General Music Chat

Recording to a click track makes it easier for the engineer, producer or whomever to edit the song. Whether it's tightening up a snare drum that's a few milliseconds off....or moving and rearranging whole arrangements of songs. Cut & Paste.

I've no problem with it and actually prefer it - either way - I'm ok with it.

Since I've been doing the online collab thing I've developed many routines and have gotten very fast at it. I've done hundreds of songs with people from all over the world. In that regard it beats the local band thing. I've met and worked with so many people I would have never met if I were still trying to find players in my own area. I actually have an isolation booth here at my home studio, so I could do that "realtime" sessions right here at my house. But there is usually a problem with a couple of the people just can't stand being desciplined enough to do session work. Seems like most of the time they just wanted to drink beer, chase women, and get in front of the audience, and could care less about the recording. Spent most of the time talking them into getting serious about recording. And writing original songs..... forget about it. So I went cold turkey with local people. I have not regretted it. In this day and age of musicians/writers having to re-invent themselves because the industry has changed, it's turned out to be a huge plus that I embraced the technology. I'm going to put some more of my online collab sessions on my profile. I do have some sessions from back in the 80s where we did it like Bob describes. Exactly like it. They were good, but I feel like the writing and production has come light years since then. And we even paid to have a commercial studio do it just like Bob did. I don't regret doing the DAW/online collab path at all. On the contrary I know how to do things now I never would if I has stuck to the local band venues. I'd probably be dead if I had continued. I feel like I've grown up and gotten serious about writing and producing. Bob is extremely lucky to have serious people to work with locally. I would love to have that, but I've long since given up trying to find the calibre of person near me.

I posted another track from my jukebox on my profile. Playing my V-drums on "Let You Go". That drum track was not edited. Just rehearsed it a few times and then hit record. There is just enough "slop" that it doesn't sound sterile. I did have a click going in my phones to keep me grounded. That's one thing about using a click that we have not talked about....

When sitting on my acoustic kit it is easy for it to get loud enough that I can loose the band mix in my phones, and get away from the sync. I usually don't but it has happened where I am doing some very lively passages and it gets very loud. Probably would not be a problem if I were doing basic blues progressions but some of the sessions I do are very much syncropated. Much more intricate progressions than just the straight blues. So it helps me to have a cowbell click synced to the band, and I can hear that in my phones no matter how heated or syncropated. From a drummer's point of view on a loud acoustic kit, in a very intricate progression, the click helps me stay grounded. That is something that has not been discussed....

Bob Re recording

Abosolutely nailed it - at least to my experience. My outfit recorded an album on a tight budget back in the day. Worked at shows for months, then rehearsed 28 days straight. i was the bass man and we never used a click track.

That doesn't mean I won't. I've been playing mostly six string guitar lately and have found that my metronome is my friend.

Talbot

Good points Fred Jam.

I might suggest you need a better monitor mix if your losing the rest of the band in your set.

Headphones are great for isolation, but if the mix is less than perfect they are useless as tits on a boar hog.

Good points Fred Jam.

I might suggest you need a better monitor mix if your losing the rest of the band in your set.

Headphones are great for isolation, but if the mix is less than perfect they are useless as tits on a boar hog.

You could be right, but a metronome that stands out in contrast to the acoustic kit helps emmensely. The thing is that if you get your monitor mix loud enough that you don't loose it against the acoustic kit, you could be doing damage to your hearing. The contrast is the key. A lot of people feel uncomfortable with this sort of cowbell in their mix, but I've embraced it from the beginning so it's not a problem for me. My thinking has been to get used to a metronome rather than fight it. It has worked for me. But this does not dispute in any way what Bob has said. I've done it both ways. I don't have the local personel like he does so I've adapted to doing it this way, and I think I'm getting good results.

Even Beethoven used a metronome. A three to five millisecond consistency for a human would be absolutely amazing, but even at three milliseconds fluctuation, IF it were entirely consistent over a four minute span. You’re out of synch with the BPM by almost a full second. I’m sure everyone here would agree a second off is easily detectable.

In a live performance, where it’s here this second and forgotten the next, twenty milliseconds can actually work. When you commit to recording something that will remain unchanged from first play, to infinity, any recognizable flaws will eventually get attention. When the listener taps their fingers in time and stumble where the drummer does, it’s not a good message. It starts with: “Hey wasn’t that hit a little late?”, from there on out, that’s all that they are listening for. It only needs to happen once or twice, before they’re examining that percussion with a magnifying glass. If the drummer is absolutely dead on, of course this doesn’t apply.

But if it’s a project you have been working weeks or months on, why would you take that chance? I’m referring to properly metered time, not quantization. In a recording session, on a final take, to use anything less seems a little bit arrogant. The computer that can keep time for 88200 samples a second is going to be a hell of a lot more accurate than my internal clock. It’s still open to interpretation and doesn’t prevent mistakes, but it can certainly help in restricting the natural drift. When you go to add separately recorded tracks weeks later, it’s also really convenient when the drum beats actually match the measures at the top.

Recording something that isn’t metered, then trying to make it fit to measured time is a nightmare. Unless you’re the one doing the editing, not recording to metered time is a cruel joke on the person who is. By not using a set BPM while recording, basically ignores half the capabilities of any DAW. Pasting, automation, punches, nudging and lining up tracks, even simple navigation, all of it is much easier if it happens in an orderly timeline. When it’s recorded to a set beats per minute, when you click on the eightieth measure, it’s the eightieth measure.

It’s a hundred times the work on sporadic track. Measure eighty could now be at seventy eight, seven eighths and twelve milliseconds. If you’re not going to be doing any editing, like the live demo situation, of course then, it isn’t critical. But even then, going through straight audio scrubbing in whole measures, beats the hell out of searching to find the start of a measure that doesn’t line up, for a punch point or marker. What would be a five second mouse click, now takes at least a minute of jogging back and forth. Repeat a few hundred times for each and every edit. Hours of extra work and for what reason, to accommodate someone who cant keep time to a basic four beat? I’ve been there too many times, to know enough that there’s much better ways of wasting my time with music. And all of those more enjoyable.

Even Beethoven used a metronome. A three to five millisecond consistency for a human would be absolutely amazing, but even at three milliseconds fluctuation, IF it were entirely consistent over a four minute span. You’re out of synch with the BPM by almost a full second. I’m sure everyone here would agree a second off is easily detectable.

In a live performance, where it’s here this second and forgotten the next, twenty milliseconds can actually work. When you commit to recording something that will remain unchanged from first play, to infinity, any recognizable flaws will eventually get attention. When the listener taps their fingers in time and stumble where the drummer does, it’s not a good message. It starts with: “Hey wasn’t that hit a little late?”, from there on out, that’s all that they are listening for. It only needs to happen once or twice, before they’re examining that percussion with a magnifying glass. If the drummer is absolutely dead on, of course this doesn’t apply.

But if it’s a project you have been working weeks or months on, why would you take that chance? I’m referring to properly metered time, not quantization. In a recording session, on a final take, to use anything less seems a little bit arrogant. The computer that can keep time for 88200 samples a second is going to be a hell of a lot more accurate than my internal clock. It’s still open to interpretation and doesn’t prevent mistakes, but it can certainly help in restricting the natural drift. When you go to add separately recorded tracks weeks later, it’s also really convenient when the drum beats actually match the measures at the top.

Recording something that isn’t metered, then trying to make it fit to measured time is a nightmare. Unless you’re the one doing the editing, not recording to metered time is a cruel joke on the person who is. By not using a set BPM while recording, basically ignores half the capabilities of any DAW. Pasting, automation, punches, nudging and lining up tracks, even simple navigation, all of it is much easier if it happens in an orderly timeline. When it’s recorded to a set beats per minute, when you click on the eightieth measure, it’s the eightieth measure.

It’s a hundred times the work on sporadic track. Measure eighty could now be at seventy eight, seven eighths and twelve milliseconds. If you’re not going to be doing any editing, like the live demo situation, of course then, it isn’t critical. But even then, going through straight audio scrubbing in whole measures, beats the hell out of searching to find the start of a measure that doesn’t line up, for a punch point or marker. What would be a five second mouse click, now takes at least a minute of jogging back and forth. Repeat a few hundred times for each and every edit. Hours of extra work and for what reason, to accommodate someone who cant keep time to a basic four beat? I’ve been there too many times, to know enough that there’s much better ways of wasting my time with music. And all of those more enjoyable.

Well said. I always tell people that once a listener hears a timing flaw they are no longer listening to the message of the song, or the lead. The focus is no longer where we want it to be. Poor timing can be a distraction. That's why you don't hear such things on the radio etc.

It makes a lot of sense to use one in many ways, especially the editing phase. But I think Bob did very little editing? Rehearsal and personel are the key, as well as having the drummer in on the initial take. I've listened to his work and it is done well. There are no such distractions. Works well for him. I would not argue that point.

If he gets to a point where he wants to do a lot of editing and or changing of arrangement this use of a click will be essential i think. I believe I only heard him doing covers. Not sure if he does much work with new arrangements or edits, to test instrumentation etc. It seems to be a totally different enviroment than I am using these days. I've put away doing covers long ago, so I spend a bit of time testing different arrangements. Being on the beat makes this infinitry easier.

No I wasn’t referring to Bob, everything I stated was through personal experience. To clarify, yes I would agree Bob’s stuff is always top notch. But for everyone to assume the same results would be crazy. Having been down that road enough times, I can’t but help to point out the problems in that method for anyone who would be editing later on. I don’t think Bob edits a whole lot either.

I’m trying to help someone out now who just winged it, because a click track is so restricting, so much trouble. But the drum track was horrible and needs to be replaced. I’m on my third round on this so far and the swings are rather large, so even matching up what was there is unusable. After extracting the transients to a MID file for a straight replacement. Which didn’t work because the timing was so bad, so then doing the editing note for note. Now he got a live recording of a drummer doing it. So I’ll be doing it all over again. It’s all backward, trying to match the percussion to the melody and all of it could have simply been avoided. Which is really a shame since it’s a nice piece and he obviously put a mass of time in it himself. Three guitars, bass, a female vocalists at least three synth pads. To do it all over again?

Mike (co-writer) and I had this discussion about three years ago. When you’re lining up analog cymbal hits because a drum machine is inconsistent depending on how many samples are playing at once. It’s immensely appreciated not to have to do that ever again. I am so glad we finally moved to MIDI versus straight audio. At first it was a struggle to determine which should be the timing master. So yes his Roland R5 may be a beloved machine but at 1/96 per “note” resolution, versus the computer? When he started hearing blatant inconsistencies his first impulse was to blame the method and then to blame the computer. So we again, we suffered through another disappointing project. Finally I learned enough about Sonar to semi-competently swap over. For anyone starting here, they missed out on a lot of aggravation.

LOL, whats a click track? LOL!

Ive done it all sorts of ways, if you are a one man band laying tracks over each other I think its a great tool, but Ive done that both ways, with my group we just lay down the drums, bass, rythym guitar and scratch vocal at the same time, we dont really worry too much about perfect timing, we tend to wander, but I like that in my band situation, hell its just rock n roll anyway, not rocket science!

No I wasn’t referring to Bob, everything I stated was through personal experience. To clarify, yes I would agree Bob’s stuff is always top notch. But for everyone to assume the same results would be crazy. Having been down that road enough times, I can’t but help to point out the problems in that method for anyone who would be editing later on. I don’t think Bob edits a whole lot either.

I’m trying to help someone out now who just winged it, because a click track is so restricting, so much trouble. But the drum track was horrible and needs to be replaced. I’m on my third round on this so far and the swings are rather large, so even matching up what was there is unusable. After extracting the transients to a MID file for a straight replacement. Which didn’t work because the timing was so bad, so then doing the editing note for note. Now he got a live recording of a drummer doing it. So I’ll be doing it all over again. It’s all backward, trying to match the percussion to the melody and all of it could have simply been avoided. Which is really a shame since it’s a nice piece and he obviously put a mass of time in it himself. Three guitars, bass, a female vocalists at least three synth pads. To do it all over again?

Mike (co-writer) and I had this discussion about three years ago. When you’re lining up analog cymbal hits because a drum machine is inconsistent depending on how many samples are playing at once. It’s immensely appreciated not to have to do that ever again. I am so glad we finally moved to MIDI versus straight audio. At first it was a struggle to determine which should be the timing master. So yes his Roland R5 may be a beloved machine but at 1/96 per “note” resolution, versus the computer? When he started hearing blatant inconsistencies his first impulse was to blame the method and then to blame the computer. So we again, we suffered through another disappointing project. Finally I learned enough about Sonar to semi-competently swap over. For anyone starting here, they missed out on a lot of aggravation.

I'm involved in the same type of thing. I am working on a project with a young guy who's timing is horrible. He says he worked to a click but I sure can't find where. So I went through his acoustic guitar track and fixed his timing. Now he is right with the click after my edits. I am nearly expert at this sort of thing. I us ACID pro for this sort of editing. It's much easier to use than sonar for this type of editing. I am very fast with it. I didn't even tell the player about his bad timing. It's easier to just fix it and show him the difference than to try to explain all of this to him. When I checked his playing against a click at the tempo he told me it was way off. Like he wasn't even listening to the click when he played this. He wasn't even sure of the BPM which told me he doesn't really understand the significance of this. He told me it was supposed to have been played against a 120 BPM click. When I found a BPM that was close to what he played it was 106. Big difference. Even at 106 it was like somone was playing with the speed knob...... Some of the worst I've ever heard. But like I said a lot of people are dead set against this idea so I usually don't go into all of this. I did here because it's what we are discussing.

I've found that there is a lot of personal politics in artists. Some would rather be considered "purists" and have poor productions than to try to keep good time. I don't usually spend the time to tell them that working to a metronome is actually basic fundemental music theory, and that it's part of music at the fundemental level. I usually just let them have the views they want to have and I do my own thing. I think my results speak for themself, just as Bob's do.

Yeah Fred agreed. To be honest I’m far from a timing Nazi. lol But every time I run across someone who has limited their options (myself included), through a non universal timing reference, going back after is just so much harder. You know it's going to be a big cans of worms, that they are totally oblivious too. For Bob (correct me if I'm wrong Bob) and quite a few others, it seems once they are past the record point it's pretty much set in stone. It is what it is.

We had a discussion here a while back about pitch correction and editing. Everyone has a personal threshold that seems like beyond that, would be cheating themselves. I take it project by project. If the idea is an attempt at something commercial, where the goal is eventually competition yeah I will edit. I’m not going to hamstring myself to any huge degree of sincerity. Even then, I still have a hard time justifying some editing methods, I should really just get over it and pull out the stops. A blind listener doesn’t care where it comes from, just how it sounds.

On my personal stuff I’m a total hypocrite and do straight record. But no one else is dependant upon the outcome and the goals are just experimental and musical expression. So sloppy and unpolished works out fine. It’s a pool of ideas, most of it unfinished for future collaboration. It makes it easier for me when I haven’t built weeks of attachment to a tune for total reconstruction, but at the same time providing a base direction for something to evolve. It’s painful ripping through a tune tearing it apart, once you’re married to it. Mike and I have pulled out a few tunes from there. Although I’m excited because the next one will be starting on his side and the vocal style is perfect for him, a gritty Led Zeppelin blues sounding thing.

Fred “Let you Go” is really good, I like the style, I’m impressed by how hot that track is. If you don’t mind me asking, what kind of filter are you using across that mix for such high compression? It’s a pretty solid wall of sound. Hey you have any examples where you’re playing sax? Sax is such a cool instrument and it’s pretty rare. When I was young my parents took me to NYC and this guy was playing a sax in an empty subway platform. Like thirty years later and remembering it still gives me chills, such a cool sound.

Yeah Fred agreed. To be honest I’m far from a timing Nazi. lol But every time I run across someone who has limited their options (myself included), through a non universal timing reference, going back after is just so much harder. You know it's going to be a big cans of worms, that they are totally oblivious too. For Bob (correct me if I'm wrong Bob) and quite a few others, it seems once they are past the record point it's pretty much set in stone. It is what it is.

We had a discussion here a while back about pitch correction and editing. Everyone has a personal threshold that seems like beyond that, would be cheating themselves. I take it project by project. If the idea is an attempt at something commercial, where the goal is eventually competition yeah I will edit. I’m not going to hamstring myself to any huge degree of sincerity. Even then, I still have a hard time justifying some editing methods, I should really just get over it and pull out the stops. A blind listener doesn’t care where it comes from, just how it sounds.

On my personal stuff I’m a total hypocrite and do straight record. But no one else is dependant upon the outcome and the goals are just experimental and musical expression. So sloppy and unpolished works out fine. It’s a pool of ideas, most of it unfinished for future collaboration. It makes it easier for me when I haven’t built weeks of attachment to a tune for total reconstruction, but at the same time providing a base direction for something to evolve. It’s painful ripping through a tune tearing it apart, once you’re married to it. Mike and I have pulled out a few tunes from there. Although I’m excited because the next one will be starting on his side and the vocal style is perfect for him, a gritty Led Zeppelin blues sounding thing.

Fred “Let you Go” is really good, I like the style, I’m impressed by how hot that track is. If you don’t mind me asking, what kind of filter are you using across that mix for such high compression? It’s a pretty solid wall of sound. Hey you have any examples where you’re playing sax? Sax is such a cool instrument and it’s pretty rare. When I was young my parents took me to NYC and this guy was playing a sax in an empty subway platform. Like thirty years later and remembering it still gives me chills, such a cool sound.

I didn't do the mix/master on that one. A member of F-Jam, Paulo Gomes did. He did the synth on the track too. I think he used wavs l3 or something like that. I can ask him. I talk to him all the time on F-Jam.

Here is some of my sax. I had this progression written and Anne Cozean came in later and wrote and sung the vocals. The music is all me.

https://sites.google.com/site/fjatestsite/finished-tracks---pop/whosgonnaloveme

Good points Fred Jam.

I might suggest you need a better monitor mix if your losing the rest of the band in your set.

Headphones are great for isolation, but if the mix is less than perfect they are useless as tits on a boar hog.

You could be right, but a metronome that stands out in contrast to the acoustic kit helps emmensely. The thing is that if you get your monitor mix loud enough that you don't loose it against the acoustic kit, you could be doing damage to your hearing. The contrast is the key. A lot of people feel uncomfortable with this sort of cowbell in their mix, but I've embraced it from the beginning so it's not a problem for me. My thinking has been to get used to a metronome rather than fight it. It has worked for me. But this does not dispute in any way what Bob has said. I've done it both ways. I don't have the local personel like he does so I've adapted to doing it this way, and I think I'm getting good results.

Guess what!? I got a fevah, ...and the only prescription... is more cowbell!...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4royOLtvmQ[/i]

The original question posed was adding the word "serious" to the word "recording".

If you're recording a demo, I don't call that serious. If you're recording a project for sale, that raises expectations of how serious you want to be.

If you use a click, you can always go back and correct parts that aren't usable.



My strongest and best advice for a drummer is this: Sit in a room with a click track EVERY TIME you rehearse. Even when playing with a band, have a click track running so you can keep the band tight.

If you do this....you will be the most in-demand drummer within a 100 miles of where you live and can write your own ticket to success.

My son learned to play with a click at age 14 and has had any opportunity he wanted as a drummer because of it.