Studio Recording Order

[ibescotty]

So what order are the instruments usually recorded in? Is there a standard? We are talking about going into the studio and Im told that were going to lay down the drums and bass first. I think that I will really miss the interaction with the guitars while I play. Ive never been in a studio for bass recording. I dont want to give people the impression that Im green even though I am. The songs are written but I have not even heard them all yet. I suppose once we work them up Ill have that short amount of time to come up with my parts then Ill have to play them dry with the drums. I like to hear everything but I think thats because Ive been just a live player in my musical career. Im wondering how key instrument interaction is in a recording and how records are recorded today.

 

Anyway its something Ive been fretting about lately so I thought Id share.

[Pernax]

This is how we've done things in the past: The drums first, with a scratch guitar track to help along the way. Guitars are next, then bass. After that it's time for keys and finally vocals.

 

For me it's a lot easier to lay down my parts when the guitars are recorded beforehand.

 

-Pernax

[jeremy c]

Some of these questions were answered in

 

This Thread

 

In recording these days, it is rare for everyone to be playing together. You will have to get used to that. You'll also have to get used to hearing yourself in headphones, everything will sound weird to you. You will also have to come up with your parts quickly.

 

Just try to relax and do your best and you will do ok. And the next time you will do better.

[ibescotty]

Thanks! So it would seem reasonable to ask that the guitars are down before I get in there and do my thing. I mean I'm the bridge between the rythm and the melody, so I kind of wanted them both there. Then again the guitar might need that bridge. I guess it depends. I'll just go with it.

 

[Cup]

Some people record a ghost track, and work from there. A ghost track is just a very basic version of the song, say piano or guitar and lead vocals. The rest of the band work from that. From my understanding (I'm a novice too) the ghost track usually gets wiped.

 

Cup

[dcr]

I've very little experience here, as well, but from what I've seen it's as Cup says--there's usually a track of scratch vocals, keys, &/or guitars (= "ghost tracks"), just to keep song sections, chord changes/harmonic structure, etc. clear & straight for the rhythm players. Those are later replaced by "real" tracks. I think it would be very reasonable to ask for a scratch track, if someone would be willing just to strum or plink the chords.

[dcr]

Here's a related question. I understand that full "live" recording in the studio is very rare these days. But would the following sort of "Ship of Theseus" procedure be viable? Do a live take, or three; pick the best one; have the drums lay down a "final" track (if necessary), using the rest as scratch; repeat until all tracks have been finalized. Or perhaps this is just too time-consuming?

[_Sweet Willie_]

Originally posted by dcr:

But would the following sort of "Ship of Theseus" procedure be viable? ...

Have pity on me, for I am but a lowly sociologist-in-training and you are a wise philosopher, but what does "Ship of Theseus" mean? I am even relatively well-informed on Greek mythology and I'm still in the dark a bit on this one.

 

(And yes, your description of the process makes sense, but I don't have the right knowledge to answer your original question. Sorry. )

[The Bear Jew]

Dudes..

You can track bass, guitar, drums, keys and vocals at once if you use PODs and DIs. See, these devices record direct into the board, which means that there's no need to use actual amps that will potentially bleed into the drum or vocal mics. As long as you have a headphone mix and can stick your vocalist in a seperate room, you can record in just the same way that you normally perform.

 

Also... this way you don't have to worry about getting perfect takes from anyone but the drummer. Everything else can easily be replaced later with real amps, etc.

 

This is the way my bands recorded more than two albums' worth of material... in two high school classrooms!

 

Most studios can provide an even better environment for this kind of recording.

[SteveC]

While I haven't had a tone of experience in this area, I know that you need to get used to click tracks, headphones, and playing by yourself.

 

The few tracks I have done were me and the drummer in the same room, me DI, drums miced, both using headphones and a click track.

 

On another track, I came in and added a fretless bass line to vocals, piano and drum tracks that had already been laid down.

 

The beauty of todays digital recording and almost limitless tracks, is that you can lay down a "scratch" vocal or guitar or whatever to help record the other tracks and then go back and clean things up. Pretty sweet. Also sweet is the ability to go in and "punch in" a measure or two. I had to do that as well. Great take except for one spot.

[Dan South]

Most of my recording experience is a one-man operation where most of the parts are played by a computer. - Don't smirk; I think I do a pretty convincing job of making it all sound "live."

 

When a computer is playing the parts, order doesn't matter. But I usually save vocals and bass and (sometimes) guitar - the parts that I play by hand - for the end. This way, I can hear the full arrangement when I'm singing or playing, and I think that that helps.

 

Sometimes, I'll record a quick vocal or bass track into the computer to use as I'm building the arrangement. Most of the time, I *program* a simple MIDI bass part and work around that until the arrangement is finish. Then I replace that with a live part. Again, I like to play when I can hear the full arrangement. If I play a bass line when there's only a drum track, I tend to overplay. When I can hear the full arrangement, I can see where fills would be desirable and where they would compete with other instruments.

 

If I were recording a *band*, I would first ask them to *rehearse* the material until they could play me a convincing arrangement that they recorded in one take on a boom box. If they can't do that, they're not ready, and they're going to waste a lot of time. Then I would track several takes of (at least) the full rhythm section - drums, percussion, rhythm guitar, bass, comping keys. I might edit or replace these tracks later, but I think that it helps to have everyone playing in the same groove, and that happens when they're all in the room at the same time. The Beatles made dozens of takes and used the best ones, or they spliced a verse from here, a chorus from there, etc.

 

My two cents - your mileage may vary.

[dcr]

I detect that sarcasm, s-dub. I'll see you after class.

 

The "ship of Theseus" was a legendary ship preserved in Athens for posterity. Of course, bits of it fall into disrepair, rot, etc. over time, & need to be replaced. Eventually, all of the original bits are replaced, & you've got a new one. (Query: is it still the same ship? (Please do not answer this query.))

 

Glad I didn't whip out "Neurath's boat."

[jeremy c]

Do a live take, or three; pick the best one; have the drums lay down a "final" track (if necessary), using the rest as scratch; repeat until all tracks have been finalized. Or perhaps this is just too time-consuming?

This seems like it would take way too much time...if you can record the band all together and wait for a good take, just use that one. Rather then re-recording all the tracks, just punch in and fix the mistakes.

[Cup]

Personally I prefer the sound of a band recorded live. Many disagree, of course things can be super perfect when recorded individually, but (IMO) it's hard to beat the energy of a band in full flow. Vocals are usually done seperate though.

 

Cup

[Tom Capasso]

dcr - I read about Theseus in fiction form ("The King Must Die" - Mary Renault), and didn't understand your reference. Thanks for clearing it up.

 

Oops - look at the time - I missed catching the bull at 4...

 

Tom

[_Sweet Willie_]

Originally posted by dcr:

I detect that sarcasm, s-dub. I'll see you after class.

Thanks for the explanation about Theseus, Athens, etc. Makes me think a little more about the art restoration that happens at museums to the paintings of "the masters."

 

I'll go back to my penance of writing repeatedly, "I will not tease dcr, philosopher king, any more on the LDL." I've already written 384 out of 1,000...

[ibescotty]

All great stuff guys. It would seem that it's all up to the engineer. He wants Drums and bass 1st. I'll have to ask about a scratch track.

 

I'm thinking of asking the guys to scale back gigging so we can do this right. Our fearless leader has us out every weekend and we haven't worked on a single song and it's only a month away. He doesn't seem to be worried about it at all. I guess it's his nickel but I want to do the best I can. We all have day jobs and families too. Something's got to give...

 

Maybe I'll start a chronicle. Maybe it will be a comedy. I probably won't be laughing.

 

It's all about experiences!!

[Dave Martin]

If you're working in a 'real' studio (as opposed to a bedroom studio), there should be no reason why the whole band can't play together. A fairly common practice for a lot of producers is to have the whole band play until there's a workable drum track and then replace the other instruments one at a time (if they're not up to snuff). And that shouldn't involve the use of 'pods and DI's' - Real studios can either provide enough isolation (through the use of booths, gobos and other methods) to use amps. The biggest band that I've tracked live in my place is a 9 piece western swing band. In fact, for one of the sessions, the decision was made to use no headphones - the guys simply set up in the tracking room and played and sang - it worked great.

 

Cream recorded Disrali Gears over the weekend, and the first Beatles record was recorded in less than a day - they didn't record one instrument at a time...

 

On the other hand, I also do a bunch of work where instruments are added one at a time, but that's typically with session players who are working from charts. We know what's left to add, so we leave room for those instruments.

 

I'd suggest that if you're recording as part of a band, spend the time in rehearsal to get the songs arranged (and learned, if the band doesn't use charts). Then all you have to do is go into the studio and play it like you learned it. if the studio can't handle that, you need to find a better studio - St. Louis should have at least one place that can still make a record the way that records ought to be made... If you're being hired (or asked) to play on someone elses project, I'd suggest that you get a tape in advance and fidure out some sort of workable chart - in other words, something that you can follow. That way, you'll always know where you are.

 

(I've left out my usual rant about people who think that they ought to be able to make a record even when they can't play well - Pro Tools can't fix a lack of ability, even though it is often used to disguise the lack...)

[getz out]

Originally posted by Dave Martin:

(I've left out my usual rant about people who think that they ought to be able to make a record even when they can't play well - Pro Tools can't fix a lack of ability, even though it is often used to disguise the lack...)

Nice line.

[LizzyD]

I think there is some magic when the whole group plays together, even if everything but the drums ends up getting replaced. If you all have patience to do several takes until at least the drummer gets a good take, that may make the drummer happy, (and be like rehearsal for the rest of the band too). If somebody else gets a good (or fixable) take too, all the better. You could also just have the guitars play along and not be recorded, just so you can hear them.

 

That said, I believe it's a very good thing to be able to play your parts perfectly with just the drummer. This also comes in handy at those gigs when your monitor mix sucks and you can't hear anyone else. Recording this way allows you to focus on the all-important groove, and make sure you are locked in together. Sometimes having guitars playing at the same time can obscure rhythmic problems that you'll hear later. Having things rhythmically tight underneath will make the whole band sound better once everything else gets piled on top.

 

For me, I've recorded in just about every concievable way - 1. drums first, then bass, guitar etc., 2. drums and bass together first, then overdub everyone one by one, 3. scratch vocal and guitar to a click first, then drums and/or bass etc, 4. guitar and bass record to a click or drum machine, then overdub live drums, 5. everyone record basics together to a click, then bass punches in an entirely new track, then drummer re-records entire track (don't try this at home unless you're really good). Personally I like having a scratch vocal there, because that can influence my bass part a great deal.

 

In the end, do it however feels most comfortable. If the band would rather play together and then redo some parts, then do it that way. If you HAVE to do just bass and drums, then practice beforehand that way so you are fully prepared. At least you have a plan, that's a step in the right direction. The most important thing is to know the music well enough so as not to waste time figuring out parts or arrangements while the clock ticks.

[ibescotty]

Originally posted by Dave Martin:

If you're working in a 'real' studio (as opposed to a bedroom studio), there should be no reason why the whole band can't play together. A fairly common practice for a lot of producers is to have the whole band play until there's a workable drum track and then replace the other instruments one at a time (if they're not up to snuff). And that shouldn't involve the use of 'pods and DI's' - Real studios can either provide enough isolation (through the use of booths, gobos and other methods) to use amps. The biggest band that I've tracked live in my place is a 9 piece western swing band. In fact, for one of the sessions, the decision was made to use no headphones - the guys simply set up in the tracking room and played and sang - it worked great.

 

Cream recorded Disrali Gears over the weekend, and the first Beatles record was recorded in less than a day - they didn't record one instrument at a time...

 

On the other hand, I also do a bunch of work where instruments are added one at a time, but that's typically with session players who are working from charts. We know what's left to add, so we leave room for those instruments.

 

I'd suggest that if you're recording as part of a band, spend the time in rehearsal to get the songs arranged (and learned, if the band doesn't use charts). Then all you have to do is go into the studio and play it like you learned it. if the studio can't handle that, you need to find a better studio - St. Louis should have at least one place that can still make a record the way that records ought to be made... If you're being hired (or asked) to play on someone elses project, I'd suggest that you get a tape in advance and fidure out some sort of workable chart - in other words, something that you can follow. That way, you'll always know where you are.

 

(I've left out my usual rant about people who think that they ought to be able to make a record even when they can't play well - Pro Tools can't fix a lack of ability, even though it is often used to disguise the lack...)

The story here is that the "leader" of our band with all the $$$ has gone out and booked studio time on his own with a local studio. A pretty good one to hear him talk about it. Our current CD was recorded there but I'm not really all that impressed with the CD like he is.

The CD that they had made there is clean and sounds OK but there's absolutly no dynamics or change in emotion and there should be. The songs are very emotional and those changes should be fealt!! People that hear it react to the CD saying that it sounds like it's all the same tempo. I think they say that because they don't know what else to call it. There are different tempos in there. It also needs a little more lows and is too midrange to me.

So he wants to rush in now that I'm hired and record another CD. I'm fine with that. I normally wouldn't even think that I'd belong in this situation. I'm just a hobbyist who loves to play.

 

So I go into this with some charts and hopefully I can force us to back off some gigs and woodshed these songs. He thinks we've got 14 in us.

 

Either way it's going to be an experience.

[ibescotty]

Lizzy

 

Thanks!! You know everyone says that the songs sound so much better live. Maybe I can use that to suggest that we try to record all together.

[Dave Martin]

Originally posted by ibescotty:

Our current CD was recorded there but I'm not really all that impressed with the CD like he is.

Don'ty worry so much about that - a wise man once told me that everyone knows two things - their own name and how a the mix SHOULD have been done...

[_Sweet Willie_]

Originally posted by Dave Martin:

... a wise man once told me that everyone knows two things - their own name and how a the mix SHOULD have been done...

That's funny, very funny.

[Pernax]

Originally posted by Dave Martin:

Don't worry so much about that - a wise man once told me that everyone knows two things - their own name and how a the mix SHOULD have been done...

That reminds me of something I saw written on a mixing console one time on a show we did... "Turn everything more up than everything else" - obviously the soundguy had been in the business for quite some time to be able to make such a conclusion about how the mix should sound like after getting enough instructions from the various artists .

 

-Pernax

[...]

I feel lucky when there is anything but the "real" drum part there to record to. It sucks to record something when you don't know what everyone else is going to be doing on top of it. Most of the stuff that I recorded when I was with the Travis Shredd band was done like this:

 

(this was a lot of my studio experience, two albums worth of stuff)

 

Drums first, with bass and vocal scratch done live; we'd then record all the bass parts. Guitars, keys, vocals, steel guitar would get layered on top of it. There were a few times where I'd do something in my part that was deemed "really cool" by the rest of the band, and one of my fills would wind up getting doubled by guitars/keys afterwards. Very odd to say the least.

 

It's hard to get inspired to play when there isn't much to listen to when recording your part. I find that most of the time when I have no idea what the finished song is going to sound like, my part gets really sparse because I don't know what I may or may not be stepping on by playing out. Better to be sparse than to overplay and have it sound bad. Words of wisdom from a slack-ass, note-happy bassist from Seattle.

[The Guy]

Originally posted by ibescotty:

The story here is that the "leader" of our band with all the $$$ has gone out and booked studio time on his own with a local studio. A pretty good one to hear him talk about it. Our current CD was recorded there but I'm not really all that impressed with the CD like he is.

The CD that they had made there is clean and sounds OK but there's absolutly no dynamics or change in emotion and there should be. The songs are very emotional and those changes should be fealt!! People that hear it react to the CD saying that it sounds like it's all the same tempo. I think they say that because they don't know what else to call it. There are different tempos in there. It also needs a little more lows and is too midrange to me.

So he wants to rush in now that I'm hired and record another CD. I'm fine with that. I normally wouldn't even think that I'd belong in this situation. I'm just a hobbyist who loves to play.

 

So I go into this with some charts and hopefully I can force us to back off some gigs and woodshed these songs. He thinks we've got 14 in us.

 

Either way it's going to be an experience.[/QB]

 

Yea, a lot of your issues with the previous CD sound more like mix issues than songwriting issues. The responsability for that lies primarily with your engineer,(recording guy) or whoever is responsible for your final mixdown. If at all possible, listen to some other recordings engineered by the same studio you will be using, and see if you have similar complaints about the midrange and lack of lows. If you find that you do, talk to your leader about mabye looking at some other studios that may be better, though it sounds like he may be a bit of a control freak.

 

Also, prioritize. If you're not in this for the long haul, and this is hurting your family life, consider moving on. It's not the end of the world.

 

Finally, as to recording process, it depends on the engineer. Some prefer to record the drums and bass, then everything else, some record everything and then go track by track over the whole song and redubb. My personal favorite is to record the rythm section (bass, drums, keys, rythm guitar) with the bass into a POD or a DI (I prefer the studio Tube MP for bass)and then ghost your lead vocal track and lead guitar track with lead guitar going directly from his pedals to a DI. Then you go over and record your lead guitar and fixup your other parts. A plus is that you may find that you want to use the ghost lead guitar track as a backing-type track, if it sounds okay, with the second lead track on top of it. The most important part is to learn to play to click. This gives you all a basis to work with, and makes things a heck of a lot easier to work with in the editing process. For example, think of the click as being the foundation to a building. Without it, the building just plain won't fit right and will break down somewhere. You need that foundation.

 

The important part is to be patient, relax, and have fun. If it ain't fun, it ain't worth it buddy.

[_Sweet Willie_]

Originally posted by Pernax:

That reminds me of something I saw written on a mixing console one time on a show we did... "Turn everything more up than everything else" ... .

 

-Pernax

'nax,

 

That's also very funny.

[ibescotty]

The important part is to be patient, relax, and have fun. If it ain't fun, it ain't worth it buddy.

 

True True

 

I'm going to go in there and soak up the experience!!

 

Yes we do have a control freak of sorts in the band but we love him. I kind of knew that before I signed on. He's the one with the solo albums and musical experience. Not exactly a big shot but he was looked at by record companies back in the 80's and did some big tours. At least big by my standards. We play some of his songs in our live shows and they're pretty good if dated.

 

It's all fun and games till someone gets a nickname from mixerman!!

[dcr]

Don't sweat it, Scotty--Harmon Neenot? No!