Newbie Needs GOOD Vocal Mic and Pre- Help!

[Orris]

I could really use as much expertise as any of you can spare. i need as good a vocal, recorded on my protools set up, as very very very little money can buy.

I am the frontman/songwriter/pianist/loopmaker/manager/etc-ad-nauseam for my band. We're working on a new record that I need to, sonically, be competitive with the best of the best. We have been INCREDIBLY lucky in enlisting the help of folks who snuck us into a great studio (where the star wars theme and u2 were/have recorded)- - we tracked all our drums and bass there on 2 inch tape with a real engineer who then bounced the tracks down to digital for us. we've been tracking guitar with 2 57's on the guitarists amp, through my mackie (vlz series) into pro tools at my apartment, and we've gone through the mackie into pt with the bass.

I had a friend's GT55 to record vox for a while but then he needed it back. I was only running the mic through the mackie and I guess it's okay. I feel stupid, but I don't really know what I'm doing. But the levels clip here and there or go too low. We have an AMAZING guy with huge mixing credits mixing for us for free (so I don't want to press my luck by pestering him with dumb questions) and I want to hand him tracks that aren't going to be a nightmare to make sound good. So... ugh. Anyway, I need to redo a lot of the lead vox at the very least and I need them to sound like they should be on the same record with the drums and piano that were recorded in this pristine fashion.

I have a lower (male-baritonish/low tenor) voice that can get a little nasal/back of my throat. I need warmth but with something to bring out the top/breathier parts of my voice.

I apologize for the long, presumptuous post. But can anyone recommend:

A. A CHEAP deal on a great mic (anyone know how the GT55 compares to the MD1b-FET?) that will sound like as good as vox on a U2 record? (I realize this is probably an insane wish, but that's the wish...)
B. Ditto A but with a mic pre (is there a REAL difference- - again, I realize this is probably a dumb question- - between using my Mackie VLZ series board and a top mic pre? I mean once the kick-ass mixing guy gets his hands on it with all his gear...)
C. If you know methods/ways/suggestions/tips on the best ways to record... like, if I don't have a "real" compressor, if I record my vocal with my mackie into protools and bus it through to another track to record it with compression, is that as good as a "real" compessor? Is that essential? Is there a way to get good level and not create a mixing nightmare with no compressor?

I guess I'm asking a lot and will probably annoy folks so I'll shut up now. But if there are any compassionate, knowledgeable audiofiles out there... I implore you, beg you... help! Please

 

[Treeline]

I think you need to invest some time looking at the FAQ, Harvey's thread, and threads you will find using the search engine. You'll find it's all here - just look around a bit and it'll appear.

The kernel of your question is: "can I do a pro recording / mixing / mastering job without equipment or training?" and the answer is "no." But you can do a fine job of parts of it, and it sounds like you've been a ways down that road already.

Think of it like this - the further down the record / mix / master path you get, the more clearly a specialized training and background makes the real difference - maybe it's more of a "day of reconing" kind of thing. Newbies like me started with "how hard can it be?" and soon learned the answer: Real Hard! But it's a hell of a ride all the same. Good luck and enjoy the process!

 

[TripleJ]

With the clipping and then dropping below required levels I believe a compressor is what your looking for.

 

[chessrock]

I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings for you on this, but my initial thought is that if you have most of your tracks professionally recorded at a nice studio and what not . . . then you've got these other tracks that were done by an amateur (yourself) at his home, whoever's mixing this thing is going to be somewhat confused.

Kind of like: "Well, half of these tracks kinda' sound really good and the others just sound like ass. What the hell?"

If you're really looking for some outright "expertise" as you put it . . . then my expert advice would be that if 75% of your album is done the right way and 25% of it is done half-assed . . . the 25% of it that sounds like shit is only going to bring the rest of your "record" down. If you're going to do it, then I say get it done right. Sell sperm if you have to. Just hire someone who knows what the heck they're doing.

 

[thispleasesme]

What kind of budget are you working with? There's a lot of options as far as mic/pre combinatinos go. If you're working with 200-300 dollars I'd say stick with your VLZ pre's and focus on getting a decent budget mic such as a Studioprojects T3 or a GT-55. I have a GT-55 that I really like, though it tends to be a bit dark, and you need something with some high end. Hrm.

If you have upwards of 500-700 dollars to spend, I'd say put two or three hundred into a mic, and then try and find a RNP Pre used or perhaps if you can really splurge, go for one of Focusrite's platinum pre's such as the Voicemaster or the Twintrak. I have the TT and really, really love it. It was 550 dollars though.

So, what are you thinking you can spend? Keep in mind, buying a good mic or pre is not something you have to keep upgrading. Look at it as an investment. I know that if I spend upwards of six hundred dollars on a nice mic, it's not going to be thrown out. Even cheaper mics have their places. Most veteran engineers still have the mics they got when they started out. It's an INVESTMENT. Keep that in mind when you're deciding on your budget

 

[Cyrokk]

Do not use a compressor. I guarantee that if you do not know how one works, there is no chance you will improve your tracks with one. The only thing you should record with is a mic into a mic pre straight into the recorder. Do not record with any reverb or any other effects, and you need to sing in an isolated room if possible, like a closet full of clothes to absorb sound.

You also need to learn how to work the mike: get up closer during softer passages and further away you sing louder. Sing with only one headphone on (the other one muted so that you don't pick up bleed from the other instruments). This is because many people sing slightly flat with both phones on.

For the type of voice you described, I would recommend a Marshall 603s, which is a condensor mic that will require phantom power, which should be available on your preamp.

The ideal is to record all the tracks in essentially the same place, with the same rooms, with sonic adjustments such as mike placement determined through the same monitors so that everything gels well together and there is no need to carve any frequencies out during the mixing process, so I am not really sure why an engineer would allow someone with little knowledge of recording vocals record them in a separate environment, unless perhaps you couldn't afford the extra time and compromises had to be made. In any event, you will have to make do and judge how your voice sounds in the context of the mix you sing against. Do NOT make evaluations in headphones. Use monitors if possible. Make any adjustments only with mic placement or adjustments to the room you are singing in.

 

[Raaen]

Have you considered renting?

Definitely need a compressor (atleast to some limiting) to go with that mic and pre if you're doing a rock project, which it sounds like you're doing.

 

[Cyrokk]

Have you considered renting?

Definitely need a compressor (atleast to some limiting) to go with that mic and pre if you're doing a rock project, which it sounds like you're doing.

The reason I disagree with the use of a compressor at this stage is because if he doesn't know how to use it, he can over either over apply it or wind up getting a crapass compressor that adds a horrid sound to his vocals, and there is nothing the mixing engineer can do to erase compression already printed on the track.

The mixing engineer is probably anticipating the use of compression for vocals on this track already.

 

[Orris]

thank you!!

thanks to everyone for their expertise and opinions. perhaps i painted a bleaker picture than is actually true. i do have some MINOR engineering training, which is to say, as one of you pointed out, i really wouldn't know how to use a compessor the right way.

my feeling/hope is that if i got a nice flat vocal, good signal, can avoid clipping or going too low, just get a nice, clean signal, our friend mixing will be albe to do the rest. i did confess my troubles with level which has been true, but, as one of you recommended, i've become the master of knowing how far to physically back up commensurate with the amount of sound coming out of my mouth and how close conversely. what i was hoping to find out from someone is if using a Pro Tools compressor plug-in was a way to go. someone at the local Guitar Center told me i HAD to use a mic pre with a compessor to get a good sound because using the pro tools plug in was in the chain after the signal had already come through. i thought A) if you're compressing the sound and is keeping you from clipping and it's keeping your level up, what's the problem? i never have the level so hot on my mackie vlz that the sound clips there, so that's not a problem, and i seem to get a pretty good level on it. the "clipping" trouble i've discovered with my set up seems to happen only once the signal has reached pro tools, oddly enough. B) if it's a matter of the signal itself be compressed in a fixed form, i could bus it in Pro Tools to another track through a Pro Tools compressor, no? Or does that downgrade the sound quality?

i was actually using friend's GT55 mic and liked it, but i was actually using the low-cut on my board and giving it a bit of high end to get the sound i liked.

i mean, if this were just a "home demo" or something for college radio, i think the vocals i've recorded would be fine. my worry is that we're handing this to someone who mixes from the likes of pink of christina crapulera (all due bows to the excellent mixing) and my music's already been used on mtv reality shows and wb shows and my publishing company as high hopes (though they're willing to give me NOTHING to help me get the record done-- love that) i'll do more with this. some really great indie labels are interested and my hope is to make something good enough to simply license to one of the labels as opposed to returning to the drawing board to record the same music again (while i've got dozens of other new tunes)- - but i'm digressing way off the point.

the point: if i run a Groove Tube GT55 or mic of similar (or greater) quality (all recommendations continue to be appreciated- - ENTIRE budget... MAYBE 300- - they've got the GT55 at guitar center now for 300) through my Mackie VLZ and get a clean signal, do you guys think that's enough for a mixer to run with? or do you think i really have to find a way to use compression and if so, can it be a Pro Tools plug-in or do i really have to find a way to pull money i don't have out of the sky to buy a "for-real" mic pre with compression?

i hear what's being said about bringing of the quality of the record down and that's my HUGE concern. BUT i don't want to give myself an ulcer over finding money to rent or buy unnecessary stuff- - which is what i'm currently doing to myself- - giving myself an ulcer. wa.

to answer another question, the music is rock, yes- - but more "rock" a la tori amos meets u2, coldplay, radiohead, brighteyes, sparklehorse "rock."

maybe it's just because i'm a singer, but we've recorded all the guitar through the mackie with 57's on the amp and i think it sounds amazing- - no qualms at all. good signal, the whole deal. of course, i was sitting there making sure nothing clipped or dipped, so i guess that's the "human" compressor of sorts. maybe that's the real answer. honestly, i hate the way most compression sounds on vocals anyway. i realize it has to happen at certain points, but i always walk away feeling like something's been lost- - even with great engineers (of which i am definitely not one).

if anyone has more to add/respond... critique... i really really appreciate all the feedback. our goal with this record was to make something bigger sounding than the last which was a lot more poppy sounding sonically- - i.e. thin. not bad, but thin. i think we've accomplished that with the drums and piano on this one and i've heard miracles happen in the mixing process with good gear. knock wood, i think that's what i'm banking on.

if anyone's curious what all this rabble is about, this is my band:

http://www.orrismusic.com

thanks again to all and hope to hear more....

 

[Orris]

something i forgot to answer

because you've all been so great and it seems i get the most help from you having all the info, i am using the self-powered Event PS-5 monitors and Sony MDR-V600 headphones as well as AKG K66 headphones.

crazy question, i've bands like the stones and in some cases the beatles did some or all of their vocals with a 57... i have 2... crazy idea? they have a quality i actually really like on my voice, but is it too dirty for vocals these days? just a thought...

 

[Cyrokk]

Take what you heard from the guy at Guitar Center with a big grain of salt. GC is not a place known for quality information.

I forgot that you were recording in protools. In that case, I would record the entire take without compression, and then copy that track and play around with the pro-tools compressor on the copied track. If you really like what you hear, then take both the dry and compressed copy to the mixing engineer and let him decide which will be the best for your song.

As to your question of using the 57 for vocals, there are quite a few vocalists that use the 57. Whether it is too "dirty" sounding depends on your song, so it's definately worth experimenting.

 

[Orris]

57's and some good luck too

thanks for that. because i'm such a know-nothing "engineer" (using that word loosely), i don't like to do weird stuff (and i do a lot of weird stuff in recording, i'm sure) without being told by someone who knows better... i kind of do it and basically decide whether or not i think it sounds good and that's my big, fancy litmus test... :-/ i guess it's as good as any?

so i think i may invest in the gt55. i actually got some balls and called the guy who's going to be mixing for us and he's actually really, really cool. i mean this guy is the shit and he's helping my little band. and to boot, he says he has a $3,000 mic pre i can borrow, it's the one he "used on aguilera." which, although she's so not my bag musically at all, we have a similar vocal timbre. but i'll never admit that again. such a nice guy.

what's with you studio/engineer/recording folk that you're all so cool and helpful? i used to work at a couple major labels and most people were just dicks. anyway, thanks.

anyone happen to know of a GT55 being sold for super cheap somewhere?

 

[Orris]

also...

just by way of info for everyone, the uber-amazing mixer guy said that actually, what i'm doing is fine and he could make the vocals sound superb, but the only thing he couldn't fix was over-compression. he actually said not to use any compression and leave that up to him (as one of you had said). fyi. this guy has won grammy's so it's probably good info...

 

[c7sus]

Actually, this is a pretty cool resource, and I've met Treeline and Cyrokk and they are REALLY GOOD FOLKS.

Tell your friends.

But don't tell any of those dicks from the record biz.

 

[Innovations]

I think that something that has been left out of this discussion is how good is your room? If you got a good room then with a good mic for your voice (which indeed could be a 57 or 58...ask experts who have actually heard you) you will get something that could be mixed in. If your room is bad...a great microphone will get you a great recording of a bad sound. Your money would be better spent renting a good room.

Also agree that when working with digital audio just record the tracks plain, then adjust at your leisure.

 

[Orris]

GT55 vs. GT66

hey, i kind of need to know as quickly as humanly possible... strictly in terms of vocal recording, the GT55 vs. GT66, price differences aside, what are the differences and is the 66 definitely better?

to answer your question, "the room" i'm recording in is my bedroom which is an average size rectangular (actually pretty big) room lined with mattresses (no, not kidding) with some wood exposed here and there.

i need some input on the mics as soon as someone can offer it if you can... please! thanks again!!

 

[chessparov]

Orris, if you like the SM57 on your voice, then just use it.
Keep in mind, however, on most any unidirectional microphone be it
dynamic or cardiod that mic placement is critical.

You have two other basic options for close miking within the Electro-Voice line.

1) EV 635a omni.
2) EV RE20 (PL20), RE15, RE16, or RE18
These all have EV's patented "variable-D" design to minimize proximity
effect.

The benefit of either of these choices is that microphone technique
(or lack thereof) becomes much less of a factor.
There have been many hit records with these types of mics FWIW.

Your SM57 (and the EV's listed above) really shine with high end mic pre's
BTW. A SM57 mops up most condensers with a good mic pre on my voice,
for example. Casualties include U87ai, AKG 414 B/ULS, etc.

Mackie pre's are notorious for making 57's sound shrill BTW.

IMHO you'd be better off either using a dynamic or getting proper acoustical
treatment of your room in order to use a condenser.
See www.realtraps.com for more info on that kind of thing.
A pair of MicroTraps along with your SM57 (or EV) if this aspect is DIY
seems quite reasonable to me. (in a "real" studio is still better!)

Chris

 

[chessparov]

And...

If you back off that '57 and spend some time experimenting with placement,
it'll clean up its sound considerably.

Then when it gets mixed, the AE can use EQ/compression to smooth things out more. It may amaze you how much better it'll sound vs. what you're used to!

Chris

 

[Greg B.]

Good Vocal Mic for very little money

I could really use as much expertise as any of you can spare. i need as good a vocal, recorded on my protools set up, as very very very little money can buy.

Take a look at the ADK A-51 Type V Large Diaphragm condenser mic. It's only a little more money than an SM58, and sounds better than most mics costing 5 times as much.

The link below has some ADK reviews and info. One review compares the ADK A-51 to the AKG 414ULS, AKG C3000, and an Audio Technica 4050/CM5.

http://www.proaudiotoys.com/store/product.aspx?prdId=70456