Erbus - Posted - 02/25/2011:  16:23:11

---

Hi all
Just curious, for all you multi-instrumentalists, what do you record first?
I used to do the banjo first but I find it easier if I lay down guitar or some kind of rhythm track first.

It's always a bit of a challange to get creative when you're trying to hear the song in your head doing the rhythm first.

Terry

The KIDD - Posted - 02/25/2011:  16:37:22

---

Yeah Terry I agree. A good solid R track made with 1/4 click track really cuts down the chances for sync prbs later if some lead tracks are just a wee bit off. If the R track is wavering, even just alittle, you can bet by the time bass, chop, and lead instrument get going, your gonna have some questionable places, plus it will make it that much harder to punch in.Alotta times if its just my own project and not a collab, Ill make a scratch R track where I can hum, sing, stomp feet, holler, etc , then play along to that.
KIDD

---

Edited by - The KIDD on 02/25/2011 16:39:17

Erbus - Posted - 02/25/2011:  16:52:56

---

I gotta agree John, you need a solid rhythm to keep everything on track so to speak.

On another note, we're both on a banjo site but our avatar pics are guitar, keyboard, drums....seem we have left out the banjo........should we fix that?

Terry

rudy - Posted - 02/25/2011:  17:27:54

---

I'm in slight disagreement as I've personally found if I play to a click track things can end up sounding too mechanical. Slight variances in timing are a natural part of playing for me and all the other musicians I know. For me, the proof of this is my inability to easily play to a click track, although others might not find any difficulty in doing so.

I get the best results by first laying down a "scratch track" including a good count-off. I do my scratch track on whatever instrument lends itself to producing the best groove or feeling for me.
I then overdub all the other instruments, especially backing guitar and bass, one at a time. I finish up by replacing the primary instrument and do the finish vocals and backing vocals last.

Most of the more complex demo stuff in my audio section was done in this manner. Check "Bernie Madoff with the Money Blues" or "Blue Moonbeam Serenade" for examples of this technique.
Obviously YMMV!

pearcemusic - Posted - 02/25/2011:  17:58:39

---

I'm with the KIDD ... I've heard the O that click tracks breed mechanical playing ... but
The best musicians I know can play with amazing feel and flow with a click.
Besides that, if you want ebb and flow in the time, create a tempo map that ebbs and flows.

I tried to do a record about 6-7 years ago without playing to a click ... it was a nightmare.
Nothing ever sounded locked.

All that said ... the very best players play well with or without a click ... unfortunately, I'm not one of them ... :)

if it's a pop or rock gig .. drums and bass first.
if it's a vocal song ... dummy vocals and rhythm guitar or bass
a "no drums" instrumental ? ... bass and mando ... or bass and keys ... or bass and rhythm guitar
always with a click ...

again only my O ... but this method has given me good results most of the time.

tom elder - Posted - 02/25/2011:  19:56:49

---

Nowdays first thing i do is set my midi clock out ,on my recorder to the desired tempo and get the right pattern set on my drum machine.When i start recording from zero the machine takes off from there every time.Then banjo to keep it on the beat,then the layering begins thats the fun .

bournio - Posted - 02/26/2011:  03:22:33

---

Click track.

It's not always a click though... Sometimes I'll use a drum sampler to play a simple drum beat then layer everything else up...

rudy - Posted - 02/26/2011:  06:06:36

---

bournio,
Good point, I've done things with a drum machine going in the background for the scratch track. Since I'm dumping the scratch track when I'm done, the mechanical aspect of the overall recording gets dumped with it. The drum machine tends to make things a little more real for me than a metronome-like click track.

bournio - Posted - 02/26/2011:  06:23:59

---

I also find I'm a bit less surprised if i lose it part way through a take and have to start counting again.

kipperr - Posted - 02/26/2011:  06:26:51

---

Guitar first, usually with no click track (for the same reason Rudy gave).

seanray - Posted - 02/26/2011:  08:50:12

---

If I'm planning on overdubbing then I usually set the tempo of the tune in my DAW, turn on the click while recording and then record scratch tracks, simultaneously, of guitar and voice either singing or talking through the arrangement. That way I have a sketch or storyboard of what I'm trying to accomplish. Then these tracks will eventually be turned off as they are replaced by keepers.

I've never found playing to a click too mechanical. On the contrary it makes it easier to play in front or behind the beat when you have a true reference. If playing to a true click is too dry or difficult then, as others have mentioned, a drum machine can help.

BC Bill - Posted - 02/26/2011:  09:00:03

---

I always lay down what I call a 'reference track' first. If the tune involves vocals, it will likely be a guitar and vocal. Sometimes it is a BiaB track, but I prefer a track recorded with real instruments and a real singer. Whatever it is, once I put down the tracks that are going to be part of the song, I erase the reference track. It is just there to provide a check. I have found this works particularly well when I am recording with musicians that don't like a 'click track'. If timing is an issue, I will play the 'reference track' over a click track, but when the other players record their parts, I kill the 'click track'. What they hear is a performance track.

I have found this works well.

Bill

tomberghan - Posted - 02/26/2011:  13:45:36

---

Click Track Versus No Click Track (does it render the session mechanical?)

My answer is "Yes it will make you play mechanical ONLY IF you set the click-rate too high."

Please indulge me in getting a little technical here - All forms of music (baroque, classical, jazz, country, whatever) need to breath . . . meaning to have some swing, lilt, bounce . . . inegale . . . it has many names over the centuries. There is a very old Italian term; "Rubato" and it means to "rob time" or to steal time. I will come back to this.

We have another term "Tactus" which literally means "a measure of time." (a period of time) With reference to music it means "The pulse." Now typically when we play in 4/4 time the pulse is not on every quarter note, but rather at the beginning of every measure (the "one") Sometimes it is the first beat of every other measure. And in Blues we typically accent the 2 and the 4.

What does all of this have to do with the click track???

Here is the deal . . . set your click to the pulse and not to the sub-beats. Example: If you are playing if 4/4 time, don't set the click to 4/4 . . . make it click only on the 1. Now, most click tracks give you the option to click loudly on the pulse and softly on the subdivisions. I suggest you do NOT do that. Set it to click only on the pulse.

Then you won't play mechanically. Then you can play with rubato . . . meaning to push and pull the inner beats in a natural manner but landing squarely on the one (the tactus). Then you will hit that magical "groove we always talk about. Then you play "in the pocket!"

Try it! Happy recording!
Best Wishes,
Tom

rudy - Posted - 02/26/2011:  14:57:25

---

Thanks Tom, great insight as always!

banjoak - Posted - 02/26/2011:  20:55:58

---

I agree with Tom about how to use a click track and still give it breath.

However, I found sometimes a little push in tempo (just a few bpm) toward the end can be a good thing. It just gives it that extra climatic push. It is possible to program that in a head of time, but really difficult to figure exactly when and over how long of a duration the change should take place, and make it seem natural. It does seem easier to do it without the click.

The other good use for a click track though is in making sure the latency is kept in check. I remember recording one time and listening back thinking, wow my rhythm sucks today, not realizing I had something totally dragging the latency.

rudy - Posted - 02/27/2011:  05:59:08

---

I'm using my "scratch or referance track" instead of a rock solid click track to play along to, that way I can naturally vary timing and/or "push". I've found if the scratch track sounds good then the finished mix timing will end up like I want it. In a DAW, I've also found that it's best just to let the recording run and do as many complete scratch tracks as it takes to get one that you feel good about. Copy and paste that section into a new track for your scratch track and dump your original multi-take track.

Latency is a concept that we didn't have to think about back in the old multichannel tape days. All DAWS can accomodate latency issues, some have a test feature and latency is adjusted manually, some do it automatically for you. I'd opt for the later, as fiddling with settings is just something that interferes with creativity.

pearcemusic - Posted - 02/27/2011:  07:27:27

---

Rudy ... yes, you are right .. a good reference track and great personal sense of time will make for a good multi track recording. (I am willing to admit that sometimes I lack in those areas)

and this is sort of off of the topic, so sorry ... but
In projects where extensive editing is needed, recording to a click "on the grid" helps make edits, re-arranging, replacement of parts, "take the rhythm guitar from verse 2 and put it in verse 1" types of decisions very easy.

I love hearing music played as raw as possible, and don't like the techno part when it interferes with musicality, but in situations where you have a client leaning over your shoulder (and he's paying "on the clock") speed can be an issue and tracking "on the grid" is very helpful.

Analog tape machines had "latency" issues too .... the distance between the record and playback head. A really frustrating feature until they figured out how to fix it for us ....

the current latency problem has gotten better and better as DAWs run on faster host cpus with more ram and faster storage. It was just a few years ago that the software for a DAW was far too demanding to run on anything but proprietary hardware that was VERY expensive. I can do more on my $300 netbook with protools or "reaper" than we could do in 1991 on $65K worth of hardware in an editing suite.

I tell the kids in my college sound classes how spoiled they are to grow up in a time where the DAW is sitting right in front of them ... with all of it's power and speed ... a modern day record plant in something you can tuck under your arm ....

back to the click thing:
recently I was playing around with a protools session that the original session tracks to Steely Dan's "PEG" had been transferred into (arguably one of the greatest grooves in pop music) ... they were on the grid for sure ... and very organic sounding. Each player was pushing and pulling the groove to achieve that "peg" sound. If you solo up a couple of tracks, it might sound sloppy, but the entire section played together sounded awesome.

The KIDD - Posted - 02/27/2011:  08:03:35

---

I hear ya Doub!..Man , you talk about tricky timing and the hardest collab we've done to date would have to be Rosanna. I had to get my live drum track with 16's in trips on HH to match the upbeat syncopation of my piano and R gtr. Even THEN, the lead parts seemed strained in places.Milli secs on my BD hits with the bass piano and gtr REALLY mattered in this one.
Toto fluctuated 6 BPM in their recording between parts.. I know why now!!.When ya listen to OUR version, I tried to create the
"lazier"feel on the bluesy jam out at the end..HARD to do with out anything to play to.. We had 19 tracks runnin in that crazy thing
KIDD

---

Edited by - The KIDD on 02/27/2011 08:06:03

Banjophobic - Posted - 02/27/2011:  12:22:07

---

In the solo stuff Ive posted, its finding the tempo that gives you the groove potential. I then lay down a track of the click. I then play the rhythm parts, usually bass or guitar or banjo-depending on how many parts for each there are. But I personally cant play with any groove unless theres a solid rhythmic 'map' in place. Yes, Ive heard folks diss click tracks, but theres hardly ever been a time in any of the session work Ive played on over the years when click track wasnt needed and extremely useful for the recording process. Try punching in to tracks that arent synced and you'll understand why clicks are vitally important to the recording process. Even the best players in the world see the need or a click track and you wont hear any complaints about how well they 'groove'. Dont let the ego tell you 'I dont need one'...you DO.haha
Trust me and what others have said..using a click wont hurt. Use it right and lay down some solid rhythm first. Everything else feeds of of it.

---

Edited by - Banjophobic on 02/27/2011 12:22:57

tom elder - Posted - 02/27/2011:  14:23:14

---

You ever play with a guitar player that keeps getting faster and faster,my drum machine doesn't do that do that.I play plenty lopsided to get the mechanical sound hidden.Sometimes a song can be slightly problematic at a tempo and all i have to do is drop it about 5 bpms to clean it up .That being said i never saw lester and earl with one on stage.

Erbus - Posted - 02/27/2011:  15:11:57

---

Lester and Earl were in no need of a click track or a lot of other great musicians for that matter, just put a click track to one of their recordings and it's bang on right till the end.

Laying down track one at a time sure isn't like a the chemistry that occurs playing live with a group of musicians.

Terry

bournio - Posted - 02/27/2011:  15:40:56

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pearcemusic


and this is sort of off of the topic, so sorry ... but
In projects where extensive editing is needed, recording to a click "on the grid" helps make edits, re-arranging, replacement of parts, "take the rhythm guitar from verse 2 and put it in verse 1" types of decisions very easy.

---

Or on the current project I'm doing... Single chords, words, and drum hits.

It is pretty painful! but at least they could play in time with the click, if not in tune or with good tone!

And I enjoy doing it.

Banjophobic - Posted - 02/27/2011:  19:15:25

---

Flatt and Scruggs played literally thousands of shows together and worked as one unit becasue of it. Most folks who are recording projects where they play multiple instruments, as they do here on the Hangout, cant play 'live' as a band anyway. The difference in F&S is that they also had literally thousands of shows together and it showed in their music. Most bands who 'play live' these days in a real studio do so in booths, where they can play together, but have no bleed over. Many of them also have a click, somewhere, that helps cement them and gives the engineer a much needed reference point.
Most bands who try to record live, together with no click find that making punches on things gets to be a very time consuming process and makes the process that much more difficult for everyone.
Some of the most famous recordings, with beautiful chemistry, were recorded in mulitple tracks and with clicks. Its not an either or situation.

---

Edited by - Banjophobic on 02/27/2011 19:17:39

tom elder - Posted - 02/27/2011:  19:43:03

---

I tend to think Lester and Earl had a bass player that worked diligently to keep the Bpms even and he was every one elses click track,i certainly don't look at it as either or either.

pearcemusic - Posted - 02/27/2011:  20:12:02

---

so this is now a "Click or no click" thread ..... :)
like the other guys said ... if everyone's playing at the same time, a click is not a help .... especially amongst the best of the best (tho the best of the best often play together to a click).
BUT ... when multitracking, a click or ANY standardized time reference, is a must for me ... i juss aint good enuf.

Banjophobic - Posted - 02/27/2011:  21:24:55

---

Well, I was just commenting on 'mutitracking' and using a click to help that. Sorry if I digressed..haha.

pearcemusic - Posted - 02/27/2011:  21:51:59

---

im withya ... :)

Banjophobic - Posted - 02/28/2011:  16:51:20

---

Now, back to your regularly scheduled programming...

tom elder - Posted - 02/28/2011:  17:43:44

---

I don't quiet know what is being said here.

MrNatch3L - Posted - 03/02/2011:  00:46:44

---

My approach varies with the song. Usually I will lay down a "guide track" which is usually a mix of me playing either acoustic guitar or piano, and singing the lead vocal. I find I keep time better with those instruments. I simply cannot work with a click track. I feel like a robot. Not optimal because as I have gotten older my timing sense has dulled. Sometimes the guide track may be banjo + vocal. After that, if the song has a drum track and/or any other percussion, I lay that down against the guide track playback. Even if the finished song won't have drums/percussion, I'll often lay down a track to give me a good reference later. I then follow with rhythm guitar and bass tracks. At that point I can usually mute the original guide track and start recording vocals, leads, etc. etc. until the song is finished.

Fishrrman - Posted - 03/02/2011:  20:33:38

---

I do almost exactly what B.C. Bill describes above.

First, I put together a lead sheet, indicating where breaks will be, with the vocals, chorus, etc. Print it out on the printer in BIG type so I can see it!

Then, I create a new "empty" project (I use Cubase on a Mac). I'll add about 8-12 empty tracks to start with. They'll eventually get filled and I'll probably need more tracks later.

Next, I set up a single mic (on "omni") for rough capture of guitar and a lead vocal. I'll run through a few times (not recording), and find the right tempo. Then I'll set the click where it seems to work best.

When that's done, I'll record a "dummy track" with vocals and guitar based on my lead sheet.

I'll play it back and make notations on the lead sheet indicating which bars each vocal line falls on -- this makes it easier to locate things during editing later on.

At this point, I'll get my mics set up (I like to record each track "in stereo") and it's time to record the basic guitar track. Usually 3 "run-throughs" is enough for that (3 separate stereo tracks).

I've found that if the song has vocals, it's probably going to work better to get at least the lead part done early on, so I'll do that next. At least 4 run-throughs, maybe 5.

Now that I have both guitar and vocal tracks, I can trash the original "dummy" track.

Additional instruments can be added at this point. Again, about 4 or 5 "takes" per instrument.

If there's a harmony vocal, it can usually come last.

All this is usually easy. The HARD part is the evaluation, and editing as to which of the takes will end up in the final mix!

- John

tomberghan - Posted - 03/03/2011:  03:39:08

---

If you will indulge me, I'd like to make a comment about the posts on the bottom of page one about Earl and Lester and what solid rhythm they had versus click tracks.

OK, so that is apple and oranges. I have played in bands for four decades and there is a huge difference between playing with others live versus laying down each track yourself. The latter is more difficult in my experience. Not that either is all that difficult, but I think it is easy to lock in with others in a live situation versus playing to prerecorded track. And, I still haven't figured out exactly why, but there is something weird . . . something slightly harder when the track is YOU. It just feels different when I am playing with another person (prerecorded or not) versus laying down a second track when I am also the musician on the other tracks.

But back to the topic . . . which track comes first?

Well, sometimes I have found that it works really well to put down a click track and play a rhytyhm guitar track, then record another part (banjo, mandolin, snare drum, whatever) and then go back . . . MUTE the rhythm guitar and the click track and re-record the rhythm guitar . . . because it then feels more like I am playing in a band with others.

Sometimes I do this several times . . . build up the tracks, and then re-record them one by one so it feels more like a band. Try it sometime, I think you will see what I mean. You might play just a tiny bit more inspired because it will feel like a band instead of just a dry old click track with an uninspired rhythm guitar.

tom elder - Posted - 03/03/2011:  04:25:21

---

In order for me to keep close to good time i have to have a good solid beat to lock onto.My footstomp does not do it,most rythym guitar does not do it including mine,though some folks can,i need a good strong bass or a click track to get things started.

pearcemusic - Posted - 03/03/2011:  05:51:33

---

I like Tom B's idea ... I'm gonna try it ...

1. click
2. play/record rhythm and secondary instrument
3. mute click and rhythm
4. re-record rhythm to secondary instrument, then continue tracking to that combo

I've noticed that I play fairly well when practicing with rhythm guitar tracks from "Flatpicking Apprentice" ... a cool web site shared here on the BHO.

rudy - Posted - 03/03/2011:  05:57:20

---

quote:

---

And, I still haven't figured out exactly why, but there is something weird . . . something slightly harder when the track is YOU. It just feels different when I am playing with another person (prerecorded or not) versus laying down a second track when I am also the musician on the other tracks.

---

Tom,
Thanks for pointing that out, as I think it's not a side note to this disscussion, but rather the MAIN point.

Solo multitracking is a entirely unique musical foray all by itself and requires a lot of techniques different to how we normally perform music. I think the original post question is meant in many ways to target the whole difficulty with generating that special "live feel" we're targeting.

It's interesting to contemplate that a lot of work in doing a actual live recording with a group of musicians playing simultaniously is hard enough to capture that elusive quality, but to add the complexity of doing it one track at a time with 1 individual musician at a time increases the difficulty exponentially.

I'm really enjoying reading all of the different ways people use to try and recreate that feel. This could end up being THE definitive solo musician multitracking thread.

Erbus - Posted - 03/03/2011:  05:58:33

---

I have at times done what Tom B describes because I didn't like the sound or tempo of the guitar and it works well.

Terry

rudy - Posted - 03/03/2011:  06:37:53

---

Fishrrman,
Excellent post. I also incorporate a lot of those same ideas. I used to do the separate tracking guide sheet as you described, but as soon as I got more familiar with my DAW of choice I started using track markers directly on the screen to use as visual ques as to where I'm at within a piece.

One other point:
Maybe this is so commonly used and obvious that nobody mentions it, but I find a good vocal count in is tremendously useful for coming in at the exact point of the song that I wish to. Regardless of the use of a click track or how your other overdubs are arrainged this allows you to use a volume envelope on this referance track any time you wish to drop the track volume to zero, but leave the count in until you no longer find it useful.

Laurence Diehl - Posted - 03/03/2011:  08:29:50

---

For jazz stuff I like using band-in a -box tracks, since I don't play bass drums or keys. They already have a swing feel built in and I respond so much better to that than a click.

5stringJim - Posted - 03/08/2011:  13:05:38

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pearcemusic

I like Tom B's idea ... I'm gonna try it ...

1. click
2. play/record rhythm and secondary instrument
3. mute click and rhythm
4. re-record rhythm to secondary instrument, then continue tracking to that combo

---

Yup, that method works for me (most of the time!). I often play PRIMARY instrument second, then re-record the rhythm...then sometimes redo the primary again, once I have that "bounce" to play off off. It very seldom reaches the bounce and drive that a real band does (though my "Dixie Hoedown" comes pretty close.)..........
banjohangout.org/myhangout/med...icid=1717

501jaycash - Posted - 03/12/2011:  18:10:34

---

Interesting stuff. When doing other peoples songs I'll put head phones on and put a solid rythym guitar track down and add the rest after that. It's nice to see so many pros and cons out there.

doug.knecht - Posted - 03/14/2011:  21:59:51

---

I usually record a scratch track, like a reference track, along with a click (sometimes). It's nice to lay down the scratch track with whatever instrument makes most sense. Different songs require different instruments, but usually either the banjo or guitar. Then I can go back and put the real tracks down later.

banjoluv - Posted - 03/20/2011:  11:15:44

---

Speaking of "clicking" together, R Skaggs and Kentucky Thunder never cease to amaze me on their recordings. Aside from the big boom smash sounds they get, I've noticed real changes in tempo during the song. Now granted they are always together on it but I find it interesting how one band's philosophy is to be completely together always with a steady, unchanging beat and other bands go for a more "realistic" feel with waivering tempo.

Of course, it seems like when Skaggs and the bunch do vary the tempo they almost always speed up! Ha!

---

Edited by - banjoluv on 03/20/2011 11:17:18

DantheBanjoMan - Posted - 03/21/2011:  10:40:24

---

I lay down a scratch track first, something that usually is nothing like the final product but has a strong beat that we can all sync up to. It is usually a guitar and vocal but sometimes piano and vocal. If I do it live I'll go back and make any minor corrections to make sure it is perfect. Once in a while I write it out note-by-note with a notation program and play it back through the computer just to make sure it's on beat, but that can make it too robotic. I also create a really long intro because that helps my bandmates get a feel for the beat. We have one band member who has a hard time staying on beat, and this helps quite a bit. On rare occasions I've even included vocal cues, counting down the measures and notes NASA style: "The guitar comes in on 3, 2, 1..."

After that I can record one track at time, which makes it easy if I have to make corrections on a particular track because there isn't any bleeding over.

bournio - Posted - 03/22/2011:  03:30:20

---

I've done that Dan... And when I'm recording other people I have been sat there with my finger on the talkback button reading through the chord changes "E... B... F...D.... E... B... and now you come in..."