Double tracking guitar / comb filtering

  • Reactivating this thread because in discussing a similar topic, I just realized that all of my tracks thus far have been stereo out of the main L/R, including all of the double tracking.

    Have you recorded to two mono tracks in the daw or one stereo track?


    Cause if it's the latter, then there is no problem when panning, as it acts as a balancing control (turning one side down)

    Provided, of course, that you use hard panning

  • I do all recording in mono.

    I can't remember, Alan - do you do double / quad tracking on your guitar parts?



    Always mono and two different profiles, very similar. With just one profile you just get a bigger mono.

    Makes sense, thanks.



    Have you recorded to two mono tracks in the daw or one stereo track?


    Cause if it's the latter, then there is no problem when panning, as it acts as a balancing control (turning one side down)

    Provided, of course, that you use hard panning

    I've been recording to a single stereo track in Cubase, and yeah, all my tests have been LCR for all track panning.

  • I can't remember, Alan - do you do double / quad tracking on your guitar parts?

    It depends what I'm trying to do but more often than not no. I'm not a metal head. Like you, I love a bit of classic rock. I'm also into funk, fusion, blues, Steely Dan, Larry Carlton, Robben Ford, Tom Waits, Frank Zappa etc. I quite like the rawness and openness of single guitars. I often play similar parts but try not to make them the same.


    A couple of examples of my sort of tastes. One cover and one original. Both pre Kemper unfortunately:



  • Reactivating this thread because in discussing a similar topic, I just realized that all of my tracks thus far have been stereo out of the main L/R, including all of the double tracking.


    It occurs to me (I'm not always the brightest bulb in the box) that perhaps those of you doing a lot of double or quad tracking are doing it mono, and hence not encountering the phase related stuff that I started this thread to discuss.


    With that in mind, I'd be interested in hearing whether you're doing your double / qaud / gazillion tracking in stereo or mono. If you're mono and not getting phase issues that makes perfect sense to me. If you're doing it in stereo, however, and not getting any audible phase artifacts, that's a horse of another color.


    When you double track or quad track, always do it in mono, not in stereo.

  • When you double track or quad track, always do it in mono, not in stereo.

    Did some playing around with that tonight and as it turns out, I'm an idiot. Double tracking in mono does what it says on the tin, none of the phase artifacts I was experiencing.


    Geez, after all these years you'd think I would know better. I blame new gear excitement. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. :)

  • What would be the point of tracking it in stereo in the first place then, Tommy?


    Unless both sides are identical (perfectly in-phase with each other), yes, it will be "phasey".


    Even if they are in-phase, all that'll happen if you collapse them to mono is that you'll notice a slight increase in level as their energies combine.


    If you're planning to do this with existing stereo tracks that happen to be in-phase with the intention of panning them left-and-right after you've summed them each to mono, by all means do so, I reckon.

  • I recorded something in stereo and it’s partially phasey. If I sum then to Mono will they not be phasey?

  • Unless you're using a stereo widener effect then tracking in stereo or mono and hard panning will make little difference to things like phasing. When only two tracks are used audible phasing in this situation is the result of wave interference between your two speakers, this is as much about your position in the stereo field (i.e. where you sit) as actual phase issues between the tracks as overlaid.


    This issue is independent of what you use to generate your tracks, whether it's a Kemper, real amps or another sim. What does matter though is the mix and the observed comb filtering frequencies. To make really big double tracked guitars maybe reduce. The in all the mixes I love I've noticed that the hugeness of guitars is nearly always the hugeness of the bass guitar and drums, coupled with just really simple well played guitar parts that have had their sound sculpted a little with EQ and hi-pass filters to ensure they fit together in the mix and give that wide stereo field effect at the upper end with the pounding heart at the center of the mix.

    I think it'd help to hear what you're current achieving and see if we all perceive the same phaseyness you do. It could simply be a monitoring issue - do you have the same issue when listening through headphones as through studio monitors?

  • This!


    So many "huge" guitar parts are really huge bass parts :)

    Very true. Try to resist too much low end in the guitars and find some good mids. I would always record most guitars mono, which gives you the possibility to create more stereo in the mix. The exception is if I want a stereo chorus type effect like a clean JC120.


    Getting the low end right in a mix is one of the hardest things to do. Finding a separate place for the kick and bass guitar is key to a powerful sound.

  • In my tests, I can't hear any noticeable difference with respect to phase when double tracking guitars in mono or stereo, hard panned or otherwise.


    Can you tell which, if any, of these samples were double tracked in stereo? There's no hard panning in any of them.

  • If it's a mono signal distributed across the KPA's stereo outs, the two halves will be phase-coherent.


    If you sum them in a DAW, there'll be an increase in level, but that's about it, so in such cases one might as well record only one of the stereo-out halves (L or R).