Which Elektronauts (or famous techno/electronic producers) don't use multitrack recording?

The Lounge General Discussion
#41

All that 90s techno and Elektro stuff Sounds pretty amazing on big club systems though. I mean you probably wouldn’t do a mainstream pop record as stereo recording but with electronic music I think it’s quite different. Getting the bass just right for example has much more to do with experience than at what time in the workflow you mix it.

I would actually suggest that stereo recordings is a very good way of learning how to do this as you have a much more instant feedback when listening to the final result. Then if it’s not good you make changes for the next recording. This gives you a very accurate way of listening.

Don’t get me wrong. There are many advantages to multitrack recording and new tools can be very helpful. Still if the final result is what we are discussing then I think experience and a good listening environment is more important than what workflow you prefer.

6 Likes
#42

As do I for the most part, or more specifically when it sounds like it came from a DAW, or using other modern gear that sounds too sterile, I find a lot of the modern digital synths, fx and workstations sound too clean and lifeless too.

I find it quite funny how there are lots of ways to add ‘vintage vibe” and faux lo-fi, but most of it sounds like crap to me, with very few exceptions, OTO stuff being a notable exception.

None of the music I buy is this kind of clean sterile commercial stuff either, and the artists whose music I buy seem to be doing ok for themselves, with actual noise on their music, and less than “perfect” productions.

By contrast a lot of people I see doing this overly clean “competitive” whatever it is called now stuff, seem to not being doing too well, but trying to fake it until they make it. Watching tutorials on how to make whatever the current flavour of the month technique or sound is, seems like they are all looking for a shortcut to “success” to me.

Still, I heard tracks made solely in Reason that unless told, I would not have thought so, the person did not have any hardware synths but knew what he wanted to sound like, and this was more than 10 years ago.

1 Like
#43

There is great and not so great music made with multitrack, stereo track, daw and dawless. Depends on the goal and what workflow suits the musician…

There are tons of sterile formulaic daw tracks, there are tons of noodly, badly leveled dawless jams that go nowhere. And there is excellent stuff done with whatever method.

I‘m very impressed by people that manage to get complex stuff and mixes done with live recording to one stereo tracks. It’s a tough challenge that needs a lot of practice.

I like jamming with hardware, I also like fiddling around in ableton.

7 Likes
#44

I worked like this and had a couple releases. Biggest challenge was really labels being like “what if this section was a bit longer and an extra part came in?” and I’d have to explain I might as well write a new track at that point.

What made this work for me was using a real mixer at the center of my setup - not even a pricey one, just a 16 channel Mackie. It helps to actually do a mix, have your FX on aux sends, maybe a little subtractive EQ (although with a lot of modern boxes you can shape it all with filters)

The other thing was having an Octatrack at the center of the setup and really getting into arranger so it felt a bit focused as far as changing up elements.

4 Likes
#45

I do all my stuff straight to stereo.

I’ll sometimes add little ear-candy fx, or overdub & few hand-played parts, & field recording beds etc after, but it’s never more than 2 or 3 overdubs. the core of the track is straight to stereo. If you’re trying to ‘perform’ a track, complete with all your mixing etc as you go, it’s the only way to do it really, you can naturally feel your way through the piece. Yeah, if you royally fuck-up you have to start again, but for me personally it’s still better than the jigsaw approach of a full multitrack recording… & I spent many years doing it that way too, both for my own music & my day job ( that has to be multitracked for other people ! )

3 Likes
#46

Overbridge totally changed my game. I find it a luxury to be able to add stuff in Ableton (fx, eq, comp) after finishing a multitrack recording. Using Overbridge also makes changes to the arrangement a lot easier. My only gripe are the send fx. I was so far not able to record those individually in one take, only combined.

#47

I read somewhere that AFX recorded Syro or most of the tracks on a stereo track but I cannot find the article anywhere now. Maybe it was just a dream. Sounds pretty wild if there is any truth to that.

1 Like
#48

https://archive.ph/cTNxL
https://archive.ph/aKu80

3 Likes
#49

That and the lack of panning information sent per track on the ST and DT!

Anyways, I’ve been struggling with the multi vs. stereo tracking debate for the past 2 years. I’m so used to being ITB and having such fine control over all my mixes, and my writing partner is very much into having that “pristine” sound when we’re working together. But I’m also finding multitracking all the hardware, especially on the Elektron boxes with how useless Overbridge is, to be a pain in the ass.

I do think I may find a happy medium where I multitrack each box separately (DT, DN, ST, Micromonsta2) and then do some basic EQ/comp/etc. on each of those tracks. It can def. be hard to get the mixes just right on the Elektron boxes, especially with really busy music and no real EQ options. While the filters are great, if you use them for EQ, you lose them for actual sound sculpting.

But hey, if I wanted to make pristine tunes, I’d go back in the box - it’s more fun pressing buttons and just making tunes.

2 Likes
#50

All my released songs have been multitracked hardware jams. I do ‘perform’ them when recording, including crude transitions and then tweak/mix/add valhalla on everything, but I think I do need that bit of flexibility. My current setup is stereo out only (because of space issues mostly) and while it’s a ton of fun I haven’t released a tune in ages :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like
#51

Yes, this is how I do it. The only method that works for me to actually finish things. Not too concerned with stereo placement so I mostly work in mono. Sometimes I split the synths onto one track and drums onto another. I’ve had to save the occasional track with some eqing or just live with with some “mistakes.” Getting the bass right can be the most difficult for me.

#52

…i’m not aware of any “famous” or other kind of pro’s or whatever u wanna call them, that get along with just catching everything they create in one take, one final recording…

this can be a great hobby or ur mission in life…and u might gonna catch heaps of surprisingly good recordings…
and u can even nail it with lot’s of expertise and exercise at some point, at least for certain genres, but any sort of detailed final arrangements and final mixdowns can only be achieved by final options to nail the details…

sure u can cut any live impros and pre defined loose arrangements u recorded in one go later for final length and appearance adjustments, but that, again, works only for some rare genres…

1 Like
#53

Both of these can be a downside for sure, although on a few occasions where both of these things happened to me I got round them.

In the first case where the label wanted a change, I just edited the file in Audacity.

In the second case, I keep going after the fuck up and try to get back on track, then when done chop out the fuck up.

Of course it isn’t always possible, depending on the situation, but worth remembering in the cases where it might be.

This is a great method, as it allows stuff to be added where it wasn’t possible to add at the time, maybe due to not enough hands/sound sources or whatever.

5 Likes
#54

I think it really depends on a) how convenient one’s setup is to multitrack and b) how much is to be gained by doing it.

For instance multitracking an Octatrack by recording the tracks one by one is a pain and, at least in my usage, the improvement from mixing it later on instead of making it sound the best I can and then recording a stereo (or double stereo) mix is not worth it.

On the other hand, multitracking an acoustic drum kit takes effort too, but good luck making it sound really good with just a single pair of mics…

Which approach one chooses depends on where the goals regarding the end result are situated in this continuum. This ties into what has been said regarding audience expectations. However I think that such decisions should not be based simply on what famous producers do. If you work full time making music, obviously the equilibrium of “effort vs. result” will be different than for semi-pros and hobbyists…

1 Like
#55

depends who you’re referring to: rock bands or an electronic artist? with most electronic music, once you get the balance and dynamics between instruments set, you’re mostly good. and I’m guessing that’s what a lot of stereo-only folks in here are doing… but rock music (for example, though this clearly applies to many genres) may have much greater dynamic changes between intro/verse/chorus/bridge/solo/etc that it takes more finesse to get that balance right throughout the track. plus you have to deal with live instruments being physically played versus machines being sequenced. which means imperfection that you either have to live with or try to smooth out. or you’ve got an amazing engineer riding all the faders, EQ’s, and compressors for every take… anyway, point is this takes time and that means money.

3 Likes
#56

After careful consideration I’m pretty sure it’s drugs and hookers on drugs that ran that bill up to 7 figures. :grinning:

1 Like
#57

What a fantastic free piece of software! It’s on my must install list when reformatting or new laptop.

1 Like
#58

Always.

Each and everytime, all of the time.

A friend recently described his experience when he opens up his DAW.

“I feel like some office worker who has been staring at the same wall for 10 years.”

(He’s famous FWIW.)

5 Likes
#59

I have gone back and forth with this myself. It’s nice to be able to edit in the DAW, I will say that. Lately been thinking that maybe I will 2 track the Drums all in one stereo file and then synths/bass and vocals for 3 stems.

got an SP16 coming and I am really tempted to just spit the kick out of it, send that into my SSL mixer and track the rest as a stereo file. I think it will matter how the arrangements sound. My issues is I tend to change my mind on arrangements a bit too much, so I need to get past that.

Also any of you all record a stereo out and then add a few synths to it in post? Curious how everything gels together. For me, I glue a mix by running it through the OTO Boum. But I typically have a decent amount of stuff split out.

One thing that has been sticking out a lot for me lately is that the sound of a well balanced/mixed stereo out coming from about any machine I own, just sounds better than when everything is split out. It sounds more cohesive and gelled.

#60

At least for Techno music, I prefer to record a live stereo track to a handheld recorder. My workflow has not changed much since the very early 90’s.