Advise on Mastering Vocals

Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 11:08 am

We are a not for profit spiritual organization and cannot offered to go for professional mastering. We record strictly male vocals in a semi-studio setup (sound proof & acoustic treated). We have only one speaker and we don't even add music. We are able to record fairly well.

NOW - please advise how to do the mastering, to the release quality. We do not sell the disks/audio material but do play it to groups of audience and want to give them the best experience. So, any detailed explanation as well as relevant links are greatly appreciated.
BTW - how does normalization improve audio quality; or does it create any problems.

We need to ensure that the audio does NOT change in anyway from the original recording, even if it sounds better. Thanks.

Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 11:53 am

proactive wrote:

We need to ensure that the audio does NOT change in anyway from the original recording, even if it sounds better. Thanks.

Do you mean you don't want to degrade the audio in any way? Mastering in it's nature changes the audio.

Would your audience be willing to make a donation for a CD? You can raise a fair amount of money that way to pay for professional work.

Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:17 pm

1) You don't "master vocals."

2) Forgive us if some of us are skeptical and jaded about "sound proof and acoustically treated" -- Too often, we find out later that there's a bunch of foam up on the walls.

3) You don't want it to change...? Are you just trying to write files to a compliant disc?

Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 3:12 pm

You want your speaker/announcer to be approximately one fist distance from the microphone capsule. A foam or nylon stocking on a stick is highly recommended.

Output of the microphone preamp would be nicely enhance with a simple dynamic range compressor. DBX 166 comes to mind as a good sounding inexpensive compressor. Only a few DB are necessary when the speaker's energy begins to build. A low-cut filter may also be a good idea depending on his working distance from the microphone. But you have to listen to it to decide whether to engage it. If he sounds like he is in a mud bucket? Switch it on. Cannot really be judged properly through headphones.

There is no other mastering necessary. No other equalization will also be necessary. This is a very nice clean straightforward way of recording the human voice. A microphone such as a Shure SM 58 to a Neumann U87 are great for this application. These are very smooth sounding for the human voice and are of the most popular vocal microphones ever used. Mastering is typically used to polish up musical productions. You as the engineer or to optimize this for most pleasant sounding and most highly intelligible with low ear fatigue. This means no hyper processing. A slight use of a downward expander sometimes referred to as a noise gate can also be beneficial, as it slightly turns down the microphone between words & at pauses. Overall providing a tighter sound. Something I frequently to come post compression i.e. after the compressor. DON'T GATE, but merely downward expand by 6 to 10 DB so that the microphone is actually always on. Never cut completely off. Threshold is critical for this setting to get it right. As you only wanted turning down when things get quiet. You don't want to turning down on low-level words. Threshold setting is critical for this function. Doesn't work worth a crap in software either. But that's for more advanced students.

An old Daffy Ducker
Ms. Remy Ann David

Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:09 pm

If the playback to the group is clear and intelligible, and doesn't sound boomy (unless it's the acoustics of the room) then you're done.

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 11:25 am

proactive wrote:

We have only one speaker and we don't even add music.

We need to ensure that the audio does NOT change in anyway from the original recording, even if it sounds better. Thanks.

One speaker? Shocked

Bad news. Chances are that what you play (wherever is played) will always seem to you like something has changed. Furthermore, maybe you should plan to make recordings for stereo not mono applications. --- Wink

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 12:12 pm

Umm... I think by "one speaker" the OP meant that there is only one person speaking.
And why would they need to plan to make stereo recordings? The stated application is for playback to a live audience - I would think this would be in mono anyway.

Personally, I second codemonkey's post. If you're done, you're done. But Remy's advice also sounds very good if you are looking for better quality up-front.

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 7:23 pm

DUPLICATE

Moderator Joined: Sep 12, 2002 Posts: 1881 Location: NYC

Uhhggg! Ed, if you are going to give advice, please be more informed than you seem to be.

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:46 pm

mwacoustic wrote:

Umm... I think by "one speaker" the OP meant that there is only one person speaking.

Well let's see:

They (he) said: "We are a not for profit spiritual organization and cannot offered to go for professional mastering.We record strictly male vocals in a semi-studio setup (sound proof & acoustic treated). We have only one speaker and we don't even add music. We are able to record fairly well."

We this and we that. Doesn't that infer a group of people recording more than one person? Why assume that one "speaker" meant one person? Then, did or did not they/he say "we record strictly male vocals?". Sorry, I had to take it literally. You could be right though, but you then must agree that the whole thing is not well formulated.

Quote:

And why would they need to plan to make stereo recordings? The stated application is for playback to a live audience - I would think this would be in mono anyway.

Did or didn't they say "cannot offered to go for professional mastering"? They did ask : "please advise how to do the mastering, to the release quality" Right?

I think they are trying to make a recording which they plan to handout to someone to hear or maybe even sell to the public. Either way, they will have sound quality problems if indeed they are mixing with just one speaker.

Quote:

Personally, I second codemonkey's post. If you're done, you're done.

Codemonkey was referring to recording people in general. Your remark is as good as advise as giving none --- Very Happy

Moderator Joined: Sep 12, 2002 Posts: 1881 Location: NYC

Why would mixing a vocal(s) with one speaker not be recommended?

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:57 pm

Michael Fossenkemper wrote:

Uhhggg! Ed, if you are going to give advice, please be more informed than you seem to be. Why would mixing a vocal(s) with one speaker not be recommended?.

I think at this point we should wait for the OP to clarify as to whether one or several persons are being recorded, don't you think?
Also, your question is surprising to me Michael. I guess the best way I can answer it is : for the same reason most cars have 4 wheels not 3.

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:03 pm

Actually, my memory informs me I was referring to the (quote) playback to the group (/quote).

Make sure it sounds clear enough in your studio, double check it's still intelligible in the room you play it back in (a hall of some sort?) and if the acoustics in there don't destroy it (boomyness etc.) then you're finished. If it is boomy, (try to) fix it with an in-house EQ.

However yes, this could apply to recording anything in general, not even just people.

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 10:24 pm

music_guy wrote:

Quote:
And why would they need to plan to make stereo recordings? The stated application is for playback to a live audience - I would think this would be in mono anyway.

And where did they say that's what they are planning to do?

I dunno, I guess I base my statement on this (emphasis added):

proactive wrote:

We do not sell the disks/audio material but do play it to groups of audience and want to give them the best experience

And codemonkey confirmed what I thought he meant - the point being that if the OP can meet his goal of a quality playback to the audience, then he doesn't need to do any "mastering", in the sense of mastering say a music album (eq, dynamics, magic fairy dust, etc).

I'm getting a growing feeling that by "mastering" he might just mean burn to CD? This would sort of explain the comment about "not changing the sound" - perhaps they just want to get it off the computer and into the sound system?

Oh, proactive, where are you? Please come back and clear things up for us.... Smile

Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 11:24 pm

As Michael Fossenkemper and "music_guy" battle it out...

A Codemonkey is playing in the bushes, learning valuable skills from his brethren and generally having a good time.

All the while, the OP has stated;

"We need to ensure that the audio does NOT change in anyway from the original recording"

So what the funk is the point of this discussion?

Just wanted to say hi Mum.

This topic sponsored by: