar gear I bought what I thought was good. Ended up buying most of the stuff again as it was a hit and miss as I was not experienced. Already not liking my most expensive mic, I am being cautious and asking for assistance trying to avoid mistakes. I tried it but I would like to get an opinion of someone more experienced than I am.

I recorded a stereo acoustic part and ended up using mono. Did not like the bridge sound. I double tracked the electric guitar and sounded great.

By 2 amps of 1 performance I mean a stereo split using a pedal and going stereo into 2 amps and using SM57 on each cab.
 
It depends what you are going for. A single performance through two amps won't really give you a big stereo effect, while two performances will. Usually when I run the same performance through two amps, I stack them (pan them to the same spot) as a way of blending the best of both amps. If I want to go for a wide stereo effect, I double track.

As was said before, with acoustic guitars, it really depends in its role in the mix. If it is a guitar and vocal sort of thing, I would definitely record it in stereo (with two mics, one performance). If it is just another instrument in a dense mix, mono will probably work better. I do double track acoustic guitars sometimes, when I need that type of thing. When I do, there is only one mic for each performance. I've tried double tracking a stereo miked setup, if you pan them both wide, it's a mess. If you pan both mics of each performance together, you get all sorts of phase problems.
 
ex351d said:
When I started buying guitar gear I bought what I thought was good. Ended up buying most of the stuff again as it was a hit and miss as I was not experienced. Already not liking my most expensive mic, I am being cautious and asking for assistance trying to avoid mistakes. I tried it but I would like to get an opinion of someone more experienced than I am.
Click to expand...
When you buy stuff you can make expensive mistakes, as you have discovered. Lots of people do that. And there's nothing wrong, as a result, in being cautious and asking for advice.

But that applies to high-risk ventures, i.e. spending heaps of money on a new mike because you're already not liking your most expensive one.

Trying out recording techniques costs nothing. There is no risk in being adventurous.
ex351d said:
I recorded a stereo acoustic part and ended up using mono. Did not like the bridge sound. I double tracked the electric guitar and sounded great.
Click to expand...

You've answered your own question. That's splendid.
 
I'm confused - double tracking from a single sound source, isn't really the right term. Proper double tracking involves two separate but very similar tracks recorded separately. Using two mics, or two pickups split out gives you two different tones, but identical content. Proper double tracking thickens the sound up and sounds very good usually. To make it work with one source, you have to introduce delays and other changes to the time alignment. Two mics in different places, or blending a mic with a pickup give you lots of tonal scope, but it's not really double tracking?
 
But the point is (and I've done it), if you record through two completely different sounding amplifiers (say a Fender and a Marshall) with the same performance and record them both, there are uses. It certainly can be full. The different dynamics of the different amps/cabs will yield a bit of difference between the two. Then there's a trick to it to keep it from sounding "just louder". Pan each to opposite sides and then nudge one track a few ms ahead (say 4 or 5). This tricks the ear into hearing them as separate and extremely tight "double tracked" guitar parts. It also gets them out of the way of the center (where the vocal will go) I do the same with stereo piano, strings or what not.
Technically, if you are pointing two separate 57s at two separate amps, it is two mono signals and not "stereo", but that's just semantics.
 
BroKen_H said:
But the point is (and I've done it), if you record through two completely different sounding amplifiers (say a Fender and a Marshall) with the same performance and record them both, there are uses. It certainly can be full. The different dynamics of the different amps/cabs will yield a bit of difference between the two. Then there's a trick to it to keep it from sounding "just louder". Pan each to opposite sides and then nudge one track a few ms ahead (say 4 or 5). This tricks the ear into hearing them as separate and extremely tight "double tracked" guitar parts. It also gets them out of the way of the center (where the vocal will go) I do the same with stereo piano, strings or what not.
Technically, if you are pointing two separate 57s at two separate amps, it is two mono signals and not "stereo", but that's just semantics.
Click to expand...

yeah, nudging them makes a diff. But I think the biggest payoff comes from the diffs in strumming and intensity. Another thing to do, while making a true double, is playing the second part in a different spot. So low E chord on guitar one, and the 7-9 E chord on A (can throw in the open low E too) on the other guitar.
 
I've never been a fan of copy-pan-delay.

I'm more likely to use two mics, close and far, on one cab and slide the far one in the DAW to match the close one. Then the direct sound is in phase but there are subtle differences between the two tracks. For a more obvious stereo mix effect I'll double track.
 
Not talking about copying. Talking about the process the OP asked about. Recording one performance through two completely different amps...I guess that's kind of semantics again.
But the point I've been trying to make--the two completely different amps, with different tube sets working on each strum and pick, running into completely different speakers that have different reproductive qualities WILL SOUND very much like two different performances.
I am not saying this is a substitute for actual double tracking, just that it is a viable technique for getting a fatter sound. It is not a recommendation, only an answer to the original question. I am not a good guitarist. If I get a good take, I'll use it for as much mileage as I can. I have done somewhat what he's asking via re-amping through Amplitube to take the same take through a Fender and an Orange sim. The result was actually quite astonishing. It can be done. It can sound full, fat and tight. That doesn't detract from the sound of a good guitarist double tracking tight tracks. Yes, that's better. I do my best to do exactly that as well. As my guitar playing gets better, my trickery to make it sound better gets less. :)
So yes, recording the same performance through both amps at the same time can be done and it will not sound poor. But better would be to play a performance through your Fender, and then a separate performance through your Marshall if you have the skill to do so tightly.

But also, as I said, copy-pan-delay works exceptionally well on things like piano that do not benefit from multiple performances but need to be stereo separated to make room for what's important to be in the middle.
 
BroKen_H said:
But the point I've been trying to make--the two completely different amps, with different tube sets working on each strum and pick, running into completely different speakers that have different reproductive qualities WILL SOUND very much like two different performances.
Click to expand...
No. It won't have any of the phase/timing differences. Other than the different type of distortion, it would be the same as copy pasting a single track and just EQing the two differently.

It will create a separation, but it will still be a narrow one.
 
BroKen_H said:
But the point I've been trying to make--the two completely different amps, with different tube sets working on each strum and pick, running into completely different speakers that have different reproductive qualities WILL SOUND very much like two different performances.
Click to expand...

Double tracking/copying+pasting/one performance-two amps are all different things with different results.

I see it as acoustic/electric/banjo. They're not the same thing.

What you're describing - one performance through two setups - may well have its uses but it's not really comparable to double tracking because the core point of double tracking is the subtle nuances and differences in performance.
I'm not saying it's no good and I'm not saying don't do it, but it's not true double tracking and won't achieve the same results.

Now, a lot of people double track with variable equipment for an extra dimension or edge and that makes total sense but it still doesn't make the fundamental point comparable to one performance through two amps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top