Quote:
I am not sure if we are talking about the same thing here but I am talking primarily about doubling a single track for "thickening" a vocal where the singer cannot sing a double for whatever reason. In these cases this technique can work quite well.


I thought that was the topic of discussion in this thread. If a singer can sing a track, certainly, they should be able to record a second (or more) track in a short time. Unless the taxi is outside honking the horn, in which case, you gotta work with what you got into that one track. I might have used this on "Give Me A Chance" because we recorded one take. I'd have to go back to the project and look to be 100% sure. The singer was not able to get back to record anther after that with her school schedule. So, yeah... sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do, or do without. When we did the original recording, I wasn't thinking about doubling the track. After the fact, I did. Too late.

Quote:
IMHO it is silly to call a technique "lazy man's way". Did the Revolver album suffer because John and the others were "lazy" and chose to use ADT instead of actually performing doubles? If a technique helps you achieve the sound you want then use it!



It is the "lazy" way to do it since doing it right means you have to take the time and make the effort to record a brand new track and get the phrasing 99.9% accurate.... vs simply doing a copy and paste then nudging the track a few milliseconds.

After all the goal of a double is NOT to have two or more audible voices but to simply make the one sound fuller, thicker, fatter. IIRC, the Beatles did use it quite a bit and it kinda became a signature sound so to speak. The Beatles invented lots of things and as a result of them being at the beginning of new concepts, had the levels set differently from what many producers use today. Not wrong, but just different...they were breaking new ground and learning about things as they went. I heard a story about Paul. It was said that he spent 2 days...and not 8 hr days, but much more than that, working in the Abby Road studio on ONE vocal track for a single song.... doubling the tracks by recording a new unique track and getting it perfect. He didn't copy it or punch it in or splice it.... he wanted it right. Beginnings of words, the consonants, the endings, the inflections.... everything had to be right.

But here's the critical thing.... while yes, absolutely, lots of hit records from every genre are using this, and have been for decades, it's critical to get it right and most folks who are using the lazy man's way to double are probably also a sure bet that in addition to being lazy, they don't really know how to get a decent double that doesn't sound obvious and have comb filtering issues in it. A good ear can almost always tell when someone is just starting out using this technique and quite often when the track is copied and nudged. I admit I have used the lazy man's double a time or two myself. Nothing's wrong with that...we all have to start somewhere and learn as we go.

Last edited by Guitarhacker; 05/14/15 03:15 PM.
You can find my music at:
www.herbhartley.com
Add nothing that adds nothing to the music.
You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both.

The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.