#1
I've looked at alot of those Authentic Guitar Tab books for albums and different songs, and I've noticed that in some songs the rhythm guitar is doubled up, and sometimes not. And I just don't understand a good rule of thumb of when to double track your rhythm guitars. Any ideas?

And what about Acoustic or Clean Electric guitars? When should those be doubled up?

And yes, this has been posted a couples times, but only because people keep yelling at me for posting it in the wrong place. Hopefully I can get some good answers from here.
Yamaha-APX700 Acoustic-Electric
Epiphone-Les Paul standard Electric
#2
just go with what sounds good. if you double track it and it makes it worse, delte the track. generally double tracking is gonna make it thicker and fuller sounding, and even gives you a chance to have a more interesting tone if the 2nd track is done with a different guitar/amp/cab/setting
Originally posted by primusfan
When you crank up the gain to 10 and switch to the lead channel, it actually sounds like you are unjustifiably bombing an innocent foreign land.


╠═══════╬═══════╣
τλε τρπ βπστλεπλσσδ
╠═══════╬═══════╣
#3
Quote by InanezGuitars44
just go with what sounds good. if you double track it and it makes it worse, delte the track. generally double tracking is gonna make it thicker and fuller sounding, and even gives you a chance to have a more interesting tone if the 2nd track is done with a different guitar/amp/cab/setting


what do you think about actually copying the track, and then panning the two to different sides with one track starting a teeny tiny bit before the other?
Yamaha-APX700 Acoustic-Electric
Epiphone-Les Paul standard Electric
#5
in my opinion i think you should when there isnt much instrumental noise besides guitar going on! try it sound kool
#7
Quote by CatharsisStudio
douvble track everything all guitars on a recording need to be 1 track left and 1 track right. and then if you quad track 1 track hard left 1 track hard right 1 rack 80% left 1 track 80% right

Bulls***. There are no rules of thumb when recording, and whatever you do NEVER do something repeatedly on every track, unless you want to make unimaginitive unchangeing records. Music is about creativity, not rules.

Catharsis - listen to some early rock, or well-mixed modern stuff like MGMT or Nine Inch Nails. Having everything equal on both sides is incredibly boring and sucks the excitement out of the music. Have a bit of imagination.

To the OP - the point of doubling tracks is, as Ibanez said, to thicken the sound - the technique you mentioned is exactly what a chorus is, but it sounds better if you rerecord of course, even with the same settings - although recording a clean track, rerecording through 2 different effects chains, and panning the two into two different spots sounds unbelievably cool. Also on single tracks try panning a 100% wet reverb away from the clean signal for athmosphere.
#8
When it sounds better than x number of guitar tracks.
Epiphone Elitist SG (Serious)
Tokai Silver Star
Epiphone Dot
Epiphone Les Paul
Washburn J28SCEDL
Washburn J12S

G.A.S List

JCM600 (Yes a 600..)
#9
Quote by Union Of V
[...]although recording a clean track, rerecording through 2 different effects chains, and panning the two into two different spots sounds unbelievably cool. Also on single tracks try panning a 100% wet reverb away from the clean signal for athmosphere.


Thanks for such a detailed answer before, but can you break this part down to me a little more? What are effects chains? And what about wet reverb? Clearly I am inexperienced in the effect category.
Yamaha-APX700 Acoustic-Electric
Epiphone-Les Paul standard Electric
#10
This is how you do it, if you have proper recording software of course:

First you record the guitar clean.
Then you duplicate that track, so you have 2 identical tracks.
You pass each track through separate effects, separate amp simulations if you want.
You then pan both tracks to different places.

You end up hearing just one guitar line, but 2 different sounds coming from 2 different locations simultaneously. It has always been one of my favourite tricks.

The reverb thing involves doing something similar involving sends, but in case your software doesn't do sends here's an example similar to the one before.

Duplicate your recorded track.
One track is going to be the normal guitar sound, the one you hear properly. Pan that as usual.
On the other track stick a reasonably long reverb and set it to 100% wet (ie none of the original signal is getting through, it's all reverb).
Keep the reverb really quiet and pan it somewhere you want ambiance, usually to the sides. If you're feeling adventurous automate the volume up and down so you get a noticeable swelling sound, almost like waves of sound.

Neither of these is exactly the "doubling" effect that you're looking for, but they're cool studio effects which can add interest to your track (as I said I'd recommend listening to NIN's album The Fragile to understand just how amazing these tricks can sound).
Last edited by Union Of V at Jul 9, 2009,
#11
Quote by kellan6
what do you think about actually copying the track, and then panning the two to different sides with one track starting a teeny tiny bit before the other?


That does almost nothing.

If you want a bigger sound, double track. Ofcourse, there are probably other ways you can get the sound (What the person above said, ought to work. But if you can play parts well and consistantly, I'd say it would be better to double track.)

It's not just limited to guitar either.
Alot of vocalists use double tracking.
I've even used on bass before with 2 different mic's for a really chunky sound.
I'm certain there are other instruments that work well with it, but my mind has gone blank
I deeply regret the 6661 in my username. Siiiigh. Damn you, 14 year old me, you edgy little bastard.
Last edited by Carl6661 at Jul 9, 2009,
#12
I double track everything at least 5 times, sometimes going to 11 times, but i am adjusting things and putting it together so my timing mistakes are hidden. If you are going to double track everything without adusting the tracks, you will have to make them very tight and in time, or it will sound jarring and bad.
#13
Quote by Union Of V
Bulls***. There are no rules of thumb when recording, and whatever you do NEVER do something repeatedly on every track, unless you want to make unimaginitive unchangeing records. Music is about creativity, not rules.

Catharsis - listen to some early rock, or well-mixed modern stuff like MGMT or Nine Inch Nails. Having everything equal on both sides is incredibly boring and sucks the excitement out of the music. Have a bit of imagination.

To the OP - the point of doubling tracks is, as Ibanez said, to thicken the sound - the technique you mentioned is exactly what a chorus is, but it sounds better if you rerecord of course, even with the same settings - although recording a clean track, rerecording through 2 different effects chains, and panning the two into two different spots sounds unbelievably cool. Also on single tracks try panning a 100% wet reverb away from the clean signal for athmosphere.


Listen to Catharsis's recordings on his myspace.
Matthew 7:7 ""Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you."

Pop Punk! Check us out!: Flinch
#15
Quote by CatharsisStudio
the point of QUAD tracking to thicken the sound THE POINT OF DOUBLE TRACKING IS TO HAVE A STEREO IMAGE OF THE GUITAR


not necessarily. yes, quad tracking does thicken the sound a hell of a lot more than double tracking. but double tracking does make the guitar sound alot bigger, aswell as stereo imagery.
I deeply regret the 6661 in my username. Siiiigh. Damn you, 14 year old me, you edgy little bastard.
#18
Quote by CatharsisStudio
yeah but you wouldn't double track a guitar thats directly centrd would you o.O? i sure as hell wouldn't


you mean double track the guitar and then leaving both tracks centered?
i wouldn't do that, that would just sound like a dodgy chorusing effect or something
I deeply regret the 6661 in my username. Siiiigh. Damn you, 14 year old me, you edgy little bastard.
Last edited by Carl6661 at Jul 10, 2009,
#19
Hello!

I did this yesterday, with double-tracking.
I added some slight variations to each track, and panned them 50% on each side.
Same tone, same amp, same effects

It definately does make the sound richer and fuller.
Please excuse sloppy playing (but please enjoy solo!)


Enjoy!

HAmmer to fall
http://profile.ultimate-guitar.com/ankthebank/
#20
Quote by CatharsisStudio
the point of QUAD tracking to thicken the sound THE POINT OF DOUBLE TRACKING IS TO HAVE A STEREO IMAGE OF THE GUITAR



So how would you quad track something?
No man has the right to be an amateur in the matter of physical training. It is a shame for a man to grow old without seeing the beauty and strength of which his body is capable


@gossage91
@overtimefitnessau
#21
Quote by jambi_mantra
So how would you quad track something?


it's the same concept as double tracking, except four times.

i've not done much with it, but as far as i know, it's something like, you record the part 4 times and then you pan them out to help create a stereo image. but you don't just pan them like, 2 of them 100% left, and the others 100% left like alot of people do with double tracking (for the record, i don't pan them out that much). you pan them more like;
- 100% left
- 75% left
- 75% right
- 100% right

or something, don't take that word for word, but you just pan them out differently, or something. if anyone knows different, feel free to correct that.
I deeply regret the 6661 in my username. Siiiigh. Damn you, 14 year old me, you edgy little bastard.
#22
Just record however many sounds best, panned wherever sounds best.

You lot aren't half making a meal of this!
Epiphone Elitist SG (Serious)
Tokai Silver Star
Epiphone Dot
Epiphone Les Paul
Washburn J28SCEDL
Washburn J12S

G.A.S List

JCM600 (Yes a 600..)
#23
i was only told about quad tracking briefly (by that, i mean like. a quick 30 second mentioning of it) by my crappy old music' tech teacher.
he basically said record the part 4 times and pan out like i said it worked decently with those settings on the one song i used it on. i've not done anything else with it though, it took too much time and just complicated the mixing. so i just stick to double-tracking.
I deeply regret the 6661 in my username. Siiiigh. Damn you, 14 year old me, you edgy little bastard.
#24
So if you had 2 guitar lines, you'd have 8 tracks?

/noob
No man has the right to be an amateur in the matter of physical training. It is a shame for a man to grow old without seeing the beauty and strength of which his body is capable


@gossage91
@overtimefitnessau
#25
Quote by jambi_mantra
So if you had 2 guitar lines, you'd have 8 tracks?

/noob


there are probably people out there who have done that
reading back, i did word it quite weirdly.

just to clear that up -
i didn't mean record each part 4 times, i meant like, say you had 2 guitars in a song - record each part twice, so that you end up with 4.
I deeply regret the 6661 in my username. Siiiigh. Damn you, 14 year old me, you edgy little bastard.
#26
n you record each part twice, you have to think of it like this, billy and joe are in a band, billy is a much better guitarist, the producer wants to quad track, so what billy gets to track all of the rythms so he would play his rythm once as he does live. and then plays it again. not copy and pasting it, now since joe sucks but has some cool leads. he doesn't get to track right now, so billy gets to track joe's parts aka, another rythm, a lower melody, and blahblah, then joe would come in and lay down his leads, only playing them once


there you have quadtracked
#27
Ahhh I get it now, cheers guys.
No man has the right to be an amateur in the matter of physical training. It is a shame for a man to grow old without seeing the beauty and strength of which his body is capable


@gossage91
@overtimefitnessau