When in a semi-professional recording situation, does the musician keep trying take after take after take until he gets a perfect one? Or is a decent take recorded and then fixed of all mistakes in post-production? I'm just curious as to how songs end up so musically flawless on CDs.
How are perfect songs recorded?
- Thread starter BBlack
- Start date
jlewis
attic boy
I'm sure there is some level of fixing mistakes, but for the most part I think it is quality playing. There is not a lot you can do to fix mistakes without the possibility of making it sound unnatural that kind of thing can also be pretty time consuming so the engineer is going to want something pretty damn good to start with. But when you're dealing with good musicians it's not that hard for them to get a good take anyway.
bouldersoundguy
Well-known member
Most professional musicians are professional for a reason. They are very good at what they do to begin with, and they hone their craft relentlessly. Usually they don't just walk into a studio and start trying to get takes. There's a lot of pre-production involved, like working out arrangements and spending weeks in a rehearsal studio so they know the parts perfectly.
But not all "professionals" live up to the name. In some cases there's a bunch of repair work done on tracks. It all depends.
But not all "professionals" live up to the name. In some cases there's a bunch of repair work done on tracks. It all depends.
I have done several recordings of bands where we did several takes of all the rhythm section instruments and lead voice simultaneously. We then used the best take for overdubbing additional parts and 'cutting and pasting' parts in the DAW to get optimal results. Sometimes it is helpful to revisit the project at a later time, scrap the parts that aren't working, and add new ones. Most of the musicians I record are weekend warriors, not pro, so 'one-take-wonders' occur very rarely.
Armistice
Son of Yoda
Because I care more about composition than execution, I use cut and paste a bit to assemble a track, when I think I can get away with it...
Mind you, it will sound better if you don't, but it's fairly common around here I'd say.
That said, I'm often doing reasonably complex acoustic guitar instrumental stuff and it can be quite difficult to get a 4 minute take in one hit. Rhythm and bass tracks I can normally nail OK...
Keyboards... I should just hire someone really, I have no idea...
Mind you, it will sound better if you don't, but it's fairly common around here I'd say.
That said, I'm often doing reasonably complex acoustic guitar instrumental stuff and it can be quite difficult to get a 4 minute take in one hit. Rhythm and bass tracks I can normally nail OK...
Keyboards... I should just hire someone really, I have no idea...
I have been able to generate some decent keyboard bits with Band-in-a-Box and also with the Roland guitar synth. (Of course, not better than a real accomplished player).
witzendoz
Senior Member
With Drums we usually go for a complete take, I don't like having to fix drums as it's hard to make it sound natural. Sometimes i just have to edit takes together if it's never going to happen (weekend drummers no offence).
With most other instruments we go for a complete take, but may do a bit of editing or a drop in or 2 if it was a great take with 1 or 2 fluffed notes or a fret buzz.
Vocals we try to get a good take but I also would usually record at least 3 full takes then edit between the 3 to fix a dud word or a slightly out of tune vocal. If we have the same dud bit on all 3 takes I will drop that part in until it is right. But usually I try to get a vocal take that is at least 99% right.
Then we get that band that are just awesome, record the drums, guitar, bass, keys live and a perfect take with a great vibe, quote, "Takes What I'm Talking About"
Cheers
Alan.
With most other instruments we go for a complete take, but may do a bit of editing or a drop in or 2 if it was a great take with 1 or 2 fluffed notes or a fret buzz.
Vocals we try to get a good take but I also would usually record at least 3 full takes then edit between the 3 to fix a dud word or a slightly out of tune vocal. If we have the same dud bit on all 3 takes I will drop that part in until it is right. But usually I try to get a vocal take that is at least 99% right.
Then we get that band that are just awesome, record the drums, guitar, bass, keys live and a perfect take with a great vibe, quote, "Takes What I'm Talking About"
Cheers
Alan.
grimtraveller
If only for a moment.....
I suspect that the advent of the technology that spawned the DAW has meant that there is much fixing and foxing afoot in studios and less 'one time thing' performance capturing. But it's not new. Whereas the Beatles would knock out 102 takes if necesary {they would then overdub rather our more modern 'editing'}, Art Garfunkel's vocal on "Bridge over troubled waters" was cobbled together from many takes. And all this is 40+ years ago.
Suffice it to say, CDs are rarely made in 20 minutes !
Suffice it to say, CDs are rarely made in 20 minutes !
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
You do a few takes and then comp the final as needed.
Just playing something over and over and over and over until you nail a single perfect take...is a TOTAL waste of time and is more about luck than pure perfection.
If you COULD play it perfect, you would have done it on the first take.
Takes+comping is done at the highest pro levels.
Don't think pros always nail it in one take!
But remember...the more takes you keep, the more editing time will be needed to comp them.
I usually go for 3 takes...drums, vocals, leads, whatever...but I've done 5 on occasion when I felt I could actually improve *substantially* on the first 3...and then come editing/comping time, I audition all 5, put aside the 2 worst ones (just in case I may need some part from them) and then comp from best 3.
Most people run out of steam by the 5th take...and then you're just torturing the thing, trying to force it out.
Sometimes...if you really want to beat on it for 20-30 takes...you can hit a short high peak (a.k.a. moment of brilliance) again (like getting a brief second wind in sports) after going through a bunch of ugly takes...but then you go down fast after that (you have to also suffer through the ugly takes until/if you can even find a brief peak).
Just playing something over and over and over and over until you nail a single perfect take...is a TOTAL waste of time and is more about luck than pure perfection.
If you COULD play it perfect, you would have done it on the first take.
Takes+comping is done at the highest pro levels.
Don't think pros always nail it in one take!
But remember...the more takes you keep, the more editing time will be needed to comp them.
I usually go for 3 takes...drums, vocals, leads, whatever...but I've done 5 on occasion when I felt I could actually improve *substantially* on the first 3...and then come editing/comping time, I audition all 5, put aside the 2 worst ones (just in case I may need some part from them) and then comp from best 3.
Most people run out of steam by the 5th take...and then you're just torturing the thing, trying to force it out.
Sometimes...if you really want to beat on it for 20-30 takes...you can hit a short high peak (a.k.a. moment of brilliance) again (like getting a brief second wind in sports) after going through a bunch of ugly takes...but then you go down fast after that (you have to also suffer through the ugly takes until/if you can even find a brief peak).