Undoing Vocal Lessons?

[zekthedeadcow]

I'm not a singer, but I would suggest taking dance (nonclassical aka salsa or hiphop) and improv acting classes in order to practice expression - a lot of performing is being comfortable with yourself in front of other people.

 

[4tracker]

My wife came from a very similar place. She was a choir singer from the beginning and did it pretty much all through high school. I met her shortly after she was graduated. I liked her voice from the start, but she definitely had more of a restrained, controlled sound. I specifically remember encouraging her to open up and let it out several times (only because she had been asking about it). That was 15 years ago. Nowadays, she's got a great style (IMHO). She doesn't bust out like Adele or even a Melissa Etheridge---that's just not her bag---but she has a great personality to her voice and conveys emotion well.

Here's her and I doing a Neil Young tune so you can make your own judgment.

https://soundcloud.com/chad-l-johnson/the-housecats-after-the

All this is to say that she did pretty much exactly what you told your girlfriend to do. Just listen to and imitate (not to the point of absurdity, obviously) the kind of singing you like.

It's funny, because I wasn't familiar with "Range Life," and while I was listening to y'all's cover, I was thinking, "She's already pretty good ... it's a little pitchy here and there, but she's definitely on her way." Then I listened to the original Pavement version and realized ... "Oh ... she's not being pitchy ... she was just imitating what she heard on the original recording!"

Thanks, Beagle, good perspective and overall info. Your wife's cover is very good.

Can you point to the pitch issues? I just ran it through pitch correction, and it found only 1 sharp note in the 3rd verse. The slides during the chorus/minor chords go like that, as you heard on the original. I actually asked her do several more takes to imitate it because she wanted to dart up to the notes instead of doing the glissando type slide (he's probably searching for the pitch)! Are you hearing pitch issues besides that?

 

[rob aylestone]

If you listen to every classically trained singer, doing contemporary songs, it's always a struggle. Some very well know names just cannot throw off the strict framework they were trained to work inside. Jose Carreras, Kiri Te kanawa and Placido Domingo have all tried pop songs and the result is often 'awkward'. Only a few seem able to switch the rigidity off. It applies to solo instrumentalists too. I wonder if they worked hard to get better at contemporary material, if that means their classical ability would suffer?

 

[famous beagle]

Thanks, Beagle, good perspective and overall info. Your wife's cover is very good.

Can you point to the pitch issues? I just ran it through pitch correction, and it found only 1 sharp note in the 3rd verse. The slides during the chorus/minor chords go like that, as you heard on the original. I actually asked her do several more takes to imitate it because she wanted to dart up to the notes instead of doing the glissando type slide (he's probably searching for the pitch)! Are you hearing pitch issues besides that?

Sure. Here are the prominent spots I'm hearing. I'm not sure if these are the intentional spots (or some of them), but I'll just mention the main things that jump out to me:

0:35 Over the turnstile: Big scoop into that note. It does get there, but it takes a while.

0:54 If I could settle down: "Set" is a little flat here.

1:06 I want a range ...: I'm not sure exactly what the notes are here, so I can't say which is off, but something's a little pitchy.

2:04 Out on the skateboard, the night is just humming

2:55 I want a range life: This is a completely different melody than the one at 1:06, but it still sounds a little pitchy.

3:38 Out on tour with the Smashing Pumpkins: A little flat on this note

3:50 Really give a fuck: Little flat

3:55 The Stone Temple Pilots, they're elegant bachelors: This whole line could be a little better, IMO, but the bold spots are the most obvious.

These are the main spots to me.

Edit: I wanted to say that I agree with Bruiser in that I enjoy her style overall. I think the fact that her vocal sounds very dry on this song isn't doing anything to hide the flaws. I'm not saying it should be caked in verb or delay, but when something's dry, it's really gotta be good, because that's a pretty unnatural way of hearing things. We're almost always hearing someone sing with at least some natural room ambiance, if not a lot of it.

 

[4tracker]

3:55 The Stone Temple Pilots, they're elegant bachelors: This whole line could be a little better, IMO, but the bold spots are the most obvious.

Exactly, that's the one we all hear in the 3rd verse. She asked me to pitch correct it, and it was an obvious problem. The "I want a range life" lines are slides/pitch searching on the original, so I think that she's mimicking, as you said. I actually asked her to do that. :/ I thought it sounded "human" and just liked it.

I can't believe you went back and minute marked all those. That's awesome! I will go back and listen to those marks now. Thanks, that is hugely valuable constructive criticism...to give the exact marks and problems. Damn, Beagle...

 

[famous beagle]

Exactly, that's the one we all hear in the 3rd verse. She asked me to pitch correct it, and it was an obvious problem. The "I want a range life" lines are slides/pitch searching on the original, so I think that she's mimicking, as you said. I actually asked her to do that. :/ I thought it sounded "human" and just liked it.

I can't believe you went back and minute marked all those. That's awesome! I will go back and listen to those marks now. Thanks, that is hugely valuable constructive criticism...to give the exact marks and problems. Damn, Beagle...

No problem. I know I always appreciate it when people give me constructive criticism on my vocals (or guitar-playing or whatever), so I'm happy to do it for others when asked.

 

[4tracker]

So I went back with the pitch correction software and looked more closely at those areas, and there are some issues with them. I'm actually pretty amazed you heard some of them because they look so minor on the graph.

How do you feel about using pitch correction software for minor fixes? In general I don't like it one bit, but I ran these through the software, and I'm not detecting artifacts. Do you use it? I'm sure a simple punch in could work, too.

I actually did have some reverb on the vocal, but it's at -19db on the send, so pretty low. Do you hear reverb on the original Pavement recording?

 

[4tracker]

Edit: I wanted to say that I agree with Bruiser in that I enjoy her style overall.

She said thanks, Beagle. So I showed her all the problem spots on the graph and she found it helpful. She said at times she felt the lyrics were going by so fast, almost like a rap/rhyme, that she thought she wasn't getting proper breathes to deliver the notes. But either way, it's good feedback, and she found it helpful.

Another question, this one from me, out of curiosity: is any vocal perfectly on pitch? It seems 1/4 to 1/2 steps fall within the realm of normal. Like, aren't there scales based around micro pitches? And didn't blues players use slides so they could get some of those micro pitches? And don't we bend notes on guitar to get some of those micro pitches? I guess what I am asking is: how important is a 1/4 or 1/2 off? I guess my own answer would be "if it's noticeable in a bad way then fix it" and if it's off but sounds good or just fits the style leave it. But I know some slide players I love who hit notes in between the notes, and they sound great. Hound Dog Taylor comes to mind. I'm not trying to justify flat, sharp or anything else, but rather understand what is human and within the realm of normal/musical.

Take the original Pavement recording. That album sold a lot of copies and has 5 star ratings on allmusic.com, et al, and he's considered an iconic singer in the American indie/underground genre. Yet he's flat often. So what's it all mean? To me it says it's still musical and fits the style, or maybe even creates the style.

 

[DM60]

One thing I didn't read in all of the posts (maybe it was there and I just missed it), let here sing her way. Maybe I am wrong, but maybe you are trying to make a cat into a tiger or vice verse.

Since we are home artists, I am a big fan of doing what works for everyone. 4tracker, you might be the problem in wanting her to sound like something she is not. The way to get originality is to let everyone come to the table as they are and develop a sound that belongs to the collective. I mean, we are home recording people, lets be creative and maybe create something new.

Didn't mean this to be a slam at you 4t, just a different POV.

 

[miroslav]

How to get her to loosen up and get better feel?

It's not easy to "teach" someone to be loose and laid back, they need to find that on their own, and well...don't take my word for it...but a drink or a puff has been known to work.

 

[4tracker]

One thing I didn't read in all of the posts (maybe it was there and I just missed it), let here sing her way. Maybe I am wrong, but maybe you are trying to make a cat into a tiger or vice verse.

Since we are home artists, I am a big fan of doing what works for everyone. 4tracker, you might be the problem in wanting her to sound like something she is not. The way to get originality is to let everyone come to the table as they are and develop a sound that belongs to the collective. I mean, we are home recording people, lets be creative and maybe create something new.

Didn't mean this to be a slam at you 4t, just a different POV.

No, I agree and thought about that.

 

[famous beagle]

So I went back with the pitch correction software and looked more closely at those areas, and there are some issues with them. I'm actually pretty amazed you heard some of them because they look so minor on the graph.

How do you feel about using pitch correction software for minor fixes? In general I don't like it one bit, but I ran these through the software, and I'm not detecting artifacts. Do you use it? I'm sure a simple punch in could work, too.

I actually did have some reverb on the vocal, but it's at -19db on the send, so pretty low. Do you hear reverb on the original Pavement recording?

I don't use it on my vocals, simply because I view it as a crutch (just the way I view it---others obviously feel differently), and it doesn't help me improve as a vocalist if I have a computer fix something for me. I feel the same with regards to timing issues and moving notes around, etc. I always just prefer to punch in and play it again. Obviously, punching in is fake in its own way, since you're creating the illusion of one complete performance when it's not. And I don't want to debate anyone on that (not speaking to you---just anyone who might want to pounce and call me a hypocrite or something). It's just that I prefer that "cheat" to the one with a mouse in my hand. The way I view it is that at least I have the instrument in my hands (or the mic in front of me) and am getting some practice, which can only make me better. Again, though, that's just my view.

I think the whole "I don't use pitch correction because it sounds fake" argument is silly. Of course it can sound fake, but it can also be completely undetectable. And I agree that it is very hard to hear any artifacts a lot of the time when it's not set to an obvious effect. Therefore, I don't include that in my reasons for not using it. The main thing is that I just see it as being a bit lazy and it neglects myself of the opportunity to improve as a vocalist.

Regarding the reverb, I didn't listen closely to the vocal sound on the Pavement recording; I was just stating that her vocal sounded pretty dry in general, which isn't generally very flattering to most voices, IMHO. Granted, it can be a cool effect on certain songs for sure, but, like I said, it shows all your warts, loud and clear.

 

[famous beagle]

She said thanks, Beagle. So I showed her all the problem spots on the graph and she found it helpful. She said at times she felt the lyrics were going by so fast, almost like a rap/rhyme, that she thought she wasn't getting proper breathes to deliver the notes. But either way, it's good feedback, and she found it helpful.

Another question, this one from me, out of curiosity: is any vocal perfectly on pitch? It seems 1/4 to 1/2 steps fall within the realm of normal. Like, aren't there scales based around micro pitches? And didn't blues players use slides so they could get some of those micro pitches? And don't we bend notes on guitar to get some of those micro pitches? I guess what I am asking is: how important is a 1/4 or 1/2 off? I guess my own answer would be "if it's noticeable in a bad way then fix it" and if it's off but sounds good or just fits the style leave it. But I know some slide players I love who hit notes in between the notes, and they sound great. Hound Dog Taylor comes to mind. I'm not trying to justify flat, sharp or anything else, but rather understand what is human and within the realm of normal/musical.

Take the original Pavement recording. That album sold a lot of copies and has 5 star ratings on allmusic.com, et al, and he's considered an iconic singer in the American indie/underground genre. Yet he's flat often. So what's it all mean? To me it says it's still musical and fits the style, or maybe even creates the style.

Yeah these are all good points. And no ... a vocal is never 100% on pitch unless it's been auto-tuned 100%, and we all know what that sounds like. It's definitely not a half step off very often, and even a quarter step is pretty obvious depending on the song. But notes will often be 10 or 15 cents sharp or flat and will seem perfectly acceptable to most people. In case you don't know, there are 100 cents in one half step, so a quarter step would be 50 cents. That's pretty noticeable to most people if you sustain the note for any length of time, and it's usually pretty easy to spot even in phrases that move a lot.

A half step off is almost always blatantly obvious, but that doesn't mean there haven't been many "pro" vocals on hit records with that kind of issue. "I Want You Back" by the Jackson 5 is a classic example. Listen to Michael singing "Ooh, ooh, ba-byyyyy" at around 1:13---it's straight up a half step off pitch when first hits the final note. Not to mention that the bass line is pretty rushed when he plays his first moving line right after the first hit of the song.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T5xWkO56GI

So, yeah, like you said it all basically comes down to what seems acceptable to people. And that's what I go by: if it bothers me a lot, I'll redo it. There's a gray area, obviously, when you include the feel of the track as well. I've left many a sour note in an otherwise note-perfect guitar solo over the years because I liked the vibe of the solo and haven't wanted to touch it. The attached song, in progress (still needs vocals and acoustic guitar), is a perfect example. The solo is in A, and it moves from an A chord to an F chord. I pretty much just decided to play A blues over most of it and not really worry about "making" the A major change. But in the last speedy lick over the F chord, you can hear me play a C# note instead of a C. I knew it as soon as it happened, but that was a first take solo, and it just had the exact vibe I wanted for the song, so I wasn't going to touch it.

Regarding Pavement, yeah it's all subjective. I know I certainly would have wanted him to redo some of those spots if I were producing the album, but that's just me. Obviously, it didn't bother a whole lot of other people.

 

[4tracker]

Yeah these are all good points. And no ... a vocal is never 100% on pitch unless it's been auto-tuned 100%, and we all know what that sounds like. It's definitely not a half step off very often, and even a quarter step is pretty obvious depending on the song. But notes will often be 10 or 15 cents sharp or flat and will seem perfectly acceptable to most people. In case you don't know, there are 100 cents in one half step, so a quarter step would be 50 cents. That's pretty noticeable to most people if you sustain the note for any length of time, and it's usually pretty easy to spot even in phrases that move a lot.

A half step off is almost always blatantly obvious, but that doesn't mean there haven't been many "pro" vocals on hit records with that kind of issue. "I Want You Back" by the Jackson 5 is a classic example. Listen to Michael singing "Ooh, ooh, ba-byyyyy" at around 1:13---it's straight up a half step off pitch when first hits the final note. Not to mention that the bass line is pretty rushed when he plays his first moving line right after the first hit of the song.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T5xWkO56GI

So, yeah, like you said it all basically comes down to what seems acceptable to people. And that's what I go by: if it bothers me a lot, I'll redo it. There's a gray area, obviously, when you include the feel of the track as well. I've left many a sour note in an otherwise note-perfect guitar solo over the years because I liked the vibe of the solo and haven't wanted to touch it. The attached song, in progress (still needs vocals and acoustic guitar), is a perfect example. The solo is in A, and it moves from an A chord to an F chord. I pretty much just decided to play A blues over most of it and not really worry about "making" the A major change. But in the last speedy lick over the F chord, you can hear me play a C# note instead of a C. I knew it as soon as it happened, but that was a first take solo, and it just had the exact vibe I wanted for the song, so I wasn't going to touch it.

Regarding Pavement, yeah it's all subjective. I know I certainly would have wanted him to redo some of those spots if I were producing the album, but that's just me. Obviously, it didn't bother a whole lot of other people.

That Jackson 5 thing was interesting. I think it's kind of cool they left it, and it passed by so fast I wouldn't have noticed.
I also like the C#. BUT...I like dissonance. To me that note is attitude and dissonance. I always hear a weird note in the opening Paint it Black line, too. I think it must be a borrowed note, wrong note, or something, but definite tension note that "doesn't belong" but sounds perfect. This could explain why vocals problems don't easily bother me. I get more easily bored by constant consonant sounds that are right on beat -- I need the dissonance, or syncopation, to make the consonance or beat sound good. That's just how I hear music. It's no wonder I love that Jackson 5 song, including the bass line, and Pavement. I think dissonance can obviously go overboard, though, and delve into unlistenable. Like this, which I thought was interesting (I actually kind of like it. :/ ): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RENk9PK06AQ

But I'm talking about the grey area. I like my grey areas to have some issues it's just the way I hear music. I read recently you can play the same song for anyone in the world and they will all hear it differently. Our ears are a lot like fingerprints if that's true, and it explains why people have such different reactions. When I give people feedback, like in the mix clinic, I always try to add a "this is how I hear it but use your own ears" for that reason. Music is pretty fascinating.

 

[famous beagle]

That Jackson 5 thing was interesting. I think it's kind of cool they left it, and it passed by so fast I wouldn't have noticed.
I also like the C#. BUT...I like dissonance. To me that note is attitude and dissonance. I always hear a weird note in the opening Paint it Black line, too. I think it must be a borrowed note, wrong note, or something, but definite tension note that "doesn't belong" but sounds perfect. This could explain why vocals problems don't easily bother me. I get more easily bored by constant consonant sounds that are right on beat -- I need the dissonance, or syncopation, to make the consonance or beat sound good. That's just how I hear music. It's no wonder I love that Jackson 5 song, including the bass line, and Pavement. I think dissonance can obviously go overboard, though, and delve into unlistenable. Like this, which I thought was interesting (I actually kind of like it. :/ ): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RENk9PK06AQ

But I'm talking about the grey area. I like my grey areas to have some issues it's just the way I hear music. I read recently you can play the same song for anyone in the world and they will all hear it differently. Our ears are a lot like fingerprints if that's true, and it explains why people have such different reactions. When I give people feedback, like in the mix clinic, I always try to add a "this is how I hear it but use your own ears" for that reason. Music is pretty fascinating.

Yes ... "I Want You Back" ... who could not love that song? It's so infectious. And I wasn't picking on the bass line; it grooves like a monster. I actually hadn't noticed the rushing before until I brought it up on YouTube. I wouldn't change a thing about the track except maybe for Michael's mistake there. There are plenty of other shades of gray, but that one crossed the threshold for me. However, I do like that they kept it, as you said, because it's just really interesting. It's kind of an anomaly--this otherwise awesome performance with this one pretty blatant clam.

That TED talk was interesting. I must say I've heard much uglier music, IMHO! With so few notes sounding together, it's hard to perceive as much dissonance.

But you're totally right about how everyone hears things differently. And it doesn't stop there. Even we ourselves hear things differently on repeated listens. It's totally fascinating for sure.