Hi you all,

I am new to this forums and I saw this thread, and since I have recorded a lot of vocals for very different styles, I thought I'd share some thoughts.

1. Omni directional mic : I really think this pattern type is best for recording a lot of vocals, and surely it is a bit frightening to have all the reflections coming at the mic, be it a vocal booth, or a big live room.

If you can give it a try you can hear the difference when mixing, since it gives a very open sound, it really breathes in. It is a good idea to record them also at a minor distance than usual, if desired, since you get a present sound with out the proximity effect you get when recording in any of the cardioid patterns.

2. Pop screens : I know a lot of people will disagree with me on this, but I try to not to use pop screens since the steal some pressence. Obviously your singer has to be aware of this, and hopefully s/ he may have a good technique. And if your producing, then you have cart blanche since it is your own call. Don't try this with some one who doesn't control his voice !

3. Tube mics : They do really make a difference when recording anything, if your budget allows to rent one, I would surely do it. They are a huge difference from non tube mics. I recommend a Neumann telefunken version of the U67, or Elam 251, they do sound awesome!. Some other great mic form AKG is the TUBE, this one is really good on anything. I know that other telefunkens or vintage AKG's sound great but I have not tried them myself...but every one knows what they are! LOL

If you don't have the possibility of getting a hold of a tubed microphone, I really recommend the AKG C-414. It is an easy choice, and they do sound great on anything !

4. Compressors : I would stay away from compressors for recording, since you are so busy editing or punching also judging performance and tuning that may be not ready to make this decisions yet. I would really leave this for mixing.

3. Backing Vocals!: Have you ever wondered why sometimes you struggle to get your backing vocals to stay on its place when mixing?. Well it is as simple as recording them some steps further back, this really works!. Since they are more reflected on the walls. Just don`t put them so far away from the mic ! LOL.

Well, I have some more thoughts, like recording on tape if you can and fly em over pro tools later, or leave some space for the circuit to not to use headroom and all those sort of things.

Any way ... my two cents !

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://e-mixmaster…"]Home - e-mixmaster.com[/]="http://e-mixmaster…"]Home - e-mixmaster.com[/]

e-mixmaster:" ...and surely it is a bit frightening to have all the reflections coming at the mic, be it a vocal booth, or a big live room."

You got that right!

omni is all good, believe me !

moonbaby, post: 395724 wrote: e-mixmaster:" ...and surely it is a bit frightening to have all the reflections coming at the mic, be it a vocal booth, or a big live room."

You got that right!

But I asure you the results are amazing ! may be I can send you some audios so you can check it out. I like to experiment a lot with mics and all, even recorded some drums with just one mic in omni, and the result was a clear image of the drums with zero phase problems, which in multiple mics you always have to struggle during mix down, no matter how good phase coherence is there. You always get some cancellation.

But we are talking about vocals... I don`t want to deviate the thread's original subject.

Best Regards.

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://e-mixmaster…"]Home - e-mixmaster.com[/]="http://e-mixmaster…"]Home - e-mixmaster.com[/]

I agree with you...to a point.
An omni will tend to have a flatter response than a cardioid (or other directional pattern), all thing being equal. But they aren't; rooms these days are often a makeshift bedroom, the garage, or a basement with a low ceiling. And as many VO's as I have done, I have never heard a vocal booth sound decent with a wide-pattern mic, in fact a shotgun was hardly bearable. In a perfect world, there would be no reason to teach a performer mic technique, how to move the pop filter in and out during phrase changes, and the like.

18. Smokers: May be hard but please to avoid smoking before sessions and focus on drinks/fruits. You need to hear my story!

Crye, post: 401375 wrote: 18. Smokers: May be hard but please to avoid smoking before sessions and focus on drinks/fruits. You need to hear my story!

Yup. Smoke is bad. But so are fruits and sugary drinks... which can leave a nasty, sticky residue on the face of the mic.

Try room temperature water instead. ;)

Thanks! ... Donny

Before even attempting to record a vocal it is essential to set up a good "cue-mix" or "headphone mix". The single most important factor to achieving a great vocal recording is a great performance. Use good quality sealed headphones. A good "cue mix" can be a stripped down version of the full mix. Ensure the vocalist feels the rhythm by setting the kick drum and bass levels more forward in the mix. The addition of a chordal instrument, like a piano or guitar will be enough to provide the fundamental key of the song. Place any other elements lower in the mix than the ones mentioned above. It's also a good idea to keep any sounds modulated with a flanger or chorus out of the mix to avoid pitch problems.

Todzilla Tip #1: When tracking with the intention of doing many unison tracks, make sure after you've nailed some good takes, to sing the rest of the takes without hard consonants. e.g., "Ih wah wennie year ago to-ay, thah argen epper augh is and to lay" The good takes can serve as the main vocal and the consonantless takes can be unison support without hassling with the T-t-t-t of slightly off timed consonants.

Todzilla Tip #2: Beer and other studio inebreants make the performance sound much better. Warning, this effect is temporary.

I usually record 4 to 5 tracks vocal takes all the way through and then I go back and comp. However a couple of days ago I went into the studio with a well known engineer producer working on my new song "Perfect World" and he had me do a take of the song all the way through. Then he listened to it and had me go back replacing lines he did not like, punching me in everytime. It drove me nuts! However when we were finished we had a dynamite vocal track. I've always been against this method but the excellent result makes me do some reconsidering here. i suspect this might only work with an excellent and experienced pro producer like the one I had but I am not really sure. I have to try it in the future when I am recording by myself. I guess you are never too old a dog to learn a new trick or?????

Ya know one thing that I didn't see mentioned in this thread, I always ask the singer whether they can work with a microphone on the stand or do they want to hand hold it? Then, no telling what I'm going to give them? It could be an enema? But most likely an SM-58, with an additional foam pop filter. Can't forget that foam pop filter. A big one.

I don't like folks hand holding my 77 DX's. No. Beyer M-160, with the additional foam pop filter, no problem. SM-81 with foam pop filter, no problem. Hey... I'd even let them hand hold a U-87 (with the big foam pop filter) if they wanted to.

For one particular recording session, to get the singer in the right frame of mind and deliver good performance, I put them outside with the crickets all chirping. It worked. And everybody loves the crickets! AKG 414 in Omni and a FOSTEX 6301 mini-monitor at the base of the stand and no headphones. It was midnight and the ground fog was rolling in. It was magical. And the singer who had just finished an eight hour shift, over a hot stove, at Denny's, then nailed each of the 17 cuts, in one or two takes. One right after the other, nonstop. And for the songs were I didn't want the crickets, I use my gates. Love my gates. Can't live without my gates.

I don't like to take gates on dates.
Mx. Remy Ann David

What are the ESSENTIAL plugins for great vocal mixing?

NovaRed, post: 423622, member: 48767 wrote: What are the ESSENTIAL plugins for great vocal mixing?

The essential plugins are NO plugin! If you have the right mic and preamp and use a good technic, you may not need any plugin if the tracking is done right. I say that because, a good performance and capture can't be replaced by any plugins or tricks.
If the track has problems, you use the tools to fix them.
The common tools are Deesser, Gate, EQ, Comp, limiter and tuning software :rolleyes:.
Common effects that rather go on a AUX bus are: delay, reverb, chorus etc...

It's fairly subjective - assuming that you already have a nice, high quality pre that delivers a great dry vocal signal to begin with (and to work from) - it also depends greatly on the performer, and the song.

I suppose a "general" consensus from most engineers on their preference for vocal tools, would most certainly include a really good EQ and compressor.

I know many engineers whom I respect that also use de-essers; although I've gotten away from using them in the last 6 months or so, since switching to Samplitude; the Object Editing in Samp allows me to get into just the sibilance wave form and, either reduce the volume of the sibilance, and/or possibly using some reductive EQ as well; I find this to be a smoother and better sounding method, because - unlike using a de-essing plug, where you can risk losing some of the nice frequencies that are being attenuated along with the sibilance - I can keep those nice frequencies that reside just above and below the freq's of the sibilance, so, I'm not "throwing the baby out with bathwater", so to speak.

I've also heard about a plug from Waves called the Vocal Rider, which, from what I understand, is kind of like having your hands on a fader, and controlling rapid, fast-happening amplitude changes; similar to what a compressor does, but it differs in that it's not raising the softer parts at the same time while it is keeping the transients in check like a compressor does. I haven't used it, but I have colleagues who have, and they've mentioned that they like it...

The nuances, the esoteric things would be, as Marco suggested, a nice reverb or delay processor. I'm personally a fan of [[url=http://[/URL]="http://en.wikipedia…"]convolution reverb[/]="http://en.wikipedia…"]convolution reverb[/], which uses various environment-measured impulses. I pick a space that I feel is appropriate, select stereo, mono, or MS processing, and then tweak them very slightly to make it sit nicely - and by "shaping", this usually involves some pre-delay adjustment, maybe a decrease or increase in the tail, and an overall balance between wet and dry. I don't do a whole lot of other reverb-parameter tweaking when I use impulses, because doing so kinda defeats the purpose of using a particular space.

Often, I will use delay instead of reverb on a vocal. Using the right kind, and with the the right settings, a delay can sound awesome on vocals, and provide a really nice sense of space.

As far as processing - which includes EQ and Gain Reduction - I will either insert these intothe track, or into the bus of the track. I don't insert effects. I use auggie returns for these, and then control the amount of the effect in the mix by adjusting the level of the aux return. Samplitude creates aux "channels" that mimic a "regular" track/channel, so I can also EQ and Pan the effect, along with controlling the level of the effect using the fader.

Other than that, you're just gonna kind of have to see what works best for you. Starting with the right vocalist, the right mic, and the right pre is paramount though. It sets up the foundation, and more often than not, you end up using a lot less filtering than you would if you were using a cheap mic and/or pre. If you don't have a nice sounding vocal track to begin with, both in performance and in fidelity, you can add all the processing and effects in the world, but it won't help much, if at all.

Final Note: If you find yourself spending more time "repairing" vocal tracks than you are simply making small changes and getting them to sit nicely in with the rest of the tracks on the song, then you probably need to try and narrow down the reason(s) why you are spending so much more time fixing - than you are mixing. ;)

FWIW

d.

DonnyThompson, post: 423625, member: 46114 wrote: I suppose a "general" consensus from most engineers on their preference for vocal tools, would most certainly include a really good EQ and compressor.

The key word here is GOOD.. Because no EQ are equal and neither are Compressors or any plugin for that mather.
Even if we put a side the emulations of classics on which we can debate for years.
Supposivly transparent plugin utility, EQ, Comp and others, are in fact not always transparent.
They may insert phase issues and undermine the quality of the mix. it all depends how they have been coded ;)

#29 If a singer is having trouble reaching a particular high note ask them to try to sing a higher note then the one they are tying to sing. Most of the time they will then reach the original note they couldn't reach.