How to tame multi Vocal tracks, VOl, EQ

I don't know about Cubase but in reaper when you split a file, you can adjust the volume of the split clip with the mouse pointer at the top of it, click and pull down. It shows you the volume change on the wave as you do it. Does Cubase have a similar thing? Item processing? Trim for clips? I've not used Cubase in years so I have no idea.

It's not a permanent adjustment in Reaper as you can just turn the volume back up or down further on the clip. As in pic.


If you were to do something like this with lines of a song, rather than single words, it could be quite quick. Single words however would take an awful long time.

Personally, I would get the levels sorted before EQ.

Thanks for your effort!

As far as I know with my old version of Cubase, I can't do this. But I will be investigating. In older projects, I've done this by selecting the word and permanently lowered the wav by xdB. I thought the automated fader would save me doing this, and be less destructive.

.. yes, this is the sort of thing I need to do in a few parts.

And as for levels before EQ, I think I have no choice, since the levels are really out of whack.

Cheers,
FM
 
Ok, well is this the best bet

- Go over all harmony parts with fader automation until they are balanced and level in volume
- same for the main vocal
- Group the harmony parts into one channel and apply EQ and (slight amount of) compression there
- Automate the fader for the group for the (now balanced) harmonys to manage the volume differences from section to section.

Does this sound like the best way to tackle this?

FM
 
Gonzo, if I group into Soft and loud, I'll still have to mix each line of vocals so the harmony sounds balanced - so I may as well not group because a soft part might actually be needing to stay soft for that bit? I dunno.

well, this is assuming that there are 6 vocals total (just example) and 3 of them are sung soft (which means they peak fairly close to each other) and 3 are sung louder.


so if all 3 soft, are going to the 'soft vocal' bus, and the same on the 'loud', then you could apply a compressor over each of those busses, to balance them out, then do the vocal rides (if you are doing fader automation) on the bus, instead of having to do it 3 times for the soft, on the individual tracks, and 3 times on the loud.


this is just a mix technique to simplify the process.

it's a way of ganging similarly gained tracks, and bouncing them down to just a couple of tracks (or in this case, busses) to simplifiy the mixing.

it's infinitely variable how you can split it all up.....


i mean, you could take the time to automate every single track (like doing manual vocal rides) and get to the same end result.

but my method is MUCH faster.


the idea is, to gel the common vocals together, and tighten each 'group' up with compression and EQ, and then mix using the busses instead.
 
I don't know about Cubase but in reaper when you split a file, you can adjust the volume of the split clip with the mouse pointer at the top of it, click and pull down.





It's not a permanent adjustment in Reaper as you can just turn the volume back up or down further on the clip. As in pic.
View attachment 77711

Another cool Reaper tip Mr Clean... I may start following you around with a tape recorder...:D
 
another thing i would do, im not sure if your DAW does this (im guessing most DO) but once you get the volumes matched up the way you want them, bounce each track in place and have it replace what was there... then it will bounce and replace the manipulated/automated tracks and give you a fresh track of all the adjustments on a new reel... then you can delete the old frankenslide one. do that for all of them and it will be as though you never had to automate them!!! woah!
 
Hehe, "Frankenslide".

I got a new PC with heaps of power, so I'm not forced to bounce. I'll group all the multi parts into one fader in the most logical mannor that I can, but for flexibility I'll be able to go back to modify it if needed.

That's really why I tried to kick off this thread. I'd like to do it once and move on but history has shown that towards the end, for example after I have grouped EQ, Compressed etc I need to go and changesome of the part volumes again.

FM
 
Ok, well is this the best bet

- Go over all harmony parts with fader automation until they are balanced and level in volume
- same for the main vocal
- Group the harmony parts into one channel and apply EQ and (slight amount of) compression there
- Automate the fader for the group for the (now balanced) harmonys to manage the volume differences from section to section.

Does this sound like the best way to tackle this?

FM


More tracking last night. It's sounding really good :)

I'd like some comments on the above. Would you guys (typically) be EQ-ing a group of voices, or each voice?

FM
 
Would you guys (typically) be EQ-ing a group of voices, or each voice?

FM
I generally EQ my vocals as a group. But, I only record myself. I would imagine there might be a case to be made for EQ'ing individual voices if it's several people singing.
 
More tracking last night. It's sounding really good :)

I'd like some comments on the above. Would you guys (typically) be EQ-ing a group of voices, or each voice?

FM

Both... i tend to see bussing like i see mixing and mastering just on a much smaller scale (obviously)... mixing would be filtering out the problem frequencies in each vocal... mastering would be filtering out any problems in the ensemble.
 
Wow, I'm not sure I follow exactly what you are doing. Different parts, recorded in different places at different levels, in different sounding rooms. And now trying to blend them together into one piece of music. That's a lofty goal. i agree with taking the time to volume automate. i wouldn't use any normalization or compression to deal with volume issues. Stick with the volume automation. I would only use compression on a mix buss to blend any transients. as mentioned earlier in this thread. This however is a great post as to the importance of pre planning prior to recording. This is one of those things you do once so you know never to do it again. again, if im understanding everything correctly. Good luck and please post it. would love to hear.
 
Thanks Elton.

Yes, It's my biggest "engineering" task yet. I'll give you a quick example of what I'm up against.

4 vocal parts, lets call them Low, medium Low, Medium high and high, with 1 panning left, 2 centre and 1 Panning right.

Then, in some cases the parts will be center and not panned.
In some cases there will be an extra (5th) part.
Then, some of the multipart harmony's need to overlap another section of multipart harmonys, or be panned, or have the level played with.
.. and of course there is a main vocal, that during sections will make up one of the harmonys.

So to try to organise this into your standard 1 main Vox track and 4 harmony tracks just won't work, yeah? There's probably a few ways to divide this up in your DAW and manage.

Now, because I'm not a singer, the very very high parts are precarious (to say the least). When I nail one good take that's in time and in tune, it STAYS because statistically it's the best that's gonna come my my throat. I then have to deal with whatever this turns out to be. It may be soft or varying in volume; far from say the mid range parts where I can belt it out. Same problem for the low notes.

So now (or very soon) I'll have to try to manage all the above into some sort of system so I can get to the end, ... you know and win the race and collect all the gold.

FM
 
you know, the easiest thing to do, is to cut to the chase

mix it.


do vocal rides, and if you have the ability to do automation (what modern DAW doesn't do volume automation) simply mix it.
voila.
done.
 
An update on the big project.

i have now (finally) finished all vocal tracks. There are ... a lot. I'm having my first ever trouble with channel level - I'll explain.

With so many vocal tracks doing different things , I thought I'd double up on the uses yeah?

So I have one group of 5 part voices, double tracked - so 10 tracks. And these are sent to a single group track so eq/compression etc can be managed. (Sounding good btw).

But for another section of the song, I have 2 parts. So I thinks, why not just put these two parts in two of the 10 tracks (mentioned above)? Because (duh) the level of 10 voices singing is way more than the level of two voices singing. All of the group input/output levels set for your eq and compressor work for one section pof the song, but not another.

So I either go and reduce all of the 10-track levels to make it equal to the 2-track level, or vice verca. Or I just leave the 2 tracks where they are.

Again, resources are plenty so I can't see (at this stage anyway) why I shouln't just create extra tracks/groups and use them as necessary.

This is just one example of what I'm currenly sifting through and already I feel way out of control. Still, what's the worst that can happen - if it all get's too hard, I'll go back to a previous version and try again.

FM
 
Back
Top