Starting point techinques...??

After you have the song written, which I never do in Cakewalk...... the first thing that gets laid down, in my opinion, should be the drum track. It's the timing track that keeps everything else on time. I would spend the needed time to get the drum track perfect to the song. That means you singing and playing guitar to the drum track and it should be right.

After that... I think a scratch vox with piano or guitar to help you find your way in the song as you lay down other tracks like bass, strings, guitars, etc....

At this point, (tracking the various instruments) be sure the tracks are as close to perfect as possible. If not, you'll be going back fixing mistakes and timing issues and later on in the project that can seem like a very formidable task if there are lots of glitches in several tracks.  Pitch issues not included.

I like to build a project one track at a time. Get that track right, then move to the next. Sometimes if it doesn't work, don't be afraid to delete the track and start again.

The methodology that Herb (Guitarhacker) has described is exactly how I work through tracking and recording a song.  Over the last 1-2 years, I have found how important it is to get your foundation tracks recorded exactly how you want them, in tune, in time, on pitch, and the tone you want.  I usually start with drums and my main instrument, whether it be guitar, piano, or what not.  I used to try to rush through a song to get the parts down and then try to fix things later on.  Now, I make sure that my main guitar track is exactly how I want it before moving on.  I will then usually record a scratch track of vocals which really helps to keep your place in the song.  The very next thing I do is record bass to go with the drum track and main rhythm track.  It is so important to have this rhythmic foundation solidly played and in perfect time because everything else you do from here forward will depend on this foundation.
 
Like Herb, I try to write the songs completely before I ever start tracking, they tend to turn out better when I know where I am going with them.  I have on occasion pieced a song together and “wrote it on Cakewalk” but when I do this by copying and pasting and moving things around; it is always understood that they are mirror scratch tracks that will be completely redone once I figure where I am going with a song.  I have never been able to piece parts of a song together and make them sound cohesive.  It has a lot to do with room noise and the feel of how you play something that always sounds cut and pasted when you do that.
 
Also arrangement is key.  Don’t be afraid to try something, but don’t be afraid to recognize that it just is n’t working and throw  it out.  I used to do that with vocals, I would be afraid to take another try at it because I thought I would n’t be able to do it as well again.  I find though, that the more familiar you become with the songs, the better you actually perform them.  I have had some of my best results going back years later and re-recording a song or doing a rewrite.  It is amazing how much simpler it is the second time around.

bitflipper


Guitarhacker and Makeshift have the right approach. I recommend it. But I almost never follow it.

You will always get a better recording if you know in advance where you're going with it, have experimented and rehearsed and thought long and hard about the arrangement. I almost never do this, however.

By separating the act of composing from the process of recording, you can put your mind in the right place for each activity instead of bouncing back and forth between left and right brains. That just makes good sense, but I almost never do it.

What I do (usually) is work up a basic concept on the piano, then pull up SONAR and its step sequencer. I fiddle with rhythm patterns and tempos, playing along on the piano while the step sequencer loops. I figure out what the slowest and fastest tempos are that work with the song (I like tempo changes but defer them until later). Then I record a scratch track that will serve as an arrangement guide. It will usually be a MIDI track so I can experiment with tempos and tempo changes, and audition various instruments over it.

From there it depends on the song and the instrumentation. But it almost always starts with the step sequencer and a MIDI guide track.

+1.


I hardly ever have a tune anywhere near done before I open Sonar, cuz it is a really good tool to help in composition. Usually I will have an idea on guitar first, but not always. I pick a word to use as a temp song title, and open up the normal template, which is just an audio and a midi track. This way I have no preconditions to the composition. I will come up with at least three parts and start dropping scratch guitar and bass tracks over what I feel is an appropriate drum track. Sometimes loops, but mostly midi loops. By the time I get most of the parts worked out, then I start going thru the drum midi with a fine tooth comb. Once it is pretty much on the money, then my real tracking begins.

+1 all,

painterly sketches (performances) plus inspiration ... emotionally, worst times are some of the best to be inspired.

Emulate fav artists but then get real
Ad-hoc changes,
music theory,
producer loops,
willingness to scrap everything and start over,
collabs with fav forum-members,
multi-versions sometimes are keepers as well.
Personal vibe over emulations.

Basic garage band elements as a minimum
Hearty vox with pitch correction
God, love, happy-accidents,

and much much more

I find my composition style over the years has leaned more towards the way guitarhacker and makeshift said they compose.  I learned to use an MPC2000 years ago and also learned to trigger drums on my old keyboards using the onboard sequencers to loop and build the foundations, so I didn't really start using Sonar for much more then a tape recorder until Sonar 7 (I've owned S3, S5, S7, S8, S8.5).  I would loop the drums to taste, then build from there.  Once I had enough to start the song, I would sync the board(s) to Sonar and record the audio.  This method served me well in many a studio.  Over the last 2 years, I've been incorporating the midi aspect of sonar into my workflow.  I REALLY am glad I did!  It's given me more immediate control over the composition and I can really "visualize" what's going on.  Since I read music (somewhat), the staff view and PRV really come in handy.  I'm still not 100% away from composing "off sonar", but who is?  Inspiration can come from anywhere so I try to be ready.  Then I take it to Sonar to give it that extra "something".

If you are doing more than one-man production (as the OP's 2 guitars/keys) the band must have the song performed out first.  Nothing wrong with doing scratch versions if you need to write the song and try out different arrangements etc., but recording is recording for the basic arrangement.  You can, of course, go back and edit changes, but for acoutic performances you had better be tight or you spend more time "fixing"  things than just re-recording it as you want it.

The other side of "band" recordings is layering.  Many live bands don't understand that the studio recordings aren't the same thing and balance is totally different. 

I had a band that had some songs done like they do live work, and other songs that didn't.  It is completely different to listen on ear buds or on home speakers and live in a club pushing lots of air. One song had a guitar, bass and drum along with some flute support and leads.  It simply sounded weak with too much empty space.  It was also unbalanced unless everything but the drums was panned close to center.  I had them add a couple of guitar tracks, one straight rythym and a chunky one that did lead, too.  The guitarist said " Three guitars?" like they had never heard of such a thing.  I was able to balance the basic "live" guitar performance with the strumming rhythm to either side, leave in most of the flute but cut it at times in favor of the lead guitar.  Cut this and that when it got too busy.  It sounded fuller and more interesting and the band liked the end result.

There is an old rule that you can listen to 3 - maybe 4 lines of music at once in a song.  Much less than that and the song better be good or it gets boring fast.  More and it gets too cluttered.  Musician's sometimes mistake excellent playing for something that keeps non-muciscian's interested.  Establish the beat, introduce the vox, then a new instrument, then a different instrument or "sound,"  rinse and repeat.  For a little more drama cut out something after a build.  By the end of the song you can have two leads going over the basic rhythm and the audience can follow it.  THis works for bands or one-man productions.

@