The Evolution of Vocal Mixing...

KineticSound

The VOICE
As I was driving home this afternoon, I was listening to a classic rock station and a through crept into my mind about a Tony Maserati interview I read recently. In the interview, Maserati mentions something to the degree of "I mix the music to support the vocal"; essentially that the vocal track or tracks are the front-and-center stars of the show, and everything else is managed around that. Listen to anything he mixes - Jason Mraz, for instance - and it's immediately evident.

The same can be said, to one degree or another, about most modern popular music. I certainly don't see this as a bad thing; it's a modern way of showcasing vocal talents.

It seems to stand in stark contrast - stylistically speaking - to popular mixing practices of the 70's, 80's, and 90's, and yet not unlike many practices of the 50's and 60's.

Due in part, I imagine, to technical limitations of the era, most popular vocals in the 50's were prominently in the front of the mix. Perhaps it was more a reflection on the style of the time, with doo-wop and eventually the Motown sound being predominantly vocal-driven.

As I listen more intentionally to many popular rock songs from the 70's - 90's, it seems as though there was a distinct shift - attempting to balance the voice as an instrument of the song. Listen to Toto's "Walk the Line" and the vocal, harmonies, guitar, and bass play off one another in equal importance - and volume. In the 80's, Quincy Jones mixed drums, guitar, and synthesizers prominently on Michael Jackson's "Thriller"... The grooves and iconic synth on the single "Thriller" were just as important as MJ's vocals. Huey Lewis and the News made hit after hit with synth/bass/guitar/drum-driven sounds. In the 90's, listen to any track on the Spin Doctor's multi-platinum "Pocket Full of Kryptonite" and you will find rhythmic and guitar-laden tracks mixed in equal with its witty vocals.

And then, into the 2000's, perhaps driven by the desire for something different, perhaps by the evolution of the hip-hop movement of the 80's and 90's (which featured increasingly bland sample-based backing tracks), or whatever, the vocal talent returned to center-stage - mix-wise - and today we have music that, as Maserati correctly identifies, primarily serves to support the vocal.

What do you think about this? What do you see in the evolution of music mixing? What do you think drives the changes? Where do you think we'll go next? Have I had too much Bourbon tonight and am just spouting off?
 
Sure would explain the predominance of Idol/____ Has Talent singer-wannabe stuff out there. Which is the cause, and which is the effect? ;)
 
I like the voice to sound "nestled" amongst the instruments, just peaking through above the bed. Nothing turns me off a song more than when the vocal is way too loud and sounds separated from the music.

Cheers :)
 
I don't know man. I listen to the Beatles (early and later) and it seems to me that it was all about the vocals.

EDIT: Sorry, I mis-read your post. Didn't realize you said "not UN-like the 50's and 60's". Amazing what one prefix can do. :eek:
 
Last edited:
I like to have the vocals just settle a little on top of the mix, and sometimes I've had them back more than most people liked, as I would get comments to push the vocals up.
Even just recently on a couple of new tunes....the other folks involved wanted the vocals up more, where I already thought they were up enough. Of course, I usually will do at least 3 mix passes with one evenly balanced as I hear it, and then I'll do the vocal up, and then another vocal up + up. That way there are few choices.

Thing is....the vocal is everything in modern music, even when it's mixed back with the instruments. That's really what everyone listens to, and maybe the occasional instrumental hook or lead line.
I know a lot of folks who play/record music think that lyrics and vocals are not important, but as dumb as some lyrics may be, that is what people focus on (even if the singing is mediocre). I was never like that, but lots of people like to memorize and sing the lyrics along with the song when they are listening to it.
It's only other musicians who really get off on the leads and drums and bass lines...etc...etc.
 
I agree that the lead vocal is everything in modern music these days, but that doesn't mean it has to be louder. I often get comments on my mixes that the vocal should come up a bit, and its most-usually from someone who is used to the typical "today" mix. Funny thing is I hear new music on the radio all the time where the vocal is defined in the mix well, but the actual lyrics are mumbled/indistinct.
 
I agree that the lead vocal is everything in modern music these days, but that doesn't mean it has to be louder. I often get comments on my mixes that the vocal should come up a bit, and its most-usually from someone who is used to the typical "today" mix. Funny thing is I hear new music on the radio all the time where the vocal is defined in the mix well, but the actual lyrics are mumbled/indistinct.
Yeah, I agree. I often find that "big" artists can get away with things that, if we did as "amateurs", people will say it's not right. Listen to "Tumbling Dice" by the Stones (off the top of my head). If me or you posted a song with the vocals that buried, everyone would say they need to come up.

A lot of things are "creative" when a big name act does them, but lame if a no name does them.

I say just please yourself because you ain't going to please everyone else.
 
A lot of things are "creative" when a big name act does them, but lame if a no name does them.

I say just please yourself because you ain't going to please everyone else.

That's a fact!
We just seem to accept "big name" stuff more at face-value. :)

Also...you can ask 20 people for their opinion on something...and you will most likely get 20 different views.
 
Increasingly loud live sound from the 60s on influenced studio mixing. We have been trained to percieve buried vocals as indicating "loud" since that's the result of a loud stage. With amps and drums blasting away at the vocal mics even if you push the vocals up you just get a bunch of stage wash with them.

Rock mixes with vocals on top sound wimpy to me, like karaoke.
 
There is a sweet spot between standing out from the music and being totally buried therein that is sometimes really difficult for many home recordists like me to exploit.

That said, I've heard some recent commercial records where I would have liked the vocal to stand out from the instrumentation more. Sometimes folks forget it's about the melodic properties of the music and not the drums that really make the song. If your vocalists isn't good enough to lead the mix, it may be time to look into getting another.
 
Ya mixing vocals is very difficult, it also depends on the genre you are in. I like to believe I do a pretty good job, but there is always room for improvement
 
I've mixed several "national" albums and have worked with some dinosaur engineers. There's an old formula they always used. The three unpanned elements in any mix are the kick, bass and vocal. If you can get these three elements exactly where you like their blend, everything falls into place, including the protection of the vocal. When anything threatens the lead vocal, keep it in perspective with the three basic elements you started with. I'll give you one more new thing I've discovered that I never did in analog. Use the doubling effect on Harmony EFX and print two extra tracks of lead vocal. Fiddle with the knobs so they are barely in use, and make the second double a bit different from the first. Pan the double and triple full left and right. Then group the double tracks and effect them to your hearts content. Double time delay and reverb add a beautiful ambience to your mix without ever touching the center panned lead vocal, and the tripling spreads the lead vocal over the panorama giving the vocal a big beautiful sound. Give it a try and blow your mind and ears kids!
 
Back
Top