How to double track vox properly

  • Thread starter Thread starter guitarguy101
  • Start date Start date
G

guitarguy101

New member
I haven't had this problem with any other double tracking, but I find that whenever I try to double track, the result sounds as if two different singers with exactly the same voice are singing simultaneously. To me, it's very undesirable.
What would you guys say I should do is as far as compression/eq in order to make it sound as unified as possible. So far, I have either been recording vox on 2 SM-57s or a single Sterling LDC...I usually don't double track with the LDC, but I do with the Sm-57s because I find they lack color on most vocals.
So, suggestions anyone?
 
Do you pan them apart at all?
I don't like double tracking if both parts are straight down the middle.

The panning is the effect IMO.

How good is your timing? Are the two parts pretty tight?
 
Two SM57s? Wait a minute - are you recording 2 tracks (2 mics) at the same time of the singer singing 1 time? The point of double tracking is two separate takes - if the vocalist can hit the notes fairly consistently, there will be minute variances in the two recorded tracks that contribute to the fullness.
 
Yup. Two distinct takes. Done well, and done tightly. Easier said than done, but it's the best and really the only way.
 
Greg_L said:
Yup. Two distinct takes. Done well, and done tightly. Easier said than done, but it's the best and really the only way.
Click to expand...

this ^^^^^^
My only experience is with multi tracking background vocals (not lead). I get an interesting chorus effect as I stack multiple tracks. I've got songs with 1, 2 or 4 backup tracks panned L/R - each combo has it's own different sound.
But back to lead vocals - yeah it gives it a fuller sound and the differences between takes actually creates something cool unless they are flat of course ;-)
 
You also don't necessarily have to have them at the same volume... you can use one to "support" the other.

Incidentally, if I am trying for roughly the same volume I'll get one good track down, be it one take, comped, however... and then do the second take against it... it's often timing on endings that gets you into trouble... this way you can hear instantly if you've got it or go back for another try.

As most vocal tracks consist of lots of silence too, you can get an accurate second vocal quite quickly if you break it down into smaller chunks and comp it.
 
Armistice said:
You also don't necessarily have to have them at the same volume... you can use one to "support" the other.
.
Click to expand...

I don't ever have them the same volume. I always have the second take lower in the mix, acting like a pasty thickener of suckage.
 
I'm doing a stereo recording two times and panning them apart at the same volume. That said, I usually only do that when I don't feel like using the LDC for whatever reason...so should I probably just solely use the LDC, double track, don't pan, and then play one track at a lower volume?
 
Greg_L said:
I don't ever have them the same volume. I always have the second take lower in the mix, acting like a pasty thickener of suckage.
Click to expand...

LOL, a handy tool for those of us what ain't really great singers...
 
guitarguy101 said:
I'm doing a stereo recording two times and panning them apart at the same volume. That said, I usually only do that when I don't feel like using the LDC for whatever reason...so should I probably just solely use the LDC, double track, don't pan, and then play one track at a lower volume?
Click to expand...

As you've realised, playing both tracks at the same volume and panning can sound like two people singing, but if you have one double track lower in volume and panned centre you'll get the thickness and it will sound like one singer (hopefully) but the width that you may have been after is gone.

One solution is to have three tracks, the main full volume vocal panned centre, then one quieter double track panned left and one right. If you don't have three different takes copying the double track and delaying that one by say 25ms can work. Rolling off some of the highs and slightly more of the lows than the main vocal can also make them less noticeable, maybe more reverb than the main track also. Experimenting with hard panned or not is also worth doing.
 
Greg_L said:
A pasty thickener of suckage.
Click to expand...
Another potentially great album title ! The cover has been banned already !! :D

guitarguy101 said:
I'm doing a stereo recording two times and panning them apart at the same volume.
Click to expand...
Blimey ! No wonder it sounds like more than one singer. There are a few ways you can do it, like record one vocal a semitone lower {slower} and one a semitone higher {faster} and combine the two with one way down in volume. Bring it to a point where you can just about hear that there are two voices then back the quiet one off until you can't hear it but know it's there. Then you'll have your bona fide pasty thickner of suckage.
Or record them at the same speed but EQ them very differently. The lesser, ultimately lower vocal is the one to do all the mad extreme EQ~ing with.
Unless you're going for the obvious chorus like effect, the average punter shouldn't be able to tell that there is more than one voice.
It's also worth pondering on whether or not your voice is suited to double tracking. You know, some just aren't. I've come to that conclusion about my own voice. I don't think it is a good voice for double tracking, whereas I have friends that have voices just made for it.
But either way, if you're going for it, like was said by the other guys, record separate takes and in mono. Having said that though, I've recorded a friend the way you did. I used a dynamic and a condenser and double tracked her voice. But I didn't pan them apart. I crunched all four to one track. There was a lovely almost reverb like effect, but I only noticed it with headphones and in isolation from the rest of the music.
 
grimtraveller said:
There are a few ways you can do it, like record one vocal a semitone lower {slower} and one a semitone higher {faster} and combine the two with one way down in volume.
Click to expand...

A few cents maybe, but a semitone is way too far.

Unless you meant shifting them back into pitch afterwards?
 
Steenamaroo said:
A few cents maybe, but a semitone is way too far.

Unless you meant shifting them back into pitch afterwards?
Click to expand...
I mean varispeeding. No one seems to do it round these parts but I stand and fall by it ! It's the most fantastic way to get varied textures of voices and instruments. I don't know if software DAWs have it because no one but me ever mentions it. On my DAW you can slow a recording down by up to 6 semitones or speed it up by 2 semitones. So if your song is in A, you could conceivably record a vocal in Eb or up to B. Of course going down to Eb would be daft unless you want to sound like Alvin and the chipmunks when brought back to normal speed.
 
guitarguy101 said:
I haven't had this problem with any other double tracking, but I find that whenever I try to double track, the result sounds as if two different singers with exactly the same voice are singing simultaneously. To me, it's very undesirable.
What would you guys say I should do is as far as compression/eq in order to make it sound as unified as possible. So far, I have either been recording vox on 2 SM-57s or a single Sterling LDC...I usually don't double track with the LDC, but I do with the Sm-57s because I find they lack color on most vocals.
So, suggestions anyone?
Click to expand...
Do not pan, bus both to a group track then compress and EQ. EQ will not make the 2 tracks sound more like 2 tracks. Compression can help to make the dynamics more similar on both tracks if you use the aux send technique.

The more the tracks sound like each other the better. (excluding copy and paste of course!)

G
 
grimtraveller said:
There are a few ways you can do it, like record one vocal a semitone lower {slower} and one a semitone higher
Click to expand...
:| Why? This can work with pitch shifting 1 track down say 2percent, but not a semi-tone. :)

G
 
ecktronic said:
:| Why? This can work with pitch shifting 1 track down say 2percent, but not a semi-tone.
Click to expand...
I don't know why !
I'm from the old days of that thing called a tape recorder where you could slow it down or speed it up and the pitch changed in real time so you recorded at the pitch it was at. So you ended up with different real time pitches of whatever you double tracked.
It was fun, it sounded fantasic, it made you comfortable in terms of notes that were hard to reach {if singing} by slowing, it forced you to up your game in reaching higher notes by speeding up. It also enabled notes to be played on something like, say, an alto sax, that an alto sax couldn't actually play.
I don't knock pitch shifting and I think it has it's place for definite but varispeeding is my preferred method and at the end of the day, it was only a suggestion, not a manifesto.
 
ecktronic said:
Why? This can work with pitch shifting 1 track down say 2percent, but not a semi-tone.
Click to expand...

grimtraveller said:
comfortable in terms of notes that were hard to reach {if singing} by slowing, it forced you to up your game in reaching higher notes by speeding up.
Click to expand...
Thinking about it further, it depends on the effect you're going for. To me, it's like cooking or doing delivery work ~ there are different ways of getting the same flavoursome meal or different routes you can take to reach the same address and so in a recording sense there is more than just one way to get a desired effect.
The very principle of double tracking means that you want to alter your voice {or instrument} in some way. So that opens the door to every and any way to do that, be it in some overly difficult and complex way or in a simple straightforward 2 minute way. They all work, the listener doesn't care either way any more than you do in a restaurant whether your meal was cooked by gas or electricity or whether the postal worker Rode a bike or walked. What's important is the meal is satisfying or that the letter/package gets delivered. If the postal worker could use a bike because it's easier but likes walking, I don't care !
Going back to varispeeding for a second, by recording a vocal a semitone or tone {or more} slower or faster, you dramatically alter the timbre of your voice. And of course, it doesn't only apply to double tracking. In fact, it has a more pronounced effect when you single track the voice. You can sound older or younger and it can also make a song much easier or let's say comfortable. Many a time by going a semitone slower, I've hit notes with ease that were a stretch normally. It's only for recording purposes. For playback everything is put to normal speed.
I guess I just come from that experimental generation where looking for and achieving different sounds each time was all part of the package and the fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top