KVR Audio

Winstontaneous · Post by **Winstontaneous** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 7:59 pm

No matter the number of tracks, I end up assigning them to 8 or fewer subgroups (often Lead Vox, Background Vox, Bass, Lead, Main Beats, Fills, FX, Support instruments). This way I can control overall levels/mutes with my Ableton Live controllers (using 8x8 pad grids) and it makes "big picture" arrangement decisions and stem mixing much easier.

Scotty · Post by **Scotty** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 8:13 pm

Yes. That is the approach I use. You want to get to the point where you are managing the energy of the mix as opposed to fiddling with a internal levels of layered parts. It really helps and it gives you less to look at.. Also grouping give you opportunity to add a little glue compression here and there to allow the mix to gell a bit or apply console emulation etc if you are going for that kind of vibe.

Winstontaneous wrote:No matter the number of tracks, I end up assigning them to 8 or fewer subgroups (often Lead Vox, Background Vox, Bass, Lead, Main Beats, Fills, FX, Support instruments). This way I can control overall levels/mutes with my Ableton Live controllers (using 8x8 pad grids) and it makes "big picture" arrangement decisions and stem mixing much easier.

ariston · Post by **ariston** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 8:16 pm

Usually anything from 5 to 15, depending on the music. I try to focus on economy, on getting my musical statement across with a minimum of instrumentation. If I weren't so lazy in the drum department, I'd probably need more; but when I'm cobbling my drum set together, I try to get it mix-ready from the outset, so I can avoid spending hours on getting "that" bass drum and "that" high hat sound just right. Same goes for any instrument I add during composing/improvising/recording: I always consider its role and its place in the bigger picture. Economy and simplicity... how many tracks did Robert Johnson need to work his magic?

Often when I'm mixing, I'll even delete tracks if they don't add anything to the whole, or if it's just too much bother getting them to fit. If it takes more than two or three tricks to get things to sit together, I usually take it as a sign that I made a mistake in the arrangement. It pays to be ruthless here, as I've never missed a track I callously deleted. It creates room in your arrangement for which you'll be thankful.

This is all home studio in the box stuff, of course. If I ever get the chance to work with an orchestra, that number of tracks will skyrocket.

Scotty · Post by **Scotty** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 8:27 pm

I agree thinning out the layers is often exactly what is called for... this applies to more complex arrangments too.. I will often bounce a stereo track to mono to create space in the mix as well. All good points but there are no rules. Sometimes a complex arrangement can be just the perfect expression of the musical idea. I don't agree with Mr. Lanois that anything more than 24 and you are doing it wrong. If it sounds good ... it is good.

ariston wrote:Usually anything from 5 to 15, depending on the music. I try to focus on economy, on getting my musical statement across with a minimum of instrumentation. If I weren't so lazy in the drum department, I'd probably need more; but when I'm cobbling my drum set together, I try to get it mix-ready from the outset, so I can avoid spending hours on getting "that" bass drum and "that" high hat sound just right. Same goes for any instrument I add during composing/improvising/recording: I always consider its role and its place in the bigger picture. Economy and simplicity... how many tracks did Robert Johnson need to work his magic?

Often when I'm mixing, I'll even delete tracks if they don't add anything to the whole, or if it's just too much bother getting them to fit. If it takes more than two or three tricks to get things to sit together, I usually take it as a sign that I made a mistake in the arrangement. It pays to be ruthless here, as I've never missed a track I callously deleted. It creates room in your arrangement for which you'll be thankful.

This is all home studio in the box stuff, of course. If I ever get the chance to work with an orchestra, that number of tracks will skyrocket.

Markku · Post by **Markku** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 8:43 pm

One extra problem I realized is that some synth sounds are really so complex, especially with FX, that they leave much less space for other tracks. Modern synths have these glorious sound patches which are almost instant songs.

On the other hand with really old-style patches (which often remind me of real instruments) you have much more room.

But both of these can make beautiful compositions. It's sometimes like I am writing two songs and trying to fit them into one.

Jace-BeOS · Post by **Jace-BeOS** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 8:51 pm

I just keep throwing tracks in as I need them. I'll bus things as I need to, and sometimes to put like items together for control. I don't specifically aim for lots of tracks or any kind of efficiency. I'm a sound design-driven musician, where a bunch of tracks might add up to feel like one specific sound, so I don't care if my stuff has many tracks.

Distorted Horizon · Post by **Distorted Horizon** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 9:02 pm

Around 8-40 tracks.. Depends really.. If I use samples, I like to give an own track to that sample even if it was a tiny "blip" that only can be heard once during the song.

Though I may toss a pile of samples to bitwigs drummachine and it only takes one track to play them all..

Well lately I may've used 4-10 tracks to drums, 1-2 basses, 1-4 synth lines per section (3-8 sections), couple of pads, few risers, 1-5 fx, 0-5 random sounds/noises, 3-5 send tracks..

do_androids_dream · Post by **do_androids_dream** » Sat Sep 30, 2017 10:33 pm

Scotty wrote:I guess Queen got it wrong then... they layered over 180 tracks for Bohemian Rhapsody ... you know that little tune? ... I kinda like that.

Hehe.. yes, I know that awful record lol

I knew an engineer who worked with Queen during their heyday. I asked him what it was like. He said "It was great. The only problem was that I had to listen to all that awful music".

DJ Warmonger · Post by **DJ Warmonger** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:30 am

About 40, plus groups and sends. I like full mixes where a lot is going on, however I avoid layering an excessive number of sounds that just duplicate each other. The leads usually have only 2 layers.

Some MIDI-controlled FX, like VolumeShaper and Stutter Edit, need additional tracks just to set them up.

jasco · Post by **jasco** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 9:26 am

I usually have between 30-50 but always bussed down to about 7 or 8. Some of these will be things like midi of rendered audio and stuff so they are not all always active.

Markku · Post by **Markku** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:01 pm

Those of you who have large track numbers, can you check/estimate how many are active on the same time in busy sections? I'm just interested how hard it is to EQ your projects (unless someone has perfect pre-selection of sounds, each bandpassed to exact areas).

Distorted Horizon · Post by **Distorted Horizon** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:24 pm

Let's say that one section has 10 tracks active. The more there are active sounds/tracks, the more I use highpass and/or lowpass to make room for different sounds and those I want to have a sound over others, have some sidechain sent to those "less important" tracks.

Aaaaand less I have tracks, less I highpass. Sections with only basic drums (k,hh,s/c), bass and for example pad or some rhythmic synthline have highpass at 100hz to keep kick and bass area clean. Even though their root is alot higher and that 100hz - 1000hz for example is only some ambience rumble but it fills the track nicely so...

Daimonicon · Post by **Daimonicon** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:57 pm

AnX wrote:Less is more

The bigger, the better

You decide

More is more as Yngvie Malmsteen said.

Daimonicon · Post by **Daimonicon** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 1:18 pm

Markku wrote:When I see videos of pros making songs, those songs seem often to have 50-100 tracks. I have read from mastering engineers that there can be twice as many.

While I can understand that with good gain staging, panning and EQ you can somehow fit all those tracks, I am seriously beginning to wonder, if all that is really necessary.

I do understand that not all tracks are active concurrently. Also, there are (probably) sounds that are composed from several parts, like kicks with separate transient and sub parts etc.

But often just ten tracks seem to have enough content to fill whole spectrum. So. I'm wondering what is really going on here...

Am I missing something completely? Or is due to some technique I am unaware? Like having dry and wet sounds from effects in separate tracks?

I mixed a a "nail the mix" which had like 84 tracks. Most of the tracks(if not all. Can't remember now) ended up in a group channel for the chorus vox, vox, rythm guitars, leads so it's not that complicated to mix it as one might think. I mean just the drums were 19-20 tracks individually and with like 20 chorus vox it's already 40 tracks. Anyway the point is that most pro mixes are yes, usually larger Even if it's like 100 tracks i doesn't mean that all of them will end up on the song.

Scotty · Post by **Scotty** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 2:35 pm

It varies tremendously and also how you count but I used side chained dynamic EQ to duck frequencies that are getting in the way as necessary. Usually the side chain is applied a group where the feed tracks are brought together as a "part" . This makes it easier to mix but sometimes it gets finicky and the side chain is impacting just a single track before it hits the group.... basically whatever is needed. But if I can make it easier for the mixdown I aim for that approach.

Markku wrote:Those of you who have large track numbers, can you check/estimate how many are active on the same time in busy sections? I'm just interested how hard it is to EQ your projects (unless someone has perfect pre-selection of sounds, each bandpassed to exact areas).

Number of tracks... How many you need?