Automatic Double Tracking (ADT) vocals

[devinb]

I've recently finished tracking all the guitars and vocals on my first studio solo project ever (also the first project that I'm more or less the lead singer on).

 

For the past year I've been researching a great deal about guitar tones and recording. I now own a couple of 1960's Gibson acoustics, a couple boutique amps and such...and I feel I know more about the recording process than most people who don't work in a studio...

 

From a historical standpoint, I read a lot about ADT, but I can't remember seeing it mentioned often on the various forums I read and such...

 

As I head towards mixing, I'm curious if it has fallen out of favor? I've certainly actually double tracked vocals before. Are people using something in place of ADT to fatten up the sound a little?

 

Thanks for the input.

[nerol1st]

 

actually double tracked vocals

 

 

This to me is the only way to do it that sounds good. I have not found a quicker AND better way yet.

[Dean Roddey]

A split harmonizer type of effect is a very easy and nice sounding way to thicken up all kinds of tracks, with fairly low overhead. It's not the same as actually doubling. It leaves the center content there, but just spreads it out and detunes it a bit to thicken it.

[iamhelpless]

how does one actually doubletrack?ive never understood the process of how people do it or how people do it well anyway

 

do you just mess with the timing and or the volume levels?

[IsildursBane]

 

how does one actually doubletrack?ive never understood the process of how people do it or how people do it well anyway do you just mess with the timing and or the volume levels?

 

 

How to do it: Play it twice.

 

How to do it well: Practice.

 

-Dan.

[Dean Roddey]

According to the type of piece you can really do a lot sometimes with editing to get the doubled parts right. If it's a choppy piece, like a little funk rhythm guitar, each of those little stabs is pretty much separately moveable. If it's a long, legato piece, you kind of have to play it right or else.

[nerol1st]

How to do it: Play it twice. How to do it well: Practice. -Dan.

 

This is correct.

[matthewmilner]

i guess if you want to get like - really technical - recording a vocal two times, in unison is just double tracking. ADT (automatic double tracking) is a specific technique/effect developed by engineers at abbey road that allowed the beatles to get the double tracked sound without the time/hassle spent actually rerecording a vocal.

 

there are a few accounts of how ADT worked - i remember reading about it in a book by brian southall about abbey road.

 

here's one, pretty detailed explanation of how the abbey road ADT system worked - i believe this came from the 'recording the beatles' book:

 

The book contains a great account of the Beatles' discovery of automatic double tracking, or A.D.T., which is a perfect example of the sort of inventiveness regularly in effect at Abbey Road Studios.

 

John Lennon complained about having to record his vocal tracks twice in order to achieve the "double-tracked" effect, which makes a person sounds like he's singing with himself. While thinking about the problem, Abbey Road engineer Ken Townsend took a nap after an all-day recording session, and woke up with a solution.

 

The engineers played Lennon's vocal track at 15 inches per second, routing the signal to a second tape deck which recorded it at 30 ips. The other part of the trick is that the second deck had twice the space between the Record head and the Play head as the first, so Lennon's voice arrived at the Play heads of both machines at approximately -- but not exactly -- the same time.

 

By mixing the signal from those machines onto a third, a new sort of double-track effect could be heard -- different than the previous kind, because the vocal nuances on the first track were reproduced identically on the second track. Lennon and the rest of the Beatles loved the A.D.T. effect, and began using it on instruments as well as vocals. A good example is Lennon's vocal on "Revolution 1," which, incidentally, he recorded lying down in the middle of the studio, as a picture in this book shows.

 

there's also another account that talks about a variable speed control between the two tape machines. i don't know what is most accurate - but you have to admit however ADT worked the abbey road engineers who dreamed it up were some pretty smart fellers.

 

i wouldn't know how to recreate the ADT effect in the digital realm. i imagine that the very small amounts of wow - flutter - distortion and speed between 2 analog tape machines makes the double different enough from the original to give it that amazing, unique sound.

[iamhelpless]

^thats so cool,i remember hearing about that a while ago but that sounds like

such a pain to do

 

i mean,really how else could you emulate that than playing around with timing and eq?

[Dean Roddey]

It's pretty trivial and done all the time. Just clone the track, adjust it about 10ms or so, and adjust the EQ and compression a bit. You can pan them out as desired/needed. It doesn't sound quite like a really good literal double, but it sounds good. For guitars, if you are using an amp sim, you can also change amp, cabinet, and mic selections to make them sound more unique as well. But a real double, if you are doing the 100% l/r pan thing as is done on guitars so often, always sounds thicker and wider really, because of subtle differences in the two parts.

[TBush]

 

But a real double, if you are doing the 100% l/r pan thing as is done on guitars so often, always sounds thicker and wider really, because of subtle differences in the two parts.

 

 

Amen. I've never had a 'fake' dbl sound as thick and cool as the real thing.

[IsildursBane]

 

It's pretty trivial and done all the time. Just clone the track, adjust it about 10ms or so, and adjust the EQ and compression a bit. You can pan them out as desired/needed.

 

 

But how does that sound in mono?

 

-Dan.

[alcohol]

Cloning a track and delaying it doesn't get the same effect, nor does applying an LFO modulation work as well as the Abbey Road ADT; because, they were riding the pitch control much more randomly than a LFO would.

[Dean Roddey]

 

Cloning a track and delaying it doesn't get the same effect, nor does applying an LFO modulation work as well as the Abbey Road ADT; because, they were riding the pitch control much more randomly than a LFO would.

 

 

You could always automate the modulation. And when the part is far too complex to accurately do a real double, there's not a lot of choice sometimes.

 

 

But how does that sound in mono?

 

 

Doesn't seem to be a problem to me, as long as it's 10ms or more separated, any more than a real doubled part does.

[nerol1st]

 

But how does that sound in mono? -Dan.

 

 

ALWAYS works for me when I double (track it 2 times). I check it with a scope and it never crosses over center.

[Dean Roddey]

You can sometimes, even in a real doubled situation, completely bottom out. I've had it happen, and I've not done that many songs yet. I had one where one chord was dead on on both sides and the signal collapsed right down to the center in a very dramatic way for tha tone chord and then bounced back out again on the next chord. It's a pretty wierd effect. It seems like it could almost never happen since it has be exactly in time and exactly in phase and whatnot, but it can.

[skr3ddy]

 

You can sometimes, even in a real doubled situation, completely bottom out. I've had it happen, and I've not done that many songs yet. I had one where one chord was dead on on both sides and the signal collapsed right down to the center in a very dramatic way for tha tone chord and then bounced back out again on the next chord. It's a pretty wierd effect. It seems like it could almost never happen since it has be exactly in time and exactly in phase and whatnot, but it can.

 

 

You could, like, flip the phase of one side or even one section in ProTools, though; right?