Vocal Double-Tracking

[john]

 

Hey

 

To double-track or not to double-track? That is the question.

 

Once upon a time it was the inevitable tool in the producer’s production kit… but now? Engineers thicken up vocals in many ways.
 

What do you do? Double-track? Double-track with a personal twist? Use a pseudo-double-track-trick? Something else entirely?

 

cheers

 

John

[Glammerocity]

I'm often amused when people complain about autotune without realising the vast majority of their music collection has double-tracking. Butch Vig said Kurt Cobain refused to do it, until Butch told him John Lennon did it, then apparently it was ok.

[john]

2 hours ago, Glammerocity said:

I'm often amused when people complain about autotune without realising the vast majority of their music collection has double-tracking. Butch Vig said Kurt Cobain refused to do it, until Butch told him John Lennon did it, then apparently it was ok.

There’s a big difference between genuine double tracking, which is about added depth to a voice with no autotune etc… just a simple second take where you tried to match your timing. Modern day double tracking as generated by some autotune/harmony engines are very different.

[Glammerocity]

18 minutes ago, john said:

There’s a big difference between genuine double tracking, which is about added depth to a voice with no autotune etc… just a simple second take where you tried to match your timing. Modern day double tracking as generated by some autotune/harmony engines are very different.

 

It puts vocals more in tune as well as thickening, or depth as you put it. Why does it need depth added? It's still strictly cheating. So I think you're drawing a subtle distinction, not a big one. And if you think about it, even reverb is cheating. Your voice doesn't sound like that! It just irks me that there's a lot of people who'll complain about one aspect designed to make recordings sound better, while ignoring that massive rack of expensive equipment designed to make it all sound better. To my mind, autotune does what double tracking and comping used to do but quicker, which saves on studio time. Sure, without autotune some people might not have had hits but the same goes for many acts in the past. There are many old rock acts I listen to now and think wow, I was really naive when I was raving about them. I don't want to hear those records without the double tracking. They'd sound awful.

 

In "Down and Out in Paris and London" George Orwell said there are two places the public should never see: the kitchen of a good restaurant and the laundry of a hospital. I'd add the studios of their favourite bands to that list.

Edited October 8, 2021 by Glammerocity

[Mahesh]

On 10/8/2021 at 10:29 PM, john said:

just a simple second take where you tried to match your timing.

 

For the "Accept EP" that I worked on a few years ago (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CW0nN2l4qQ), my producer Leslie was very particular about having DTs. As you mention John, a simple second take with matched phrasing can add SOOO much harmonic character to the vocals in the mix. Thickens it up too. 

 

The only time I tend not to double track is when it is a home production (as opposed to a nice studio with enough hours you can afford) as it introduces more noise into my mix that I'd have to deal with it. Fading Colours is one such example. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDGy3X4tT-0

 

 

If I have the option to DT, I generally take it. 

 

[powerchord]

If song needs it, you should double track the vocals. But in general, double tracking is a good practice in chorus.