Vocals in mix

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:31 am

wow guys relax. you're both right.

recording mono source in stereo does take up hard drive space. if you care about hard drive space then this is a problem. knucklehead does not care about hard drive space, so it's not a problem to him.

you guys just do it different ways, so what?

</petty argument>

<thread topic>

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 11:00 am

Sorry guys.

Please allow me to elaborate.

There are a lot of folks that are new to the recording biz that eat up this kind of misinformation, some take it a step further and assume that recording a vocal (or guitar, etc.) to a stereo track actually results in a stereo image. Search the site, see for yourself how many posts start off "How come my stereo vocal track doesn't sound like (insert band name here)" or my favorite "Why is it that when I record my vocals to a stereo track they sound the same in both speakers?"
When we ask these folks how they are recording their vocals, they tell us they are running one mic to a stereo track - they do not know the difference between a stereo track in a DAW and an actual stereo image.
They think that if it says "stereo" it must truly mean "stereo".
Rolling Eyes

When someone comes on here and says it's perfectly fine to record vocals to stereo tracks it raises the confusion factor, why not say it's fine to record ALL of your instruments to stereo tracks? How about the kik drum? Or maybe a stereo track of hi-hat?

Filmmusic is correct, sorta (he leaves out the main ingredients, that being pitch and flange) when he talks about splitting the files and separating them by a few ms - it's ADT, after all. But IMHO, it's bad form to continue to suggest that it's acceptable to record single mono sources to stereo tracks to accomplish it.

There are far better ways to skin a cat!

</end elaboration of petty argument>
I couldn't resist, Rockstar!

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:48 pm

There is only theory.
The point about 4 GB of vocals is if you have an external drive you can let the program record for 30 minutes. I have no hi hats, perhaps I need some. Just a voice and a guitar.

No iso booth. Move the laptop far enough away to not pickup any fan noise.
Recording myself, it is best to watch the screen when recording. It works having a stereo track recording, besides there are two mics and a Firewire interface with dual XLR inputs, we are getting a stereo image.
The advice is to use two mics, though the original answer was what to do with vocals that were already recorded...

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:54 pm

This is truly a case of, well... misinformation.

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 6:03 pm

filmmusic2008 wrote:

Now simply move one vocal, either L or R, forward or back in the mix.

hmmm yeah, but how do your tracks sound in mono? Rolling Eyes

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 6:53 pm

I am just kinda upset my mbox does not have this forward and back pan pod.
Seems like an unlikely thing to leave out.

I am just having my fun. Very Happy

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:35 pm

Nor does Vegas!!!

Wonder if there's a freeware version we can download somewhere?

Laughing

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:06 pm

Well there is this...

you just need like 10 grand, and a 6 grand mic to go with it.

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:46 am

Markd102 wrote:

filmmusic2008 wrote:

Now simply move one vocal, either L or R, forward or back in the mix.

hmmm yeah, but how do your tracks sound in mono? Rolling Eyes

The vocals merge.
The Doors' first record doubles the vocals, even though they only had 4 tracks. No effects other than having the singer listen to the playback and layer it. They recorded it so the vocal jumped out of the front of the speakers.
In theory a 2nd vocal track could be done with a different timbre voice from the same singer, as was the case with Morrison. The sound quality or timbre is affected by volume of singing. It is useful to add a softly sung vocal on top of a heavy one.
A higher or lower octave, or even singing in levels.
A singer could singer a Minor Chord by singing the I then the Flat third as an interval stacked on each other with two tracks

With a second vocal track, similar to "Cars Hiss By My Window" by The Doors the second is lower in volume and has more room sound. Jim was further from the mic.

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:38 pm

Well. I couldn't bare to read all of it. It's just too much. I think it all fell apart here:

Quote:

What was found on playback, is that if the computer freezes or overloads for a second then one of the channels gets "accidentally" delayed and gives a huge sound.

Now, to me that sounds like your computer is pooched. Time to buy a new computer if it cannot handle recording a single stereo track in sync. Otherwise it's pointless to record a mono source to a stereo track.

Ok. Then there is also this:

Quote:

There is only theory.

What about practice? Is there no practice? That is don't people actually put these ideas to use? Does gravity only exist for some people? Theory seems to be what you are reading about. Practice is what many people here put to use. Experience is the best tutor.

Everything after that seems like some regurgitated schlep from the instructor at Full Sale(as Ms. Remy would put it).

Anyhow. Carry on. It has been entertaining.

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 2:40 pm

filmmusic2008 wrote:

Re-Record the vocal in stereo. Now you'll have a L and a R channel.
What was found on playback, is that if the computer freezes or overloads for a second then one of the channels gets "accidentally" delayed and gives a huge sound.

HUH!!!!!

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:07 pm

Having gone back to painfully read some of the other posts, I've finally made sense of this post:

Quote:

What was found on playback, is that if the computer freezes or overloads for a second then one of the channels gets "accidentally" delayed and gives a huge sound.

Audacity? The problem here being that you assume that all DAWs use the same crappy engine that windows supplies. For it's internal sound devices. Having gathered that I can also assume that you are using the highest quality Soundblaster card there is!

Think about this though. What if. Just what if, the person in question is using an actual audio interface designed for recording. Using a decent audio engine and ASIO or other IO driver that bypasses windows operations altogether. And, what if their daw can actually record multiple tracks in sync over large time spans?

You are comparing apples to oranges and commenting on something that it is all too apparent you know nothing about. Please! Stop! I don't want to see you get torn into over such a trivial thing.

Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:19 pm

hueseph wrote:

Well. I couldn't bare to read all of it. It's just too much. I think it all fell apart here:

Quote:

What was found on playback, is that if the computer freezes or overloads for a second then one of the channels gets "accidentally" delayed and gives a huge sound.

Now, to me that sounds like your computer is pooched. Time to buy a new computer if it cannot handle recording a single stereo track in sync. Otherwise it's pointless to record a mono source to a stereo track.

Ok. Then there is also this:

Quote:

There is only theory.

What about practice? Is there no practice? That is don't people actually put these ideas to use? Does gravity only exist for some people? Theory seems to be what you are reading about. Practice is what many people here put to use. Experience is the best tutor.

Everything after that seems like some regurgitated schlep from the instructor at Full Sale(as Ms. Remy would put it).

Anyhow. Carry on. It has been entertaining.

Correction, the stereo track is always recorded in sync. Maybe you misunderstood.
Of course any computer that is 2 years old can be replaced.
It happens that a momentarily delay on playback, not on recording, caused an effect
Once Stop is pressed, the delay is corrected.
It only gave an idea, try re-creating that delay by moving the L or R track forward a few ms. That is practice.
Good and Bad is Roman.

Audacity does not come with Windows. No one ever said it did. It is simply free and easy. http://audacity.sourceforge.net/download/
Sound Blaster? Is that comedy? If so it is Roman, not Greek.
We have been talking of interfaces...
Try a Yamaha GO46 32 Bit 192khz. What is higher quality than that?
There is only different sounds at this level.
Of course there is the Sonar Producer which is 64 bit, only if you use that will I agree you have a better system than ours.

Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:59 pm

filmmusic2008 wrote:

Markd102 wrote:

filmmusic2008 wrote:

Now simply move one vocal, either L or R, forward or back in the mix.

hmmm yeah, but how do your tracks sound in mono? Rolling Eyes

The vocals merge.
The Doors' first record doubles the vocals, even though they only had 4 tracks. No effects other than having the singer listen to the playback and layer it. They recorded it so the vocal jumped out of the front of the speakers.
In theory a 2nd vocal track could be done with a different timbre voice from the same singer, as was the case with Morrison. The sound quality or timbre is affected by volume of singing. It is useful to add a softly sung vocal on top of a heavy one.
A higher or lower octave, or even singing in levels.
A singer could singer a Minor Chord by singing the I then the Flat third as an interval stacked on each other with two tracks

With a second vocal track, similar to "Cars Hiss By My Window" by The Doors the second is lower in volume and has more room sound. Jim was further from the mic.

Now you're contradicting yourself.
In your original comment you were talking about 1 vocal take on 2 tracks, with one of the tracks nudged a few ms ahead or behind the other, and panned left and right. Yes, this will give you a bigger sound.
However, if you listen to that in mono, those two tracks are will create a phase problem and the vocal will be drastically reduced in volume and sound like shite!

Now in this post you talk about the tallent singing the part twice. Different kettle of fish!

Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:18 pm

Quote:

It happens that a momentarily delay on playback, not on recording, caused an effect
Once Stop is pressed, the delay is corrected.

You're talking about latency here. It does not get recorded to disk like that.

As far as audacity is concerned, there are far better free solutions out there. Kristal for Windows and Ardour for Linux/OS X. Both allow for real-time effects. Can't do real time effects with Audacity.

I won't even bother commenting on the Yamaha..oops too late. Is there better quality than that? Well if you have to ask...........

This topic sponsored by: