What is your primary reason to use reamping?

    Flexibility. In many cases when a production is nearing its completion the demands on the guitar tone can change dramatically. Very often the density of the mix is increased due to all the processing which results in the guitars needing more cut in the high or high mid frequencies. Instead of using post EQs it often sounds better to choose a different guitar sound.


    Another is example is double or quad tracking. Often you will need to decrease the gain on each single guitar track to get a fuller and more transparent sound.


    Since it´s so simple to do with the KPA i would recommend to anyone to ALWAYS record an additional DI track, without exception. If you are famous in 20 years, you can still remix your old tracks with every possible option and earn more money

    Although I generally appreciate the merits of reamping I personally never do it.
    I want to see and achieve commitment which implies also committing to a sound (and of course performance) in the first place.
    I'm not so into the potential possibilities.
    In the genres I write, record and perform in this is still the de- facto standard.


    This may very well be different in other genres, where it has become a habit to do quad tracking for hugeness and tightness.
    This is a good example for the diversification of Rock'n'Roll over the years.
    Which in fact means that there are VERY different production approaches and values nowadays

    Reamping helps solve the "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" problem when recording yourself in one-man band situations where the tendency is to build the mix around the order in which the instruments are Tracked, as opposed to the order in which instruments are Important.


    I'll give you one example.


    While arranging, I tend to use simpler, lower-overhead sample libraries (often GM), saving the big ROMpler guns for later. It would be a mistake to commit to guitar tones in the context of an unstable mix; and yet something must be recorded simply in order to move forward. The drum or bass library I'm using today may not be the one I'm using at the end of the project, and for that matter the arrangement itself will likely evolve between now and final mix. At the same time, I'm not in love with throwing away good takes in pre-production simply because different tones may be required later on; hence reamping. I've lost track of the times I thought "man, I wish I could have lowered the gain a little during the verse" or tweaked the presence slightly in light of a different set of cymbals. By the time a song is finished, the division between pre-and-post production is so blurred that I'll actually have to relearn the song from beginning-to-end at some point because it's not until all the mutes are in, and all the layers sorted that I'm even certain of what kind of beast has been actually built. The studio is much more than just a set of ears; it's a songwriting tool.


    Yes, it would be wonderful to do as the Beatles did and enter the studio with fully rehearsed, club-tested tones and arrangements that allow an entire album to be recorded and mixed in three days - but that's not going to happen. Not for me, anyway.


    -djh

    I think it's a tool that allows you to commit to a sound a little later. You can do your initial tracking of guitars, but when you include a bass and drums in the mix, the sound can often change in unexpected ways, depending on what you're using.


    It just presents more options in the recording process, something that is a plus, imho. I can understand not needing it if you've got a signature sound and you plan to use that sound on record after record. But when you're doing stuff on the fly, which sometimes calls for stepping back and listening to the finished product a few days later, you might be grateful if you don't have to do the whole thing again from scratch.


    One of the big issues I'm facing in the studio today is that I don't use programmed drums and so I have been trying to lay down the tracks myself in different ways -- direct recording of drum module, midi to VST, a blend, etc. Since I haven't committed my guitar tones, there is so much more scope for me to decide on other sounds in a more leisurely fashion, rather than "this is it".


    That said, I'm swerving around to the view that if I have a good isolated guitar tone, I can do some EQ tweaking to achieve the desired results in any mix, rather than switching out the guitar sound for something else, which could take the whole thing in another direction.


    A bit off topic, but I also realised how much better it is to record real drums instead of sequencing them. The feel of a song can change dramatically. In that sense, I have to throw out my initial DI tracks and re-record again, so lesson learnt: I don't need a DI track when I'm just creating a structure to play drums to.