Live Recording and Overdubs

  • Thread starter Thread starter JG96
  • Start date Start date
JG96

JG96

Active member
Hey everyone, my band has an option to use a studio running an 003 rack and a nice iMac there are some nice mica there. The only problem is the live room is tiny. Woul it sound good to over dub live recordings and then delete the origianal track or would it be to sterile. Has anyone used this technique.
 
If your band is the type that is more used to playing together and would find it difficult to do this with separate track takes, there are some ways to get the best of both worlds.

Depending on how many instruments and what types here are some suggestions.

For a start, record all together but minus vocals. DI the Bass and guitars. The guitars can be fed through an amp simulator for monitoring. If you have keyboards, the same thing, just plug in. Everyone will be on headphones and only the drums will be mic'ed up. This way you record your basic song bed. Additional tracks can be added and performances can be substituted. On the off chance that the original guitar or bass take is a keeper, you have the option to re-amp the performance (connect the DI in reverse to an amp).

I have worked with a number of bands that just couldn't get the hang of working off a click track or are just not able to get a good performance without playing together. Sometimes this is just what is needed to get it started. If this is what your issue is, then just leave the amps out of the initial session and then build from there.

Don
Folkcafe
 
hmm that could be a good idea what if we did a simple 1 track recording in our practice space and then did overdubs one by one. we kind of want a warm miced amp sound as there are some nice amps there. 100 watt portaflex for me yum.
 
Sure, you can lay new tracks over a live track all you want. Give it a try and see how you like it. If it comes out good, it's a keeper.

If the tracking room is tiny and/or has poor acoustics, try adding short reverb to some of the tracks to give them more of a big room sound. Be careful though, it's easy to over-do it.

Lately I have been experimenting more with reverb. I route all of the drum mic tracks into one stereo subgroup. Then I apply verb to the whole kit on that track. I solo the subgroup and then go through all of the presets on all of my reverb plug-ins to find the sweetest sounding one. Then I tweak it to my own taste to get it sounding real. It really gives the kit more life.

I sometimes put a "slight" amount of verb on the final mix as well (on the master L & R tracks.) Some of the verbs sound somewhat ugly. You really need to find and tweak just the right one for each song. And some songs may not work with it at all. You'll know when it is right and when it is not. Let the songs tell you.
 
I only have one problem with a one track take. Recording is really all about capturing that one special performance. A magic moment in time if you will. What if that one performance is in your scratch track. A guitar solo you just can't recreate after the fact for instance. I like to have all the pieces separate. I can always throw out what I don't want that way.

I can do everything possible to ensure a quality recording except I don't control the performance. Great ones are rare and seldom happen on que.

Don
 
yeah that would be a good idea, the drums are going to sound especially weak as we usually play in auditoriums and we practice in a very large house.
 
btw here are the recordings done live
 
Last edited:
My friend has a particularly small room. So most of the work he does is with programmed drums. (he is excellent at it) The problem is that he has trouble with signing bands on to work with him because of the drum issue.

One thing he sometimes does when he is working with live drums that don't sound great but the performance is there is he will replace all the drum tracks with samples. He has a great library of samples.

I auditioned a couple of tracks this week and had to ask because it sounded so real. It was only because I knew this is how he does most work I suspected he programmed the drums. The drums sounded great.
 
Folkcafe said:
My friend has a particularly small room. So most of the work he does is with programmed drums. (he is excellent at it) The problem is that he has trouble with signing bands on to work with him because of the drum issue.

One thing he sometimes does when he is working with live drums that don't sound great but the performance is there is he will replace all the drum tracks with samples. He has a great library of samples.

I auditioned a couple of tracks this week and had to ask because it sounded so real. It was only because I knew this is how he does most work I suspected he programmed the drums. The drums sounded great.
Click to expand...

that sounds like a pretty good idea but since this is not our studio we are kind of on borrowed time plus my drummer has so many small but essential tricks and stuff that are very important to the music. The sampling might be good if i'm writing music by myself at home. I live in an apartment.
 
Last edited:
Here is a rough mix done micing the drums while DI'ing the bass and guitars. Pardon the mess of a website it is very much under construction.

I tracked the guitars both with a DI and a Rockman. The guitar player saw the Rockman in my studio and started playing with it. I was initially going to re-amp the guitar but he ended up liking the Rockman tracks. I was able to build upon this and could have easily replaced guitar tracks at will and still keep the drums and bass on the original take. Overall I got drums tracks I could work with and no bleed from the guitar and bass. Any way this project was never completed. Ended up as a rough demo but they decided it was too retro.

I could have feed the clean DI'ed tracks back into whatever guitar amp I wanted after. A good reason for adding a DI'ed track even when recording guitar tracks that are plugged in.

Don
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top