#1January 8th, 2006 · 07:39 AM
8 threads / 6 songs
29 posts
United Kingdom
Vocals
What can you do to vocals to make them sound better? I normally add a bit of reverb and compression but it doesn't sound anywhere near as good as many of the songs on hear. What can I do?
#2January 8th, 2006 · 07:47 AM
121 threads / 56 songs
3,098 posts
Netherlands
well, compression / limiter normally comes first, it may be a good idea to equalise afterwards, and then perhaps an exciter to bring up the presence and higher harmonic frequencies.

after that some stereo spread with a subtle stereo chorus or doubler (which is pretty much a very short delay), or indeed some reverb. that's all I know (and a good mic would help too ofcourse)
#3January 8th, 2006 · 08:43 AM
55 threads / 30 songs
1,558 posts
United Kingdom
Two things - but neither of them answering scaramouche's question 

1) Thanks for asking the question in the first place - I was wondering the same thing myself; and,
2) Puppet, you're great with the technical info.  I'll have to record a track with vocals (once my voice has come back after this poxy cold!) and try out your suggestions  - by the way, what's an exciter?

Actually, I remember reading something on this site about using a tube pre-amp to add a bit of warmth to the vocals; so perhaps I can add something to this thread!
#4January 8th, 2006 · 09:27 AM
121 threads / 56 songs
3,098 posts
Netherlands
ah yes, ofcourse, tube pre-amp would be a great idea! see, I am not so good with my tech info after all!

an exciter - well I'm not so sure how it exactly works, but it adds brightness to the high frequencies and can make the lows more dense, so your overall signal will become more "defined" and better "contoured". on vocals, it will make them sound clearer, brighter, better audible. it's not the same as an equaliser though - if you really crank an exciter up, your signal will distort somewhat, but in a pleasant (useable) way - which, arguably, can be great for a sax solo.

I know it's closely related to an enhancer (a behringer ultrafex has a pot to blend between enhancer/exciter) and I really don't know all the tech details, I am but an end user myself.
#5January 10th, 2006 · 02:48 PM
7 threads
104 posts
United Kingdom
DaveUK has posted a few thoughts which may be of help in this very same forum.

Here's my 2pence worth....

The Source: the 2 things which will arguably make the greatest difference are 1) the voice and 2) the mic. If your source signal is duff then no amount of aural exiters is going to make it sound good. So.... use the best (large diaphragm) condenser mic you can afford (or borrow). Lots of people compromise with (Shure) SM57's for vocals for a budget/home studio but try out a few top end studio mics and you should be able to hear a difference (with no FX processing). You get what you pay for I'm afraid.

Now the voice - there are various after-processing toys which attempt to convince us that any tone deaf moron can sing (see Antares (Auto_Tune), Eventide (Harmonizer), etc.). The truth is some people can sing and some people just can't. I fall into the latter group. Out of those that can sing, there is an even smaller group who can sing on the next level (think Jimi Hendrix to guitar players or George Best to footballers). This group can sing anything but have a distinctive sound or style so that you always know it is them (you know who they are).

If you have the best combination of 1) & 2), then there is not a lot more that you need to do in the after-processing / FX department. The danger is that you will actually over-process what you had in the first place.

If however, you have a sub-standard 1) or 2) and you want to make the vocal track sound "better" somehow, then you are entering into the ever expanding world of studio FX.

I'll let the others get into that one but remember the words "Pig" "Purse" & "Silk".
#6April 14th, 2006 · 03:43 AM
2 threads
28 posts
New Zealand
First, I would not go down the route of stereo spread, chorus or other modulating effects, as they tend to screw heavily with the phase and - in most cases, but not all - sound corny. First link in the chain should be eq (you might cut some low end, and boost around the sweet spot ~ 1200 - 2000 hz for males, higher for females). Second: a compressor (reasonably high ratio... 6:1 for rock etc, less for jazz or more dynamic music; threshold should be so that at the loudest peaks it doesn't attenuate more than 8-10 db; soft knee; fast attack, medium release). Reverbs and delays are probably best if they come last in the chain. I would be careful about eq'ing high frequencies, as they can make the vocal harsh and create problems with sybilance. If s,t,z etc are too prominent you can try a desser, but be warned: less is more. Dessers can really mess up a good vocal track if driven too harshly (virtually always the case if you just use preset settings).

Most importantly you should use a large diaphram condesor with a pop filter and experiment with distance until you find something nice. The closer you move the more bass response you get (more dramatic with dynamics) but also the more sybilance you get. A trade off.

Double tracking also helps, though you should blend the second vocal in subtely unless you're really going for an obvious effect.

All the best,
Mark
#7April 14th, 2006 · 03:53 AM
48 threads / 41 songs
144 posts
New Zealand
Geez, Mark.

You must have been teased at school.

- Chester
#8May 14th, 2006 · 09:22 PM
77 threads / 59 songs
923 posts
Netherlands
just a simple tip, very known..

if you copy a track(so you got 2) and pan them hard left/right and delay one track 30 ms you geat a 'great' semi-stereo sound, works great with vocals..

o, and isn't compression something you should not notice?(unless used as an 'effect')
 
#9May 23rd, 2006 · 01:32 AM
160 threads / 33 songs
1,965 posts
United States of America
Right on the money
Mark pretty much sumed it up.
Get a good mic. If recording all digital, preamps will help.  We try to stay away from
exciters, the top end sounds phony to me.
Focusrite is a low end affordable preamp
with phantom power, compression, some eq, this seems to help out a lot of home pc recordings.

  Work on your eq's find the sweet spot for your voice. also use stereo field to develope
voice/instrument seperation.

                                                 Hope this helps some
                                                                Greg
#10May 30th, 2006 · 03:33 AM
10 threads / 10 songs
101 posts
United States of America
re-tube pre's
I read that a top rated tube pre is Pre-Sonus' Blue Tube 2-channel. It's also cheap, a hundred doallrs? And it's even a 1/2 rack space, which is nice. I also saw it used when I was a live sound guy (?) for  a Greek Bizouki band. They used one designed for acoustic intruments.

Saw something neat recently...a DI box that you plug right into the wall, thereby getting rid of a lot of ground loops at the source, and saving a cable.
#11June 2nd, 2006 · 08:15 AM
37 threads / 25 songs
237 posts
United States of America
how about BBE sonic maximizer for finishing,,,,and audio fx 3 soundstage for mic placement and room accoustics I know my stuf is middle of the road  but keep playing ..
we learn by DOING!
 
#12October 5th, 2006 · 03:22 PM
160 threads / 33 songs
1,965 posts
United States of America
I found this it might help some one
Sorry, you do not have access to post...
Wanna post? Join Today!

Server Time: March 29th, 2024 · 4:09 AM
© 2002-2012 BandAMP. All Rights Reserved.