Comping question (post-comping, actually)

[Chipotle]

Originally Posted by b1j

I’ve now given a listen to all the hidden takes, and they’re basically so many loads of garbage. What seems unexpected by the good folks here is that my unused takes were unused because they are unusable. Welcome to my world.

I don't think anyone is saying that all the "bad" takes are actually good ones. Just that there's little benefit (and possible downside) to taking the time and effort to remove them after the fact. After you've created your comp, it's usually just a couple mouse clicks to hide all the takes so you only see the final comp, and move on to more important stuff.

I think Doug sums things up well, and:

The challenge is that often when you're playing, you don't know what the good takes are. Sometimes the take I thought was "the one" actually sucks when I listen back, and another that I thought I messed up sounds good. That's a good reason to not do anything rash, like cutting off the last notes, or swearing at the end :-) You just never know.

And sometimes, you don't know until far, far later. Ever think you had a track done, and then on the 178th listen you hear a mistake that you somehow missed the first 177 times? Or, a more extreme example, I recently remixed some tracks from 2020 that I recorded "live" to video, but for streaming release I wanted to clean up. I'm glad I kept all the takes, because the version used for the video had a few flubs that I could overlook for "live" performance, but for audio-only I was able to comp in a few alternate takes to improve things.

[b1j]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Steve wants most of all to capture the feel he's after, so we'll listen to them all, and Steve will take notes on parts he likes or doesn't as we go, but most of all, he's looking for the take that was the most musical, in some undefined way.

Doug, thanks for pointing this out. This is the other reason I’m going to try to change my process and capture more takes, even after it feels like I have one with no mistakes. It would give me more to work with. There’s more to a good recording than the absence of technical flaws. I’ll keep this in mind when I start up today.

[b1j]

After my day in the studio, Doug’s advice rings true. In one passage in particular, I had about six error-free takes, but only two fit my taste for an expressive, musical passage. It’s the first day of the rest of my life.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by b1j

After my day in the studio, Doug’s advice rings true. In one passage in particular, I had about six error-free takes, but only two fit my taste for an expressive, musical passage. It’s the first day of the rest of my life.

Something else to keep in mind is that you can break you guitar tracks up into smaller chunks. A "take" doesn't have to be the entire song.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by jim1960

Something else to keep in mind is that you can break you guitar tracks up into smaller chunks. A "take" doesn't have to be the entire song.

Yeah, that's an option. In my example of my work with Steve Baughman, he always wanted to capture complete takes. We're talking solo guitar here, and he just seems to feel that there's more cohesion or maybe integrity to the piece if it was all one performance (with a few edits here and there).

I mostly do the same, again, solo fingerstyle guitar, but if needed, breaking it up works. Most easily done if using a click track. I've done this mostly when recording something that I'm not interested in learning as a performance piece, like a tune for a book or article, especially if I'm reading the parts, and the music spans multiple pages. Record page 1, as many takes as needed, then on to page 2, etc.

I don't know about the DAW b1j is using, but Logic also has some cool features for recording in sections, especially if you're doing a sort of pop tune with a typical structure. You can create "Arrangement" markers, like verse, chorus, etc, and then once you've recorded, you can simply drag those around, re-ordering the tune, making copies, etc. So with a typical pop tune, you can just record one verse, one chorus, and a bridge, and then drag the parts around as needed. You can reorder and duplicate either a comp, or the pre-comp'd set of takes and everything goes with it. Not something I use a lot for solo guitar, but handy for more multi-instrument kinds of things. No need to play everything multiple times if you don't want to.

[b1j]

Originally Posted by jim1960

Something else to keep in mind is that you can break you guitar tracks up into smaller chunks. A "take" doesn't have to be the entire song.

Among other sections, I did several takes for a two-note sequence. But it’s the best those two notes ever came out. True story. Crossfades are my friend.

So yeah, smaller chunks.

[b1j]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Yeah, that's an option. In my example of my work with Steve Baughman, he always wanted to capture complete takes. We're talking solo guitar here, and he just seems to feel that there's more cohesion or maybe integrity to the piece if it was all one performance (with a few edits here and there).

I mostly do the same, again, solo fingerstyle guitar, but if needed, breaking it up works. Most easily done if using a click track. I've done this mostly when recording something that I'm not interested in learning as a performance piece, like a tune for a book or article, especially if I'm reading the parts, and the music spans multiple pages. Record page 1, as many takes as needed, then on to page 2, etc.

I don't know about the DAW b1j is using, but Logic also has some cool features for recording in sections, especially if you're doing a sort of pop tune with a typical structure. You can create "Arrangement" markers, like verse, chorus, etc, and then once you've recorded, you can simply drag those around, re-ordering the tune, making copies, etc. So with a typical pop tune, you can just record one verse, one chorus, and a bridge, and then drag the parts around as needed. You can reorder and duplicate either a comp, or the pre-comp'd set of takes and everything goes with it. Not something I use a lot for solo guitar, but handy for more multi-instrument kinds of things. No need to play everything multiple times if you don't want to.

I’m not that guy. My goal with recording is to have a mistake-free but still expressive “document” that bears up under repeated listenings. It’s similar to what I used to do when I had the space for black and white darkroom. Comping is the new burning in.

As for my DAW, I hear that Studio One does everything Pro Tools or Logic can do. I started with it in 2010 when it had a home-hobbyist focus, and just grew up with it through the years. I mainly use the Arranger track for labeling and quick navigating to the verses and choruses. But for the two songs I’ve written, it was a helpful feature to get everything down in order.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Yeah, that's an option. In my example of my work with Steve Baughman, he always wanted to capture complete takes. We're talking solo guitar here, and he just seems to feel that there's more cohesion or maybe integrity to the piece if it was all one performance (with a few edits here and there).

I mostly do the same, again, solo fingerstyle guitar, but if needed, breaking it up works. Most easily done if using a click track. I've done this mostly when recording something that I'm not interested in learning as a performance piece, like a tune for a book or article, especially if I'm reading the parts, and the music spans multiple pages. Record page 1, as many takes as needed, then on to page 2, etc.

I don't know about the DAW b1j is using, but Logic also has some cool features for recording in sections, especially if you're doing a sort of pop tune with a typical structure. You can create "Arrangement" markers, like verse, chorus, etc, and then once you've recorded, you can simply drag those around, re-ordering the tune, making copies, etc. So with a typical pop tune, you can just record one verse, one chorus, and a bridge, and then drag the parts around as needed. You can reorder and duplicate either a comp, or the pre-comp'd set of takes and everything goes with it. Not something I use a lot for solo guitar, but handy for more multi-instrument kinds of things. No need to play everything multiple times if you don't want to.

Interesting I tend to use the one pass all the way through method at least in the main part of my most of my productions if for no other reason than I have never had much luck recording the main guitar or the vocals in deliberate sections.
However I have recently started playing with auto punch in (which I suppose is a type of section devision) yet still maintains the flow of one pass

For example in my "One Pass One Take" series of productions
I will record a pair of mics on the guitar and the lead vocal part all at the same time, and I usually try to record all the way through the song

In full disclosure I will often do more than one take, (so a bit of a misnomer) But if or example I make a blatant error I will stop that take delete it, then start on another single entire pass. And I keep going until I get one good pass all the way through But I am going to try the auto punch method instead on my next production to see if I like that better

I do believe that Studio One which b1j uses also has some kind section marking

[b1j]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

I mostly do the same, again, solo fingerstyle guitar, but if needed, breaking it up works. Most easily done if using a click track.

I meant to add that I arranged this piece with a slight rubato and different tempos for different passages. A click track wasn’t possible. So, for each segment, I tracked the solo voice, giving it the expression I heard in my head. I did usually go full-length on those eight bars. Once the lead was down, I applied each of the accompanying parts to it in turn. Then I moved on to the next passage, usually eight bars at a time. The lead voice would change from section to section, so, even if I could or wanted to track the whole song, there were several lead-instrument changes along the way. In this way, I shimmied through the piece.

Yesterday I nailed the most technically challenging few measures in one of the solos, and the remaining punch-ins are minor. So today it’s the eight-bar coda that’s been entirely untracked so far. All hands on deck.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by b1j

I meant to add that I arranged this piece with a slight rubato and different tempos for different passages. A click track wasn’t possible. So, for each segment, I tracked the solo voice, giving it the expression I heard in my head. I did usually go full-length on those eight bars. Once the lead was down, I applied each of the accompanying parts to it in turn. Then I moved on to the next passage, usually eight bars at a time. The lead voice would change from section to section, so, even if I could or wanted to track the whole song, there were several lead-instrument changes along the way. In this way, I shimmied through the piece.

Yesterday I nailed the most technically challenging few measures in one of the solos, and the remaining punch-ins are minor. So today it’s the eight-bar coda that’s been entirely untracked so far. All hands on deck.

Not that you would need or want to, but it is possible to automate the click track through automating tempo changes in different song sections in S1

[keith.rogers]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Not that you would need or want to, but it is possible to automate the click track through automating tempo changes in different song sections in S1

You can, but my experience is that it's pretty-to-very hard (at least for me!) to play to a click that's variable, especially when the intent is something like rubato, i.e., vs. a hard change at defined break. Maybe it would help when you've got a take that you like the tempo, and are just trying to punch in a note or two, but I find it easier to play along to a take or guide/backing track that has the tempo captured as I want it. (Once I've got a comp with the notes I like, I can pull and stretch it around if I really want to change timing, but usually by that time I'm just doing it to match up any other trailing tracks that are sticking out, rhythmically.)

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by keith.rogers

You can, but my experience is that it's pretty-to-very hard (at least for me!) to play to a click that's variable, especially when the intent is something like rubato, i.e., vs. a hard change at defined break. Maybe it would help when you've got a take that you like the tempo, and are just trying to punch in a note or two, but I find it easier to play along to a take or guide/backing track that has the tempo captured as I want it. (Once I've got a comp with the notes I like, I can pull and stretch it around if I really want to change timing, but usually by that time I'm just doing it to match up any other trailing tracks that are sticking out, rhythmically.)

Good point I have never tried to use a click with tempo changes hard or rubato. Now days I seldom use a click at all.
So I am uncertain if one can automate in a ramp up or down in tempo?
In fact seldom do tempo changes of any kind (intentionally that is )
I recall only one song that I play where I slowly and steadily ramp up the tempo from a slow start to a fairly rapid finish (which BTW is Fogerty's Who'll Stop The Rain)

[b1j]

Oh, I love a click track for my pop and Americana songs. Snap to Grid is my friend.

For me, the whole idea behind the loose timing in this piece is to treat it like a dance, for lack of a better word. Or maybe like an a cappella quintet with a director leading the phrasing. There are moments of expressive pause before gliding back into tempo, and times when the next segment needs to speed up or slow down just a bit. It’s the direct opposite of automation. That’s why I need each section to have an intact lead part comped before adding the other 3 or 4 parts.

For the music nerds among us, the instruction is adagio cantabile. Slowly, singingly.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Interesting I tend to use the one pass all the way through method at least in the main part of my most of my productions if for no other reason than I have never had much luck recording the main guitar or the vocals in deliberate sections.

The arrangement thing can be useful in some cases, especially since it cuts across multiple tracks. I have mostly used it for mockups - how would this sequence work? and so on. for what I do 99% of the time, it's not going to be useful for an actual final recording, more of a songwriting tool. But when it's useful, it's great. I've done recording for a local theatre group here for several years, and I'll be working with a backing track and like 20 vocals. They'll be all done and suddenly want to rearrange the structure of the tune, drop a verse, add a chorus, etc. It could all be done manually, but with this feature, it's trivial to operate on all the tracks at once and give them what they want.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Good point I have never tried to use a click with tempo changes hard or rubato. Now days I seldom use a click at all.
So I am uncertain if one can automate in a ramp up or down in tempo?
In fact seldom do tempo changes of any kind (intentionally that is )
I recall only one song that I play where I slowly and steadily ramp up the tempo from a slow start to a fairly rapid finish (which BTW is Fogerty's Who'll Stop The Rain)

I've done that a far bit in Logic (as well as some earlier DAWs). You can basically draw in any curve you want. It's a lot of work to program in where you want to be "rubato" or where you'd like to slowly increase the tempo, but it can be done. I've also changed time signature to support fermatas, and so on. Useful when you're working with others. I'm happy being "expressive" with time on a solo guitar piece, but if I want to ask others to overdub something, asking them to follow my free time can be a bit much. Having a click track, even if it's varying in tempo makes that all much more feasible. And having the time actually vary can help keep it from being overly stiff.