Could you pls advise?

Suppose you are happy with the BIAB arrangement and you export the tracks to your DAW. For each track (bass, guitar, piano, etc), you may add your favorite VST instruments.

But will you double the tracks in order to have a fuller sound? I mean, should you duplicate so that you will have two tracks of piano, two tracks of drum, etc?

Thank you

Almost never. If I do, it's for the lead instrument or vocal.

This would be a good topic in the Recording/Mixing Forum.

I will do it for lead vox, rhythm guitar, and occasionally backup vox if I am the one singing. Some artists use doubling as an in-your-face effect, but I tend to keep it subtle.

I've done it on a part or two to emphasize a part. I've also detuned or put a little chorus on the doubled one and that can change the sound, sometimes making it sound fatter, sometimes just weird - experimentation is the key for me.

But I think if you did it to all the parts, it would sound pretty much the same.

I'm also talking MIDI here, I do most of my editing with MIDI because (1) it's easier to edit MIDI and (2) there are hundreds of edits you can perform on MIDI that you just can't do with audio yet.

Insights and incites by Notes

Mostly.......NO! Doubling a track in that manner does nothing except make it louder and risk other issues.

You can use compression and level control to get a louder sound if that's what you're after.

But before you do anything..... ask yourself and answer this question. What do you mean when you say you want a "FULLER SOUND"? Is there anything wrong with the version you have with one track each? Does it sound OK or does it lack something? Could the problem be solved another way...such as with EQ and compression?

Figure out what it's lacking first. There may be a way to get what you want... in fact there is....and you don't need to double to get it.


Having said that: doubling, tripling, and more (aka layering) is a useful tool when it's used correctly and in the proper places. Doubling everything in the project is NOT the right way to get it. In fact, that will simply cause other issues to occur. I use it on vox and acoustic guitars..... but I NEVER copy a track to do it. I always ALWAYS record unique tracks for each track I want in the mix. Levels and EQ are critical to a successful double vs something that isn't.

Most of the lead vocals in my projects are triples..... main in the center up nice and loud... 2 additional leads, lower, and panned 100% L/R. In fact, you probably can't hear the other lower vox in the mix..... but in a soloed state.... they are audible. That's how it works best. The subconscious hears them and to you....they simply sound a bit fatter, or fuller.

Often, the desire to double the tracks to get a "fuller sound" is really a band-aide solution on something else that's really the problem. You should be able to get a nice full sound with relatively few instrument tracks and none of them doubled. If you can't..... you need to find out why you can't and work on that problem.

Doubling is a fine technique to use if it helps you accomplish the sound you are looking for!

I have used it on vocal tracks to "thicken" my voice. And I have used it when I want a background of something like a strummed acoustic panned both right and left.

Of course you have to do a little more than just double the track...mainly add some delay to the doubled track. Check out these articles for more info,

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr09/articles/doubletracking.htm

http://music.tutsplus.com/tutorials/how-to-create-rich-depth-with-doubling-techniques--audio-559

Oh and John Lennon famously used Automatic Double Tracking to great effect!

If you are using BiaB, there is a special feature working behind the scenes to deal with the issue of doubling parts. It actually makes completely different parts, it doesn't try to just change one slightly from the other. This is for Realtracks.

If you put 2 or more of the identical Realtracks on separate tracks, BiaB will automatically generate different parts for each of them, so that there is no time in the arrangement that it would be playing the same thing - because if it did, it would sound like one player instead of two.

There is no setting needed for this, it just works, as long as you are generating them all at once by pressing the play button. We call this feature same-but-different.

Fwiw, in our tests, attempting to generate different parts by just offsetting the timing of an audio track, or panning doesn't work, and it often sounds worse. That's why we made the same-but-different feature, so that you actually hear 2 different parts play at all times.

This is really handy for the rhythm tracks. Use this on the acoustic guitars for example, in the background of the song. I simply set up 2 tracks and record my Taylor guitar 2 times playing the same thing. RB will also duplicate this quite easily and well.

I would not advise using this on a lead part for the attempted purpose of doubling the track since it does NOT play the same thing twice...... HOWEVER..... I use this unique function quite often on lead parts, not to double, but to choose segments from each part to create one awesome solo. Listen to the piano and the guitar solo in this song.

The Best Christmas

There are 3 piano parts rendered from the same piano in real band and there are 5...yes 5...count them.... 5 guitar tracks rendered from the same real band track and in Sonar, I used envelopes to allow the parts I wanted to play. The result is fills and a solo that sound like they are one simply amazing part/solo. Some of the piano fills, while very short, are in fact coming from 2 different tracks controlled by volume envelopes.

AS PeterG points out... the worst way to attempt doubling is the lazy man's way.... simply copying a track and delaying it or detuning it.... this method causes some serious phase issues as the frequency of the notes played a few milliseconds apart mix in the DAW. You get comb-filtering and that doesn't sound good. I've done it, we've all done it, it's just not the best or recommended way to do this.

A lot of people have used double-tracking in hit records. It's an effect, and like most effects, it's probably best to use sparingly and only when it contributes something special to the song.

Here's another approach. Have you tried a BBE Sonic Maximizer? A little bit of processing with that gizmo can really liven up tracks. (they have a software plug in too).

Like most things, too much is too much.

The theory behind it is this (the way I understand their literature):

The voice coil of any loudspeaker delays the high frequencies more than the low ones. Coils resist changes in voltage. This results in the low frequencies hitting your ears first.

The BBE has a control (process) that delays the low frequencies so that they highs and lows can enter your ear in phase. Since no two voice coils are alike you use your ears to adjust the process control. Note: I find it best to adjust the BBE before equalization.

There is also a low contour that acts like the "loudness" button on an old stereo set. It boosts the presence of the low sounds, adding punch without adding mud.

I have the hardware unit on my PA set, and won't leave home without it

Insights and incites by Notes.

Peter, this is a wonderful feature of BIAB and I use it a lot!! But on a few occasions I have seen BIAB generate the exact same part for two different tracks on a few bars. In these situations I either regenerate or I export each track individually and manipulate them in my DAW. I noticed this because I had both tracks panned hard left/right and on some bars it would come back to the center as they combined! If I see it again I will save the file and send it to you. I do not think I have seen this in BIAB 2015 yet. And, as I recall it was a ukulele RealTrack in at least one case.

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.

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!

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.




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.

Sounds like elitist BS to me! if a technique works and gets you the sound you want then by all means use it! John Lennon knew that as do thousands of others. I guess it is lazy to use pitch control or a digital reverb instead of building your own plate version? Must be really lazy to use BIAB instead of hiring studio musicians! It is always about the results, not whether you used this tool or that tool or took a route someone else considers "lazy".

Waves Doubler exellent on vocals and guitars!!!!!

That made me smile......

Yes, it's lazy when you simply copy a track to double it rather than recording it two, three, four or more times, taking the time to do it the right way when you have the option and the time to do it the right way. I don't think I have said "don't do it"....just that there is a better way to do it that takes more time, effort, and skill. It's not the easy path, but it does yield better results in the long run.

That's all.

Just as "nudge" is a tool that can line up a clip properly, pitch, reverb, and BB/RB are tools. Just as using a hammer to drive a nail is using a tool, rather then trying to use your hand or a rock..... tools make a job easier. It's not laziness to use a tool.

And if you want to use copy/paste/nudge & detune for your doubling .....all I can say to that is... be my guest. You will get out of it what you put into it.

Need my EBS filter for sure! You say doubling a track is lazy yet you use computer-generated backing tracks rather than hiring studio musicians! Gag at a gnat and swallow a camel much?

Everyone has their tools and techniques and shortcuts. One man's BIAB/digital reverb/ADT is another man's lazy technique. There is ALWAYS "a better way to do it" for everything in producing music (and life in general) but I choose the techniques that work for what we are trying to achieve in any given situation and ignore "authorities" who frown on such techniques. Because the end result is what I am after!!

Some do.....some talk. You talk a good game. When was the last time you posted some music you worked on?

Just wondering, because I took a few minutes to search back over 2 years to find and listen to something you actually recorded and posted to see and hear your skills in action.... sorry, but I came up empty handed.

I don't post my music here. Simple as that!

Care to elaborate on how you can say ADT is lazy while you use computer-generated backing tracks and that is not lazy? For the record, I don't think either one is lazy!

The first plug-in on ++ THIS ++ page should work. Here is a quote from the developer's page:

"ADT - Artificial Double Tracking
The ADT technique was developed at Abbey Road Studios by engineers recording the Beatles in the 1960s. To free John Lennon from having to sing everything twice for real double tracking they came up with an artificial replacement: they sent the original signal to another tape machine and re-recorded it. Due to the physical distance between record and playback heads the new signal was delayed. The length of the delay depends on the tape speed (the slower the tape is running the longer it takes for the signal to travel from the record to the playback head). However, due to the machine's (small amounts of) Wow and Flutter the delay time was not fixed but varied slightly, giving an additional chorus-like effect.
The ADT Plug-In takes a mono input signal and creates a stereo output. The original input signal will be output on one channel, the new ADT signal on the other. Blending the two is also possible. The Plug-In allows to control the delay time (10 - 50ms), Wow and Flutter (both with intensity in % and frequency). All values are based on the technical data of the tape machines that was originally used to create this effect."

By the way, this VST is free and is comparable to the $150(US) Waves doubler. There are 12 pages of comments on ++ THIS ++ KVR Audio forum.

Hi Jim,

You've done it again! This looks excellent. I'll have to give it a go.

It makes sense that the automatic doubling using a tape recorder is more effective than today's 'copy and paste' because of the mechanical variations that the machine naturally experiences. It's interesting to note that delay was also variable and a consequence of the electronics. Cool.

Regards,
Noel

• previous song: Just A Little After Midnight

Jim,

I've just tried this effect on a song I'm currently putting together. WOW!!! It's EXACTLY what I needed. A spectacular little plugin; and free too.

I owe you one!

All the best,
Noel

• previous song: Just A Little After Midnight

Thanks Jim! I'll give this a try...sounds even easier than doubling and shifting tracks!

Jim thanx, I know that I can find a use for this one.

Could you pls advise how I can use this feature in BIAB?

Thank you

The doubled tracks need to originate from the same RealTracks and both tracks regenerated at the same time.

Evidently the regineration process compares what portions of the RealTracks is used by one track then makes sure the same portion is not used in the same period of time in the second track. As long as both tracks are regenerated at the same time and are using the same RealTracks as source material it automatically works!

fantasyvn,

There are a couple of ways to use this feature...

1. Simply load the Realtrack onto two different tracks (e.g. String track and Piano track). Then, when the song is generated, PG Music programming (introduced a few years ago) ensures the tracks will be 100% different versions of the same Realtrack. For this to happen, the song needs to be fully regenerated so that all tracks are created simultaneously; regenerating an individual track will not work (as far as I understand the process, at least). This approach allows the tracks to be panned independently.

2. Use the Realtracks "Medley" option to assign multiple Realtracks to a single track.



This is found in the Realtrack Picker window. Before you can activate it, though, you need to assign a Realtrack to the track that you want to install multiple RTs on. Once you've selected your RTs, activate the "Play all simultaneously" checkbox.

If you have a look at the following link...

http://www.pgmusic.com/videos.bbwin.htm

...there's a video tutorial in the "Intermediate" section called "Band In A Box Medley Maker" that explains how to use it.

Regards,
Noel

• latest song, I Can See Tomorrow

I cannot recall which RT is was, maybe ukulele or acoustic guitar, but I had issues with BIAB generating the same part on several bars. I noticed it because I had them panned hard left and right and sometimes everything seemed to move to the center and get louder! I resolved this by simply nudging those bars in my DAW.

Thanks a lot for your kind tutorial.