Is it common copy pasting parts recorded songs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheComposer
  • Start date Start date
T

TheComposer

New member
Hey guys, i'm recording a few songs, and i can see, mainly on the chorus parts, that my voice slightly varies from part to part (only chorus), so i'd like to ask you how common is to copy one "perfect" chorus and paste it to the next one and so on?

Do the major artists use this technique when singing? And with other instruments?

Thank you.
 
I don't see anything wrong with vocals or anything varying from chorus to chorus, etc...In fact, I make it a point to do it. It makes the song sound like it was a performance, and that the "feel" got more intense as the song progressed. Having said that, I often copy and paste back vocals from chorus to chorus. But I never do it out of laziness, but more for the fact that they're back vocals, and it allows the lead vocals to work around it and vary.

I think the answer to this also depends on the genre of music we're talking about. Pop, techno, and a few other genres can probably get away with more copying and pasting. Whereas rock would probably call for less copying and more variation.
 
Like Rami said, you can get away with copying in techo or pop, but variation in rock sounds good. A friend of mine wanted to do a hip hop song with acoustic drums, he insisted I play one bar and copy paste it for the whole song. I'd never do that on my own, but he wanted a beat that was exactly the same throughout. If you want to copy paste vocals because you can't sing it like you did before, keep trying. The worst that could happen is you'll get a little more vocal practice.
 
I find it quite interesting this subject, I have read online people saying it's the subtle differences in singing from chorus to chorus, or the slight difference in timing of the drums throughout the song that helps keep people listening and if you just copy paste stuff people will 'tune out'. However dance music drums are usually quantised ( I find any slight variance in timing in this genre actually sounds like a mistake) and vocals are often based around a sample that's repeated again and again exactly, yet I dont think people bore of these songs any quicker.

Maybe Rami's right though, it's about context and what's right for that genre.
 
benage said:
dance music drums are usually quantised.......and vocals are often based around a sample that's repeated again and again exactly, yet I dont think people bore of these songs any quicker.........

it's about context and what's right for that genre.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I said.

"dance music" isn't about the SONG. It's about the beat. Nobody's listening, just moving to a beat.
 
TheComposer said:
Hey guys, i'm recording a few songs, and i can see, mainly on the chorus parts, that my voice slightly varies from part to part (only chorus), so i'd like to ask you how common is to copy one "perfect" chorus and paste it to the next one and so on?

Do the major artists use this technique when singing? And with other instruments?
Click to expand...

Yes...it's done often enough, even by pros, though doing straight copying from one section to another is usually the "last resort".

A better approach is to do 3-5 takes of the vocal...and now, you can actually try/combine (or comp, as it's called) different sections of different takes for one final. That way, if you mess up a verse or chorus on one take...rather than taking one good section and repeating it...you just go to your other takes, and find the better version.
By doing that, you maintain some difference/variety and you also have several choices to pick from to get that "best take" comp.

I like to just do a few takes back-to-back, that way the flow and sound stays pretty consistent from take to take. If you try the "punch-in" approach, it can often feel out of place, and sound, well...punched-in. :D
 
I would do it if I had no other alternative, in one spot, but I wouldn't do it as a general practice, especially if you have numerous choruses... variation is good.
 
miroslav said:
A better approach is to do 3-5 takes of the vocal...and now, you can actually try/combine (or comp, as it's called) different sections of different takes for one final. That way, if you mess up a verse or chorus on one take...rather than taking one good section and repeating it...you just go to your other takes, and find the better version.
By doing that, you maintain some difference/variety and you also have several choices to pick from to get that "best take" comp.
Click to expand...

This ^

Do a few takes and comp together the best one for each chorus.

I'm a lot more inclined to copy/paste background vocals since consistency is more important than dynamics for them.
 
I comp the vocals, guitars, solos etc when needed. But I'll only copy a part from chorus 1 to chorus 2 if I could not get it right on any of the 6 takes I usually use. It sounds weird and boring to just repeat in rock/blues/folk stuff. But if there is a line I can't get right sometimes I'll copy and paste, but rarely.
 
This reminds me of an article in Vintage Guitar a few years back. They interviewed several well known studio guitarists who had been at it for many years comparing analog recording and digital recording. In the "old days" of analog tape, all songs were recorded in the studio with all musicans present. They'd play the song all the way through with most/all of the musicians playing together. In the digital world, it is not uncommon for a guitarist to record the rhythm part at home or from the road to a basic track e-mailed to them. They would record only one pass each of the verse and chorus and e-mail it back to the producer or engineer. The engineer would then copy/paste those for each verse and chorus. So, I believe that the copy/paste technique is used extensively by professionals.

Personally, I don't do this for instrument parts. For vocals, I use the technique described above... 3 or more takes of a vocal part. I then use the best parts of the 3 takes and mute the other unused parts. If I can't get a good chorus vocal at all parts, I'll copy and paste the best one in place of other sections. Kind of a last resort.
 
Just one old guy's opinion ... make it right when you track it. Fixing a performance in the mix is what one does when one can't really perform it. In which case, why record it?
 
RustyAxe said:
Just one old guy's opinion ... make it right when you track it. Fixing a performance in the mix is what one does when one can't really perform it. In which case, why record it?
Click to expand...

Do you really think that's how things are done in most studios? :)

I mean...yeah, playing well is important, but most recording/mixing is eventually about *fixing* to get an optimal product. If you turn the EQ knob on a channel when mixing...you are changing the original performance.

Very few people record "as-it-falls" without touching anything afterwards....don't kid yourself.
 
And a lot of us are one man bands and aren't great at every instrument we play. I'm a guitarist who has a bass, and can sing some. So comping is ours best friend.
 
There is some talk here of dance music 'tolerating' more copy and pasting than rock as though it still would be better to sing each part separately, but I don't think that's the case. I think dance songs actually work better if you do copy paste vocal phrases.

I always felt the idea behind dance music is that a computer or machine is producing the music, so quantised beats synth sounds and synthetic sounding vocals work well, and if a machine were to sing, it would sing the same phrase exactly the same each time, so copy/ pasting works well even If you have the opportunity to sing your 'sample' multiple times.

You could argue that's just what were used to hearing over the years as real samples often only have one version to use.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top