Recording Tracking to Mastering?

[Thunder7]

I know a lot of you guys have recorded at studios and things like that. I was just wondering what it's like going from tracking guitars and everything to the actual finished product. We've started recording and it's hard for me to imagine what it's going to sound like when it's done, I've laid a lot of guitar tracks and I just don't understand how it's all going to come out in the end. I'm pretty sure that's why I'm not the one with tons of recording equipment and a studio haha. So has anyone else laid down full band tracks and on the listen back not quite understand how all of this is going to lay together? I know in the end it will come out sounding great it's just this initial tracking that has me kind of apprehensive, so I need some of the experienced guys to lay my anxieties to rest!

[DankStar]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

hello fellow georgian! (i'm not from here, but still)

so you've never even done the 4-track or computer recording thing? i remember the first time I recorded two guitars playing a riff and panned them left and right on a 4-track. it was like a world opened up. if it's done right, it'll sound pretty wild to you. it may also sound unexpected, like it seems like someone else is playing your riffs.

when you get a mixdown, it's sort of like doing a walkthrough of a house. at first, the house always looks great, but when you really look and think about it, you notice there's a crack here and there, that paint doesn't match perfectly, etc. don't be afraid to say stuff like "I really don't want reverb on my rhythm guitars" or whatever it is that sounds odd to you. you have ears too, so don't just rely on the engineer's. he may not even be that versed in your type of music, meaning you may know how it should sound better than him. hopefully, he's better at actually acheiving that sound you want by turning the knobs.

the recording process can be very sterile and un-natural. recording stuff separately, using fake virtual amps, triggers on drums to use sampled drum sounds. it usually comes out in the end, but it's kind of a weird process. i always thought it odd that the best recorded guitar tone comes from putting a mic right up to the speaker, but who in the heck listens to their guitar like that? and then there's bass guitar. live, the bass guitar usually shakes the walls and is probably the most powerful sound of a band, but recorded, it's reduced to a little rumble in the background that often gets buried. and when it's all said and done, it'll be played through a pair of $1.00 ipod headphones and some dude will complain that there's not enough midrange in the snare or some crap like that.

[weisserj]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

and when it's all said and done, it'll be played through a pair of $1.00 ipod headphones and some dude will complain that there's not enough midrange in the snare or some crap like that.

hahahaha it's all too true...

[Thunder7]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

Yes sir hot and sticky Georgia. The most recording I've done before this is just cutting a lead on a track here and there. The guitars sound really good the way he's recorded them, I haven't had to change any EQ's really on my end, he comes in and moves his mic's around and I might have to tweak a little after that to get a little varriance in a 2nd rhythm track. We have a song that is the same riff throughout that our drummer wrote. during the verses I roll back and do a picked out kind of thing, still a little dirty but not as full on as the choruses. On my first take through I played pretty much the "heavy" riff all the way through, then he had me do a track of just the rolled back verses and listening to the play back I can hear both tracks and I just don't understand how it's all going to come out in the end. I'm sure it will be fine though when it's all said and done.

[DankStar]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

thunder - can you PM me when the final deal is done; i'd love to hear it!

[Thunder7]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

I'll be sure to do that, I might get brave and post it on the forum. I'm not sure how long it will take to finish up, me and the singer are tracking two more songs today and then we have two more songs to do...everything still have to be done on those. But the guy recording us is going to take the four "completed" songs after today and do a basic mixdown on it and let us check it out and make sure that everything is right and all that good stuff, make sure nothing else has to be added. I'm pretty excited I've heard a few things that he's recorded and he does a great job, he told us if we're anything less than amazed with the finished product then we'll just keep recording. Since he's a long time friend of our drummer he cut us a deal, that we just pay per song and not by the time it takes. So it may take 6 years to get this stuff recorded Lol

[wahwah]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

It's a fascinating process, and it's worth asking the occasional question when you're really not sure what's going on. These days, so much can be done in the editing stage that an engineer or producer will have an idea, while tracking, of the sort of edits they will be doing at mixdown time. It's worth asking them what they have in mind, and that can help you play appropriately to help get the desired results. Asking a few questions can help you get the bigger picture of what is going on. Use your own discernment to know when is a good time to ask questions or not. It also shows that you are into the whole process. You'll learn a lot, which will go into your next session with you. There is more than a lifetime's worth of stuff to learn about recording. The same could be said of mastering, which is an entirely different process again. Enjoy the ride, and keep us informed of how it progresses.



Cheers..................................wahwah

[J Moose]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

Disclaimer ~ I produce "rock" music for a living & could very easily pontificate about the subject of recording for hours on end...

There are at least a thousand ways to make a record... a lot of it depends on what kind of record you want to make. At one end, go live in the studio like Van Halen I... at the other... Steely Dan or Alice In Chains... everything layered to the hilt with a dozen tracks of whack.

That's really the first question I ask ANY band when we start talking... what do they envision for the recording?

Gotta have it in your head before you can get it out!

the recording process can be very sterile and un-natural. recording stuff separately, using fake virtual amps, triggers on drums to use sampled drum sounds. it usually comes out in the end, but it's kind of a weird process. i always thought it odd that the best recorded guitar tone comes from putting a mic right up to the speaker, but who in the heck listens to their guitar like that? and then there's bass guitar...

Well, not all records are made like that! The only places I hear of and see using those methods of virtual amps & drums... getting the band to track each instrument seperatley are low-dollar demo studios and the "bubblegum" pop acts like a Mariah Carey or Ricky Martin where it's more "construction" based then "performance" based.

Everyone else, at least in the rock world is still using real amps, real drums and tracking with the band as a whole unit, even if 80% of the guitars and whatever else get replaced later. There's too much magic that happens when a band plays together... sometimes you even get lucky and end up with keeper tracks, a solo or vocal that's killer and doesn't need to be redone for performance reasons.

Besides, I never thought it was very fair for the drummer to have him going at it "for real" and everyone else just slogs though the songs, anticipating the "inevitable" redoing of their parts. At the minimum, bass & drums go down as a unit.

and when it's all said and done, it'll be played through a pair of $1.00 ipod headphones and some dude will complain that there's not enough midrange in the snare or some crap like that.

Yeah... hahahaha There's no accounting for taste!

Ask questions about the process and of the engineer, especially if you don't like something or aren't comfortable. Most people forget that recording is a "service" based thing, the artist should always be in control. The engineer is really just a catalyst for the idea...

Unless it's a minor EQ thing, make something a little brighter or a level adjustment... DO NOT fall for the old "fix it in the mix" line.

If you don't have time to get it right the first time, where are you going to find the time later on???

I'm not really going to touch on production vs. engineering unless someone wants me to... but they really ARE two vastly different roles... and someone needs to be picked as a "producer" for the project. The producer is the person who's responsible for the paperwork and "delivering" the record, basically making final decisions & seeing it to completion.

Generally speaking... "the process" breaks down like this;

Preproduction - This is where you figure out which songs are worthy of being recorded and make the plans for recording, including budget and timeline.

Basics session - Where all the baisc tracks for each song are recorded. Generally it's rhythm section; drums, bass, guitar, scratch (final?) vocal etc. It's common to do multiple takes to edit from... I don't keep dozens of takes, working with the artist we'll pick the best 2-4 and comp one "master" take for each song if we didn't get it in one.

Overdubs - Adding parts on top of the "master" take; solos, vocals & anything else from a cowbell to a string section. Again, I prefer to edit as we go and not put off decisions until later.

Mixing - Where all 40 tracks of whack are blended into a final 2-track master. At best, this process is simply balancing and sweetening the recorded tracks and moves quickly & easily, especially if good performances & tones were captured. The magic! Otherwise, it's sometimes common to "reinvent" the songs at mixing and spend days on one song trying different things.

Mastering - The final step of the creative process and the first step of manufacturing. The mastering engineer, usually with years of experience and $20k speakers sitting in a tuned room gives the individual mixes a final sweetening with minor EQ and other tools to turn them into a cohesive sounding record. Levels between songs are balanced out and spacing between tracks is adjusted. After all that is done & approved, they'll create an error-checked "PMCD" that goes to the plant, essentially a glass-master that thousands of CD's will be created from.

[Thunder7]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

WOW, sweet breakdown J Moose, I think I definitely need to ask some questions it's just the age old fear of asking stupid questions. Hopefully I can get with him a little beforehand and ask a few questions, he said his main concern right now is getting a good sound and tone from each instrument and then he'll work on levels...does that sound right? Also I haven't done many amp tweaks as far as my sounds go it's more him moving mics around to get a different sound...does that sound right? I think the most tweaking I did was turn my highs down a touch, they were biting just a little too much.

[innerdreamrecords.co]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

he said his main concern right now is getting a good sound and tone from each instrument and then he'll work on levels...does that sound right?

Oui. Crap in crap out. The truth is you're always mixing as each additional thing recorded affects the previous things, so get it how you want it first then it will only get better sounding if the mix is good.

+1 to Moose.

[sosomething]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

Let me make it very, very simple.

You get out what you put in.

You can only take away from the sounds that hit the board to begin with. You cannot add anything to them.

So it is ESSENTIAL that you record good-sounding tracks from the very beginning, because nothing you or anyone will do to them will make them sound "better." This means good tones and good performances.

Things like EQ and compression will make the overal mix sound a bit cleaner and more consistent by adjusting certain frequencies on certain tracks and leveling things out a bit, but on a good recording these changes amount to less than you would think.

Some folks will try to tell you that you have to spend a fortune to make anything that won't immediately be thrown away by anyone who hears it, but the truth is that these days it's getting easier and easier to make a good-sounding record without spending a ridiculous amount of money. Certainly going the established professional route and making a massive investment can yield a good-sounding record if the band has all it's ducks in a row beforehand, but it's not as complicated to do on one's own as some would lead you to believe.

[Bender]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

Also I haven't done many amp tweaks as far as my sounds go it's more him moving mics around to get a different sound...does that sound right? I think the most tweaking I did was turn my highs down a touch, they were biting just a little too much.

+1
You can also set another mic out and away in front of a guitar amp and mix it with a close mic ( at the amp ) it can really make a difference when panned opposite each other. Gives a deeper feel for depth ..

[J Moose]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

WOW, sweet breakdown J Moose, I think I definitely need to ask some questions it's just the age old fear of asking stupid questions. Hopefully I can get with him a little beforehand and ask a few questions, he said his main concern right now is getting a good sound and tone from each instrument and then he'll work on levels...does that sound right? Also I haven't done many amp tweaks as far as my sounds go it's more him moving mics around to get a different sound...does that sound right? I think the most tweaking I did was turn my highs down a touch, they were biting just a little too much.

I'd say that you need to talk with your bandmates first, make sure everyone is on the same page or at least in the same book and THEN talk the engineer! Though, 'ya know... feel it out.

Typically that's how I work... move the mics around in small fractions of inches esp. if the artist has a tone coming in and we like the sound of the amp in the room. Almost anything goes though and it's hard to say w/o being there or hearing anything...

Another reason I prefer tracking with the band working as a unit is that I get to hear "everything" in context. If the tone of the bass isn't working with the drums or whatever, it's IMO... VERY obvious and easy to fix. The times we've started with just drums as keepers, guitars into DI etc. building layer by layer... things never seem to be as cohesive when it's all said & done. It's missing some glue... Seems to be as much performance as it is having to guess at how much space an instrument may or may not be taking up.

It's also really common, esp. if the production requires some degree of "polish" to record clean guitars & dirt guitars on different passes so they ring over each other as the sections change... listen to some records with headphones on & pick 'em apart. I love the layering on STP records... "Purple" is great... "Tiny Music..." killer stuff. Great to study...

Good bit of it is basic orchestration skills.

[J Moose]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

Some folks will try to tell you that you have to spend a fortune to make anything that won't immediately be thrown away by anyone who hears it, but the truth is that these days it's getting easier and easier to make a good-sounding record without spending a ridiculous amount of money. Certainly going the established professional route and making a massive investment can yield a good-sounding record if the band has all it's ducks in a row beforehand, but it's not as complicated to do on one's own as some would lead you to believe.

Truth...

Sort of.

If it was really super easy... then everyone would be doing it and cats like Tom Petty would be making records with nothing more then a Smackme mixer, 007 and some $80 mics in a bedroom "studio"...

But you don't see them doing that!

Regardless of anything & everything, the band DOES need to have all their schit together before even thinking of pressing the big red button.

Doesn't matter if the budget is $250,000 $25,000 or $2500.

[sosomething]

Re: Recording Tracking to Mastering?

You won't see me argue with that.

You need to have decent gear and know how to use it, and that includes all the necessary recording equipment as well. I would never recommend someone use one of those horrible all-in-one mixer/interface things.