Audio editing - is it necessary for all recordings?

diwata

New member
I did a audio home recording just for a hobby. I have portable Zoom R24 digital recorder/mixer. Few days ago my daughter recorded a song during her free time and posted on Youtube. No audio editing just raw files. I was surprised when I heard it. This sounds better than my edited audio. How can we further enhance it? Should I put more reverb, etc? Any suggestions before I share this video to friends? Thanks

 
So, pardon the way this might come across, but if you don't have an idea what to do, then whatever editing you've been doing has likely been guided by the wrong reasoning, or perhaps simply "rules" you've read off the internet, regardless of your intentions.

This video does sound good, but what you can do with it will also depend on how it's recorded because it seems to be a piano and vocal recorded together as a single track. You could make changes, but I guess I'd ask, why? She's done a really nice job, obviously understands how to add a second voice (unless that's someone out of frame!), and the video is posted. On to the next.

While I could think of things I might do, and list them here (others can do that, too, of course), it would be biased, and likely incorrect on some level, because I've never heard your daughter's natural voice, so it's possible it could go the wrong way, and I might also make it worse by simply doing something she'd think was wrong.

So, I'd start with a conversation with your daughter and whether she wants to improve the audio in her videos, and what things might be bothering her about this, if anything, and you could talk about what you're hearing and come to some agreement about specifics to address. Then, if you don't know how to make those changes, perhaps come here with a basic audio mix and ask for some suggestions you can try out. Apply the techniques one at a time, with small moves so you can start to hear which ones are really making the changes you want, and which are simply making changes. We have a tendency to think any change is better (novelty effect), and that's one of the hardest things to learn to ignore. (Well, I doubt most of us ever learn to completely not be infatuated with our latest whatever, but we learn patience, so perhaps re-listen later or the next day at least :)).

Sorry for my [too-typical] long-winded reply that doesn't actually tell you what you asked for.
 
I always look on editing as a tool and a process. I always do a very fast fade in on the start of every recording. I play many off my tracks at high volumes through a PA, and noise, even really low noise is obvious on pressing play. So I do a fast fade in from nothing so tracks start silently - I often have sustained ends, and at the point the tail dies away, I then fade the silence to real silence. I edit to change overall levels if I got them wrong in the mix and they jump out compared with the tracks either side. I might edit out a tiny click, or blend two overlays to make them less obvious. Some tracks need 30 seconds to reach my 'norm' others take longer if they need more work. Is editing 'enhancing' or part off the recording process. I never EQ in editing - that's a decision for elsewhere. My editing is simple top and tailing for the most part. What do you do to your tracks in your editing phase?
 
Big +1 to Keith there.
The gear and knowledge she has/you have isn't destroying her performance or anything.
If she's happy I'd leave well alone and, if she wants to improve things, I'd look to how the next video could be better, rather than techniques to improve a previous.

If the interest and desire is there, I'd be thinking of looking into a real nice quality vid-cam and maybe some simple lighting; A lot of youtubers have 'my setup' videos where they show everything you need to know.

I'd also think about how the piano is recorded. It sounds quite brittle and lofi so I guess that's the sound coming straight out the keyboard?
A big-ass pro studio grand piano sound is a midi cable and a VST away, depending on the keyboard.

For me those two things would make a much bigger difference than any mixing.

Don't get me wrong, if she was making an album or was soundcloud-only or something there's plenty that could be done,
but I just don't think it's crazy important for what I just watched.
What she's doing looks and sounds real; Value that. ;)
 
OK I listened to the version....It's a very nice performance...heard some nerves in some parts but she has the goods to put out great music / performances if she takes the time to do multiple takes...so I am assuming 3 tracks...That would mean she used a multi track recorder.. For sure the vocals appear dry and could be prettied up easily with just a little reverb...Of course you can go down the rabbit hole and do a lot of things with those 3 tracks or leave them as raw as possible ...all in what you are going for... I have been working on doing one shot live recordings for a few years now..where everything is to my liking before I press record. I'm generally happy with what I'm getting albeit it seems there's always a few clams that I have to leave because I am trying to be really live... That said I definitely use automation most times afterwards to remove the piano keys clicking and any ambient noise in the blank spots that the vocal mic picks up. I use Reaper and it's pretty easy.

My advice if you are trying to keep it as raw as possible is just a little reverb on the vocals on this one... Good luck!
 
Thanks for your inputs/feedback. This was her first recording and I actually encouraged her to do more cover. The accompaniment she used for this cover was a low-res mp3 audio. I think that part I could help her to improve on her next recording. Also, she doesn't know how to operate our DSLR camera so video quality wasn't good but this I can help improved as well. keith.rogers, you are right. About the vocal editing, I don't know exactly what to do except to follow some rules I've found in the internet; apply reverb, compression, equalize, etc. My last work on editing the vocals, it sounded too artificial :-( I still have a lot to learn and really glad I've found this forum. Sorry for my English, not my first tongue.
 
Thanks [MENTION=1094]TAE[/MENTION]. Yes, I think she did it in one take with Zoom R24 multitrack recorder. It was her first recording that she did it my herself during her free time, so the audio accompaniment and video quality are not good. I will try to play around with the vocal, perhaps applying reverb and apply filters. As I am doing audio editing just for a hobby (for now), I still have a lot to learn. I've been hearing a lot about reaper. I saw their website and the price is so cheap for personal use. Maybe time to replace my expensive editing software :-)
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=130578]diwata[/MENTION], one bit of English that can help clarify, and maybe [MENTION=178786]rob aylestone[/MENTION]'s reply covered that in a way, is that many of us consider "editing" to be a first step in tidying up the recorded tracks to (as mentioned), clean up beginnings, endings, remove noises where possible, perhaps by cutting out longer silences, e.g., on a vocal so only the specific bits of the track where the singer is singing are left, etc. I would probably include minor timing adjustments between tracks in that, so that the raw mix sounds clean and in time. It does not include using effects and VSTs.

Then, you'd be off to the mixing stage, where you will adjust balance and panning (sometimes called a static mix), to get the relative levels between the tracks and stereo image of the piece placed. Only after all that is hanging together do you start doing other things, and for that you really have to learn what each tool does.

And before I go any further, exposing my own dumbness, let me say I'm still learning all of this stuff myself! Everyone has to develop their own workflow, and sometimes there's not an exact, right way to achieve something, and sometimes (even when we speak the same language), we don't know quite the way to describe a problem and where we want to go, e.g., I might not like the dynamics of a track, but get 3 different suggestions, like using clip gain, automation and compression. Which do I use? Of course it depends on what I want it to sound like when it's done, but "more even" or "less dynamic" can mean different things, and my idea of "less dynamic" might still sound too dynamic to someone else, while theirs sounds like a bleeping squashed piece of poop to me :).

Which, in a round-about way brings me to listening to finished, pro mixes and referencing them against your own mix, or even pointing us to them, to say, "this is what I mean" - that can help reduce the language barriers.

Sorry for chapter 2. (I just watched Sweden lose badly, so have to take it out on someone!)
 
[MENTION=196982]keith.rogers[/MENTION], thank you very much! That clarifies everything. When I work on vocal tracks, I always follow the below steps as my general guide. Though most of the time, the sound ends up too artificial :-(
1.) Noise reduction
2.) Compression
3.) Filtering (low pass, high pass)
4.) Equalization (boasting 2kHz - 5kHz)
5.) Reverb

I will try to improve my daughter's recording and will share to this forum afterwards. For now, I need to logout. It's already past midnight here in Thailand :-)
 
Last edited:
Though most of the time, the sound ends up too artificial :-(

+1 over and over.
I urge you to just leave it alone. :)

If you want the vocal to sound better maybe look into microphone technique, so that loud and quiet are balanced by the performer.
That knocks compression out of the way.
If noise reduction is needed, then record somewhere where there's no noise. ;)

List down to 3.
EQ+reverb? Fair enough. :P

But yeah, a nice sounding piano and maybe a more balanced vocal performance will, in my opinion, do much more than post editing, particularly where 'keeping it real' is important.
 
[MENTION=196982]keith.rogers[/MENTION], thank you very much! That clarifies everything. When I work on vocal tracks, I always follow the below steps as my general guide. Though most of the time, the sound ends up too artificial :-(
1.) Noise reduction
2.) Compression
3.) Filtering (low pass, high pass)
4.) Equalization (boasting 2kHz - 5kHz)
5.) Reverb

I will try to improve my daughter's recording and will share to this forum afterwards. For now, I need to logout. It's already past midnight here in Thailand :-)
Your list might raise some eyebrows here, particularly using compression as early as your list indicates, and my own question about what "noise reduction" is - editing, ok, a plugin, uh, no. Low pass, why? But, I get ahead of myself, and I look forward to a bare recording and seeing what suggestions might come from the experienced folks here.
 
I got nothing to add really. However, that's never stopped me before.
:D
She has a good voice. Definately has talent. You should be proud.

One thing I would work on is the set. It's kind of cute having the bedroom background. It gives off that 'it's just a kid' singing this song. But I'd go with a bit more polish. Maybe a bit more of a blank set to draw more attention to her singing.

If the plan is more videos, with a bit more production she could be a youtube star. :D
 
Last edited:
That sounds really nice.
I get that the vocal is the focus and the whole point, but I'd turn it down substantially.

When you do you'll notice, more, that tails of phrases and lower pitched parts are disappearing a bit; That comes back to the mic technique I mentioned earlier.
Would be a good investment! ^^

I suppose I'm saying if I had to mix this for something I'd be automating the vocal to make the super quiet bits more audible,
but if I was in your position I'd rather teach mic technique and know that it won't be an issue in future.

I know you want to learn the tools and that's great but never ever forget that the goal is to capture the best possible performance.
Use tools for preference. Use doing it again to fix. ;)

As somebody just flicking through youtube live vids, though, it sounds great. :)
 
Thanks [MENTION=43272]Steenamaroo[/MENTION] Ok, I need to research more on mic technique. Is there any tools you thing I should invest for this? Perhaps high end mics, sound diffusion mic booth shield, etc? I only have Audio-Technica AT2020 mic for my daughter :-(
 
No, it's just simply user control.

Experienced recording singers will know to move in closer to the microphone for delicate or quiet parts like each "...my love".
They'll also throw their head back, or sideways, slightly when belting out a loud one.

The more aware a singer is, of this, the less need their is for heavy handed compression or even volume automation.
I bet damn near every Freddy Mercury vocal fader was set+forget.

Anyway there's middle ground and I don't want to over stress the point but if you have a a choice between teaching your daughter that the computer can make her better,
or teaching her that subtle performance techniques can make her better (and have less need for computery stuff), do that second one. :)

Consider, also, that if she ever sings live somewhere there is no post-editing. That microphone technique pays for itself over and over on-stage.

Damn, sounds like I've a bee in my bonnet here. lol.
I've nothing against editing or manipulation at all but if she's learning and you're learning, the first question should always be do I NEED the computer to do this, or can I do it myself during the performance.
 
Just search on YouTube for "microphone techniques for singers" and start there. Watch a few, together perhaps, and then when you watch good singers performing you'll start to notice how they use them. It's very subtle sometimes, just a slight shift in the hand to move the mic, or a little turn of the head, but it makes a big difference.

During recording, IME, the problem for the singer then becomes learning to listen to, or at least separate, the sound in the headphones (i.e., the voice coming back from the interface/computer) vs the sound heard directly in the head, so the singer learns to control what is actually going down the wire and getting recorded. (Easier said than done.) The good thing is, as [MENTION=43272]Steenamaroo[/MENTION] points out, these skills will give her a big advantage in live performance, never mind eliminating so much of the mixing work.
 
[MENTION=43272]Steenamaroo[/MENTION] ok I got your point. Indeed, in that recording, she did a lot of movements; closer and moving backwards from the mic but that I understand as it was recorder by herself during her free time just for fun. She has though a little bit of recording experience in a studio. Below is the link, but it's different story coz it was in the studio. I agree that the goal is to capture the best possible performance and that's a "lesson-learned" for me today :-) .

YouTube
 
Thanks again [MENTION=196982]keith.rogers[/MENTION] . One question; teaching singers on microphone techniques is one thing but how about us, as technical persons, how do we eliminate this issue to minimize retakes? In your case, do you apply something like hardware limiters or compressions during the recording or you just record "as is" then apply necessary editing after recording? Sorry for asking. I tried to search this on youtube but got mixed answers.
 
Compressors and limiters aren't for fixing volume fluctuations across a long term. They're for shaping the dynamics in the short term.
Volume automation would be the way to go for (duh) automating the volume. Good mic technique minimises the need.

It's like the old 'how do I make the high-hat quieter'. Like it or not, the answer is tell the drummer to play the high-hat quieter.
You can do a multitude of other things, but none is as good as getting it right. :)
 
Back
Top