Two things.

1. Way too much reverb.
2. I don't believe you. Do you really long for yesterday?
   class="xf-ul">
   
   Strictly on the production side, why not listen to the song on CD and try to mimick the production? Squeeze what you can out of the gear that you have. The reverb in the studio version is a small hall. There's not a lot of verb at all. The mix is low. More dry than wet.

Hi Adam,

Actually I find your voice quite appropriate for this arrangement. This suits you a lot more than Sweet Home Alabama ( S.H.A.) Nicely sung and played. But I agree with Hue. Way too much reverb which makes it hard to get past that and actually listen to the song. Remix that again with half 2/3 less.

For S.H.A., you need more grit which comes from tightening up your technique. Two opposites of the spectrum.

Thanks audiokid and Hueseph, I took your advice and here is what came out.

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Yesterday2 by Adam Mishan on SoundCloud - Create, record and share your sounds for free[/]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Yesterday2 by Adam Mishan on SoundCloud - Create, record and share your sounds for free[/]

Good for you, try even less. Cut it in half and bring your vocal up 2db.

PS, don't delete the other soundcloud tracks just yet. You need them to refer back for a few days.

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Yesterday3 by Adam Mishan on SoundCloud - Create, record and share your sounds for free[/]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Yesterday3 by Adam Mishan on SoundCloud - Create, record and share your sounds for free[/]

Nice. thumb

What do you think Hue?

Much better. Ten fold. Too much reverb tends to cheapen your sound. It makes it seem as though you're trying to hide something. Let your voice has to stand on it's own. And it does. It sounds much better now than with all that wash in the background.

You're getting a lot closer this third time around. Here's what I'm hearing. First, it seems to me you are using some kind of small diaphragm condenser microphone for your vocal? It's clean, it's bright it's not what it should be. Paul took full advantage of the proximity effect on that U-47. It creates a great deal of intimacy when presented well. It sounds to me like you have some kind of dynamic range processing but it's really not doing what it should, where it should. All of your low-level stuff is getting lost. That means you need compression not limiting. And you might want a fair amount of it? While Paul's dynamic change, the dynamics really don't change. I'm hearing far too many dynamic changes in your vocal. The delivery is fine the compression needs work. Remember you are trying to emulate the original. Put the CD up alongside of yours and keep referring back to it as a reference. This is where I think you'll also find a SHURE SM58 would actually do a better job on your vocal than whatever condensers thingy you've already used? In fact that 58 can be made to sound a lot like a 47 were a cheap Chinese small diaphragm condenser microphone will never sound that way.

They used a real chamber at Abbey Road. It wasn't even an EMT plate. Which is why his reverb sounded so nice and yours sounds so damned electronic. This is where you really don't want a perfectly flat response in your reverb.

I also found some of your tempo to be somewhat rubato. Actually was rather strange in the phrasing. I think you rushed things a little too much? The vocal isn't as lazy as it should be sounding. You sound forced in places where it shouldn't be forced. But who doesn't love this song anyway that anyone has ever done it? It's just one of those perfect songs that no one can really screw up that badly on. I'd like to hear your vocal on a 58 with an extra foam pop filter. And use that proximity effect to warm your vocal up a bit.

That song takes me back. I'm taken aback by being back. I don't know that I'd left? Or, write?
Mx. Remy Ann David

RemyRAD, post: 395891 wrote: The vocal isn't as lazy as it should be sounding.

Somber is the word that comes to mind for me. Not somber enough. Loss hurts. It's painful.

Much better the third time around. I agree with Remy, it is rushed, with the guitar a bit too fast and "oompa-pa-ish". This song strikes a chord with me every time I hear it...I still remember the first time I did hear it, on Ed Sullivan's show, black and white. Nice vocals.
Adam, you are WAY too young to be singing this song ! Wait til you spend a few years with that pretty bride...:)

moonbaby, post: 395901 wrote: Wait til you spend a few years with that pretty bride...:)

Indeed.

I'm pretty sure the music is a backing track downloaded from the internet. You can however slow it down using Acid or even the free Acid Express.

wow thanks for the lengthy response. I just wanted to say though, that I am not trying to simply recreate what paul did because then why listen to this when you can listen to him. I tried to make it my own to a degree so while I agree with some of the things you said I don't want to simply line up Paul's recording and mine and make mine sound identical, I want a different flavour.

I tweaked a couple of things though, what do you think of this try. [[url=http://[/URL]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Yesterdayfinal by Adam Mishan on SoundCloud - Create, record and share your sounds for free[/]="http://soundcloud.c…"]Yesterdayfinal by Adam Mishan on SoundCloud - Create, record and share your sounds for free[/]

Been married for 2 and a half years now lol

I think ya got it down right on that last try. It sounded real. It sounded honest. It didn't sound electronic or enhanced. It was lovely to listen to. And you want that lovely factor in a song as lovely as Yesterday.

One of my favorites.
Mx. Remy Ann David

Thank you RemyRAD great to hear