I was watching this video on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DVJ3Z0oiFU&feature=related 

They recorded the same guitar part twice panning them l&r. Is it always a good idea to do that to make the guitar sound more full?

It's a pretty common practice to record more than one pass of the same instrument or vocal part. Sometimes the parts are panned apart to make the sound bigger, sometimes the parts are stacked together to make the sound thicker. Is it always a good idea? It depends on what sounds good in the song. If you can, go ahead and record multiple passes. At mix time you'll have the option of using them or not.

Ok a few questions.

1. When do you not use this technique? (bass guitars and drums?)

2. Does it make the mix muddier?

3. By common practice...Most of the time do you do double passes for let's say a guitar and stack it or pan them differently?

4. How many passes is too much being stacked or panned?

Thanks

That is a good question and I think one answer might be that there is no correct number of overdubs. It really depends a lot on what it is being used for.

In a country tune two rhythm acoustic guitar parts will sound very nice and quite big when panned. A lot depends on the timing of the two in terms of how large an image is created after doing it. Three and four might be starting to sound too messy and can clutter things up a bit in a mix for sure. 

But there are times also when a large number of overdubs works well. I have often created massive drum phrases by overdubbing my floor tom playing a phrase but doing it many times and tuning the drum also in between each overdub. You can do this 16 or 20 times and it sounds massive and quite spectacular. Being the player of all of the overdubs means a very similar timing and feel can be applied if you want or I tend to mix that up and alter the groove on each one resulting in a wider massive tom hits and phrases. These are handy in large soundscape soundtrack for film promo type tracks. Panning all these drums around the sound field makes them sound huge also. 

With other instruments it might only be 4 or 5 overdubs eg strings etc..

The more you do you then the more complex and busy the resultant combination of all those overdubs are. There are times when you need a lot of them and others when just those two acoustic guitars will do and even then one might sound a little better as well.

You must be prepared to mute tracks and take things out of your music. 

Enya did many vocal overdubs to get the sounds she was working with like 180 + tracks but after a while it starts to sound like something else rather than a vocal ensemble. And that is a good thing too. And also when gets that big it ends up all going through a buss and being processed and considered as just one musical part. But what a great part it might be though.

Doubling a part will tend to make the part loose impact.
Then again, some styles may call for this. It basically depends on what sounds good to you.
You could quadruple the part if that's what floats your boat.
Actually, I would disregard this video. It was pretty stupid.

As you can tell Sharpdion.... it is very subjective and decisions need to be made depending on what you are going for. You tend to get more distinction and clarity out of a single track or fewer tracks, If you are talking a heavy power chorded hard rock chorus then 2,4,6 passes of rhythm guitars usining different guitars, Eqs, mic placements, etc. can really help fatten up the sound. tiny timing variations help the effect. Big variations & sloppy performances will create a muddy mess. Try it & see what YOU think!

Thanks for all the responses.

So really it comes down to what type of sound needed for the project. Its a choice between clarity, crisp/thin sound vs full fat/thick sound?

Timidi - Would you care to explain what is wrong with the video? 

Agree with Jeff and Chuck on this one. It's really subjective, but pretty much a necessity in my opinion with certain styles of music. For some things, a single instrument recorded right with that "up close and personal" sound is all you need. The intimacy it brings into the mix is what makes it literally have more impact for THAT particular situation.

The only thing about the video that I didn't like was the tracking part. Trust me when I tell you, on that second pass, if you smash your foot on the floor that hard, a mic like the Nuemann is going to pick that up to where you'll need to re-record the track. So I questioned if that really was in real time. I also have not had luck in all my years shooting a mic at a sound-hole. That said, those are my only issues with the video really. The technique and it's use is spot on. Oh yeah, he also made a mention of messing with timing. The whole thing about creating a doubled part IS about the timing not being quite spot on. This is what gives you "Stereo". If it's too perfectly lined up, it will give you a mono type sound and you actually lose some stereo spread.

I personally like to double track electric guitars and acoustic guitars. But I also like the sound of an X/Y mic rig on an acoustic too. Electrics in rock seem to just have a little extra something when you double track them. As for when to do this...it depends on the style of music as well as what YOU feel you need. I'd never double track drums, piano or bass. To me there is just no reason to do so yet there are no rules that state "you shouldn't."

Certain instruments react to this technique differently and you also have to keep in mind that some aren't really focal points. If you double tracked a bass, it would have to be for a bass oriented album. Bass to me is a filler instrument and doesn't need to shine from a doubled part. However, when we record bass, it is a good rule of thumb to record the sound the bassist likes as well as taking a DI out so you have some other things to work with. You may want to re-amp him or do something to the DI to blend it in. I do the same with electric guitars. Mic up the amps and use a DI as well so if I need to, I can re-amp the sound or run it through a plugin. It's just a safety net really but it can also give you more cool options to work with.

Drums, you definitely don't want to double track because they are all about timing. Again though, no rules that say you shouldn't. But to me, they make enough noise as is and if you allow for the human timing errors that create stereo to be apparent due to a double tracked drum part, it's just not going to sound good. In my opinion, I like to stay away from any solo instruments as far as doubling goes. I don't do it on voice because it gives me that "Ozzy" sound. There are times when I will double a voice that is singing the same part for impact on something, but I don't use it as a part of my common practice like a lot of other engineers do. If I can't make a single lead vocal sound good on its own, I keep recording it until it does. Doubling it in my opinion, only doubles the lack of performance x2.

So yeah, it's really subjective and something you'll need to decide per song or per style really. It will, in my opinion, always make a sound bigger than say a HAAS effect where you clone a played track and move the clip a few increments or use a delay with a HAAS setting. That has its place too...but I prefer two independently played tracks when I need them. :)

-Danny

Timidi - Would you care to explain what is wrong with the video? 

Because of what Danny said. 

There's not much I can add to what was already said. 

Good points all and I'll just say that this is a technique that I use quite often especially with acoustic guitar. 

I don't often use it on anything else. By using it on the acoustic guitar, it gives a wider feel to the mix without making the mix seem watery and weak.  Especially in cans.