I completely agree with all your points. We know what the best solution is. We went over that and it's not possible seemingly....so I think it's a little unfair to give mattr a hard time for offering some things to try, when we'd all already acknowledged the whole retrack/can't retrack thing.
I undersand what you're saying about attempting to polish a turd and inadvertantly shooting yourself in the foot when crummy results are yeilded, but I figure that's the OP's call. He's made his decision, but more importantly, so has the vocalist and the recording guy.
Believe me, most of my sentiments about this kind of thing are similar to yours. I'm not trying to disagree with you, or call you an elitist. I just don't see the harm -in this particular situation at least- in offering workarouds, The most important thing is that it's understood that there are better solutions.
OK, I admit I kinda came across as the heavy in this (and many other) threads when it was perhaps not absolutely necessary to do so. But, let's back up and re-read this thread and see what actually happened here:
First, in my original replay, even after I recommend the re-track thing, I offered up the following additional advice:
"You can try evening the volume by automating the gain on the vocal track, but there may still be tonal differences between the passages. You can *try* mitigating those differences with a little gentle EQ by ear, but frankly if the singer is inconsistent, he's going to sound inconsistent."
So yes, I did offer up some additional advice beyond that, along with my reason why such additional advice was a lesser choice.
This was followed by mattr's advice, much of which was good for processing screaming, but none of which will truly remove the "weakness" from the vocalists screams. Matt made reference several times in that post that he knew we was going to draw flack with that post, even ending it with:
"Basically, Go crazy.
I'm ready to take the flak. 
"
And you'll notice that I did not respond to his processing advice, but rather specifically to the "this is only home recording" line, which as you've been around enough to know is a complete red herring excuse used here all the time and is pure baloney. So, yeah, I did give him flack for the "this is only home recording" line. That excuse has got to stop. Apparently he wasn't as ready for it as he claimed.
So, in summary:
- I did give further advice other than re-track and (and in fact was the first in the thread to do so (after jm asked for more info), and then further explained why that was a second choice.
- Mattr literally asked for tough rebuttal ("flak") and said he was ready to take it.
- My rebut had nothing to do with his specific advice, only with his use of the long-ago discredited "this is only home recording" gambit.
Could I have used better language than "bullshit"? Yeah, OK, I admit that was not very diplomatic of me, I could have said it nicer. For that I apologize.
But for my stand or my opinion, I don't. Listen, I have some legitimate questions here for which I am at a loss to think of any legitimate answers: I honestly, and with an open hand (not a closed fist) to everyone would like to ask these questions here:
I can understand how with larger bands (for lack of a better term offhand, "more professional" bands) how re-tracking can not be an option: they are butting up against an album release.tour date deadline, they don't have the budget for any more tracking studio time, they had a guest artist who was only available on a certain day, etc. But with a bunch of home recordists "just having fun" or even a band just making their first demo on their own time with their own gear for nothing, how is re-tracking not an option? Even if they are on a deadline to get a demo to a venue to try and get a specific gig date (which those not of legal age are not doing), how is spending one more hour in the garage/basement/wherever going to screw up that deadline? What IS the hurry?
Why do the vast majority of newbs find it more enjoyable or somehow intrinsically better to minimize the amount of time playing and honing their performance in the studio and maximize the amount of time they spend twiddling knobs in the control room? It's so much easier - and the results will be better - to spend an extra hour punching in weak spots in the performance than it is spending an hour chasing a phantom mix at the desk. Especially since these guys and gals are ostensibly musicians first and home recordists second; one would think that there'd be much greater enjoyment in playing or singing the music and greater satisfaction in getting it right one's self rather than sitting there listening to a playback of a subpar recording over and over only to have some wares do it for you. I know that as a harp player, I'd take much more pride and would much rather blow the proper performance and sound into the mic than try to synthesize it behind the glass. Even if it took me 30 takes to do it, at least I'd know and be able to say that "I* did it, and not some little black box.
And why, for God's sake, is it such a crime to ask these questions or to call "bull...loney" (
) on them?
G.
