BTW, you ever hear of soundclick?

http://www.soundclick.com/

Nobody likes ads like this before you download, besides your file size is 11mb which can also be a drag for slower connects.

FWIW, I would suggest you start posting your songs on soundclick, its a sure way more people will check out your tune and perhaps give you some advice.

Well my friend, while your computer & software are fine, it's your technique that needs some work.

First. You have plugged your guitar into your interface DI guitar input. Here's the problem with that. It's not an amplifier nor cabinet. If you don't have the guitar amplifier, you will need to look into other types of cabinet emulation, available in your software somewhere. Since your guitar pickup only has a single output, that's not stereo. Supplementing your direct input and a microphone in each channel will give you more of a stereo effect. But that's still not quite where you want to go. Your mono guitar can be simulated into stereo utilizing time delay manipulation. There is more but that's enough for now.

On to the vocals. While it's nice to have 2 folks singing together on a single microphone, the ambient nature of the room can become excessive. Oh, you said you used reverb. And again, this is all mono. And it's customary to put stereo reverb on to centered mono vocals. Same for your guitar.

So your entire production was straight up centered mono. Nothing wrong with mono. Plenty of us have worked for years in mono. But mono ain't stereo. Stereo gives you width, depth, height. And while you can also create that in Mono, it just ain't the same. Don't be confused by sound coming out of both speakers. That does not connote stereo. That is dual channel mono. Stereo requires different signals applied to each channel not the same signal which is what you have here. But then this also comes down to recording technique/mixing technique of which you are still new at. So it's the directions to Carnegie Hall response.

Ya, those obnoxious advertisements were a bit much. And especially the slow download speed on my high-speed Internet service. Geez.

I don't look as sexy as those girls in the advertisements
Mx. Remy Ann David

Remy brings out so many good points. It kind sounds like your singing into the back of a condenser.

The vocals are pitchy as I'm sure you're aware. The song writing is good as any I've heard on the radio lately, if not better(Sorry, I just realized it's a cover..DUH.). You need help with the performance as well as the tech side. Guitar would definitely sound better mic'd. Try using the direct as well as a mic and blend the two.

If I were you I would get someone to sit with you and just press record and stop every once in a while. Just make sure they're up to speed with all the transport controls. That will leave you to be creative and not have to think about what's going on in the DAW.

Two ppl were'nt singing at the same time... it's just me singing in two tracks.... doing harmonies.

and so u say I should use stereo?
I was told that I should use mono.
and I don't totally understand what I should do with the guitar

Yes. Record in mono. MIX in stereo. Pan the vocals. You can double(triple,quadruple) the guitar and pan that. Try micing the guitar in stereo. Don't be satisfied with just getting it done. Try to make it sound as good as you can get it.

Check your private messages.

No, you don't use stereo microphones. You use a single microphone. You can record as many vocal tracks as you want. You then position those vocal tracks in the stereo field. Left, left of center, center, right of center, right. That gives you stereo vocals or a stereo perspective per se. Recording in stereo would indicate you are using at least 2 microphones. You don't want to record vocals that way. It's different if you are recording an operatic recital. But you're not. So those " pan" controls are not related to the Gary Larson " suck" control as portrayed in the cartoon.

Practice practice practice
Mx. Remy Ann David

Well, I really didn't want to reveal this to anyone but this is the content of that PM that I sent. I figure may as well let it out. I would never advise someone to deal with their tracks in this manner, I was just trying to get at a point though, I'm not even sure what that point was. Finding the mud? Natural chorus as a result of doubling? I don't know. I was just saying that all is not lost.

I never meant to say that you should record in stereo, only that you can record a guitar in stereo and it can sound good if you take the time to do it right. So here is the message I sent(Minus the bold. That is, what I typed in bold was there just not bold.). Admittedly it's a hack from a hack. So, there it is.

I wrote: Ok. I fudged some of your cover to see if I could get blood from that stone.

Here's the link: http://www.box.net/shared/1ecavxvyb5

All I did was try to take out some of the mud between 200-500Hz. I added some chorus, verb and limited the master.

This is by no means an acceptable solution. You should try to make it sound it's best before you go to mix. Just thought I'd share.

I love this song! Too bad the mix seems very distant though, lots of ambient noise, and I think it's a little slow, I'd like to hear it about 10 BPM faster IMO.

Were you recording in a bathroom or something? That's what it sounds like. What mic were you using? Built in laptop mic? That's what it sounds like as well.

chrizgarrido wrote: I'm using Vista, Cubase LE, with a presonus Firebox.

hueseph wrote: [quote=chrizgarrido]I'm using Vista, Cubase LE, with a presonus Firebox.

Was that directed at me? I assume so, and I'd assume it was because of my laptop mic comment as well. What I'd hoped to get across there was that I thought it *sounds* like a laptop mic. Seems distant with lots of ambient noise and reflections. I think your assessment of singing into the wrong side of a condenser works as well.

To Chris, you mentioned at one point that the tracks were near clipping but still not loud. 'Loud' is a misnomer in the recording world, just because the signal is almost peaking does not mean that it is as loud as it can be. Signal almost peaking means that you are giving the converter as much signal as it can safely handle at any one given time. This however doesn't mean that the signal being processed has much 'presence' to it, and that is the key word. It takes a long time and a lot of experimentation with mic technique/room technique/treatment to get good presence. Just a half an inch shift in the mic position to the source changes the entire frequency response of the recorded signal. Think of it as thinning out the frequencies that you don't want to hear while bringing out the frequencies that you do want to hear... all just with mic position and placement.

Fun stuff,
-Jake

I'm using a Behringer C-1 Condenser Mic. I'm pretty sure I'm singing into the right side of the mic.
I used the Roomworks SE plugin and set it to 1.07 Reverb time with 100 mix.

That's why, 100% mix means you are sacrificing all of the dry signal and processing the entire signal with reverb. Generally when adding reverb to a recorded track without using a reverb send or summing bus verb, keep it under 25%. Can't really think of a good reason to use more than that in an average situation.

Yup. What GF said is certainly true if you use your effects as inserts. If you use them in a send though(auxiliary send in some DAWs but I think it's just a send in Cubase), you can have the mix at 100% and control the amount of signal going to the effect from the effects send if pre-fader or by using the fader if the send is set to post-fader. I realize this is another can of worms. If I've confused you I'll try and explain or direct you toward a thread that explains.

Thanks for sharing. :D