Recording in one take

Lately I have been lazier with my recording, we do alot of prog-rock time sig crazy poly-stuff, and then ther groove groove (dream theater but calmer like porcupine tree) Anyway, I find there is more pride and satisfaction in one take, but a 12 min. long song I'd almost rather just punch in here and there between crazy sections to finish it quicker. Thoughts?
 
Should add this:
First of i said "we" when really its me tracking all the instruments and the music isnt published or really shared to much, even tho I record gig and teach professionally i like to do the obnoixious shred vain music on my own time ha! Anyway i guess the discussion is regarding one take versus punching in
 

Otto

Platinum Member
Depends on the feel you are wanting...

Punch-in can be smooth...but nothing is like the overall feel of a one shot take.

...besides, practicing until you can do a one shot take will mean you can probably do it live as well...

Practice until you cant do it wrong...
 
Depends on the feel you are wanting...

Punch-in can be smooth...but nothing is like the overall feel of a one shot take.

...besides, practicing until you can do a one shot take will mean you can probably do it live as well...

Practice until you cant do it wrong...
totally agree, I guess it is different since this wont be played live, just recording just to record and something fun to jam too
 

mikel

Platinum Member
Yea....do it in one take.

I well remember seeing the Close to the Edge tour by Yes back in the 70s. Two hours, straight through. Awesome musicianship, and superb performance of beautiful but highly complex music.

Rehearse man, rehearse.
 

steverok

Silver Member
I often find that, while later takes might have less mistakes, or be more "correct", the earlier takes often have more energy and a fresher feel. My approach is to get a good, snappy take, and then fix it with a punch-in if I have to.
 
Yea....do it in one take.

I well remember seeing the Close to the Edge tour by Yes back in the 70s. Two hours, straight through. Awesome musicianship, and superb performance of beautiful but highly complex music.

Rehearse man, rehearse.

Probably good practice, just annoying when I need to track the bass lead and rhytm guitars and all that, if I ever get the confidence to publish it or play live I will take the time, right now all my practicing and learning tunes is for the music i get paid to play lol :eek:)
 

drummerman42

Senior Member
Personally I would rather almost do the drum track in one take if yo can pull it off that way. I find that when I do multiple takes, usually about nine per song, I'll find the one that i find to be the most satisfying and energetic, lay that one down as the foundation and then take other nuances from the other takes and paste them into the foundation track. Almost like building a hybrid track. then when it's done, you get a complete MONSTER drum track. The only thing is that, when you come to playing it LIVE you have to learn that MONSTER track.
 
P

plangentmusic

Guest
Here's a little secret...

People wonder how I get tracks done so quickly. This is what I do...

I have every instrument on two tracks. I play until I make a mistake, cut, switch to the other track, then do the same thing, back and forth until it's done.

Cheating? Hell yeah, BUT...once I'm finished with the process (mixing, listening a hundred times, etc) I'd be able to do it live with no problem.

The thing with recording is that it has to stand up to repeated listening, whereas a live performance can have a little imperfection and it's fine.
 

DrumEatDrum

Platinum Member
As a matter of self pride, I always strive to do everything in one take.

However, it is rather amazing how many of our favorite records are NOT one take, and the performance is a result of punch-ins, over dubs, or splicing together multiple takes.
 
P

plangentmusic

Guest
As a matter of self pride, I always strive to do everything in one take.

However, it is rather amazing how many of our favorite records are NOT one take, and the performance is a result of punch-ins, over dubs, or splicing together multiple takes.
It's best to go for it that way, but in a real fife situation where you can just punch it, or spend another $300 in the studio to try it again, guess which one will be expected of you? lol

The same goes for singing. It always sounds better to do it in one take. But if a note is off pitch, there's no pride in leaving it or re-doing the entire take. Just punch it.

Having siad that, the drums are the hardest to punch because of all the overtones, so yeah, it's expected that a drummer can go top to bottom without stopping.
 
A

audiotech

Guest
It's the way things were done and it also helped if you were great with a razor blade, for splicing tape, not cutting wrists.

Dennis
 

Elpecs

Senior Member
I would do whatever it takes to have a good track going on. For me it's just usually playing the parts, and then fixing minor mistakes as long as the proper energy and feel is there. It's true that after recording a lot of takes it starts to get annoying and frustrating but you gotta a professional and always deliver! Still, I don't find anything wrong with tracking per sections a 12 min song. You must really focused to play throughout the whole song focused and consistent.
 
Here's a little secret...

People wonder how I get tracks done so quickly. This is what I do...

I have every instrument on two tracks. I play until I make a mistake, cut, switch to the other track, then do the same thing, back and forth until it's done.

Cheating? Hell yeah, BUT...once I'm finished with the process (mixing, listening a hundred times, etc) I'd be able to do it live with no problem.

The thing with recording is that it has to stand up to repeated listening, whereas a live performance can have a little imperfection and it's fine.


exactly what I do! I always make sure the cymbals ring into the next take to ensure good flow.
 
Top