Vocal Tracking

M

moelar2

New member
I've 'gotten' into the nasty habit of double tracking all main vocal parts. It sounds good, and that's the most important reason why I do it, but I feel like I've become a bit complacent. Besides, once you start double tracking everything, it all starts sounding the same. To be clear, what I mean by double tracking is having the vocal record the song/part once, pan that hard L, then have him record it again, pan it hard right. I clarify because some people have described double tracking has recording once then copying/duplicating the track within their recording software.

How is it done as standard practice? Let's assume the singer is good and can execute within a reasonable amount of tracks so that the only concern is how to track him. The music is hard/alternative rock.
 
This is not a direct answer to your question, but rather a question in return: Why does "double-tracking" in the HR world almost always include hard panning? Especially with vocals. It's bad enough that everybody and their brother wants to use the same old trick of hard panning double-tracked guitars on every single song they record, but now to do the same thing with vocals?

I don't care if the MePod Generation does listen via headphones and earbuds more than any other generation has, and that hard panned double tracks is kinda "k3wl" listened to that way; this hard panning of double-tracking is really starting to get stale, isn't it guys? Leave the edges alone once in a while; you'll be surprised how much more depth you can get in your mixes once in a while that way.

And as far as vocals, if you have to double track them, try leaving them together once in a while. It can give a nice thick sound...not to mention help bolser otherwise weak vocalists.

But even more, like you said molear, it all starts sounding the same when you go to the same trickbag every time, even if the panning is different. I love garlic and ginger, but that doesn't mean I sprinkle them all over my Special K for breakfast or hot dogs for lunch. Double tracking is like a nice spice; it's great, but you don't want to use it all the time.

G.
 
I agree that if you're double tracking your vocals then just leave them right up the middle, no need to pan unless you're really looking for the effect. As far as double tracking and hard panning guitars, guilty as charged. I love the sound and just can't get away from it. In fact just this last weekend we did a bunch of double tracking the the talent was asking why the guitars sucked so bad. I sat there and scratched my head for the second and then realized I hadn't panned them, made all the difference.
 
Personally, i'm not a huge fan of double tracked lead vocals, unless they are done extremely well. and then only on a chorus section, or another section that needs the extra "energy". i think that double tracking vocals takes away from the little subtleties and nuances that make the performance. of course, in backing vocals, i'll double them up, and throw some auto tune, an pan them right and left, and it creates a nice little effect that compliments the lead vocal very nicely.

Guitars are a whole different story.

I normally track bands that have 2 guitarists, but if there's a band that has 1 guitar, i definitely have him double track with different set-ups and pan them hard right and left with one microphone, then leave another microphone at around 85%. I think it gives it a ton of depth, and helps support everything.
:D
 
Glen -- I'm totally with you. I've totally got that old bag of tricks. Sometimes I succumb to the good ol' "if it ain't broke don't fix it" routine. But every now and again I realize that recording is an art, and as such, it doesn't hurt to try new things, or maybe just different old things.

What do you guys do? I'm tracking my band now; vocals come in next week. I want to have a good set of suggestions/approaches to work with. I really want to avoid double tracking.

As far as double tracking the Chorus sections, I've tried it but I've found that you can tell too much b/t the sections if one section is double tracked and the other isn't...it sounds like it gets bigger and smaller, but not in a good way...
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
This is not a direct answer to your question, but rather a question in return: Why does "double-tracking" in the HR world almost always include hard panning?
G.
Click to expand...

I double(at least) all of my vocals and put 'em straight up in the middle. It makes my voice less shitty, proving once and for all that two wrongs do make a right, or at least makes things a little bit better. :D
 
also, i definitely wouldn't pan doubled lead vox hard L/R

moelar2 said:
As far as double tracking the Chorus sections, I've tried it but I've found that you can tell too much b/t the sections if one section is double tracked and the other isn't...it sounds like it gets bigger and smaller, but not in a good way...
Click to expand...


yeah, when using this technique i'd normally use automation, and some compression to get both the solo and doubled vox to sit right in the mix.
 
moelar2 said:
What do you guys do? I'm tracking my band now; vocals come in next week. I want to have a good set of suggestions/approaches to work with.
Click to expand...
Let the song itself tell you. Listen to the song as a raw performance.

Ask yourself what are the hooks (vocal and instrumental), and keep those in mind as you plan your mix - build to accentuate the hooks at least somewhat. Also listen to what the overall mood of the song may be. Is it upbeat? Melancholoy? Sarcastic? Do you want to make the mix sound the same way, perhaps? How about the raw arrangement, does it accentuate any particular instrument at any given part of the song? How about the performances? Are some musicians better than others; do they deserve a bit more of a spotlight at any point? What's most important or the most hook-ish, the rhythm section? The leads? The vocals?

Consider all these questions. Take notes of answers to these questions as they strike you (bar by bar if you really need to, or at least verse by chorus by bridge if bar by bar is overkill). Then, using the notes as a general guide, paying attention to hooks, lyrics, mood, and musicianship, start arranging a rough mix in your head as you mentally play back the song. NOT based upon what neat little tricks you have in your trick bag, but based upon the song.

Only then should you start pulling out what tricks and techniques you may have in your arsenal to use *in support of the mix you're building*. Build the mix around the music using appropriate tricks to support it instead of (the other way around of) building a mix around the tricks and fitting the music to your go-to techniques.

G.
 
Yes, I'm glad people pbrought up the fact that they still pan lead vocals up the middle. Panning them hard will not allow them be where they should usually be to the listener. If and when I do double my lead vox, I also leave them up the middle, or very slightly panned left and right (I'm not even talking 11 0'clock and 1 o'clock...less than that). I'll pan back vox, but even then, I'll try to be more creative than simply have all 3 (6 when they're doubled) back ups panned hard right and left.
 
RAMI said:
Yes, I'm glad people pbrought up the fact that they still pan lead vocals up the middle. Panning them hard will not allow them be where they should usually be to the listener.
Click to expand...
True that maybe 90% of the time vocals will be up the middle, I don't know that I'd want to go so far as to say that is where they "should" be. A lot depends upon genre and arrangement (as ALWAYS), but don't get into the formula rut of thinking that's where vocals *have* to be, because that is not at all true.

Also, there is a whole LOT of room between center and hard pan. Many a hit has had vocals panned just to one side of center or another - perhaps 30% or so - in order to balance a call and response with a guitar or horn section or backgroud vocals that were about the same distance to the other side. Or how about vocal duets? Do you want them both up the middle? Perhaps, but often not. It's not uncommon to have one slightly panned L and the other slightly panned R (about 5-10° seperation). And back in the 60s and therabouts, it was not uncommon to find vocals indeed hard panned and sounding good.

A few songs I'd like to reference here as examples of very nice and very popular productions using such techniques:

SLIGHT PAN SEPERATION: DUET
Patti LaBelle & Travis Tritt - When Something Is Wrong With My Baby (Rhythm Country and Blues)
Willie Nelson and Johnny Cash - Ghost Riders in the Sky (VH1 Storytellers)

HARD PAN/INSTRUMENT BALANCE:
Nancy Sinatra - Bang Bang, My Baby Shot Me Down (How Does That Grab You)

If I took the time, I could come up with many more examples, but those off the top of my head should give some inspiration.

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
True that maybe 90% of the time vocals will be up the middle, I don't know that I'd want to go so far as to say that is where they "should" be.
Click to expand...
Having re-read my post, I realise I was exaggerrating. I don't really think there's a "should". But 90% is about right. There are times when I have panned the leads hard for effect, in a bridge that needs to take off sonically from the rest of the tune, for example.
 
NYMorningstar said:
sounds like you care more about your music than your health :(
Click to expand...
Truely spoken like someone who does not live in Chicago, and does not understand that the pure pleasure one gets from a good Vienna brand dog on a poppyseed bun with yellow mustard, relsih, onion, tomato, cucumber and celery salt (and NO ketchup!) does far more positive for one's health than the nitrates do negative. Life without an occasional Chicago Vienna Hot Dog is just not worth living. :p

Unless of course you just replace the dog with a LaScalia's brand Italian beef sandwich, soaked, and topped with grilled sweet peppers ;)

Might as well try convincing a New Yorker to lay off the bagels and pastrami, NYM. :)

How is it I'm always talking about food lately???

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Truely spoken like someone who does not live in Chicago, and does not understand that the pure pleasure one gets from a good Vienna brand dog on a poppyseed bun with yellow mustard, relsih, onion, tomato, cucumber and celery salt (and NO ketchup!) does far more positive for one's health than the nitrates do negative. Life without an occasional Chicago Vienna Hot Dog is just not worth living. :p

Unless of course you just replace the dog with a LaScalia's brand Italian beef sandwich, soaked, and topped with grilled sweet peppers ;)

Might as well try convincing a New Yorker to lay off the bagels and pastrami, NYM. :)

How is it I'm always talking about food lately???

G.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to try to convince you to change your diet. You can go on fooling yourself about the nutritional value of a hot dog. Then again, I wouldn't eat a bagel or pastrami. It's all fiber cereal, fruits and veggies for me with a daily fixin of yogurt and some protein like turkey, chicken or shrimp. Of course, I kinda need to do that because I run 40-50 miles a week. :D
 
I know it depends on the song and performance, but when vocals are doubled, are the tracks typically brought up at the same level? Because to my ears, the slight inconsistencies in pitch typically hinder the vocal performance-especially when both are brought straight up the middle.

People have told me that my recordings need doubled vocals, but IMO it sounds like shit that way. I don't doubt the possibility that it's my vocal performance, but then again, the early Beatle records have that same, annoying, double-track sound, and most bands I listen to (all heavy rock or metal) seem to NOT double their tracks, such as Zeppelin, Tool, and Megadeth. Are these vocalists double tracking and I just don't hear it? Or are they using a single vocal track, copying it, and applying delay or other effects to the copy?
 
Cyrokk said:
most bands I listen to (all heavy rock or metal) seem to NOT double their tracks, such as Zeppelin, Tool, and Megadeth. Are these vocalists double tracking and I just don't hear it?
Click to expand...
I don't know about Tool and Megadeth, but Robert Plant's vocals are doubled quite a bit. Listen closely to the end part of "Stairway", for example (..."and as we wind on down the road"...our shadows, etc..."). I'm sure more singers than you think double-track at least parts, if not the whole song. Well done, and well mixed, it's not obvious.
 
Last edited:
RAMI said:
Listen closely to the end part of "Stairway", for example. I'm sure more singers than you think double-track at least parts, if not the whole song. Well, done and well mixed, it's not obvious.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can hear his doubled voice during that part of "Stairway", as well as most other parts of their songs where there is a chorus-like emphasis. But I don't hear it at all in the other verses. I also have an outtake of "Trampled Underfoot" where his original vocal track was duplicated throughout the whole song and the doubled copy was delayed and both tracks were panned to approx 9 and 3. If you listen to the official release, it sounds like they buried the delay to the point that it sounds like slapback echo.

I guess that's the heart of my question: if double tracking is necessary to strengthen the vocals, what are some ways to mix the two tracks together so that it sounds like one person singing?
 
Ah, I see. Well, in that case, you have a good enough ear to hear it. So, I'd say that where you don't hear it, it's probably not done.
I personally don't believe in double-tracking everything. I think a vocal part should be about feeling and spontaniety. It's one thing to double a line here and there for emphasis, or a part that you want to sound like a "section", or a chorus to make it stand out. But, and this is just personal, I think that, like any "effect", too much is no better than not enough.
 
RAMI said:
I don't know about Tool and Megadeth, but Robert Plant's vocals are doubled quite a bit. Listen closely to the end part of "Stairway", for example (..."and as we wind on down the road"...our shadows, etc..."). I'm sure more singers than you think double-track at least parts, if not the whole song. Well done, and well mixed, it's not obvious.
Click to expand...


Yup Zep gots loads of double tracked vox, at least to my ears.

The thing about double tracking, is that it can be done in different ways, I find it to be cool in the way Gilmour\ Cat stevens does theires`, wich to my ears are quite simular the double trackin that is.

Then again I`ve heard some double trackin of Ian Gillan wich is not synchronized at all, and I think that was on purpose, to get a more raw sound (ex listen to the screams in Child in time, Space truckin).

Anyways big fan of double trackin, once I discovered its effect I did it nonstop for 4 years :D

I`ve learnt my lesson now, I think :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top