My Vocals Suck, Tips?

F

FredFredrickson

New member
Here's a quick background:

I started home recording over 10 years ago (at about 12 years old). I eventually got an sm57 and I wasn't very good, but that certainly didn't stop me. I enjoyed the sounds I could produce, but I found that the quality of my vocals was lacking. Any vocals that I sang in my mid range sounded "muddy." I could sing high and falsetto and it sounded just fine.

I messed around with compressors and EQs, but no matter what I did, I couldn't make my vocals sound professional. I decided a few things: I needed voice lessons, and I needed a new MIC.

Over the past 8 years I've taken 3 years of voice lessons (I'm pretty good live now, actually) and upgraded from the shure sm57 to the shure beta87a, with a mixer for phantom power. Now, the beta87a really improved the quality of my vocals- I was very happy with my results, they finally sounded less muddy. (But not perfect).

But one issue still stood: On my mid range, there was always a bit of an "off" quality to my recordings. There was an extra layer of tone to my voice that you don't hear when you listen to pro tracks, such as the Killers. My voice seemed a bit off- almost like most of my voice was in-tune and only a small quality of my voice was out-of-tune.

Playing with the EQ would help lessen the problem, but also took away from
the overall quality of the vocals.

I couldn't quite place it, but I decided that since the lead singer of Killers is rarely straight on tune, there must be more to recording vocals that capture vocals in their natural state without making them clash with the music.

I must be doing something wrong. My vocals clash with my music, unless I take out the lower frequencies of my vocals with an EQ, but then they sound like a home recording.

So I decided the Beta87a isn't quite the studio mic. I'm considering the Shure KSM27 Studio Cardioid Condenser Microphone, which is available on zzounds for about $329. I'm very interested in recording vocals, and I feel that since I've improved quite a bit about every aspect of my recording- this is the next step. (My budget isn't much bigger than that)

Has anybody else had a similar problem? I just feel that the professional artists in the booth feel more free about singing because the way it's recorded, it captures the natural quality of the vocals without muddying it up. Instead I concentrate on only singing certain parts that I know won't sound like crap- even though my Teacher (still taking lessons) doesn't think I have a problem in my midrange.

My studio setup: I have a recording booth with sound dampening foam on 2 of the 4 walls. It sounds decent for spoken words. (I've tried foam on all 4 walls, 2 sounds the best).

Please advise!:eek::o
 
maybe it is a mic, maybe you should check out other brands like akg, cad, audio technica (my favourite that works for me... the at 2020) or even studio projects. I haven't had a lot of experience with many large diaphragm condensers but you might want to give it a shot... try renting out new mics if you can.
 
Yo Fred:

Somehow I "didn't" read your post about "What unit are you using to record?"

I can offer a couple of things that may or may not help you out.

1. Do you have a GOOD mic preamp?

Recently I decided to run my Synth into a mic Pre and then into my recorder machine. What a difference. I've had this nice Grace Design unit just sitting in my studio for vocals. The other day I decided to just plug in the Synth and WOW--such brilliance. However, it may be a tad pricy for some.

I've used the vocals on the Grace for other projects and it is a very nice unit. I just bought a second Grace unit to do more stuff with each unit.

Next, how good is your EQ? I record with the 1600 from Yam. The EQ does make a difference providing what you may be after?

Also, the Dynamic programs in the Yam have three "samples," among various other programs. However, I've found the samples come out in 3 different types of fullness. Sometimes I use one sample that goes up a tad, or either of the two others which raise the bars. And, there are other Dynamics that can tweak one's mind.

Mics are all over the place with variations. Those, you might try by trying out vendors that have them available to try before you buy at the dealer.

I also like to move my tracks-some to the left or some to the right with the music. I usually run vocals right down the middle.

Good reverb can make things sound good. But, going beyond limits just make vocals muddy. Almost "everybody who sings" uses some reverb. Vocals via a good mic pre do not need much work for decent reverb.

And, then, there is your "work area." Sometimes you home studio might not be quite what you need. Thus, some adjustment might be needed.

Most of the folks here offer a BUNCH of assistance from this site.

Cheers,
Green Hornet
Happy New Year:D
 
Thanks for your responses.

I record a dry signal through a behringer mixer with no effects or EQ.

I then tweak the audio with post effects, compressors, and eqs in FLStudio.

I don't think it's the environment, I believe it to either be something wrong with my voice, or more likely a combo of a decent mic and some know-how with a compressor and EQ.

Here is a great example of a recording. I spent no more than 15 minutes on this, and made sure my vocals were somewhat out of tune in places, however it's mostly high pitches.

What you'll notice is that the freq range my voice is in doesn't exactly emphasize the variations in pitch when it's out of tune- at least not where it sounds terrible. It's doable, quite in the same way the lead singer in the killers has a widely shakey vibrato that makes the actual pitch near-but-not-spot-on, except his voice is often in ranges I can't record without it mudding up.

fredrickville.com/downloads/darkclouds.mp3
 
i have the same setup; using a behringer mixer... they aren't good preamps from what i've heard but it works for me. I can't really hear the vocals in your mix... it's really ambient. well I can hear them, but they aren't prominent. do you have another song wither more up front vocals? To me they sound good... but thats coming from a signer who taught himself.
 
tojo said:
i have the same setup; using a behringer mixer... they aren't good preamps from what i've heard but it works for me. I can't really hear the vocals in your mix... it's really ambient. well I can hear them, but they aren't prominent. do you have another song wither more up front vocals? To me they sound good... but thats coming from a signer who taught himself.
Click to expand...

Well, it was an example of how my higher ranges record well, even when parts are "out of tune" or possibly just showing "character"

I will try to post an example of how my mid range vocals sound muddy later tonight when i get home from work.
 
Preamps

FredFredrickson,

The behri mixer does not have good pres. On some vocals pres are less important. On some very important.

There are many very nice preamps but the most affordable are the M-Audio. For example the DMP2 or DMP3.

Does the behri mixer then go line in to your soundcard?

If so that may be another problem. Very few soundcards have hifi line ins. In fact the line in is kind of an afterthought. Most people never use it.

An interface will do a better job of putting the audio onto your harddrive.

If you have a PCI slot the M-Audio Omnistudio is well regarded and like the DMP3 has very good preamps. Of course there are many other quality options.

I would thoroughly explore the rest of your recording chain before investing in another microphone. Since your first mic upgrade retained the problem it's likely that it's something else.

Thanks,

Hairy Larry
 
I'm using the M-Audio Delta 4/4 for my sound card.

The new mic helped lessen the muddy issue, but not 100%, I'm thinking a studio mic may be the answer.
 
Your vocals don't scream "bad" by any means - superior to a lot of what you hear (especially mine :D) - you could have told me that you're getting the sound you wanted, and I'd be impressed :D. I'm no expert, but here are some thoughts:

I think you do want a large diaphragm condenser - you'll get a smoother sound, and probably a bigger one. I've got the SM87C (like the A, but cardioid instead of hypercardioid), and it's intended for live use, of course, and has a smallish electret biased diaphragm. Not bad sounding, but a little thin IMO. The KSM-27 would probably work, but I think you could do just as good or better for less money. I've never used the AT2020, but it gets a lot of praise around here. I've used the AT4040 (maybe just a little cheaper than $329?), and it's great. In the same neighborhood price-wise is the Shure SM7b dynamic, which would probably be awesome for you, but you'll probably want a new preamp. If you want to go really cheap, you might go for a used Oktava MK-319 - it may be good as is, but they can be modified into very nice sounding mics. The microphone I'm using the most for vocals these days is a TnC ACM-6802T that has been extensively modified, but it was good before that, with a tube upgrade. These aren't available retail, but watch the classifieds here, since a bunch of us just got them in a big "group buy" and some may be selling for not too much.

I really think you want a better preamp in any event -- Larry's suggestion about the DMP3 or DMP2 is good and not too spendy. One I really like for vocals is the ART Digital MPA (or MPA Gold -- but *not* the Tube MP or related ones) - $300-$400 + new tubes. If you've got bags of money, you have tons of options, most of which are outside of my little universe.

Anyway, if you get the chance to try out different mics (or, better, mics and preamps) - definitely go for it. I think I would have a hard time making the best possible choice when hearing a very short sample of myself repeatedly through different setups in a short period of time, but I'm sure I'd steer clear of any choices that were obviously wrong.
 
You sure you're not getting comb filtering at your listening position when you're listening to the playback? That's very, very common...guy says, "the vocal sounds harsh", then everybody listens to the playback and says, "No it doesn't." That super-annoying 1.5Khz-3Khz range is a very common bounce off of a flat object between the listener and the speakers.

Frank
 
i would deffinitelly recomend a new mic, possibly an akg of some sorts, i've had great results with the perception 220 which goes for about $125 or so. then you will deffinitelly need a decent mic pre, for example, if you dont want to spend a lot of money, the simplest i can say would be the presonus tubepre, whcih works great and you can get it for about $100, i liked the song, had a very radiohead esk sound, and your voice sounds a lot like thom yorke
 
cost of parts

FredFredrickson said:
Thanks for all the replies! Can somebody explain the core difference between the preamp in a behringer mixer vs a dedicated mic preamp?
Click to expand...

FredFredrickson,

I don't know what mixer you have but say it costs a couple of hundred dollars. Well there's a lot of stuff there, case, power supply, I/O, pots, electronics, etc.

So the cost per preamp has to be low or they couldn't sell the mixer reasonable.

One of the least expensive quality preamps is the DMP3. Two preamps for $160. $80 a preamp. This means M-Audio can use a lot more expensive components than any small mixer can. And this is for an inexpensive preamp.

After you get a nice preamp do an a/b comparison between the new preamp and the preamp in the mixer. The difference will be pronounced. The investment in a quality preamp will make all your mics sound better.

With regard to comb filtering in your listening environment you should take your recordings to several of your friend's houses and borrow their stereos long enough to listen. Every stereo sounds different. If your problem goes away on even one of them then the chances are you do have a problem with your monitoring setup and some room treatment is in order.

As far as buying a better mic I say go for it. Who am I to tell someone not to buy mics. I buy them all the time.

What you don't want to do is shell a lot of bucks for a new mic and still have the same problem.

The Delta 44 is a nice interface. I think the Omnistudio uses a Delta 44. The Omnistudio has the same preamps as the DMP3. (correct me if I'm wrong) So you have either option, Omnistudio interface or standalone preamps. There are several mono preamps in the $100 range. The DMP3 is about $150 for two preamps. Prices go up from there. One advantage of the DMP3 or the Omnistudio is if you decide to record stereo you've got a nice matching pair of preamps.

Thanks,

Hairy Larry
 
I listened

I thought your vocals were not up front enough but I didn't see anything wrong other than that. The reverb was a little wet but it suited the "feel" of the song. A LDC might give your vocals that little extra presence you want. Stand alone preamps are best. I wouldn't say the vocal sucked.
 
Hey guys! Thanks for all the responses. I'm def going to look into a new mic AND preamp!

As for the song I linked- it was an example of my higher voice which I think records well, even when I'm a bit flat.

Here's an example of the BEST recording I could do with my mid ranges. It's not bad, but it's not perfect either. I worked very hard on keeping it from getting muddy. Listen to the vocals at the beginning and you might hear a bit of the mud.

The chorus is heavily reverbed, and it doesn't sound great but that's another story. The verse is repeated twice, since I haven't recorded the second verse yet. Give it a try:

 
i listened to the second track

that's pretty cool stuff Fred...I thought it sounded fine. Vocals seemed to have more presence. Mid-voice is good too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top