K
K-dub
Well-known member
Me and a friend doing a song I finally got around to reworking some nuance parts that I remembered I always wanted to change. Any/all comments welcome.
Me and a friend doing a song I finally got around to reworking some nuance parts that I remembered I always wanted to change. Any/all comments welcome.
DM60
Well-known member
I think the main vocal is a tad hot. Might be the way you want it, but I am thinking it could get pulled back a dB or two. I didn't hear anything bad in the song mix.
Hope the feedback helps.
Hope the feedback helps.
K
K-dub
Well-known member
I am in similar frame of thought. The issue is the in/out of the music bed makes it hot then buried - then hot - then buried. I'm playing w/ several factors at the moment ... trying to gain pinpoint clarity.
Papanate
Well-known member
You can accomplish this by automating the mix - I noticed what you are talking about - the vocal goes underneath - BTW the tone and timbre of the vocals have a McCartney like Quality to them to me.
K
K-dub
Well-known member
Yeah - they're 3db too loud in the quiet passages but when I roll the track back down, they wind up diving under the chorus vocals too far. It's not hard to automate it. I'm just wondering if I can maybe get away with a different technique by separating the parts on different tracks etc ...
Thanks for the thoughts P!!
DM60
Well-known member
Depending on your DAW, I have been splitting the vocal track and raising or lowering the section to get my levels right, then using the fades for final adjustment/level of the track. I think it helps by using less compression and not using automation. I don't know why, but it seems automation is such a PITA while a work is in progress.
I wouldn't say my approach is the best, but it seems from a workflow it helps me at least. Makes final mixing less complicated.
K
K-dub
Well-known member
George Martin had a production trick where he'd layer and effect different passages in a song to lend subtle production lift to sections. It could be quite effective. Putting different parts on different tracks and making them sound slightly different (for the same singer) is the easiest method to achieve that goal.
I haven't decided yet if that's what I want to do. If I decide to leave the vocal untouched and JUST change the levels, then I will just automate the volume.
Papanate
Well-known member
Lowering the volume by using db instead of Automation is a bit more accurate than using the Auto function.
K
K-dub
Well-known member
Plus I tend to loathe having to fiddle with all the automation points later if I decide to ultimately move to a different gain stage scheme. I then just delete the whole envelope rather than fuss w/ it.
It's easier just to adjust the gain, set, and forget.
K
K-dub
Well-known member
I did wind up splitting the track and adding an effect - slight thickening.
Plus I pulled WAY back on the limiting.
I moved my studio recently into a more muffled room - and so I'd been hitting the volume harder. Wrong. Oops.
DM60
Well-known member
Good mix. I didn't hear anything that needed tending too. Main vocal has plenty of space, clear. If I touched anything, I would lower the vocals closer to the rest, but it is more on a personal opinion than a "fix".
dobro
Well-known member
I like it, and the mix is good.
Papanate
Well-known member
I did wind up splitting the track and adding an effect - slight thickening.
Plus I pulled WAY back on the limiting.
I moved my studio recently into a more muffled room - and so I'd been hitting the volume harder. Wrong. Oops.
This is good IMO - whats the doubling effect on the vocal? And the background vocal I would brighten a bit - match the lead vocal tone.
