I used to record and release music as many different acts in different electronic styles, but most of them are techno. Instrumental, without vocals. I like one take recording concept. When I use modular gear or sometimes when I use grooveboxes and more conventional synths anyway I prefer one take recording to 1 track recorder. Am I the only one or many producers do so? Who among Electronauts or famous producers used to do like that? And
3 Likes
Previously on Elektronauts:
13 Likes
this is my plan with my current setup – multiple devices running into my Behringer X2442 Xenyx USB, then outputting the signal into Logic for digital two-track stereo recording. but will see what my producer friend thinks about that idea (i suspect he won’t be keen but in theory the EQ and mixdown should all be able to be handled on the board)
1 Like
I do that. One take stereo recording. No multitracking.
10 Likes
Surgeon does that and sometimes adds some extra percussion etc after the fact.
5 Likes
I just work with a 2-track master, as I perform my music live with improvisation. Having stems isn’t very useful to me personally, and in most cases I would have to re-record or bounce stuff if I made changes anyway. I don’t have the patience for that.
I think it requires a different mindset to traditional arrangement - you need to be more accepting of the end result whatever it is. There are times I might want to remove a percussive element or change a part, but it’s ephemeral, what’s done is done. A lesson to take into the next track.
11 Likes
Most of my releases were live jams recorded to stereo, no multitracking, occasionally I’d use song mode/arranger but mostly not.
I’m quite interested in multitracking as a creative option though, but am yet to find something that can do what I want to do.
I think most people use multitracking in the most mundane and utilitarian way, just as a means to mix tracks individually, or apply boring, same as everyone else VSTs 
4 Likes
I think Stef Mendesidis & Mark Broom do one take stereo recordings.
1 Like
By the way, if I would buy Syntakt for example, can it be the only one instrument with enough live tweaking stereo field and main mastering FX for I could get ready raw track out of the box or it would be better to have some EQ and compressor + limiter at the end of chain? I dream of very compact and complete setup, easy for live techno improvisation… And in the same format minimalistic studio setup. Because 2 channel but one track recording is the same as live performance recording.
1 Like
There are so many classic rock, jazz, house and techno tracks that were one take stereo recordings it’s silly. I think one take recordings can have a vibe that is missing from songs recorded with 16 tracks devoted just to hihats. You’re not at all alone. I too have released recordings like this.
4 Likes
The Syntakt has the additional, so-called base-width filter on every digital track, and then there’s the filter of the analog fx block to which you can route any track. Every track has panning, every track can be routed to delay and/or reverb.
But it doesn’t have a compressor. In my opinion, one can use those tools and not need a compressor. But you can always add some not-so-expensive compressor at the end. Or, rely on the venues you are playing at have a mixer with compressor etc. built in.
4 Likes
Oh, thank you. I’ll research
Most of my stuff has been two track jams.
Mathew Jonson also does a lot of straight to stereo stuff.
Definitely a fun way to work.
1 Like
Hard to pull off nuance with just stereo. Not a fan when with just as much effort I can record 6-12 tracks depending on whether I record into DAW or Zoom.
1 Like
That’s why it takes a lot of practice
6 Likes
I play with four elektron machine into a mixer + FX pedal. I have always done one shot to 1 track for Dirty Amator Beats Ă©dits.
The result would certainly be more polish but Multitracking sounds like a lot of work back on the computer…
To a certain extent, I m not even sure that the mixing would improve that much. There is already much of it happening within each machine… I can’t fathom the idea of each single track for a full edit. Not enough hours in the day 
2 Likes
Yeah, just don’t personally see the point, seems like a waste of time tbh unless you play live a lot, at which point it’s just practise for live shows to me.
I’ll do at most 2 stereo tracks (pairs) into the 4in 4out interface, mixed in an outboard mixer upstream of the interface. Ill throw all the percussion into 1/2 and all the voices into 3/4. This is incase I feel that one of the parts is possibly going to blow up during performance and will make cleaning up the mix harder if it all was mixed down into a single 1/2 pair. But honestly the “what’s done is done” is an extremely refreshing perspective.
2 Likes
Honeysmack goes to 2-track. I do as well. If it sounds good as it’s happening what more are you going to get out of making more work out of it?
This reminds me of a story when I was interning at Dark Horse Recording in Nashville (Franklin). One of the other interns was pulling double duty interning at another studio. He was setting up a session at DHR and started dialing in the EQ on a 1073. I asked aren’t you worried about being able to edit later? He said no cause I’m not a pussy. That changed how I work now cause I force myself to make stuff sound great as it happens and not allow myself to dial stuff later. Commit now.
EDIT: The intern friend was learning from an established producer in town at his other internship who committed to EQ settings. So when he came back to DHR we were like whoa what are you doing.
10 Likes
I’m on the record everything as a stereo mix side of things. It takes more time to get mixes right, but it’s good practice to have your mixes right anyway if you play out!
2 Likes