Re-Amping guitar. Will this work?

[metalj]

Question on "Reamping" my recorded guitar tracks. Will this work.

So first I record into protools using whatever plug-in to get the sound I want direct.

Now I want to have some fun and re-amp with an actual guitar amp. Lets say IM going with a Mesa Boogie Mark V.

If I copy my original track to track 2, take the Plug-in off of it, am I left with a real uneffected guitar signal I can send back to the MESA as if I was actually plugged into the amp itself like normal.... guitar - chord - amp ?

So while track 2 from above is playing out to the MESA, I am then recording the MESA by micing the cab it is hooked to? If I dont like the tone, I can just go back reposition the mic, or tweek the MESA'S pre-amp.

Will this work and Is there anything I am missing?

Seems too easy, but will save tons of tiime and studio costs if it will.

Thanks.

 

[miroslav]

Will this work and Is there anything I am missing?

You need a reamp box to convert from line level to guitar level for the amp (ReAmp, Radial)

Seems too easy, but will save tons of tiime and studio costs if it will.

You will probably spend a lot more time looking for tones that way, than if you had just found the tone to begin with and recorded it with a mic in front of your amp the first time you played it.

 

[Sonixx]

Yeah, pretty much other than the plugin thing.

Question on "Reamping" my recorded guitar tracks. Will this work.

So first I record into protools using whatever plug-in to get the sound I want direct.

Now I want to have some fun and re-amp with an actual guitar amp. Lets say IM going with a Mesa Boogie Mark V.

If I copy my original track to track 2, take the Plug-in off of it, am I left with a real uneffected guitar signal I can send back to the MESA as if I was actually plugged into the amp itself like normal.... guitar - chord - amp ?

So while track 2 from above is playing out to the MESA, I am then recording the MESA by micing the cab it is hooked to? If I dont like the tone, I can just go back reposition the mic, or tweek the MESA'S pre-amp.

Will this work and Is there anything I am missing?

Seems too easy, but will save tons of tiime and studio costs if it will.

Thanks.

 

[stevieb]

Ya' know, I would use reamping to get a more objective idea of what amp I liked- you can concentrate on the tone and sound; and not have to focus on your playing, and you get the exact same playing, warts and all, each time, so your listening isn't influenced by different flubs; and you don't get pissed when you keep making the same darn mistake, no matter how many times you play it, but when laying down the final track, I think you feed off your own energy, which is driven by the tone you hear yourself producing. So, use reamping to get the tone and setup "right," but lay down the track "live."

JMHO.

 

[CaptGoldenEars]

Ya' know, I would use reamping to get a more objective idea of what amp I liked- you can concentrate on the tone and sound; and not have to focus on your playing, and you get the exact same playing, warts and all, each time, so your listening isn't influenced by different flubs; and you don't get pissed when you keep making the same darn mistake, no matter how many times you play it, but when laying down the final track, I think you feed off your own energy, which is driven by the tone you hear yourself producing. So, use reamping to get the tone and setup "right," but lay down the track "live."

JMHO.

My thoughts exactly. This is a great way to find different amps that work for you in studio settings. Having the songs and riffs matching the proper amps. Honestly i've only done this once, on the fly. They make simple and more sophisticated units. Maybe i need to pick one up. This technique is easy to do analog.

 

[miroslav]

Re-amping is often used by producers and record companies who won't let the artist pick his tone...and they want to save ALL the decisions for the final mix, so's they can sit there and dial through "tones" like they're at a Chinese all-you-can buffet.
If you are the artist and you are recording your own music...wouldn't you have some idea of what you are trying to record at the outset?

Yeah...it might be fun to re-amp and dial through a bunch of amps if you never ever played those amps before and you want a quick check as to what each sounds like...but if you have a bunch of amps available, wouldn't you already know how they sound...???
Even if you never played them before, wouldn't you rather play them and audition tones that way instead of using your mouse to audition tones?
I just don't see re-amping as a short cut to anything...it's more about indecisions and hedging your bets, but if you really need that security, of waiting to make a decision later on, during the mix...you can always pick one tone during tracking, but do a split signal and record one dry track for possible re-amping.

I kinda' like play the to the amp, and to record with a tone in mind...based on the song in mind...based on the production in mind...as it falls, committing to it.
I dunno', maybe I'm out my mind.

 

[Wireneck]

I would also like to point out that having a copy of the direct signal is quite helpful for Post editing work on distorted guitar. Seeing/finding the transients on a direct track is much easier than on a wall of distortion track. I always record a direct track even if I have no intentions of re-amping. Just my 2 cents

 

[Greg_L]

When did this re-amping nonsense become all the rage? It's just one more thing that allows unskilled people with bad ears to record bad music. Do we really need that?

 

[miroslav]

I don't see it as totally bad tool...but I also don't see/understand the reason that some folks always need to work that way...being indecisive until final mix time AFA WTF they are doing with a given song...???
Does pre-production even mean anything?

At most, I would still pick my tone at the amp while playing it, and record that...but if I knew that there was a "client" that had yet to hear/decide on the guitar tone, then maybe I would also split and record a dry track for "just in case"...but not when I'm doing my own stuff.
For my own stuff, I know my amps, I know the general direction of the song and the overall "sound" am going after...so I just ballpark it and take it "as it falls".

Producer talking to the Young Rock Stars band about their finished album:

"OK...so we re-amped all the guitars with some really great tones, replaced all the drum tracks with HOT drum samples off of Johnny Drummer's newest library, auto-tuned all the vocals into pure perfection (Christina Aguilera would be jealous), and then brought in a session bass player, backup singers and horns for the final ingredients...
...but I gotta say, you guys sound GREAT on the album...never better!!!"

 

[CaptGoldenEars]

When did this re-amping nonsense become all the rage? It's just one more thing that allows unskilled people with bad ears to record bad music. Do we really need that?

You are missing the point. What if you have a session and at the time you don't have the amp you really want? But the session must go on as scheduled? At a later time you can re-record your part with the desired amp. Seems like a fail safe system with a lot of positive results. Also, if at a session you can only record with one amp? Again, at a later time you can split that signal and record 2 or more amps at once. So many up sides to re-amping. Why be so closed minded with something that gives you so many options? Of course doing it right the first time is always best, but why not leave the door open for so many more options? It's a win - win. Too bad you can't see that.

 

[miroslav]

You are missing the point.

Trust me...Greg rarely misses the point, even if you think he did.
He's just making a counterpoint in his own special way.

Hey...if you need a million options saved and waiting for the final mix of a song...knock yourself out, but it really can become just a lot of jerking-off, to put it bluntly.
"Ahhh…wadda you think about THAT amp tone?
Eh…not bad, but let’s try another 10 amps, I'm sure will find something we like.
DUH…OK."



I'm sorry...I just can't think of too many guitar players that wouldn't cut off your fucking arm if you tried reamping their tracks!
It's almost always about the tone they hear in the room when playing.

Like I said, if you really need a “safety net”...find "the" tone, track it, but take a split and save a clean/dry track.
But I would just go more with my instincts at the outset..."What am I doing with this song?"...and then track with that in mind.
I think most times you will stick with the initial tracks if you have a strong enough vision of your production. I mean yeah, we all "tweak" during mixing...but it's tweaking in the ballpark.
If I tracked with a "dummy" amp track juts so I could hear some amp tone, that's what would stick in my head and drive how I recorded other tracks....
...so to then toss that out and start jerking around re-amping later on...
…I would rather go get a root canal without Novocain.
Heck, I already HATE the time I have to spend in the DAW editing and whatnot...never mind going BACK to the drawing board and audition tones!

YMMV...............

 

[CaptGoldenEars]

Trust me...Greg rarely misses the point, even if you think he did.
He's just making a counterpoint in his own special way.

Hey...if you need a million options saved and waiting for the final mix of a song...knock yourself out, but it really can become just a lot of jerking-off, to put it bluntly.
"Ahhh…wadda you think about THAT amp tone?
Eh…not bad, but let’s try another 10 amps, I'm sure will find something we like.
DUH…OK."



I'm sorry...I just can't think of too many guitar players that wouldn't cut off your fucking arm if you tried reamping their tracks!
It's almost always about the tone they hear in the room when playing.

Like I said, if you really need a “safety net”...find "the" tone, track it, but take a split and save a clean/dry track.
But I would just go more with my instincts at the outset..."What am I doing with this song?"...and then track with that in mind.
I think most times you will stick with the initial tracks if you have a strong enough vision of your production. I mean yeah, we all "tweak" during mixing...but it's tweaking in the ballpark.
If I tracked with a "dummy" amp track juts so I could hear some amp tone, that's what would stick in my head and drive how I recorded other tracks....
...so to then toss that out and start jerking around re-amping later on...
…I would rather go get a root canal without Novocain.
Heck, I already HATE the time I have to spend in the DAW editing and whatnot...never mind going BACK to the drawing board and audition tones!

YMMV...............

Point taken, but it's not all about wanking off. If you are producing yourself, it's a nice option to be able to audition many different amps. Record a rough track and audition amps. I just see so many upsides. It's seems narrow minded to me to think of re-amping as a waste of time. It just gives the player more options. What if the amp starts to fart out and you keep playing the perfect take? Same thing with a bum microphone. There's just too many positives.

How about if you are having a really great session and you are all over the place, only to find out you bumped the mic in the middle of the performance?

 

[miroslav]

I didn't say re-amping is a waste of time...I'm saying it's a waste of time for me.

I get what you are saying about auditioning amps...but why wouldn't you do that anyway before you even track anything?
There's a bunch of really nice amps in my studio...
I've "auditioned" each of them right after I got them, and many more times since.
I "audition" them every time I play them just for the ha-has.
When I'm going to record something, I'll put up my scratch or backing tracks...and then again...audition amps/tones until I get what I'm looking for.
I just don't have much reason to audition yet again later on as I'm mixing.
When I get to the mixing, the "tones" of the song are all pretty set in my head.
To re-amp, that's like go back to re-track...which I would do if something TOTALLY wasn't working, but I'm pretty set with my tones when I get there, and that goes double AFA guitar tones. I don't think I ever re-tracked because I didn't like my guitar tone when I got to mix stage. It's usually because some part just doesn't work...and you can't fix that with re-amping.

Hey...ReAmp and Radial make some great boxes...around $150...go for it. I may get one, one of these days, it's just not something that's ever been high on my priority list, and I'm honestly not hurting for studio gear if I may say so.
I just never saw re-amp boxes as something that would make my recording of guitars easier, faster, better....

 

[CaptGoldenEars]

I didn't say re-amping is a waste of time...I'm saying it's a waste of time for me.

I get what you are saying about auditioning amps...but why wouldn't you do that anyway before you even track anything?
There's a bunch of really nice amps in my studio...
I've "auditioned" each of them right after I got them, and many more times since.
I "audition" them every time I play them just for the ha-has.
When I'm going to record something, I'll put up my scratch or backing tracks...and then again...audition amps/tones until I get what I'm looking for.
I just don't have much reason to audition yet again later on as I'm mixing.
When I get to the mixing, the "tones" of the song are all pretty set in my head.
To re-amp, that's like go back to re-track...which I would do if something TOTALLY wasn't working, but I'm pretty set with my tones when I get there, and that goes double AFA guitar tones. I don't think I ever re-tracked because I didn't like my guitar tone when I got to mix stage. It's usually because some part just doesn't work...and you can't fix that with re-amping.

Hey...ReAmp and Radial make some great boxes...around $150...go for it. I may get one, one of these days, it's just not something that's ever been high on my priority list, and I'm honestly not hurting for studio gear if I may say so.
I just never saw re-amp boxes as something that would make my recording of guitars easier, faster, better....

By audition i mean you get to be your own engineer in real time. You get to take the playing part out of the equation and be your own engineer, perhaps with a little more objectivity, because you're free to move the mics without a guitar strapped to ya. I'm not saying re-amping is a miracle fix all. But i am saying it has a lot going for it. Way more pluses than minuses. And like i said before, i've only done it once, because i asked a guy about it and he showed me with my own tracks. We didn't do anything radical, he just gave me an example. I never thought much about it again until now. Just seems like a smart thing to do even if you don't use it. A failsafe if you will.

And it sure is a trip to hear the clean track if the intended track has a lot of overdrive, effects and wild solos.

 

[miroslav]

A failsafe if you will.

I like to record dangerously.

I know what you mean about auditioning.
When I'm tracking guitars, I'm standing in front of my console, with my guitar and playing. I'll listen to the playback a couple of times after I do a test track...make a few tweaks...maybe another test track...
....and then I lay down the final tracks with the tones I want.

I have no use for a dry, "safety" track. I'm committed to the tracks I've already recorded, because they ARE the song, the production.
What I'm saying is that I can't really track without having a production idea already in my head. I can't do it "dry" and then figure it out later when I finally get around to choosing tones. That just seems bassackwards to me.
It's nothing personal, but I find that a rather lame way to record and it's just not the way I want to record....but to each his own.

I know many people do like to save lots of choices for the very end...when they mix.
I can't make that work, because I'm a firm believer that a song has a life of it's own...and usually it comes to life part way during the tracking. To put off all those wonderful tone decisions until the very end would IMO kill the life of the song and make it more about "assembling parts off the shelf".

I'm not disputing the technical usage of re-amping. I'm saying it's a rather lifeless way to assemble a song, especially when people add in the drum samples and autotune...etc.
Can you make a good sounding song using those tools?
Yes.
But that's not my point.

I'm not trying to be a "purist" about recording techniques...it's mostly the thing I said about the song coming to life during tracking. I don't see how it can, if I reserve all the decisions for the mix stage...???
For me, when the mix stage arrives the song is already DONE, the vibe and intent are already there, and all were driven by pre-production ideas and what I did during tracking, by the sounds/tones I chose.
The mixing is just about setting up the final "performance".
For me, the BEST part about recoding IS the tracking...always has been. When you have that initial song idea in your head, and you start with those 2-3 tracks, and then build on it, and you find that guitar tone or that organ tone that just all of a sudden makes the whole thing open up, come alive. THAT'S what it's all about for me.
If I have no pre-production ideas of my sounds/tones, and I don't really try to get them during tracking...WTF do I have when it comes time to mix?

It's just how I prefer to record...commiting to tones/sounds as I build the production.

 

[Wireneck]

Its not always about replacing what you already tracked. We often re-amp and blend with the original tracks to get distorted guitars thicker/punchier. For example....we might track with a Rectifier which is thick and punchy and then re-amp with a 5150 and blend to taste with the Mesa tracks to add some midrange bite.
Really...if it works for you then do it. I have been in enough studios to know that everybody has their own work flow and techniques. What seems crazy to one guy might be business as usual for the next.

 

[CaptGoldenEars]

Its not always about replacing what you already tracked. We often re-amp and blend with the original tracks to get distorted guitars thicker/punchier. For example....we might track with a Rectifier which is thick and punchy and then re-amp with a 5150 and blend to taste with the Mesa tracks to add some midrange bite.
Really...if it works for you then do it. I have been in enough studios to know that everybody has their own work flow and techniques. What seems crazy to one guy might be business as usual for the next.

Blending tones....and yet another pro......way more than cons. Just seems to me to be yet another weapon in the holster. And really there doesn't seem to be ANY cons. Just the very little time it takes to set up another track and check the levels. And it never has to be used. It's just there, like insurance.

 

[miroslav]

Hey...that's fine. You should go get a re-amp box and experiment.

That's another thing I never do...record a lead and then blend it with the a second/same lead track but from a second mic or second amp. I just prefer to get all the tone from one amp, one mic.
I use to put up two mics awhile back, but I found that the more layering you do the more "diffused" the sound gets. Maybe it still can sound good and rich texturally, I just like the clean, fundamental punch of a single amp and mic combination for my leads.

And as an aside...I just learned that Radial bought out ReAmp. They were licensing the ReAmp circuit for one of their passive re-amp boxes (JX44)...so now they own all the rights to ReAmp and plan to release the exact same ReAmp circuit but in a new Radial box. So the ReAmp boxes are no more as of February....though you may still see some leftovers at retailers.

I may get one just to have, for when someone wants to re-amp their dry tracks through one of my amps...I've got a few decent amps. I'm sure I'll try it out...but I just know how I like to track, so I don't expect it would become my new SOP.
It's like my assortment of OD pedals...
I rarely record with them, but feel the need with a studio to have an assortment.

 

[c7sus]

Radial JDI passive direct boxes will work as a reamp too.

 

[metalj]

Its not always about replacing what you already tracked. We often re-amp and blend with the original tracks to get distorted guitars thicker/punchier. For example....we might track with a Rectifier which is thick and punchy and then re-amp with a 5150 and blend to taste with the Mesa tracks to add some midrange bite.
Really...if it works for you then do it. I have been in enough studios to know that everybody has their own work flow and techniques. What seems crazy to one guy might be business as usual for the next.

Well stated and exactly what we intend to do. Its all about experimentation and finding what sounds the best for our recording. We will be renting a variety of MESA amps, ENGL's, that would cost several thousand dollars each to buy. This way with the re-amping, the performance is done, now we can concentrate on getting proper mic placement, and dialing in the amp exactly the way we want it. The "plug in" direct tones we are getting actually sound pretty good, but we will try real amps as well and blend the whole thing hoping to get a unique sound.

Thanks for all the input. much appreciated.