Cassette 4-Tracks & "Gimmickery"

[theavondon]

One of my favorite reggae-ska-whatever artists records only on 4-track.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flQy7N44sY0[/youtube]

[coldbrightsunlight]

But about the 4-track and gimmicky question, really, you could say it's as gimmicky (or more so) to make recordings out of infinite tracks, takes, spliced / patched-in takes, studio trickery. As a musician, I would just go, "oh cool!" when I hear about a band recording to only four tracks. Four is a really small number. Haha. It might be too constricting...I'd personally go for 6 or 8 tracks, but I'd be less impressed by that than by four tracks. But then, I guess that means the 4-track angle is working. But hey, if you're a 3-piece band, then you should be able to record onto a 4-track and have it sound great! It's really annoying to me when 3-piece bands not only super-multi-track, but even live, will bring another guitarist with them! Then you're not a 3-piece band!

(But I don't think I'd mix it to mono!!! Yeeps! There's gotta be some interesting pans to give it some body.)

This this this. If a band has 3 people and can't sound good on a 4-track then fuck that band. And it's only a gimmick if you go around bragging about how the stuff was recorded on a 4-track, if you just make recordings and they happen to be recorded on a 4-track, whatever.

Personally I love the sound of old cassette 4-tracks, my band cut quite a few songs on an old tascam and they sound awesome! Part of what makes it fun is being so limited. I mean, you CAN bounce stuff onto another track to free up extra space, but you lose mixing ability of that part so it's a dangerous game. Just got to balance instruments right in the room so you can record a couple of instruments onto one track if you need extra stuff.

[CBA]

Thanks everyone for chiming in! Glad to have a discussion about it.


I guess it is true that it's only a gimmick if you present it that way. I think mostly the point of recording a whole record on a 4-track would be for FUN. Most of the people that are going to be listening to the music aren't gonna know what the difference between a 4-track and a computer recording is anyway. I find that most people I talk to about recording have no idea that the whole thing isn't just recorded live. My girlfriend is a smart cookie, but she didn't really understand multi-tracking and overdubbing until I drew a picture for her.

Most likely I would be "cheating" anyway, as the damn thing would probably be bounced into a computer... probably Logic on my Macbook. I don't think I'd do a whole lot to it after that, but it's most likely easier to get it done and out when it's on a computer.

There are several ways to do it, too. I could do:

1- drums
2- bass
3- guitar
4- guitar

And then mix that down onto a computer and do vocals in Logic. But I don't really dig that idea.

Then there's:

1- kick
2- snare
3- overhead

4- submix of 1-3

1- guitar
2- bass
3- vocals
4- submix


OR:

1- drums
2- bass
3- guitar

4- submix of 1-3

1- lead guitar
2- vocals 1
3- vocals 2
4- submix



I don't know.

What I'd really like to do is:

1- drums
2- bass
3- guitar
4- vocals


The 424 mkII has four inputs, and I could get a great drum sound with those 4 inputs onto one track. Then fuzz bass, then guitar, then do the lead and backing vocals live together on one track.

DONE.

It IS possible to do the whole thing without bouncing within the machine, so I think it's important to go for that. That's basically how it sounds live anyway... I just would have to do some trickery to get it to sound good in a stereophonic field. There is the monoaural case... I'll have to listen to some old Beatles records and maybe some Kinks shit to get a good idea. I don't think there are many modern records that are mixed in mono.

I also like the idea of computer recording being just as gimmicky as 4-track recording could be... and then you think, well, computer recording IS gimmicky, and 4-track recording isn't at all. But yeah, again, it's all how you present it.

One should probably always record in a way that is easiest... meaning use whatever is on hand to present the song as well as possible, or as close to your aural idea of it as possible. So what's on hand? A cassette 4-track or two, a 16-track digital recorder, and a MacBook Pro with Logic 9. I guess you do whatever it takes to get the song done.

Not done yet... will come back.


C

[theavondon]

Sounds like you definitely have the right mindset. Stoked to hear the results!

[jrmy]

I guess you do whatever it takes to get the song done.

This, right here.

I'm with Donny, though - sounds like you've thought it out, and have a pretty solid strategy in the works.

Also, old 4-tracks were great for getting that lovely soft tape compression. And there's always the ol' overloaded tape sound, which can get pretty glorious.

However you work it, I'm looking forward to hearing the end result!

[dubkitty]

there's also the ug-ger-lee sound of plugging straight into the deck or into a fuzz->deck and redlining the meters a la Flying Saucer Attack.

[Achtane]

there's also the ug-ger-lee sound of plugging straight into the deck or into a fuzz->deck and redlining the meters a la Flying Saucer Attack.

Yeah! Give this a shot.

[sonidero]

What I'd really like to do is:

1- drums
2- bass
3- guitar
4- vocals

C

DO IT!!! I have too much to say about TAPE...

[Big Mon]

As a 4 track-exclusive artist myself, I encourage you to at least do an EP and see how you and the other 2 bandmates like it. Even if the desired result isn't achieved, there are ways to remaster it to your collective liking. Me personally, I'll +1 what dubkitty said. I run straight in, guitar>pedals and Tascam (glad to see some Tascam love 'round hyuh). And yeah, the earlier Guided By Voices stuff is a definite confirmation of the power of tape. I'm just a sucker for dat hiss and potential unruliness that comes with the tape territory. Also:

There are several ways to do it, too. I could do:

1- drums
2- bass
3- guitar
4- guitar

And then mix that down onto a computer and do vocals in Logic. But I don't really dig that idea.

Then there's:

1- kick
2- snare
3- overhead

4- submix of 1-3

1- guitar
2- bass
3- vocals
4- submix


OR:

1- drums
2- bass
3- guitar

4- submix of 1-3

1- lead guitar
2- vocals 1
3- vocals 2
4- submix



I don't know.

What I'd really like to do is:

1- drums
2- bass
3- guitar
4- vocals


The 424 mkII has four inputs, and I could get a great drum sound with those 4 inputs onto one track. Then fuzz bass, then guitar, then do the lead and backing vocals live together on one track.

DONE.

There is the monoaural case... I'll have to listen to some old Beatles records and maybe some Kinks shit to get a good idea.




C

Now you're talkin' Definitely listen to older recordings, or albums that you know were done on 4 tracks. Read up on the actual processes used by the producers of those albums to get the best sound possible out of it. Those are all great ideas you had. Start out by just trying each of those techniques. Maybe just record some open yet short jams to see what best suits your overall sound. I like this thread, thanks for posting, and good luck with it

[CBA]

Thanks everyone!

A lot of my favourite recordings are done on 4-tracks or 8-tracks... and yeah, some of them are done on reel-to-reel, but some aren't. One of my favourite bits of advice from TapeOp Magazine is this:

The first thing you need to know about 4-tracks is that the Beatles recorded "Sgt. Pepper's" on one.
The second thing you need to do is forget that.

The Beatles used a 4-track, but it was a state-of-the-art (or at least what EMI/Abbey Road would shell out for) reel-to-reel with really lovely thick 2" tape that was presided over by world-class engineers and sound men. Then they had George Martin. Then they had Geoff Emmerick and Norman Smith. Also they were the Beatles.

So it's hard not to get caught up in that idea... however, you're right... Guided By Voices, Elliott Smith, Quasi, a lot of those jerks... all 4-track cassette pioneers. A lot of work was put into them pre-, during, and post-recording, but that's not to say that it's hard or not worth it.

TBT started out as a "pet project" when our main band Starling Electric was on hiatus. Same guys (minus one), but me writing and singing all the music. So I had originally said "Let's do a fun fuzz pop band and really be like a 90s kinda underground group that records very simply and raw." Then SE was on hiatus a little longer, and TBT played more shows, and started to actually get pretty popular and well-liked around Michigan. So a bunch of people are looking forward to our record, and it's been almost three years since we formed... 2 1/2 so far.

So but anyway I was using Logic to record SE and stuff 2 1/2 years ago, but I've since abandoned that because I don't like it. So no for TBT. Then I wanted to do it on a cassette 8-track (8-track being ideal, maybe) TASCAM 488, but both that I bought on eBay were duds. SO THEN I thought I'd at least do drums on the 4-track (which is in awesome shape; 424 mkII) and then mix it down to Logic and then go from there. But eh. SO THEN I got another BOSS digital record like I used to have and actually started recording the record.


GOT TO GET BACK TO WORK

Part II later.


C

[CBA]

Part II later.

Recording on the BOSS 12-track is going pretty well... I'm just finding that I'm putting in extra guitar stuff, or trying to fill space that I don't normally have to fill at a show. I know that sounds backwards, but for instance: a certain solo in a song works really well with just bass and guitar, but putting rhythm guitar chords underneath kinda messes it up.

I wrote and arranged all the songs to work best live, so everything can be covered by one guitar and fuzz bass, and it sounds complete. I DO like doing layered guitar tracks, L and R, one being really thick and one being more open... but I also like hearing a power trio pull everything off without extra shit. The other thing that I've found is that if you have multiple guitar tracks going, fuzz bass is unnecessary when recording but cruicial live.

I've been listening to "In Utero" a lot lately, and while there is some double-tracking with the guitar, it's not necessary, and I don't think Cobain liked to do it. If you listen to "Pennyroyal Tea", there is only one electric fuzz guitar going through the whole song. "All Apologies" is similar, although I think there is a second guitar in there, even if they play the exact same part. We're no Nirvana, but still...

I've read (in TapeOp again) about Robert Pollard shit-canning entire records because he didn't like the way they sounded, then starting over from scratch using whatever he got his hands on first... so I wouldn't feel too bad about starting over with 4-track. It will work or it won't.

ALSO:

The beauty of recording like

1: Drums
2: Bass
3: Guitar
4: Vocals

...is that if I get through the first 3 and find that it doesn't sound thick enough... instead of recording the vocals, I could submix the first three tracks onto track 4 and then do one more guitar track and have two left over. So even if I START with the above configuration in mind, I'm not wasting any time if I decide to submix it anyway. Pretty cool.

I also love thinking out "problems" like this with recording. Logic just bored me to tears because I never had to think this way.


Much love,

C

[CBA]

"But even at his most extreme, Brian Eno didn't manipulate records as much as any sophomore in college does these days the moment he gets a Pro Tools rig. The manipulation capabilities of the digital editing programs are now so elaborate that sonic manipulation has become a cliché. I don't see the studio as a laboratory as more important than the band as a performing unit. Anyone can do whatever he wants in the studio — I would never say 'No, you're not allowed to do this.' But in the same way that not every movie should look like Star Wars, I don't think every record should be manipulated to the extent that they often are. I don't understand where the impulse comes from to make a record that doesn't have any relationship to the sound of the real band. That seems crazy to me."





C

[drkieck]

Gimmicks are for marketing, cassette 4 tracks are for old schoolers.

[putsia]

What ever you do, you need to do it loud. Make sure you push the decks meters to around +10db, it's of no use otherwise >_>

[CBA]

Well holy shit:


Just found four "tape outputs" on the back of the 424. That means I can do four separate outs directly from the tape either into a mixer or a DAW!

Didn't know I could do that. Pretty great. That simplifies things quite a bit.

I just need to figure out a way that I can do the 4 separate tracks and then be able to hard pan "copies" of those (like with a buss).

Like I want to pan the guitar slightly to the right, then slightly delay the same signal and hard pan it to the left.

C