Punching In Frustration

[Brother_N_t_]

Well, I just tried recording the beginning of Nothing Else Matters to my Tascam 424mkIII. Now, naturally, I messed up a few times so I went to "punch in" to play the parts perfectly and no matter how hard I tried it still sounded "broken up" when I'd listen back to it.

Are there any tips for this or do I just have to play the WHOLE THING as flawless as possible and accept the fact that my playing might suck? I have the "punch in" pedal, but that doesn't seem to work really well, it leaves a gap in there as well. Just looking for tips. Is this why digital is preferred? Thanks.

 

[The Ghost of FM]

Even higher end equipment with gap-less, seamless punch ins still requires an art factor when punching in a replacement part to get it to fit smoothly with the existing parts on the track.

Usually the best way to do it seamlessly is to try to repeat an entire chorus or verse part where there is a break or change of sound so that it is not as noticeable as trying to just fix a few notes or singular note!

Matching levels, effects and eq is also critical to making a convincing punch in.

Practice the art a little more and the technology will look after itself.

Cheers!

 

[Brother_N_t_]

Thanks for the reply. Yeah, it just seems you have to really know your part pretty well and what not. I noticed the punch out has sort of a longer gap than the punch in. Like it takes about a second for the punch out to get back to the original, I wish that could be fixed, but other than that, I think you're right - it's gotta be the whole segment that's redone. Is that what they do with professionally do albums?

 

[Farview]

You must make sure you are playing before you hit the punch button and keep playing for a few seconds after you punch back out. Sometimes when people punch themselves they try to hit the button and start playing at the same time (doesn't make a convincing punch) and will leave the gap themselves thinking it was the machine

 

[DigitalSmigital]

It is crucial to punch in and out during a break in the track where there is no VU action going on, and if you can catch the mistake before you change the eq and mic placement etc, you'll find a better match in the final product.

It may be true what you say about digital being easier to fix in the mix, but good habits are formed using tape and common sense, in that order...

 

[The Ghost of FM]

I think you're right - it's gotta be the whole segment that's redone. Is that what they do with professionally do albums?

On professional albums, there is usually two differences.

1 - There is usually a dedicated recording engineer who is solely looking after the running of the recording equipment and this allows the performer to concentrate 100% on their part which can facilitate smoother, less noticeable punch ins and outs.

2 - Because professional studios are probably using better equipment then a home recordist, such as yourself, are using, the gap times are shorter and less noticeable on the final result so, in many cases, a singular note or shorter musical phrase can be punched in with better success.

Of course, there's no substitution for a well rehearsed part, thus not needing to punch in at all.

Cheers!

 

[shockingcandy]

I used to have a simaler problem with punching on my old 414. Seems to be a mechanical switching delay. No such problems on my 788 though. Absolutely seemless even when the VU is lit at the IN point. The only additional advice I'd give is to make sure you play along with the pre / post roll and also set the IN / OUT points right on the beat as then the drums will mask any "clicking".

 

[expansion]

the other difference between what you're trying and what a pro studio might do is that multiple takes or the guitar part can be recorded to separate tracks and then the best sections of each take can be complied to make the final track.

These days this kind of editing of separate takes is often done digitally but in the old days (or in modern analogue studios) there is lots of tape cutting involved to create one final 'performance' from various takes.

However to a degree you can do this yourself with the 424. (If your other 3 tracks are still blank) record two more attempts of the intro and then (through skillful use of a stop watch, tracksheet, mutes and faders) bounce all 3 parts 'live' to your 4th track and edit in/out the sections you like.

 

[Brother_N_t_]

the other difference between what you're trying and what a pro studio might do is that multiple takes or the guitar part can be recorded to separate tracks and then the best sections of each take can be complied to make the final track.

These days this kind of editing of separate takes is often done digitally but in the old days (or in modern analogue studios) there is lots of tape cutting involved to create one final 'performance' from various takes.

However to a degree you can do this yourself with the 424. (If your other 3 tracks are still blank) record two more attempts of the intro and then (through skillful use of a stop watch, tracksheet, mutes and faders) bounce all 3 parts 'live' to your 4th track and edit in/out the sections you like.

This sounds interesting, can you explain it in a little more detail? I think I know what you mean - I bounce all three tracks to the fourth track, but while listening to the bounce I mute/fade/cutout sections of each track so the final track on 4 is the "perfect performance?" Do I have that right? THanks.

 

[The Ghost of FM]

This sounds interesting, can you explain it in a little more detail? I think I know what you mean - I bounce all three tracks to the fourth track, but while listening to the bounce I mute/fade/cutout sections of each track so the final track on 4 is the "perfect performance?" Do I have that right? THanks.

Yes, you do.

Cheers!