Recording Planning And Process Ideas

[psw]

I am entering the digital age after bouncing around cassette tapes in my youth and am coming to terms with the Roland BR-600.

The BR-600 is a very powerful, tiny portable unit (and it has become a lot less mysterious since the arrival yesterday of the Roland DVD) but this question applies to any recordings especially in the digital situation where you can do a lot of overdubs and building tracks on your own or one instrument at a time. A full blown computer based DAW obviously gives more options than a portable unit, but I suspect a lot of this question remains the same.

So, I'd be interested to hear if people just turn the thing on and jam or meticulously craft tracks. Do people write out charts, work out the drum tracks in advance, play to a metronome and work out the drums later plan the parts or layer upon layer...do you record a guide track with the intention of scrubbing it later? That kind of thing. There may even be people who might be able to give tips on crafting a more interesting track or song!

pete

PS...the BR600 has 8 tracks and 64 virtual tracks plus the drum machine track and a host of mic and mastering tools as well as a huge array of guitar effects. The whole thing can be dumped into a computer for further editing and samples and drum sounds can be loaded into the drum pads or virtual tracks...it is not as easy to do of course without the big screen!

[WAK Guitars]

I have a BR-600! Its great. I was just using it a few minutes ago. I find that when I get a riff or melody, I record it, and write it as I go, which can be a blessing as well as a pain. Sometimes when I do it like that I just get stuck half way through not knowing where to go with it. Other times though, it works well and I can try stuff that I wouldnt have in the first place. I like doin stuff with the drum machine that is on the BR. You can like write your own beats and stuff. its a good time.

One time though, I was trying to load some of the songs on to the computer, and I lost like 20 songs that I had on there. It sucked big time.

[foil1more]

One of my friends has recording equipment in his basement. Now we have sony acid pro and a multi-port plug in thingy (firewire or something that can record on multiple tracks) for his drum mics and our guitars. We turn the stuff on every time we jam so if we do something cool we don't miss it. The best thing we've ever recorded though was recorded with a single condenser mic wrapped in a towel and hung from the ceiling (everything was recorded on one track). It took some checks to balance amp volumes to the drums but you don't need much to get a decent recording. The song that was the best was written out (in his head, he now forgets it) by our lead, who taught the rhythm to the other guitarist. I (on bass) just improved like normal. But I guess we really haven't gotten to use the new stuff too much. We always record right onto a computer and save it as soon as the song is over so we don't loose it.

[psw]

Yeah...the BR600 is great...but after watching this DVD...BR 600 Tutorial DVD...it has become a bit clearer yet now there are a million new things that I did'nt even know was in there.

The USB thing is a little clunky, but he explained that very well. There is also a free software for the BR900 that works for the BR600 at rolandus that allows you t do drum mapping on a computer and some of the effects listings...but again, a little clunky.

However...

It is easy enough to get one of these things or plug into a computer and record some sound, but another thing to craft something more than a static drum pattern, riff and jamming solo. Great for getting some ideas down...but I was wanting to take it a little further so it sounds more like a piece of music than just a jam or notebook of ideas.

In order to do that, with the BR 600 they recommend using a click track and then building up the drums so that it interacts with the rest of the track, not just keeping a steady beat.

I also want to avoid over layering parts or having everything very compressed...that means the guitar is a one take or series of edits rather than a strict riff and lead kind of affair I would assume...at least for the kind of music I often play these days.

Obviously this little box has a huge amount of stuff in it, a computer even more...but I was really wondering how people structure their recording work (if they do) to create a track with the variation and dynamics of a real performance without having a band...or at least utilizing multiple individual parts...to make something a little more finished, if you know what I mean...

pete

[Thoughtless 7]

I don't record myself because i don't have a band at the moment, but i record my cousin’s band. The way we do it is, mic up the drums and put the guitar through a Vamp and record those together. Then when we are happy with the drums, we'll scrap the Vamp track and mic up his guitar. I used to use amp modelling a lot for guitars, but now i prefer the sound of a real amp. I use a Bass V-Amp for the actual bass though, because they don't have a very good amp. For software, i use Tracktion 3 (thanks to GregP for recommending Tracktion in the first place) and hardware i use a FocusRite 8 channel preamp into 2 Delta 1010s into my PC.

[westhemann]

In order to do that, with the BR 600 they recommend using a click track and then building up the drums so that it interacts with the rest of the track, not just keeping a steady beat

That is what I TRY to do,but I can Not figure out my drum software(I have Battery and Nuendo)

Plus,in my OVER- perfectionist mind,I can't make the call on tuning or guitar tone....I am leaning towards a C standard ,dop B tuning to sound more modern,but at the same time I still hang on to E standard and drop D.

If I EVER get it sorted though it will kick ass...

[WAK Guitars]

I'm almost done a song on the BR600, I'm entering it in a contest but when I do I'll post a link. I think I did a pretty good job with the drum part. But really in order to really get it to interact with the song, a lot of times I find I need to make my own beats for it. Even though theres like 300 presets.

[joshvegas]

I just plug in and see what comes out the other end!

[Prostheta]

Record your instruments using as few "destructive" effects as possible, so you can edit and refine them later. For the purposes of recording, effects should ideally be in the monitoring chain and the recording done dry. Guide tracks are great for keeping continuity, setting the mood and pace and physically hearing a rough combination of the entire work before finessing by rerecording. There's no real formula of course, it really depends on what makes you feel more comfortable and productive.

I play to a metronome/click track which is a basic stripped down version of the final drum track. Sometimes those drums are written slightly differently for the sole purpose of helping the rhythm of the instruments recorded over the top work better.

For fun I decided to record a cover of Strapping Young Lad's Detox using SONAR and EZ-Drummer a few weeks ago. Two guitar tracks panned slightly left and right, one fx guitar track, one bass and multi-tracked drums. I decided to make it very bass-heavy so it "lopes". I wrote the drums first of all and tracked the guitars as two or three recordings per track with as little punching in/out and copying as possible. I try and maintain a live feel as opposed to sampling phrases and using them throughout a track. This was just for fun, mind: Detox cover

[westhemann]

Prostheta,or anyone really into metal that can run a good drum track...If I emailed you the intro that I wrote for my cd,could you put some drums to it?The more natural sounding the better...but that is all I lack on this track...

[Saber]

Usually, I work most parts of a tune out in my head, first. I prefer doing that over writing with a guitar in my hands. That way I end up writing stuff that I can't already play, learn how to play it, and then record it on computer. This helps my playing to evolve.

I write the drums and bass midi sequences in Cakewalk and play guitar and do vocals if the song has any. Sometimes I'll first program the guitar as a midi sequence before learning to play it, to hear how it fits. Then I'll do rough recordings of the different guitar parts, and once all the details are worked out, I re-record the guitar track properly. It's a lot of work but but I'm pretty happy with the results.

You can hear the only 2 vocal tunes that I've written here:

Larry O'Meara

[psw]

Nice stuff...that would have taken a lot of work to do Saber, I enjoyed that. It is interesting hearing this kind of thing as you can hear things that you wouldn't in a "commercial" recording.

I'm almost done a song on the BR600, I'm entering it in a contest but when I do I'll post a link. I think I did a pretty good job with the drum part. But really in order to really get it to interact with the song, a lot of times I find I need to make my own beats for it. Even though theres like 300 presets.

The BR600 is incredibly powerful with the drums...you can load a midi track into it (but only the drums will play), sample things into the pads and adjust things like velocity of hits, but perhaps something that needs the bigger screen. You may wish to try these Roland BR600 Downloads but the USB interface very clunky and tricky to work with. I got a bigger flashcard (1GB) but intend to dump everything into a computer rather than risk filling the card with too much stuff for various projects...but still early days for me with this thing.

I was thinking of developing a spreadsheet chart so I can note down what happens where and keep a track of things. For instance on saber's "That's it..." (which was great BTW) I would have liked the riffing guitars to drop back almost to bass, maybe even a little change in the drum feel so that the solo pops out and provides a bit of an interlude in the song. I guess this is a lot to do with arranging and that's where I guess digital media is supposed to come into it's own but you often don't get these ideas till you hear the track a little more finished.

I am finding that I go through these periods where I get a cool riff or idea and want turn them into something but the recording process is interfering with the creative side...maybe I just need to learn and practice more of the recording process till it becomes more "natural" or something.

Good tips though...keep them coming...

pete

[Prostheta]

Prostheta,or anyone really into metal that can run a good drum track...If I emailed you the intro that I wrote for my cd,could you put some drums to it?The more natural sounding the better...but that is all I lack on this track...

I was wondering why my email client started gipping last time I checked for new mail....might not have time this week as we're flying to Finland on Friday and I have my Muay Thai instructor's "approaching the ring" music to sort out for his English title fight in a few weeks, but i'll see what I can do.

<edit: it seems to have been gipping for some other reason...nothing in my inbox Wes...sorry to go OT guys>

Edited August 17, 2008 by Prostheta

[Saber]

Thanks Pete! I guess it isn't really work when you're having fun doing it.

[psw]

Thanks Pete! I guess it isn't really work when you're having fun doing it.

It's funny really...I remember when the cassette portastudio thing was "invented"...unfortunately I kind of missed the boat on that...I had to learn with vinyl records. Eventually, I made my own recording thing with dual cassette decks. You'd have to play a complete take, rewind and record that to another machine at the same time as you recorded next...along the way compensating for the loss of high end and ever increasing hiss . I used to really enjoy it and it did kind of sharpen things up a little playing wise but a lot of bulky equipment for a one track stereo capacity.

Boy have things come a long way really quickly...

This thing is incredibly powerful. At first I thought it was it was simply like a digital version of the old portastudio thing with a few extra bells and whistles...which I guess it is...but since watching this DVD on it I realize that some how they have squeezed a ridiculous amount of stuff into it for the price of some software packages...the thing even has pitch correction in it!

One of the problems though is learning all this stuff from a players point of view without getting frustrated. Obviously you can just plug in and play, easy to pull up a drum track and select any number of effects...even has a whole bunch of bass guitar emulations that are reasonable realistic (hehehe...I remember playing twice as fast bass lines so when put back to normal speed it would be slowed down to create that kind of effect!)...but for some reason, I find it kind of inhibiting and instead of playing guitar, I wind up playing the machine...too much choice perhaps, or more hours required.

I have tried computer based stuff...I have an EDIROL UA-25 that came with SONAR. But as soon as you start using these things you want more and more add ons. The SONAR lite has no drum machine even. Eventually, I might well get into recording, especially if I were to switch to MAC with built in GarageBand or something...but I would have to upgrade my computer significantly and I suspect a lot of what is built into this tiny machine may not be in there as stock.

The computer versions though are a lot more visual so perhaps that is easier...you can see where the sound is...on this I guess I will have to do it the old fashioned way and write out what is where. There are a potential 64 tracks with all the virtual stuff. Soon, with a max of 1GB, it will be filled and need to be dumped back into a computer and when you restore it back to work on it later...who can remember all of that!

pete

Next I will need to learn how to put sound to images

[joshvegas]

Porta studios still have a lot to offer I think they are just so easy to use and they are a brilliant way to learn how mixing desks and recording should be done properly and effectively.

are you using a mixer to power you mics? or are you just using dynamics?

The whole mac thing is such an old fashioned notion (unless you want to use topflight protools) if you are used to using PCs I'd stick with them all you need is a decent soundcard once all the dross is removed a regular off the shelf PC nowadays is more than adequit. I built my computer the soundcard cost the same as the whole computer!

I have an E-MU 1820 a few years old now but it still goes up to 192khz (not that i've ever used it) and is a PCI card with a breakout box connected by a network cable (here my computer knowledge fails me!) rather than a yucky usb job.

Edited August 18, 2008 by joshvegas

[psw]

I don't want to start a whole platform debate...I use PC and have soundcard and UA-25 preamp plus SONAR...but for ease of use the BR-600 is the modern portastudio.

The subject I guess is in part about arranging and building tracks I guess. How you go about developing an idea using recording from a few riffs or a scribbled down lyrics and chord sequence into something a little more "presentable" or "finished"...not necessarily a big production thing or a CD so much.

I kind of feel like many I guess, there is a decline in bands and jamming for a number of reasons and players coming up today learn through TABs and playing to backing tracks. I have seen the results of this kind of thing on youTube for instance where there is a big following of what to me are like "Karaoke Guitar Players" that play note perfect renditions (often to bad midi backings) of well known players (usually the usual suspects like Vai's 'for the love of god'...giving me an ironic twist to the title every time I hear one of these guys attempt it) and then a kind of fandom develop that lionize this.

I mean, it is an achievement of course and in many ways fun to watch. I saw this guy doing Eric Johnson's 'Manhattan' a little while back....note perfect. And I was pretty impressed...but then I checked out EJ play the same tune live with a live band on a stage with a live audience...and not only played it 'note perfect' but with so much more depth, feel and tone. We all hear things we like and learn stuff and magpie parts (EJ's whole style for instance is a montage of influences) but being able to play something does not equate the player with that artist...for one thing they didn't have to write, arrange, record and perform the thing and they have an infinite time to practice and present their best take.

I am interested in the recording thing as a band substitute and to work out ideas and keep a record of them. I'd like to be able to record my own 'classic solo' or neat tune...if for no other reason but to keep a record of these things. I doubt very much I would be doing covers of tunes I really like without a big rearrangement...I can always play the original recordings if I like it so much that I want to listen to it.

It would be cool though to create my own backing tracks for when I just want to jam along with something but with some structure without forced into the imitation that backing tracks of classics always inspire.

The drum track seems to be a sticking point...I guess you only really appreciate drummers when they are not around!

pete

[Saber]

Pete, that's exactly how I feel about creating and playing music. I was never motivated to learn famous tunes note for note. I learned Satch Boogie once but didn't bother to learn the solos note-for-note. I only learned the main riff and the tap solo, and winged the rest. I never felt any gratification in learning someone else's work to perfection. Of course, there's a lot of stuff out there that I couldn't play if my life depended on it. But I get more pleasure in creating my own stuff whether people want to hear it or not. One advantage that I may have is the fact that I've played a bit of drums before so programming a midi drum track is not too much of a problem.

Edited August 19, 2008 by Saber

[psw]

Pete, that's exactly how I feel about creating and playing music.

Oh good...I had a feeling that I was hijacking my own thread there...can you do that?

I also thought...hmmm...that is a little unfair and perhaps insulting to some. The fact is that there is something really magical in "walking in the footprints" (or should that be "fingerprints") of the greats and tab is a great shortcut to understanding the mechanics of the music we love and admire. There is nothing wrong in only playing stuff note for note if that is what you want from the guitar...why not!

I remember being horrified by an old interview with John McLaughlin where he said he only listens to himself. A player like SRV obviously studied hendrix and albert king slavishly...so much so that he made it his own. Obviously players like that transcended their influences and continued a tradition to great effect. Far worse would be to take the attitude to consciously avoid learning from the greats of any style.

The fact also is that there is a bit of modern guitar repertoire. Classical guitarists aren't stigmatized as I seemed to be doing in my last post for playing things "note-for-note" so why should rock music or whatever be any different. I was also thinking about this as I played yesterday after posting that last post that most of what I play and what people would enjoy hearing are songs and tunes that are pretty well known. Some of the stuff I was mucking around with yesterday included JH 'wind crys mary' and 'angel', 'time after time', 'moondance', 'billie jean' and 'don't let me be misunderstood'...so it is not that I only play blues improvs or my own stuff. In fact, audiences love hearing familiar material and it's fun to play, people like variation and the entire Jazz tradition is based on 'playing' with the harmony and melody of known tunes.

Still...it would be nice for people to hear you play and recognize 'your sound' over a poor, or even good imitation of someone else.

It is interesting you mention being a drummer...it seems all of my favorite players have a background in drums and I think it does influence things a lot. Perhaps drummers do think more along the bigger scale of things like song structure and dynamics than guitarists who have to take in harmony melody and often improvisation amongst a range of details like vibrato and tone.

I am going through a stage where I am practicing a lot more. Instead of the old running around scales and stuff, I just think of a tune and try to play the melody, work out the harmony a bit till it is recognizable and then ask...well how would I play this. With a tune like wind crys mary...almost the entire thing and the solo is kind of essential to the whole thing! But it is interesting to take some weird song that comes into your head and arrange it as a guitar instrumental or something...I like the groove of billie jean for instance and I find myself doing those wes montgomery octaves things over it. Beats playing scales anyway and the fingers get a workout!

Eventually this filters down to where you want to be able to communicate some of this or put these ideas into a concrete form...hence recording. I guess also, I have become more aware of a whole tune and performance lately.

The other thing I am working on is being able to do a lot of this kind of thing on my own and I am hoping the recording process will tighten this up. I am working on almost 'party pieces' so that when people come round and see all these guitars and say..."so play something"...I don't lamely parrot the solo from sultan's of swing (ok...I admit to learning that back in the day!) and then be compared to the original...'yeah, your pretty good, but not as good as knophler of course'... Or am I the only one who feels like this!

pete