live band or multitracking?
Home > Home Recording Forum > Recording Techniques > live band or multitracking?
Posted on May 11, 2003 11:00 pm
fredzs
Member Since: Jan 07, 2003
whats the ups and downs of recording the whole band at oncee? and doing it one by one . . . ?
[ Back to Top ]
May 12, 2003 12:37 am i would think # of inputs would be the deciding factor. With my sound card, although i've never tried it, i only have 4 inputs so i would have to track the drums out first, then add each instrument/vox later
i guess some plusses of tracking everyone at once would be the "vibe" and "groove" that you get when a band who knows each other and plays well tegether is doing just that. i know that can be lost when tracking individually. another plus is the time involved. it would take a fraction of the time to track all instruments at once
one big minus about tracking everyone together will be bleed from one instruemnt to the next. again, i've never done this, but i understand how easily it could happen. you could put up acoustic sheilding of some sort, or separate your band members in different rooms, but then you risk losing that "vibe" you were going for :O( -j
May 12, 2003 12:51 am ive found that recording one at a time sounds way better than all at once, plus unless you have many inputs on the sound card, you have to pretty much get it right on one take. recording one thing at a time allows you to go back and mix afterward (unless of course you can afford many inputs on the soundcard, but even then you get a lot of bleed through). im curious if anyone that records "live" can describe how they cut down on this problem, separate rooms?
WaltChief Cook and Bottle WasherMember
Since: May 10, 2002
May 12, 2003 03:17 am Yes,
It is pretty much get it right in one take. It's a lot of playing around with mics and acustics. I do a lot of work with one band that I am in, which is a 17 piece Big Band. Swing genre. The best recording so far was done with four mics on the drum set, Bass direct, guitar and keyboard miced amp, trumpets, trombones, reeds with a seperate mic per section, and a pair of mics for room ambiance. Oh and a vocal mic. There was some bleed between some of the mics, but there was still plenty of seperation to work with on mix down. I treated each of the three sections as a seperate instrument would be in a rock band. Able to fit each section into the mix.
With the smaller groups I work with I like to rehearse as a group to get the groove in place and then while that is still "hot" within each of us, record the instruments seperately. I still often do vocals as a single "take". There's something about singing together live that it is hard to duplicate recording each singer seperately. Depending on how well the singers work together I may put each one on a seperate mic.
May 12, 2003 05:26 am The upside of doing everyone at once (or at least the whole "rhythm track") is that I have often found you can get a much tighter, much more lively performance recorded when the rhtyhm guitar, bass guitar and drums are all playing together...it's a cooler vibe. However, for many home recording people, the person doing the recording plays at least two of those three roles, so that makes it kinda tough...
flame...bringing sexy backMember
Since: Jul 01, 2002
May 12, 2003 08:37 am unless you do it one-man-band stle...drum on your back, guitar round your neck and cymbals on your knees!
fredzsMember
Since: Jan 07, 2003
May 12, 2003 08:39 am No, cause i have a band . . and i play the drums . . .
flame...bringing sexy backMember
Since: Jul 01, 2002
May 12, 2003 08:43 am with your knees?
May 12, 2003 02:09 pm fredzs. id say for what you want to do, record everything live. if you arent trying to make a million dollar record then dont try to make one. know what i mean? plus your really young. but thats not a band thing at all! my advice to you would be get a decent 4 track tape like a tascam 424 or something. they are cheep. tapes are cheep. good investment for a first time thing, and youll use it forever.
May 12, 2003 02:12 pm Actually, you would use a 4 track for about 6 months (at best) and get sick of the limitations and bouncing tracks and all that lame crap...I completely disagree withthe above on that one point, but I also agree that one needs to determine what they want to do and what the budget is for it. And spend it wisely.
May 12, 2003 02:44 pm the kid is 14 years old db. one of my best friend just bought a church and gets contracted bands coming through his studio. and in his bedroom he still uses his 4 track. i still use mine. anyone else? i didnt mean as your main piece for recording projects.
May 12, 2003 03:05 pm Dude, I jwas just disagreeing with you, not a huge deal.
MinkusMazBane of All ExistenceMember
Since: Mar 27, 2003
May 12, 2003 04:01 pm hey...once i spent $150 on that audiophile, i still found my 4-track useful as a crappy mixer, since it had RCA outs and LEDs that i could follow. i used it to record this:
64.147.14.11:801/chinbo2.mp3
live recording is for people who have been playing for a long time and understand the dynamics of the groove. it's also far more preferable for songs where jamming and improv is key. you might take it a step further and talk about capturing the energy that travels between musicians who are contributing to the same musical idea. but none of that is useful if you're a garage band laying down your verse-chorus-verse song. speaking of which, the above song was NOT recorded live.
fredzsMember
Since: Jan 07, 2003
May 12, 2003 05:02 pm im actually gonna buy a Delta1010LT and a Behringer Mixer . . and im not using my Mom's Money . . im using mine . . . and yes im not gonna make a pro recording . . but AT LEAST i want it to sound good so that i can ask my friends to make CD's and im gonna charge them . . . that way, i can enjoy my stuff WHILE earning . . . .
MinkusMazBane of All ExistenceMember
Since: Mar 27, 2003
May 12, 2003 05:29 pm look at echo or MOTU for better cards than the 1010. if you've got the cash, that is. it also doesn't make sense to get a mixer for a multi-tracker unless each channel has direct outs. make sure you know what plugs into what before you buy it.
fredzsMember
Since: Jan 07, 2003
May 12, 2003 09:54 pm yes, it has direct outs . . its a Behringer UB-2442FX pro . . . . but im not sure if the sound with the RCA cables would be good . . . i kinda like the quality of your song Minkuz . . .
May 12, 2003 11:54 pm i love that chibo song, it's sounds like a video game!!
Noize2uCzar of MidiAdministrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002
May 14, 2003 09:11 pm Minkus, the Layla and the 1010 are statisticly the same card, only differance is the price. I have used both Echo and M-Audio gear and find that there is no differance other then M-Audio uses much more stable drivers and updates them regularly. Now MOTU on the ohter hand is a large step up, agreed. But it is also more then twice the price, but you are paying for much higher quality AD/DA converters. And truly in a home studio that is not a priority. the converters in the Echo and The M-Audio products are extremely high quality and I would recomend their gear anytime.
And fredz, the Behringer will be a good match for the 1010LT. Both are good sensable choices.
Peace
May 14, 2003 11:04 pm Having done both I prefer one-at-a-time tracking. This is only for recording myself, though. My main limitation is that I have only two tracks to input but several computers, so eight inputs (for example) is a nightmare. The other factor that makes me prefer one-track-at-a-time is that usually the other musicians don't have the patience to do a take over and over again until it's perfect.
How many takes did the Beatles do of some songs? Hundreds?
May 15, 2003 02:45 am and don't forget, even with only two tracks (left and right), you can still separately record two signals with a mixer by panning one hard left, and the other hard right.
