Double Tracking Made Easy

[Don_Zabu]

I'll explain it in the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lMXXoTcKjE

[Alex]

Sounds more like flanging than double tracking.

[rab2591]

Sounds more like flanging than double tracking.

It did sound a wee bit flanged. Though it gave me an idea to double-track with one track normal and the other auto-tuned. However, I can NEVER get autotune to work properly.

[Don_Zabu]

Sounds more like flanging than double tracking.

It probably depends on the singer. Freddie Mercury hits his notes perfectly, so it sounds more flanged, but Mike Love doesn't hit all his notes perfectly, so it sounds more doubletracked.

[pancakerecords]

Sounds more like flanging than double tracking.

It probably depends on the singer. Freddie Mercury hits his notes perfectly, so it sounds more flanged, but Mike Love doesn't hit all his notes perfectly, so it sounds more doubletracked.

The very term "flanged" comes from the nonsense description of "Automatic Double Tracking (ADT)" given to John Lennon by George Martin after EMI engineer Ken Townshend pioneered the technique.  A more natural doubling effect can be achieved by creating a copy of the original vocal part and offsetting it by a fraction of a second from the original.  Sometimes adding some subtle reverb to one of the vocals can enhance this a bit.  I hesitate to use pitch correction at all, since some of my favorite vocalists have a tendency to waver a bit...

[the captain]

A more natural doubling effect can be achieved by creating a copy of the original vocal part and offsetting it by a fraction of a second from the original. 

An even more natural doubling effect can be achieved by singing it twice.

[pancakerecords]

A more natural doubling effect can be achieved by creating a copy of the original vocal part and offsetting it by a fraction of a second from the original. 

An even more natural doubling effect can be achieved by singing it twice.

Yes, but when your working with decades old vocal tracks (and, on occasion, deceased vocalists) that's a difficult proposition.

[the captain]

Fair enough. Unless, say, you can raise the dead. I am going to go see if I can raise the dead right now. [please hold] Nope. I couldn't.

[Alex]

Sounds more like flanging than double tracking.

It did sound a wee bit flanged. Though it gave me an idea to double-track with one track normal and the other auto-tuned. However, I can NEVER get autotune to work properly.

Loooove the T-Pain/Cher effect...not.

[Andrew G. Doe]

That sounds utterly, utterly dreadful.  More to the point - why ?  The original vocal was impeccable.

[rab2591]

Sounds more like flanging than double tracking.

It did sound a wee bit flanged. Though it gave me an idea to double-track with one track normal and the other auto-tuned. However, I can NEVER get autotune to work properly.

Loooove the T-Pain/Cher effect...not.

I agree, but there is nothing wrong with experimenting. There is a difference between a mellow auto-tune and full-blast T-Pain effect.

[the captain]

A terrible mistake in making music is deciding that certain tools are out of bounds. Dedication to something, or avoidance of something else, does nothing but pigeon-hole you. There is nothing wrong with autotune, just like there is nothing wrong with any other effect or tool. (What else could we have shunned to our own detriment? Digital recording, synthesizers, rack unit or pedal effects, multitracking, tape splicing, electricity itself ... you get the point.) The lazy use of any such tool, though--and by lazy I mean mindlessly following a trend--is annoying. Eventually the cream rises regardless. (This thread probably belongs in the Smiley Smilers Who Make Music forum, btw.)

[Jay]

In my opinion, that sounds awsome!