recording vox without a compressor

[SouthSIDE Glen]

One thing that I wonder about when working with global track adjustments in any DAW...like what if you pooch the track settings and you can't UNDO them back...you kinda mess up the whole track, whereas with the Objects...it's always minimized to individual elements rather than the whole track.

When I want the level changes to happen before the inserted compressor I slice up the block and adjust there, driving the signal into the compression. When I want to adjust the level after the compressor I use fader automation. The first is "correction" and the second is "expression".

This is what's fascinating (to me, anyway);is just how many different permutations there can be in technique. You two guys have here brought up two different situations that I personally very rarely have to deal with because of my own homegrown methods. At the same time, I'm sure the way I do things has its own weaknesses that you guys can regularly avoid having to deal with.

In the first instance, I actually only very rarely apply global compression to the entire track in the DAW; I tend to do like you say miro, and attack the level issues via spot waveform editing and fader automation. I do often compress "globally" during tracking using the outboard box in order to get a good character on the track (and a bit to keep levels sane too, but I probably would not do that if I didn't really like the sound of my outboard compressor), but once in the box, the amount of compression I use is actually minimal (unless I'm going for a special unnatural effect.)

I do apply global EQ often in many different forms, but "undoing" that if an actual undo is unavailable for some reason is usually as easy as just applying new EQ to get the new sound I want. But rarely is that kind of undo even necessary in EQ, because A) I can usually work with/around whatever I have, and Bee) I try to keep my "saves" at strategic points to ensure I can go back if I need to.

And as I tend to address localized level problems with spot editing and/or automation instead of insert processing like Boulder describes, the potential issue of fading around edited or processed insert points never arises; it's all automatically just part of the automation curve or of he spot waveform editing.

Yet your methods have their advantages too. It's just really interesting that the more one works with others, the more one sees how others have developed their own favorite techniques that are equally valid, with each introducing their own set of strengths and weaknesses. There is no one right way. Which is why I've started to adapt some of Jay's methods and add them to my own - and vice versa. I'll use his divide and conquer when it's best to do so and my own "home" set of methods when they seem more fit. And he's doing the same with learning some new tricks (for him) from me.It'll only make us both better.

G.

 

[PDP]

This is a good thread, good ideas, information. The same technique(s) applies to other things as well, for example I dont like the tone compression gives to a Bass guitar, so I use other ways to make it work.

 

[bouldersoundguy]

And as I tend to address localized level problems with spot editing and/or automation instead of insert processing like Boulder describes, the potential issue of fading around edited or processed insert points never arises; it's all automatically just part of the automation curve or of he spot waveform editing.

By inserted I meant on the track as a whole rather than in a spot. This is how I work in Sony Vegas. It's easy to split the block and apply "Gain" changes to the parts, then crossfade the sections. It's like automating the input gain of a mixer channel. The Gain in Vegas is a non-destructive process, unlike Pro Tools in which you have to process the audio destructively with AudioSuite. I don't have to do it often, but if a take is uneven I can slice it up and trim all the Gains so the various parts drive any channel plugins evenly. Then I can automate the Volume in the manner of fader moves.

 

[PDP]

, then crossfade the sections.

What does that mean? What process is that? Why do you do it?

 

[bouldersoundguy]

What does that mean? What process is that? Why do you do it?

A crossfade is a transition that fades down the first block while fading up the second one where they're overlapped.

In Sony Vegas you just grab an edge of a block and pull it over part of another block and it automatically crossfades. You can choose from various slopes, my preference for this application being constant power. In Pro Tools you overlap the blocks then, using Multi-Tool, manually create the crossfade.

If the audio in the track is constant and I split it up to mess with the Gains I don't want the changes to be instantaneous, I want them to transition smoothly from one section to the next, so I crossfade. If a vocal track has breaks between lines and there's no breathing or bleed then you can just chop up the blocks between lines. That's also true of instrumental tracks that have silent parts.

 

[PDP]

Thank You,

Good to know, sometimes I do feel the gain edits I do sound un-natural. Thanks for giving me the info.

Pete

 

[miroslav]

It's just really interesting that the more one works with others, the more one sees how others have developed their own favorite techniques that are equally valid, with each introducing their own set of strengths and weaknesses. There is no one right way.

What's funny/interesting...is that when I listen to some of the chatter on the Samplitude forum, I find a lot of those guys using some of the Samplitude features that to me have little or no use....or they approach things from a different angle.
No real right/wrong way...I think everyone just finds a method that works best for them, and a lot of it might have to do with how someone came up in the studio environment.
Like doing multiple takes for instance...some of the Samplitude guys use all kinds of software managed approaches to do multiple takes...and quite frankly it confuses the shit out of me, but because I came up from tape multi-tracking, I just use my DAW like a digital tape deck with lots of bells and whistles...so my logic is completely different.
It's all good!
My approach is to find the most methodical, assembly-line method when it comes to the initial editing in the DAW, as I find that is the fastest/easiest way to slog through it, rather than bounce around from one process to another trying to both edit, comp... and also mix at the same time.
Of course...you kinda have to make some decisions when you do that, and then stick to them, otherwise you still end up just bouncing around from process to process.
Yeah...there is a certain back-n-forth between processes...but it's like when I do web work, I first cut all my graphics before assembling the web pages.
Some folks like to cut graphics as they assemble one page at a time.

To each his own.

What does that mean? What process is that? Why do you do it?

Make cross-fading your friend…

Like bouldersoundguy explained it…it's very handy when you are splicing things together.
Like you can take the first half of a word and splice it to the second half of that same word, but from another section of a song to fix a glitch (even for a single vowel/constant)….and the cross-fading makes it seamless/smooth…you can’t hear it when it’s done well.
There are times when you don’t want to splice things together, and then you use harder cuts/fades at each tail/head. But with good cross-fade techniques, you can pull off some nice edits and NO ONE will notice them.
That is one of the reasons the use of Objects in Samplitude is so sweet. You really CAN fix just about anything…but it’s VERY time consuming if you let it take control of you. You can get too obsessive with micro-edits…but it’s a great tool when needed.
The editing, to me, is the real beauty/power of a DAW…not so much the unlimited track counts and endless layers of plug-ins.

 

[grimtraveller]

What's interesting...is that when I listen to some of the chatter on the Samplitude forum, I find a lot of those guys using some of the Samplitude features that to me have little or no use....or they approach things from a different angle.
No real right/wrong way...I think everyone just finds a method that works best for them, and a lot of it might have to do with how someone came up in the studio environment.
Like doing multiple takes for instance...some of the Samplitude guys use all kinds of software managed approaches to do multiple takes...and quite frankly it confuses the shit out of me, but because I came up from tape multi-tracking, I just use my DAW like a digital tape deck with lots of bells and whistles...so my logic is completely different.

That's one of the things that I like about forums, you catch so many different ways and methods and I guess that's why I sometimes inwardly baulk at anything that approaches standardization. And sometimes I'm surprized at what people don't do. Like I virtually never hear anyone talk about varispeeding whereas for me, I couldn't do this without it. Aside from slowing things down to make the playing of unfamiliar instruments easier, I've learned so much about different keys and textures and also great tricks like slurring organs and whatnot, just thru speeding up and slowing down.

The editing, to me, is the real beauty/power of a DAW…not so much the unlimited track counts and endless layers of plug-ins.

The main reason I moved to a DAW from a portastudio is because I wanted more than 8 tracks. The editing however, was a bonus that in retrospect justifies the move and is of greater benefit than the extra tracks. 'Back in the solely analog day' there was extensive editing but it was risky, took absolutely ages and possibly put people off trying certain things. Whoever would've thought that 'undo' button would bring about the collective sigh of relief among possibly millions, heard across the galaxy ?
Woah ! That was seriously off topic ! Apologies....

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

By inserted I meant on the track as a whole rather than in a spot. This is how I work in Sony Vegas. It's easy to split the block and apply "Gain" changes to the parts, then crossfade the sections.

I use Vegas (an older version, V4) myself quite a bit, but really only when working in A/V. I have to confess to not using/knowing a whole lot of the more advanced audio editing features in it, because I have Sound Forge hot linked into it's menus, and I cut my teeth on Sound Forge (ever since at least V2, I don't remember if I had anything in V1 or not, TBH)) so it's the old, "one goes to what they are used to" syndrome there. But I do *love* Vegas overall, it's a freakin' killer for multitrack A/V NLE, IMHO. Except for that damn jog/shuttle control. Without a physical wheel to control it, that slider bar sucks.

it's like when I do web work, I first cut all my graphics before assembling the web pages.
Some folks like to cut graphics as they assemble one page at a time.

To each his own.

Trust me; you don't want to get me started on how one of my friends/web devleopment associates and I get into it sometimes. For many years we'd get into many loud philosophical disagreements over certain aspects of web development/design. Not that either is right or wrong, just two completely different styles and philosophies. I think by now we've learned the boundaries on where we've learned to agree to disagree, but it took a few years to get there.

The editing, to me, is the real beauty/power of a DAW…not so much the unlimited track counts and endless layers of plug-ins.

Amen to that. Frankly I could do without plugs almost altogether (I said *almost*. Get you paws away from my hard drive! ) It's the whole forgetting about razor blades and tape and so forth and the ease of non-linear, non-destructive editing that makes digital worthwhile, IMHO.

G.

 

[bouldersoundguy]

I use Vegas (an older version, V4) myself quite a bit, but really only when working in A/V. I have to confess to not using/knowing a whole lot of the more advanced audio editing features in it, because I have Sound Forge hot linked into it's menus, and I cut my teeth on Sound Forge (ever since at least V2, I don't remember if I had anything in V1 or not, TBH)) so it's the old, "one goes to what they are used to" syndrome there. But I do *love* Vegas overall, it's a freakin' killer for multitrack A/V NLE, IMHO. Except for that damn jog/shuttle control. Without a physical wheel to control it, that slider bar sucks.

I started with Sound Forge 4.5 and then got into Video Factory, then Vegas Video 3 and currently on Vegas 6/Sound Forge 6. Vegas is up to version 9. Sound Forge 6 is a big step up from 5 and earlier as it keeps most edits in RAM rather than writing them to disk, which saves a lot of time. Select, delete and it's gone without waiting for a write to disk. Basically, Vegas does everything non-destructively, and Sound Forge does the destructive processing.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I started with Sound Forge 4.5 and then got into Video Factory, then Vegas Video 3 and currently on Vegas 6/Sound Forge 6. Vegas is up to version 9. Sound Forge 6 is a big step up from 5 and earlier as it keeps most edits in RAM rather than writing them to disk, which saves a lot of time. Select, delete and it's gone without waiting for a write to disk. Basically, Vegas does everything non-destructively, and Sound Forge does the destructive processing.

Yeah, I'm up to 6 in SF also.I think SF is actually up to at least V9 or V10 now also, isn't it? I haven't bothered upgrading either one because, honestly, I haven't found either version I have to be holding back my productivity in any way worth writing home about.

G.

 

[chessparov]

I wish every thread could be as good as this one. Although frankly some of the tech talk is presently beyond me. IMHO this one deserves a "sticky" so far.

Wondering if the original poster is using 24 bit or 16 bit?

Chris

 

[paresh]

16 bit still. & thanks for all the replies. re. mic technique - when recording someone else, it's out of my control. I can coach him somewhat but too much can be distracting & he may not do it anyway.

 

[miroslav]

One thing you can do that might help a little...is to put up a pop filter where you want it for best level purposes, and tell him he can move as far as the filter and even "kiss" the filter or move back away from it a bit...
...but the filter at least keeps him from "eating" the mic.

That forces a little bit of control.

Also...play back the takes, let him listen and point out to him what is happening when he wildly moves about or overloads the mic.
At least then it might sink in a bit and he will become conscious of it and maybe focus on better singing technique when he works the mic....

...but yeah, some people just do what they want and then you have to find a way to fix it.

 

[chessparov]

Unless it was with Phil Spector when he was producing!

Chris