Double tracked vocals

andrushkiwt

andrushkiwt

Well-known member
I like using this on choruses, but I'm noticing some issues the more I do it. For one, sometimes the two takes seem to "jump" into complete harmony and the combination of the two is louder, almost piercing. Hard to explain the sound, but it's almost as if they are completely in pitch with one another...so that cumulative effect starts to resonate. It's not the entire line, but usually a loud, held word. I use Melodyne to separate the pitch slightly.

What is your chain/setup for processing double takes? Anything in particular that works well for you? Here's mine:

- harder compression on second take
- panning is both centered, sometimes L5 R5, or in that area depending on song.
- EQ is slightly different. second take has highs rolled off.
- second take is 8 or so db's quieter, usually

What works for you?
 
I never liked double tracked vocals at equal volume occupying the same space or being very close.

For me it's either double tracked, equal weight, panned far apart,
or doubletracked both centre where one is the main one and the other one is just dialled in a little for taste.

In the latter setup the quieter of the two is usually compressed pretty hard.

Another way I do it sometimes is to record one solid main vocal and mix it as such (dead centre), then have two more takes panned quite far apart and dialled in for taste.
Kinda using the two additional vocals as you would a chorus plug, but obviously it's going to sound different.


The point of double tracking, whether vocals or guitars, is the effect created by the subtle differences between the two recordings. That's why copy/paste is no good.
If you're ridiculously accurate or use pitch correction tools, the effect of double tracking can get lost and you'll hear what you're describing.
Alternatively you might hear some cancellation.

Kurt Cobain had a knack for doing several takes that were very close to each other. You can hear him cancelling himself (to some extent) quite a lot in the big choruses, if you're listening for it.
 
No copy and paste...different takes. Sometimes this "cumulative effect" (maybe that's cancellation, but the term sounds to me like something that would be quieter...not louder) is apparent before pitch correction, so the single line might be very in tune with the previous take, yes. When I DO use pitch correction, it's never to 100%. The main vocal will get about 95% while the other about 90%. There are still differences between the two before the correction and when i've tried putting both to 100%, I can still tell it's 2 different takes.

Your second scenario above sounds like what i'm doing now.
 
Yeah, I know you're not copy/pasting - it was just a reference.

You could double track a held note in one chorus and find there's audible cancellation, then recording the same thing again and find they compliment each and stick out.
That unpredictability is the nature of double tracking.

I guess for problem notes you can try singing the second part a few times until you get a nice pairing.
Alternatively you could manually duck the volume on the lower take where there's a problem, or even try nudging problem notes (on the lower take) by milliseconds, adjusting the phase relationship of the two parts.

It's not a problem I've run into much but either of those three ideas should make some difference.
 
cool; yeah i'm just wondering if the techniques i'm using are on par with some things others do for double takes. Maybe someone has an idea i haven't realized. I notice that my choruses are usually higher in the register, so the bottom end drops even with the double take. I'd rather not boost anything down there, and maybe bringing the take up in volume would help the "fullness" of it. i'll play around with it. good to know the eq, comp, and panning stuff i'm doing are on the right track though. thnx
 
Everyone's style is different and we all want to hear different things, but maybe you could try having a straight up single vocal down the middle, then two extra ones panned fairly hard left and right.
When I do it I bus the pair and process them as one thing.
I usually tame the extremes with eq, avoiding lots of bass or sibilance build up. I also compress them pretty hard so they're less dynamic and add something audible to the main vocal consistently.
You'll still get your dynamic range from the main central vocal.

Usually when I do it it's for the reasons you're describing - to beef up the main vocal.

Like I say, I avoid have doubletracked parts occupying the same space but, if I did, the additional part would be sooo subtle. Really - Just dialled in the tiniest amount, like you would a subtle reverb.
 
Steenamaroo said:
Everyones style is different and we all want to hear different things, but maybe you could try having a straight up single vocal down the middle, then two extra ones panned fairly hard left and right.
When I do it I bus the pair and process them as one thing.
I usually tame the extremes with eq, avoiding lots of bass or sibilance build up. I also compress them pretty hard so they're less dynamic and add something audible to the main vocal consistently.
You'll still get your dynamic range from the main central vocal.

Usually when I do it it's for the reasons you're describing - to beef up the main vocal.
Click to expand...

ok i'll try this out and see how it works. unfortunately, i only kept two takes of the chorus...i have a feeling i won't get the same feel/vibe if i tried to do another take now (a week later). but maybe if they're hard panned and under, it won't be too much of a problem. This is my new AT4040 - first tune i'm doing with it, so i'm excited to see the final result.
 
andrushkiwt said:
ok i'll try this out and see how it works. unfortunately, i only kept two takes of the chorus...i have a feeling i won't get the same feel/vibe if i tried to do another take now (a week later). but maybe if they're hard panned and under, it won't be too much of a problem. This is my new AT4040 - first tune i'm doing with it, so i'm excited to see the final result.
Click to expand...

Cool man. Just one guy's approach but hopefully it'll be useful to you.
Enjoy that new mic! :)
 
It always seemed to me that just like guitar double tracks there isn't really a shortcut to it other than having an ear for a perfect take/lots of edits.

I'm not 100% sure but adding pitch correction into the mix made things worse - you can end up with two copies of the track that are too close together in terms of tone and pitch, especially when you get into the 'straighten pitch' stuff with melodyne.
Have you tried backing way off on the pitch correction of the double track?

You can be pretty brutal with edits on the DT if necessary, noone is going to hear it on it's own, after all.
 
Jake_JW said:
It always seemed to me that just like guitar double tracks there isn't really a shortcut to it other than having an ear for a perfect take/lots of edits.

I'm not 100% sure but adding pitch correction into the mix made things worse - you can end up with two copies of the track that are too close together in terms of tone and pitch, especially when you get into the 'straighten pitch' stuff with melodyne.
Have you tried backing way off on the pitch correction of the double track?

You can be pretty brutal with edits on the DT if necessary, noone is going to hear it on it's own, after all.
Click to expand...

I haven't gone less than 90% on them, no. I can try that out for smoother instances of words that are too "in sync". But like I said, I do give about 5% difference between them. Sometimes more. I don't move the words in time, just a little in pitch. I get a little fatigued after 10 takes - and my "best" takes are usually in the 7-9 area, as far as take number. Rarely do I pull a line from the 1st take - second is almost always the worst. third just as bad. (now "bad" might sound good to someone else, but I know when I'm on and those early ones just aren't good enough) and things get better by 4.

maybe i'll try doing takes of JUST choruses instead of the whole thing start to finish. the problems i see are:

- i'll lose the energy of the chorus if i'm not going into it singing the verse first
- i might miss out on better takes of verses
 
Jake_JW said:
I'm not 100% sure but adding pitch correction into the mix made things worse for me- you can end up with two copies of the track that are too close together in terms of tone and pitch, especially when you get into the 'straighten pitch' stuff with melodyne.
Have you tried backing way off on the pitch correction of the double track?

You can be pretty brutal with edits on the DT if necessary, noone is going to hear it on it's own, after all.
Click to expand...

+1. I know you said you never go to 100% but it'd be worth trying without any correction at all.
You're a good singer and minute differences are the whole point of double tracking. Anything that diminishes those differences is taking away from the desired effect.
 
andrushkiwt said:
- i'll lose the energy of the chorus if i'm not going into it singing the verse first
Click to expand...

Fair enough concern. Quite often I do record sections at a time but I always give myself (or the singer) and good length run up to the thing.
I probably won't record it but I always get them to sing a few lines of the run up to the chorus, for example, so they hit the ground running.
Worth a try?
 
Steenamaroo said:
+1. I know you said you never go to 100% but it'd be worth trying without any correction at all.
You're a good singer and minute differences are the whole point of double tracking. Anything that diminishes those differences is taking away from the desired effect.
Click to expand...

So, i'll have a take where it's 90% what i want...except one word is slightly off key, enough that it bothers the double. maybe i'll think about using it JUST on those words then, and not on the whole thing.

Since i've started mixing my own crap, i've gone from making a mix in 1-2 days to 2-3 weeks. lol. now here is something else to add to that time frame.
 
There is the lazy way - there is a very real ADT plugin that does a pretty passable job most of the time (especially on BV's).
 
andrushkiwt said:
So, i'll have a take where it's 90% what i want...except one word is slightly off key, enough that it bothers the double. maybe i'll think about using it JUST on those words then, and not on the whole thing.
Click to expand...

I have to admit, I do that. If there's literally a word here and there that's out enough to be noticed, I'll tune it back in.
I avoid using a tuning plugin though - I just use protools built in pitch tool because it'll raise or lower a selected region by a specified number of cents without alternating it in any other way.

Of course the textbook rule would be to just sing it again better but I'm the first to admit I don't always do that.
 
Jake_JW said:
There is the lazy way - there is a very real ADT plugin that does a pretty passable job most of the time (especially on BV's).
Click to expand...

I haven't used it but it's pretty interesting. It does differ from a straight up chorus in that it modules the difference in an unpredictable way.
It sounds pretty cool but for $250 I'll just sing twice. ;)

Hard to tell but listening to demos I can't help but feel it'll be another recognisable sound...An alternative to, rather than a replacement for, double-tracking.
 
Steen, I just googled double tracking stuff and came to an HR thread where you're discussing it with someone about how it was used on Nevermind. HR shows up A LOT on google searches for specific mixing stuff. Anyways, what do you think the vocal arrangement is for some of those tracks...wide panned? centered? i haven't listened to that specific album in awhile. i'll give it a go on my lunch. i wonder if it's layered underneath with EQ and comp, or spread out far.
 
Steenamaroo said:
Hard to tell but listening to demos I can't help but feel it'll be another recognisable sound...An alternative to, rather than a replacement for, double-tracking.
Click to expand...

In ten year's time they might call it a 'modern classic'. Anything could happen...

Just thought I'd mention it for flavour. Absolutely - as with all 'professional' (said with a sneer and a fair amount of cynicism) plugins its way overpriced, and it's also super-recognisable sometimes. I got a bunch of licences on an iLok from someone last year and it's one of the few that I use.
 
andrushkiwt said:
Steen, I just googled double tracking stuff and came to an HR thread where you're discussing it with someone about how it was used on Nevermind. HR shows up A LOT on google searches for specific mixing stuff. Anyways, what do you think the vocal arrangement is for some of those tracks...wide panned? centered? i haven't listened to that specific album in awhile. i'll give it a go on my lunch. i wonder if it's layered underneath with EQ and comp, or spread out far.
Click to expand...

I'm not certain but I think they just did straight forward sing it twice, down the middle. Maybe they're panned apart a bit? Really not sure.
Check it out here man - You can really hear phasing on Kurt's parts when they're solo at 4:58.

Listen at 4:12 too man - How many people would be reaching for autotune to bring Grohl up a little bit here and there? Would probably have ruined that record.
That's the sound of someone giving it balls! :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top