Whenever I read these post about track counts on forums like audiosex, gearslutz, etc... its just lets me know demographic that primarily posts on these boards. I assume that many of the people who are scoff at, or amazed at the idea of a 100 track session do mostly instrumental based, acoustic, retro, old school rock and indie music. So in essence 98% of posts are by users who produce what would be considered white non-mainstream music.

In top 40, pop, and urban genres most notably R&B (which get no love on these boards), it is normative to have a non consolidated session with a track count ranging from 50-100+ tracks. What some that work in instrumental based genres dont realize is that most pop genres are vocal based, so a lot of those tracks are usually vocals. For example, Lou Pearlman boy band type of song from the backstreet boys or N'snyc would have 48+ just for backing vocals. Or take two mega popular black R&b groups from the 90's Jodeci & Boyz II Men, again you'll need 24-48+ tracks on vocals per song to achieve that sound. Same for Justin Bieber, Beyonce, Katy Perry, or Adele (Although Adele's music seems more minimalist).

That means every note sang, for each harmony, and layer, vocal stacks, creative intonations, etc. all spread out as individual tracks. That's also not counting the tracks electronic drums, samples, synths, and real instruments that are usually mixed together in pop genres. some songs may have 2 or 4 different rhythm guitar tracks, 2 lead guitar tracks, and 2 bass guitar tracks. The principal is the same in today's time for current artist and producers, except its all in the box now, so no hardware imposed track limits and there is less need to consolidate to 24 or 48 tracks.

I just mixed a song that had around 300 tracks of vocals. Lots of harmonies and layers.

 

As Baxter asked, who said that?

Even orchestral tracks... you use as many as you need. Watch any Spitfire video to see that's bull.
Who the feck counts?

Notes however, only pro's use more than 3

 

That's luxury that is.

 

I'd rather say
creating the necessary number of tracks for every project
is more relevant to each of us.

 

A high track count has more to do with this being the digital era, the days of unlimited tracks than music genre itself ... or demographics. Today, there is no such a thing as limiting a track count even in the "white non-mainstream music" you mentioned. In fact, even if there was such a thing in the past it had nothing to do with the genre. The track limit was strictly imposed by the technology that was available during the magnetic era. There were only so many times that you could bounce tracks. Sonic differences occurred with multiple tape generations. The high-end degraded. Each copy added more wow and flutter to the resulting mix and so-on. Accordingly, earlier in the process, the engineer and producers were forced to limit the track numbers.

 

Even being a total beginner I can understand why many tracks are, if not necessary, at least useful. That doesn't mean you can't do very good tracks with a limited number of them.

When it comes to recording, we have for instance:
- that complex drum micing. The bleeding figure of speech sometimes gets pretty real for perfectionists
- double-quad-many-tracking not only electric rhythm guitars but voices. Then comping at fine-auto/manual-tuning until even I can sing like a god. Well, not really, in my case even alien technology couldn't do shit lol. But you get it.
- besides multi-tracking, with the same rhythm guitars you can add very subtle but cool layers, sometimes doing arpeggios of the current chord

With plugins, many times even for a change of preset it's advisable/mandatory to increase the effect/aux/whatever track count

And the list goes on.

 

Last edited: May 24, 2019

For me it is. Im fairly new at producing so having more options helps me. I think with more experience I will be making decisions at an earlier stage that will result in less tracks.

 

I think the most important is to create the good ones

 

A lot of modern music is actually very simple. A lot of times it's just a beat. a bass synth, and maybe another line, and a vocal or rap. (often no full chords) It's the processing that uses channels and extra tracks. The most I have ever used at once is 30.

 

I am old enough to remember recording on, 8 tracks. I thought 16 was great. Then the had 24. Then they had two 24 track machines hooked together for 48. I never did use all 48. Track management was quite a balancing act. You had to decide what went on the basic tracks and what got done as overdubs, get the drums mixed , down to two or four tracks etc.

 

I used to record overdubs and etc on different tracks, but now I use track versions in Cubase for the sake of clarity

 

And then they had 48 Track machines...and then they hooked them together for 96 tracks and then...it was never enough.

 

Have you priced a 2" roll of magnetic audio tape? I think BASF is about the only company making it. I still have Ampex 2" and a couple 1/4" master tapes on my shelf. would have to bake them before they could be listened to, and rent studio time.

 

Of course you can do things whatever you like, but 4 tracks for a drum in a pop/rock song is just not real. (unless using just samples)
A minimum, the very least, is about 10-12 tracks.

Kick in
Kick out
Snare bottom
Snare top
HH
tom 1
tom 2
OH HH
OH Ride
OH Top
Room

And that's if you don't use a third tom, or don't want to use separate mics for each cymbal. There could be multiple mics used for the snare too.
Same thing with a bass. I just finished a production that i used 3 tracks to a bass guitar. One for the line, and two different amps.

There are always multiple options. It can be done as you said, with very little tracks, but that's if you use only samples, or want to go for the minimal way.

 

We should make a clear distinction when we talk about projects with recordings and what type of them. Drums are the prime example.

 

The Glynn Johns method works-4 mics-It's just not going to give you control over every part of the kit. You have to listen closely and position the mics just so. I have used it a few times because it sounds more retro. My set up though-Kick, Snare , Hat, 1st tom, 2nd tom, floor tom, mid-side overheads with a Fathead II ribbon mic and Cloudlifter for fig. 8, and a Shure KSM137 for the center. Sometimes I use an ART pre-amp for the overheads.

 

Two mics on the drum might work for a certain track. It all depends what you wish the song to sound like or what you have to work with. Sometimes simple is better, other times, not. Same would go for stereo micing acoustic guitars, sometimes it works and sometimes not.

 

Haha! Phase-cancellation City! lol
A guy I've worked with, and meet up with every other week, was the recording engineer for vocals on Bohemian Rhapsody, and also recorded Supertramp, Jimi Hendrix, The Zombies, The Kinks. The list goes on. It's Ray Hendriksen of Scorpio Sound. And his brother Andy recorded a lot of The Kinks stuff.
The kind of thing you've said makes us laugh, when we've talked about it.
He can mic a kit with one kick mic at a distance (and it sounds like an in and an out!) and two ribbons pointing at the drummer, not from above as per overheads, but again from a special distance (which I shall keep to myself!), and it sounds like a multi-channel mix!
And of course, all channels are sitting equal on the desk faders, after!
This is one of the skills he is renowned for, and one of the things that is much sought after. No phase cancellation. Using the room sound. etc.
There is no time in my life I've ever heard of mic'ing up every cymbal! That is ridiculous.
And if a snare is close mic'd, top and bottom is all, really. Especially if you've already close mic'd toms and/or used overheads.
But each to his own, I guess.

Also, just to mention, tracks and channels are obviously different things.

 

C'mon lads, we gotta get that groove going.

 

...as they drag Roger along! lol