1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

New Member.. some questions..

Discussion in 'Recording' started by Tikilovegod, Oct 12, 2012.

  1. Tikilovegod

    Tikilovegod Active Member

    Hi all, I am a new member here and although I have been reading some of the threads and picking up tips here and there I still am not getting my recordings together as I want them. Guitar sounds seem to be a hit or miss and when i comes to vocals I always seem to get glitches when the notes change during the words. When I put auto tune on it makes it even more noticeable. I have an Antares Harmony program that only lets you choose Cher, a weedy Cher tone or pretty transparent but I hear glitches sometimes.

    Is this the singer or is it that I need to go into the editing side of pro tools and drop the volume where these points occur. I have heard about digital artefacts but don't know if this is the proper terms. I don't want to shoot the singer if this is more down to recording technique. I mean they can record Bob Dylan and John Hiatt without this showing up in their recordings.

    next, I can sometimes get a good guitar tone but never can get it clear like you hear on modern recordings where it sounds like you are right in the amp and you can hear the whole spectrum of sounds. My mixes always seem to be mushed together with things sitting ontop or blended together, never the definition I want.

    Below is a link to two of the songs we are working on and I obviously want to do it right for the final takes.

    Island Girl - Giant Head Collective - New Scottish Band 2012 - YouTube

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWYi9sGHM8M

    Am I hoping for too much with the equipment I have and need to comprimise? I know that a few thousend $$ can get you 95% of the way there but the ofther 5% costs hundreds of thousands..

    Pro Tools LE with Digi003 Rack
    TL Audio Tube Preamp/Compressor (5101??)
    Focusrite Platinum
    SM57, Sennheise 421, M-Audio Solaris, Rodes NT1
    Various plugins

    I am sorry if any of these points are covered in other threads and I will be searching through the forum as well but any onfo on what I can do to improve these tracks much appreciated.
     
  2. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    turn off the pitch correction. don't track with pitch correction.

    suicide
     
  3. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Well-Known Member

    +1 on don't track w/ pitch correction, did so on a dsp system, it's too much of an illusion at that stage for my tastes. And you can't 'wow' them in the tuning front, on mix, cuz they sang into it. She sounds like krissy hinds, or Natalie imbrubliea? i dunno how they spell there names, but they sound good.

    what i don't like is the guitars/bass being so subservient, to the snare vocals. i hear a snare (sampled?) and vox out front, then the band, w/ lack of sub bass. i think it'll translate to smaller systems well, but what if a system was made show those depths? like a typical 'club' system.

    guessing the nt1 was used? you got some good products there, i'd just try to tweak them more, than spend money on new stuff. you could have her overdubb a new scratch track that she sang along w/ the tuned version. i'd shelf cut from like 500hz and below, on the new one, it could coax a full breathed performance. or just have her practice a bit in tune and do it another day.

    you have some well rounded mics. i'm thinking either leave it alone, or retake the vocs, and adress mic choice on the vox. i'd probably start w/ the 421 to get an idea.
     
  4. RemyRAD

    RemyRAD Guest

    The sound and technique of both of those recordings are very different from each other. I like your Giant Hand cut much better than the other Scottish tune. The Scottish tune almost sounded like it had analog tape flutter? It must've been some kind of digital compression artifact I was hearing? That Giant Hand cut only needs a little work. That other cut was very nice but it lacked depth and clarity. And that flutter like sound was driving me crazy. Female vocal top end is lost. And everything else comes in kind of that way also.

    We use use the 421 for snare drums, bass drums, tom-toms, DJ's. They're fine for live PA vocals but I don't like them much for vocal recording. Kind of a 58 on steroids. At least with a five position low-cut filter. What makes it a little more doable for vocals. It's actually a great vocal microphone but not my favorite for vocals. Wasn't even my favorite on the DJ's at NBC, DC. That's actually where I like the SM-7 better overall for vocals. The 421 doesn't come away that smooth sounding. But what the heck, it all works.

    421 on snare drum can't be beat. Bass drum also. My favorites.
    Mx. Remy Ann David
     
  5. hueseph

    hueseph Well-Known Member

    These are just my opinion so take with a grain of salt. Mic that acoustic. It will sound so much better than plugging it in. Blech. Decide which guitars need to be asserted and which ones only need to be implied. Not sure what I mean by that but it sort of makes sense to me. The guitars sound like they would be fine on their own but they're all fighting for attention in the mix.

    Vocals sound excessively sibilant to me in Play the Hand. Personally, I would cut a more defined hole for the vox down the center and try to keep the other instruments from sharing that space. But again, this is just my opinion and there are far more experienced people here to take advice from. Namely the ones who have responded already.
     
  6. Tikilovegod

    Tikilovegod Active Member

    I have been on vacation but thanks to all for their input, I don't track with Autotune but was told that if you did not have it on then there is no chance of getting any radio play, if I ever got the quality there. I am prepared to work at the mixing but just wanted to make sure that I was on the right track quality wise before recording them all properly.
     
  7. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Well-Known Member

    well i dunno, readio existed before antares, so, i guess we're talking performance merits. I agree that bad vocals won't propell a song, but who says you need a cpu algorithm to make good vocals? a performance w/ conviction and a couple errors will sell more than a technically perfect slouchy one.
     
  8. Tikilovegod

    Tikilovegod Active Member

    I agree that is the way it should be, Just want to get my tracks ounding as professional as possible that will allow us to push them online and for publishing.
     
  9. RemyRAD

    RemyRAD Guest

    I really think what they meant to say is, most folks are really crappy singers. And with six you get egg roll. Competent singers and musicians don't need it. For everything else there's MasterCard. Which translates to pitch correction to the feeble incompetence of the general public. And of course if it's wrapped/hip-hop where the slather pitch correction makes for a cool sounding effect on the urban contemporary charts. I mean without pitch correction what makes you think that any rapper could sing anything? They can't even sing. And the only way to make those little puppet vocals sing at all is with pitch correction. And in that vernacular I could understand. So it's true and it's not I mean, it's snot.

    I belong to the snot of the month club.
    Mx. Remy Ann David
     
  10. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Well-Known Member

    the tuning in digital performer is pretty transparent, and built in. like any pitch malfunction, i'd only adjust the badly obvious.
     

Share This Page