How could they record back in the day with only four tracks?

DADGAD · June 4th, 2008, 07:14 PM

The Beatles recorded everything before The White Album on four tracks or less. How could albums like Sgt. Pepper get recorded with only four tracks of tape? What was the technique of multi-tracking with only four channels AND getting a great sound? Just adding the orchestra to a four track mix seems inconceivable.

Any links or articles would also be appreciated as I am fascinated by this.

Thanks!

Gary

octatonic · June 4th, 2008, 07:19 PM

Complex topic.

1st- they had George Martin producing- the guy is a genius.

Most orchestral recordings are done with two mics.
You REALLY don't want to close mic a 72 piece orchestra.
It doesn't work like that.

You use two incredibly high quality mics, top shelf pre's and converters as well as great acoustics.

I'll let some other people respond before writing more- this topic could really be a biggie, plus it is late and I am for bed.

hamish5178 · June 4th, 2008, 07:42 PM

If you're curious about this you should read this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Little-Help-My.../dp/0316547832

George Martin goes through with a CHAPTER for every track, he tells about recording and mixing in the most pain staking detail you can imagine. He talks all about the different techniques used on the album, such as speeding up the vocals on Lucy, etc. Of course he also spends a lot of time talking about how he fit all of it on 4 tracks, and how he made it still sound good.

Really a great read.

David Barnett · June 4th, 2008, 07:49 PM

Fill up three tracks, mix them down to one, repeat.

Stackabones · June 4th, 2008, 07:51 PM

I'd always heard that they had a couple of four tracks in a series and that they did a lot of bouncing.

IIRC in the doc Tom Dowd & The Language of Music , Dowd talks about how he had already helped develop multitrack recording at Atlantic and they'd been using it for a few years before Sgt Pepper was recorded. He tells Martin and the Beatles this and they were just amazed. Info traveled slower back then, I guess.

Cool doc. Check it out if you get the chance. Dowd's name is probably on most of the recordings on any classic rock & soul & RnB & whatever track on the airwaves.

tonewoods · June 4th, 2008, 08:10 PM

Check out "The Making of Sgt. Pepper" video sometime....

A common recipe:

Band backing tracks mixed to one track....
Overdubs on another...
Then, amazingly enough, 2 tracks of doubled vocals....
(They must have really wanted total control over those doubled vocals...)

And sometimes no bass, which was added as a performance during the dumpdown to 2-track....

By the way, the 4 individual tracks of "Pepper" are becoming available as individual tracks, and are very revealing as to how they were created...

Stackabones · June 4th, 2008, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonewoods

By the way, the 4 individual tracks of "Pepper" are becoming available as individual tracks, and are very revealing as to how they were created...

WOW!!!

Any further details?

tonewoods · June 4th, 2008, 08:21 PM

Well, I downloaded a few of the multitracks here, but it looks like it's no longer available for download...

But you can see the track listing, which is pretty informative.....

spauldingrules · June 4th, 2008, 08:26 PM

Four Beatles, four tracks. One mic each. Easy!

Stackabones · June 4th, 2008, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonewoods

Well, I downloaded a few of the multitracks here, but it looks like it's no longer available for download...

But you can see the track listing, which is pretty informative.....

Thx!

Larry F · June 4th, 2008, 10:21 PM

In the 70s, I had quit gigging and gone back to school. For several years, every Friday night, I would do a one-man version of my favorite songs--Time Won't Let Me, Ramblin' Man, Paint It, Black--with a 4-track recorder. The hardest was the pre-mixing. But you developed a feel for it. That, and pre-EQ, if that concept makes sense.

When Session 8 came along, I was more than ready. Anyone remember that?

stephwills · June 4th, 2008, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Barnett

Fill up three tracks, mix them down to one, repeat.

+1. Have done this many times. No, you haven't heard any of it. And you never will. But it works.

/where was George when we needed him?

woodman · June 4th, 2008, 10:34 PM

the basic principle's the same as using a Tascam four-track cassette or the like ... that's how i first learned to multitrack. record guitar, bass & drums, dump onto one track, start over on remaining tracks. agonizing when, for instance, the bass ends up buried after all the ping-pongs and you can't retrieve the original track!

octatonic · June 5th, 2008, 03:04 AM

One thing to remember is that the 4 track machines were pretty high quality.
This wasn't the Beatles and George Martin sitting around with a Tascam portastudio.
Generation loss was an issue, but not as bad as the cheaper 4 tracks most of us have used in the past.

Guitar_Ninja · June 5th, 2008, 04:00 AM

They didn't seem to be as concerned in those days about doing "destructive editing" as it's now called. Due to the technological limitations bouncing things around was the way albums were made so if you had to do it then you had to do it.

Sometimes I can't help but feel that the common modern outlook where a recording is a fragile piece of art which must be flawless and pristine with no errors and perfect track separation has been a huge step in the wrong direction. No take is so perfect that it can't be redone reasonably well if need be. IMHO.

octatonic · June 5th, 2008, 05:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guitar_Ninja

Sometimes I can't help but feel that the common modern outlook where a recording is a fragile piece of art which must be flawless and pristine with no errors and perfect track separation has been a huge step in the wrong direction. No take is so perfect that it can't be redone reasonably well if need be. IMHO.

No everyone has that aesthetic.

There are plenty of bands who don't clean things up too much- White Stripes/Raconteurs come to mind immediately.

woodman · June 5th, 2008, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by octatonic

No everyone has that aesthetic.

There are plenty of bands who don't clean things up too much- White Stripes/Raconteurs come to mind immediately.

i confess i'm guilty of that ... i'll take a raw-sounding track with good feel/tone/vibe any day over a "perfect" track that just sits there. of course, everyone's mileage varies, particularly in the "mainstream" (i.e. consumer-targeted) music industry.

monetmelly · June 20th, 2008, 01:53 PM

They used bussing systems so its like 72 tracks bussed to 4

idylldon · June 21st, 2008, 09:20 AM

Talent. A LOT of it on both sides of the glass.

Recording The Beatles is the definitive guide to the gear used during their entire recording career.

Another good read is The Beatles: Recording Sessions, which gives a blow-by-blow description of a song's progress.

These two books will give you a LOT of background on how they accomplished what they did.

Cheers,
--
Don

nicnite · June 21st, 2008, 11:50 AM

As others have said: a combination of mixing multiple inputs down to one track on the fly, and bouncing tracks (combining them).

What's amazing is how high the level of expertise in live mixing was. When I was working in a guy named Jim Reeves' studio a few years ago he played me all these board mixes he'd saved from big live sessions at the old 30th st. Studios in NYC (a converted church where, among other things, Kind of Blue was recorded). I remember in particular some mixes of Aretha and Georgie Fame sessions (not together!) that featured huge string sections and full bands, and sounded like classic, finished albums right off the console. I think these were 4 or 8 track sessions, but with like 30 inputs! The mixing had to be dynamic too, with level changes, mutes etc.

That's definitely a skill that's on the wane in this day of unlimited tracks though plenty of folks are still tracking big live sessions to tape.

Just Nick

mojocasterman · June 21st, 2008, 12:11 PM

somewhere, Les Paul is smiling :)

June 4th, 2008, 07:14 PM	#1 (permalink)
DADGAD Tele-Holic Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Palmdale, CA Posts: 764	How could they record back in the day with only four tracks? The Beatles recorded everything before The White Album on four tracks or less. How could albums like Sgt. Pepper get recorded with only four tracks of tape? What was the technique of multi-tracking with only four channels AND getting a great sound? Just adding the orchestra to a four track mix seems inconceivable. Any links or articles would also be appreciated as I am fascinated by this. Thanks! Gary __________________ "I need to learn some new scales and stop obsessing about this stuff." http://www.myspace.com/slickshoes

June 4th, 2008, 07:19 PM	#2 (permalink)
octatonic Tele-Afflicted Join Date: May 2007 Location: An Australian in London. Posts: 1,443	Complex topic. 1st- they had George Martin producing- the guy is a genius. Most orchestral recordings are done with two mics. You REALLY don't want to close mic a 72 piece orchestra. It doesn't work like that. You use two incredibly high quality mics, top shelf pre's and converters as well as great acoustics. I'll let some other people respond before writing more- this topic could really be a biggie, plus it is late and I am for bed. __________________ “Music is perpetual, and only the hearing is intermittent.” - Henry David Thoreau.

June 4th, 2008, 07:42 PM	#3 (permalink)
hamish5178 Tele-Meister Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Delaware Age: 17 Posts: 216	If you're curious about this you should read this book: http://www.amazon.com/Little-Help-My.../dp/0316547832 George Martin goes through with a CHAPTER for every track, he tells about recording and mixing in the most pain staking detail you can imagine. He talks all about the different techniques used on the album, such as speeding up the vocals on Lucy, etc. Of course he also spends a lot of time talking about how he fit all of it on 4 tracks, and how he made it still sound good. Really a great read. __________________ Fender 52RI - Gibson SG Standard '77 Deluxe Reverb SunFace w/ Sundial - ProCo RAT - Fulltone GT-500 Keeley AD-9 - Boss CH-1

June 4th, 2008, 08:10 PM	#6 (permalink)
tonewoods Tele-Holic Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Orcas Island, Washington Age: 57 Posts: 595 18 Photos	Check out "The Making of Sgt. Pepper" video sometime.... A common recipe: Band backing tracks mixed to one track.... Overdubs on another... Then, amazingly enough, 2 tracks of doubled vocals.... (They must have really wanted total control over those doubled vocals...) And sometimes no bass, which was added as a performance during the dumpdown to 2-track.... By the way, the 4 individual tracks of "Pepper" are becoming available as individual tracks, and are very revealing as to how they were created... __________________ Bruce "Mangler of Bluegrass" "Mandolin Graffiti"

June 4th, 2008, 08:21 PM	#8 (permalink)
tonewoods Tele-Holic Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Orcas Island, Washington Age: 57 Posts: 595 18 Photos	Well, I downloaded a few of the multitracks here, but it looks like it's no longer available for download... But you can see the track listing, which is pretty informative..... __________________ Bruce "Mangler of Bluegrass" "Mandolin Graffiti"

June 4th, 2008, 07:49 PM	#4 (permalink)
David Barnett Poster Extraordinaire Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: LIttle Rock, AR Age: 52 Posts: 5,285	Fill up three tracks, mix them down to one, repeat.

June 4th, 2008, 07:51 PM	#5 (permalink)
Stackabones Tele-Meister Join Date: May 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 130	I'd always heard that they had a couple of four tracks in a series and that they did a lot of bouncing. IIRC in the doc Tom Dowd & The Language of Music , Dowd talks about how he had already helped develop multitrack recording at Atlantic and they'd been using it for a few years before Sgt Pepper was recorded. He tells Martin and the Beatles this and they were just amazed. Info traveled slower back then, I guess. Cool doc. Check it out if you get the chance. Dowd's name is probably on most of the recordings on any classic rock & soul & RnB & whatever track on the airwaves.

June 4th, 2008, 08:26 PM	#9 (permalink)
spauldingrules TDPRI Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Kansas City Age: 33 Posts: 10	Four Beatles, four tracks. One mic each. Easy!

June 4th, 2008, 10:21 PM	#11 (permalink)
Larry F Friend of Leo's Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Iowa City, IA Age: 55 Posts: 2,301	In the 70s, I had quit gigging and gone back to school. For several years, every Friday night, I would do a one-man version of my favorite songs--Time Won't Let Me, Ramblin' Man, Paint It, Black--with a 4-track recorder. The hardest was the pre-mixing. But you developed a feel for it. That, and pre-EQ, if that concept makes sense. When Session 8 came along, I was more than ready. Anyone remember that? __________________ larry

June 4th, 2008, 10:34 PM	#13 (permalink)
woodman Poster Extraordinaire Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Mint Hill, NC Age: 62 Posts: 5,671	the basic principle's the same as using a Tascam four-track cassette or the like ... that's how i first learned to multitrack. record guitar, bass & drums, dump onto one track, start over on remaining tracks. agonizing when, for instance, the bass ends up buried after all the ping-pongs and you can't retrieve the original track! __________________ Truth is stranger than fact ... www.myspace.com/woodymitchellmusic BAND PAGES: www.myspace.com/stragglerswing (Stragglers - Western Swing) www.myspace.com/loafersgloryband (Loafers Glory - '70s country-rock)

June 5th, 2008, 03:04 AM	#14 (permalink)
octatonic Tele-Afflicted Join Date: May 2007 Location: An Australian in London. Posts: 1,443	One thing to remember is that the 4 track machines were pretty high quality. This wasn't the Beatles and George Martin sitting around with a Tascam portastudio. Generation loss was an issue, but not as bad as the cheaper 4 tracks most of us have used in the past. __________________ “Music is perpetual, and only the hearing is intermittent.” - Henry David Thoreau.

June 5th, 2008, 04:00 AM	#15 (permalink)
Guitar_Ninja Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Kingston, Ontario Posts: 1,200 5 Photos	They didn't seem to be as concerned in those days about doing "destructive editing" as it's now called. Due to the technological limitations bouncing things around was the way albums were made so if you had to do it then you had to do it. Sometimes I can't help but feel that the common modern outlook where a recording is a fragile piece of art which must be flawless and pristine with no errors and perfect track separation has been a huge step in the wrong direction. No take is so perfect that it can't be redone reasonably well if need be. IMHO. __________________

June 20th, 2008, 01:53 PM	#18 (permalink)
monetmelly NEW MEMBER! Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: universal city Age: 18 Posts: 5	They used bussing systems so its like 72 tracks bussed to 4

June 21st, 2008, 09:20 AM	#19 (permalink)
idylldon Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Idyllwild, CA Posts: 102	Talent. A LOT of it on both sides of the glass. Recording The Beatles is the definitive guide to the gear used during their entire recording career. Another good read is The Beatles: Recording Sessions, which gives a blow-by-blow description of a song's progress. These two books will give you a LOT of background on how they accomplished what they did. Cheers, -- Don

June 21st, 2008, 11:50 AM	#20 (permalink)
nicnite TDPRI Member Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 13	Yup As others have said: a combination of mixing multiple inputs down to one track on the fly, and bouncing tracks (combining them). What's amazing is how high the level of expertise in live mixing was. When I was working in a guy named Jim Reeves' studio a few years ago he played me all these board mixes he'd saved from big live sessions at the old 30th st. Studios in NYC (a converted church where, among other things, Kind of Blue was recorded). I remember in particular some mixes of Aretha and Georgie Fame sessions (not together!) that featured huge string sections and full bands, and sounded like classic, finished albums right off the console. I think these were 4 or 8 track sessions, but with like 30 inputs! The mixing had to be dynamic too, with level changes, mutes etc. That's definitely a skill that's on the wane in this day of unlimited tracks though plenty of folks are still tracking big live sessions to tape. Just Nick

June 21st, 2008, 12:11 PM	#21 (permalink)
mojocasterman Friend of Leo's Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 4,206	somewhere, Les Paul is smiling :) __________________ Lentz HSL - McNaught SC Jr - Tom Anderson Cobra w/ 3 P90s - Crook Custom Tele w/ Lollar & TV Jones - Trussart Deluxe Steelcaster - Vinetto Legato - SRV Strat - Dr. Z. Carmen Ghia & Mini Z - Fender Tweed Blues Junior.