We will record a song at a studio.Our gear is nice and theres nothing related to those in this question.Our guitarsts say that they should go riff by riff and create few tracks.I say they should play whole song perfectly a few times and create a few tracks.What is the best and the cheapest way to go (in terms of buying studio time)
I've never recorded in a studio so i can't comment on this specifically but i think for either option your guitarists need to be practised to the point where they can play it perfectly in their sleep. The more you can reduce wasted time from inaccuracies the less overall takes you'll need with either method which should save you on hourly studio costs...personally i'd rather focus on the one that gives the better overall performance, regardless of the cost. If they're gonna bang out better performances section by section then do that, there's no guarantee that you can chop between full performances if there's errors in the same spot every time. But again this is why practise is important.

Hopefully someone a bit more experienced can answer your question directly
"If you want beef, then bring the ruckus." - Marilyn Monroe
Last edited by USCENDONE BENE at Jul 24, 2016,
Lots of different opinions on this and a case can be made for several approaches. Personally I prefer to be well rehearsed and play as much live full band as possible to capture subtle interaction between players. Don't expect perfection but strive for excellence and leave room for happy surprises that pop up during the process. If a guy fat-fingers a riff or solo, just go back and overdub that part til you get a good result. This is the way we get our best recordings in minimum studio time.
"Your sound is in your hands as much as anything. It's the way you pick, and the way you hold the guitar, more than it is the amp or the guitar you use." -- Stevie Ray Vaughan

"Anybody can play. The note is only 20 percent. The attitude of the motherfucker who plays it is 80 percent." -- Miles Davis

Guthrie on tone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmohdG9lLqY
Last edited by Cajundaddy at Jul 24, 2016,
I worked in two studios for several years so I have some knowledge about this. This of course will be my personal opinion but based on a lot of experience. First off I agree with Cajundaddy. Record like a live band as much as possible and get down the basic rhythm tracks first. That's the only way to insure that there is a tight, emotional performance. Save leads and vocals for overdubs. You want a good solid bed to build on. To repeat an often used cliche; you can't build a quality house on a poor foundation.

Here are a few quick tips:

Remember that studio time is expensive so you should have a well rehearsed song ready to go from the first minute. Before you even book time in the studio practice playing the rhythm parts without leads or vocals from beginning to end, over and over till you are very tight. The studio is an expensive place to rehearse. I also suggest you work out your ideas about all these issues long before you get in the studio. I suggest that you choose one person (the one with the most knowledge about recording) to be the sole person to interact with the studio's engineer. There's nothing worse than five different opinions being thrown at you while you are trying to engineer a session.

Lastly remember that serious recording is not a spectator sport. Let the girlfriends and others stay home. There is nothing worse than band members each trying to impress their guests or others while you are attempting to sort out issues with the engineer and everyone's throwing in their opinions.

Good luck. Let us know how it goes.
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
It really depends on how you play/record. For most metal you want tight production which lately means click track. It is up for you to decide. If it means click track, sit down and create at least a paper (or midi) map of you tempo tracks, so when you go into the studio you're ready to give the engineer the tempo map. If you have to create it in the studio, that'll most likely drain your budget, especially if you have complex tempo changes.

I prefer the live band in a room approach, and have for the most part recorded most of my projects this way. You do one pass with the idea that your drums are keeper, the rest scratch (or possibly keeper?) and then you start building up from there. If you can end up with guitar and bass tracks from these first sessions that are a keeper or need just a few punch in/outs, then you're much further down towards song completion. Listen to the whole thing, something might be a little off, but is it really? Beware of costly edit jobs - usually engineers will get you down an edit track and you'll burn a few hours of studio time for something that you could have been re-recorded or even dropped from the arrangement in 5 minutes.
Diabolical makes an excellent point. Don't get hung up on trying to do repeated punch in's to fix parts when it would take a lot less time to just do the whole part again. I can't tell you how many times I have engineered a session where someone is spending 1/2 hour to an hour or more trying to fix a vocal line or guitar solo that would have taken 4 minutes to just do again from the top. Diabolical is right, beware those costly edit jobs. They will destroy your budget, waste time, slow down the work flow and make others at the session loose enthusiasm.

Again, lots of practice and pre-planning is needed. Have a plan going in and stick to it.
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.