Putting songs together?

LSK · Post by **LSK** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:56 pm

I've had difficulty (both with the current songfight [my first] and past songwriting attempts) with piecing together multiple parts. They always seem to be off-sync, not working together, or things of that sort. I've had similar problems with remixes, which I just can't manage.

Billy's Little Trip · Post by **Billy's Little Trip** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:39 pm

What program and or recording equipment are you using.
When you say, "piecing together multiple parts", do you mean individual tracks, or piecing parts end to end on one track?
I'm sure that if you give a bit more info, myself or someone here can help.

LSK · Post by **LSK** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 6:31 am

I mean taking individual tracsk and mixing them together.

(By the way, someone PMed me with intent to help me, but this is still good to learn.)

Steve Durand · Post by **Steve Durand** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:49 am

It sounds like you may be talking about latency problems. The solution will be specific to whatever hardware you are using.

Make sure that you have the latest drivers for your soundcard. Use an ASIO driver if you can.

You can adjust the settings for buffer size and things like that to reduce latency.

You really ought to start by reading the documentation for your hardware.

Steve

Billy's Little Trip · Tue Aug 21, 2007 11:43 am

My first thought was latency problems too. But he still hasn't said what he's recording on. He could be click tracking parts with no set sync points, and trying to piece them together in a new project. He did say when he "pieces" parts together.

LSK · Post by **LSK** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:23 pm

Sorry, I haven't stated my problem very clearly. Let me attempt to explain in detail.

Basically, I have a song (a theoretical song) which I have recorded in multiple parts. The parts are not necessarily synchronized because they were recorded on separate occasions, and may sound bad together. I do not know proper techniques to synchronize these and piece them into a single song.

Note that this is not a hardware problem - If I record over a song, the new recording will be on-sync. I am recording without the original playing, because recording with the original playing requires a complete, start-to-finish, performance.

starfinger · Post by **starfinger** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:25 pm

i think that's just a bad way to do it.

Tonamel · Post by **Tonamel** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:51 pm

Are you recording the seperate tracks using a click track?

It sounds like you're not, and if that's the case... you should.

LSK · Post by **LSK** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:53 pm

Tonamel wrote:Are you recording the seperate tracks using a click track?

It sounds like you're not, and if that's the case... you should.

Thanks! Is there a good way to see (visually) where the clicks are so that I can place the tracks together?

ken · Post by **ken** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:01 pm

What software do you use? You can always record the click track and then you would be able to see the clicks in the waveform. I think you would be better off learning to play your parts start to finish, or at least with some kind of reference.

Ken

Post by jb » Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:06 pm

LSK, one of the basic principles of recording music at home is that you record a track while listening to the previous tracks. You do not record tracks in isolation from each other unless you are purposely trying to prevent them from lining up.

Do you need help figuring out how to listen to your previously-recorded tracks while you record a new one?

JB

LSK · Post by **LSK** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 3:38 pm

jb wrote:LSK, one of the basic principles of recording music at home is that you record a track while listening to the previous tracks. You do not record tracks in isolation from each other unless you are purposely trying to prevent them from lining up.

Do you need help figuring out how to listen to your previously-recorded tracks while you record a new one?

JB

No, I can do that, it's just that I make mistakes from time to time.

As for click tracks... how do I remove them when I'm done?

Post by **Lunkhead** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 3:58 pm

A click track usually is just a metronome that plays when you record. Generally you wouldn't actually record it. Most folks only need to hear it, so they can play to the beat. If you record all your tracks to the same beat they should line up rhythmically, which is a good start to making your songs not suck.

But if you decide to record it for some reason, just mute the track it's on when you're doing your final mix down.

Billy's Little Trip · Post by **Billy's Little Trip** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 4:14 pm

In past collaborations I've done here, I've gotten back parts that weren't properly lined up to the wav I sent them to record to, for some reason. 8)
Basically, in this situation, I lined them up as close as I could, then went to a sharp hit, like a snare hit, that was also a hit point for the instrument that I was trying to line up. Then I will blow them up as big as I can and line up the peaks of both on the sound wave. By the way, have I mentioned that I LOVE computer recording?
If your track that you're trying to line up is at a different tempo, you "can" do a time change to match the other tracks tempos, but it hurts the quality. You can really work it, I've found, to get an OK quality, but not great.

But I agree, re-record when ever possible.

Post by **Lunkhead** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 4:38 pm

When collaborating, make sure everyone's using the same sample rate (and probably sample size), or be aware of sample rates/sizes anyway. Things aren't going to line up if you're project is in 16-bit/44kHz and you get some audio from your collaborator who's using 24-bit/48kHz, for example. (Right? Or am I smoking crack on this one?)

king_arthur · Post by **king_arthur** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 6:04 pm

LSK wrote:I am recording without the original playing, because recording with the original playing requires a complete, start-to-finish, performance.

Generally, this is addressed via "punching in." You lay down one complete track of the song, say a guitar or a click or a drum machine, and then you start overdubbing the individual parts. Let's say you started with a rhythm guitar, and now you're doing the vocals. Coming into the second chorus, you screw up a word. You go back in "play" mode until you get to just before you screwed up and you "punch in" to record mode and keep recording vocals 'til you get a good vocal track all the way through.

Many recording software programs offer ways to set up a punch in point so that you don't even have to press anything, it will just go into record whenever it gets to the specified point...

Charles

roymond · Post by **roymond** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 7:02 pm

At first I thought you recorded a verse, then the chorus was recorded separately, and now you wanted to splice these together (rather than tracks recorded separately). If this is so, then you need to set the tempo in your software to match each section of the song, or stretch time to match them literally.

This is how lots of stuff was recorded in the analog world. We're so locked into computer recording now that people (myself included) can't live without a sync track. Which makes me wonder:

Who here records without a sync track? Or, who records outside the confines of a constant beat? Did this breath of life fade when digital recording hit?

Sober · Post by **Sober** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 7:46 pm

I like how this guy hasn't answered the question of what program he's using.

"Help me!"

"What's your problem?"

"Just help me!"

Quit trying to record songs. Start a rock band and play at bars. Girls are way more impressed by a guy on a stage than a guy on a burned cd.

Mostess · Post by **Mostess** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 7:52 pm

roymond wrote:Who here records without a sync track? Or, who records outside the confines of a constant beat? Did this breath of life fade when digital recording hit?

I don't use constant beats very often. But I do get one song-length take down first and then add stuff to it. An odd exception was our "Evil April" which was intentionally recorded over multiple days, then stitched together. It's how Ravel wrote the 2nd movement of his Gmin piano concerto, too.

LSK: I'm afraid you're running into the first realization of home recording: all the technology in the world won't replace musicianship. It sounds like you need less time recording and more time practicing. I practice like mad to get a full song-length track down. Sometimes it takes 30 or 40 takes. Keep at it, because no one will ever hear the bad ones. Just delete them as they happen. Remember that you can multitrack stuff in later. My advice:

1) Plan ahead. Make a list of the tracks you'll add in the order you'll add them.

2) Split stuff up. If you can't play the whole guitar lick without goofing up, just play the first part, then rest. Record all the second parts of the lick on a different track. Same for vocals: one verse at a time.

3) Don't record anything you don't want in the song. Keep your metronome, foot taps, countdowns, throat clearings, tuning checks, etc. off the recording. That's all work you'll have to do later cleaning it up. Sometimes it's impossible.

4) As soon as you record something, listen to it all the way through in silence to make sure you like it. Reserve the right to delete a track because of some minor flaw (though it's usually smart to keep a hard-to-do, though substandard full take around just in case you can't manage to do it again)

5) Don't save work for mixing/mastering. Don't say "I'll piece these together at mix time" or "I'll just record this once and then make it a looping sample" or "double-schmouble, just add flange". Do the work at recording time and everyone (listener included) is happier.

6) If you don't practice, it will take 6 hours to record a 3 minute song. If you practice for 1 hour, it will take 3 hours to record the 3 minute song. If you practice for 2 hours, it will take 30 minutes to record a 3 minute song. Practicing saves time. Do it.

That all said, I know that "Strawberry Fields" was mixed from 2 recording sessions (I believe they were even in different keys, and Martin played with tape speed to make it work out). Also Beach Boy's "Good Vibrations" is made of a whole mess of different sessions, though I'm sure Wilson used a click track and careful tuning each time. Men of vision plan ahead.

Reist · Post by **Reist** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:25 pm

A click track is your best friend if you're having trouble with timing.

Billy's Little Trip · Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:02 pm

The Sober Irishman wrote:Girls are way more impressed by a guy on a stage than a guy on a burned cd.

Aww fuck! There goes my dreams of being the first Steely Dan Punk band.
....but I still say that "my old school" would kick ass played as loud and fast as possible.

Lunkhead wrote:Things aren't going to line up if you're project is in 16-bit/44kHz and you get some audio from your collaborator who's using 24-bit/48kHz, for example. (Right? Or am I smoking crack on this one?)

By the way, this is a bridge I haven't come to yet. I don't see why it would matter, but then again, I have no clue.

ken · Post by **ken** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:28 am

Lunkhead wrote:When collaborating, make sure everyone's using the same sample rate (and probably sample size), or be aware of sample rates/sizes anyway. Things aren't going to line up if you're project is in 16-bit/44kHz and you get some audio from your collaborator who's using 24-bit/48kHz, for example. (Right? Or am I smoking crack on this one?)

You are correct sir.

Two other suggestions while I have you:

1. always export your tracks from zero. Even if you only play one lick in the third verse. It will line up easier if you leave all that empty space at the beginning.

2. Export mono tracks for mono instruments and stereo tracks for stereo instruments. Bass is a mono instrument, so is a vocal track. Save time and space by exporting the right kind of file for the track.

Ken