Vocal mixing, especially harmonies

[DM60]

Seemed like a standard A key, and what I heard, the tuning sounded standard. But I only ran through some notes in the key to see if it worked and at quick pass, it seemed like it did.

Try a standard piano voice and make sure it is in standard tuning.

 

[Steenamaroo]

Seemed like a standard A key, and what I heard, the tuning sounded standard. But I only ran through some notes in the key to see if it worked and at quick pass, it seemed like it did.

Try a standard piano voice and make sure it is in standard tuning.

All I hear is one song that's out of tune (that won't change on different speakers/headphones),
and a full collection of mixes with limited high end and too much bass/mids on the vocals.

I know you talked about technique and what not, but IMO you've either eqd these tracks to be muddy, or your mic is an old beat up dynamic with no highs.
What is your mic, out of interest?

Again, not being awkward. I just have a hunch that you're looking for a magic bullet, but really all you're hearing is a few common tracking/mixing issues.

There is something separate going on with that pitchy track though. That's a separate issue, IMO.

 

[Steenamaroo]

I'm starting to wonder if my headphone mix is too muddy during those tricky parts for me to stay in tune and that, because Yes It Is is so much trickier, the pitch problems stand out more.

It's possible.
I'd give you massive benefit of the doubt on that because everything else really is tip top, tuning wise.

It's extremely hard to tell in context, but I get the feeling the vocals might be in tune to themselves, but just not to the backing track.
Are you using any sort of pitch shift tools/tempo adjustment tools, or anything like that?

It really sounds like you recorded the thing properly then adjusted the key of the backing track slightly.
In the nicest possible way, you sound too good to get it that wrong.

When I play my keyboard along with the instrumental, the keyboard sounds out of tune.

What was your reference whilst recording vocals?

 

[jaja714]

Ok, so let's see if mixing with my new speakers worked!

It looks like my Without The Beatles website has become a Yes It Is website. I've uploaded two versions, the new mix (with The Beatles take 9 instrumental) and another acapella version (same mix though).

If anyone has the courage to listen to these again, just listen to the first two lines of the first verse of the acapella version.

1. If it is still "out-of-tune", stop listening! That means the problem was me all along.
3. If it is in tune, feel free to continue listening to see if things "stay" in tune. then, listen to the non-acapella version to see if The Beatles did, in fact, tune their instruments off slightly.

 

[jaja714]

What was your reference whilst recording vocals?

That Beatles take #9 instrumental at 50% volume!

 

[Steenamaroo]

Ok, I took a listen.
It sounds to me like maybe that a cappella isn't quite as tight as your other vocal performances, but broadly speaking it's right as a group.

Full version - the whole vocal group is (somehow) offset in pitch from the backing track.
It might be a semitone flat; It might not be quite that much, but it's definitely out.

Damn though...That really is a tricky set of harmonies dude.

Personally, given the quality of your other harmony/vocal work, I'd go for a full vocal re-record.
If you're not sure, maybe do the main vocal line first and post it up here with the backing.
We're pretty quick to say "that sucks" around here.

 

[jaja714]

Now that I have all the parts completely memorized, I will re-record perhaps over the holiday weekend. I can't believe any of you have the patience to listen to any more of this but this song is sort of like a poker hand now. I've invested so much already, I would regret walking away without at least showing all my cards so to speak.

As far as this song is concerned here is some of what is in the wikipedia article (go there if you are interested in the source references).

The Song is in the key of E and begins (on "If you wear red tonight...") with a I-IV-ii7-V7 chord progression (E-A-F#m7-B7) in which the word "tonight" (B melody note) appears as a "delicately haunting" 4th above the F#m7.[3] The melodic pitches of this first two bar phrase are repeated (with initial repetition of the G# melody note) on "remember what I said tonight," except that the B melody note on the second "tonight" is now backed by a ♭VII (D) chord that shapes the B melody note into a more "luscious" 6th.[4] The chorus ("Yes it is, it's true. Yes it is, it's true") involves a I (E chord)- III (G# chord)- IV (A chord)- I (E chord) progression in which the major III (G#) chord appears for the first time in the Song to propel the Plagal drop from IV (A) to the tonic I (E) chord.[5]

 

[Steenamaroo]

Now that I have all the parts completely memorized, I will re-record perhaps over the holiday weekend. I can't believe any of you have the patience to listen to any more of this but this song

Ach, it's good to see something through.
Well, maybe this pitch stuff is a tangent and not relevant to your original question, but if it's helpful anyway that's no bad thing.

 

[PTravel]

Cool, you are hearing what I am hearing ... "out-of-tuneness" at low volume on speakers. I wondering if I really am out-of-tune on this song ... because of my headphone mix when I am recording. Notice that the "out-of-tuneness" is consistent throughout the song. It always sounds "out-of-tune" in the exact same places and the exact same way.

I have noticed this from time to time in my own work, but I'm not knowledgeable enough to understand why this happens. In fact, this might be worthy of its own thread: "Why do instruments and voices sometimes sound out-of-tune when they're not?" I'd also note this: I have absolutely no qualms about using autotune (I use Melodyne) -- I'm only recording internal-use demos and my writing partner and I just don't sing that well. I've noticed that, on some parts of some pieces, even when autotuned exactly to pitch, it sounds slightly out-of-tune in the mix. My only guess is that, between the instruments and the voice, some harmonics are reinforcing each other and creating an unwanted overtune. I usually fix it by manually adjusting the pitch of the note or notes in the DAW (I use Audition for mixing). For what it's worth, it seems that, when I have to fix something this way, I wind up sharping the vocal ever so slightly.

Hmmm. I just re-read your post and realized that I had this problem only when I was mixing with cans. Since I switched to mixing with near-fields a couple of months ago, the problem seems to have gone away. Might be coincidence, might not.

 

[jaja714]

Yes, autotune is fine for songwriters but for singers who aren't in it for the money, it sort of defeats the purpose.

I've heard a few people mention "near fields". Can you give more detail on how those are different from speakers?

 

[Steenamaroo]

Near field is a description of where the speakers are placed, and I guess their size etc.

You ever see mastering houses with massive speakers far away? Those aren't near fields.

 

[PTravel]

Yes, autotune is fine for songwriters but for singers who aren't in it for the money, it sort of defeats the purpose.

I've heard a few people mention "near fields". Can you give more detail on how those are different from speakers?

Reasonable Wikipedia article here: Studio monitor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Basically, near-fields have a couple of features designed specifically for mixing audio:

- They have a flat, uncolored response (in theory). When you're mixing, you only want to hear what is there, and not any coloration or tonal peculiarities added by the speakers.

- Their physical design presumes that you'll be positioned quite close to them, rather than many feet back as is the case with standard home stereo speakers.

- They don't use side- or back-facing ports, but instead position the ports on the front. This minimizes the effect of room reflection and also direct the full-spectrum of sound forward towards the listening sweet spot.

- A lot of near-fields, though by no means all, have built-in amplifiers and take the line-level signal from the signal source via balanced inputs. The internal amplifiers are matched to the specific characteristics of the speakers and the balanced inputs ensure against EMI and distortion that can result from impedance mismatch.

Bear in mind, I'm not an engineer and very, very far from any kind of a recording expert, but I think this is correct.

 

[Tom Hicks]

If you are looking for a vocal slapback effect ala Lennon/Elvis/Sun records, around 80-120 ms is a good starting place to look for a delay setting.

And don't do it via copying a track and sliding the copy in time. Create an aux bus and send your vocal tracks to that aux. Put a delay on the aux, and use the time range that I suggested to dial in the sound you want. Set the delay effect as 100% wet and 0% dry. Each channel's aux send level will individually control its amount of slap per channel in ratio to the other vocal channels. The fader for the aux bus will control the overall blend between the effect and the dry vox.

 

[Seafroggys]

Since I'm pretty well versed in Beatles recording techniques, the time to get their ADT effect is 28 ms.

(ADT is Automated Double Tracking that they started using in Revolver onward....pretty much just a tape delay set to 28 ms)

 

[jaja714]

And don't do it via copying a track and sliding the copy in time. Create an aux bus and send your vocal tracks to that aux. Put a delay on the aux, and use the time range that I suggested to dial in the sound you want. Set the delay effect as 100% wet and 0% dry. Each channel's aux send level will individually control its amount of slap per channel in ratio to the other vocal channels. The fader for the aux bus will control the overall blend between the effect and the dry vox.

I don't think that will work with my current hardware ... I'm trying to keep my home studio simple, a computer, a mic, and my new monitors. The only other piece of hardware I have is my BOSS VE-20 vocal processor because I like to hear the reverb as I sing.

 

[jaja714]

Since I'm pretty well versed in Beatles recording techniques, the time to get their ADT effect is 28 ms.

Hey, thanks for the info that corrects some previous misinformation I read elsewhere. How about slapback echo? Do you have any recommendations (keep in mind, I only have Audacity and no special hardware)?

 

[jaja714]

All I hear is one song that's out of tune (that won't change on different speakers/headphones),

What is your mic, out of interest?

Ok, well, I think the best help you can give me is to say that the vocals are out of tune. Everyone else I play that for says "Hmmm... sounds nice" when I know for darn sure something's wrong. As you know, the problem was that the instrumental mix in my cans were way too low when I sang the lead vocal. Then, I used only that lead vocal in my cans (without the instrumental) when I recorded the other two harmony tracks. So, the vocals all ended up "in tune" with each other but a semi-tone (of half a semi-tone) higher than the instrumental.

Anyway, it only took me about 30 minutes or so to re-record all the vocals and then double-track them all. I know that John was double-tracked in the Beatles' version, so I double-tracked George and Paul just for good measure. I did most of the mixing with my headphones (so as not to disturb the family too much more) and then spent about 20 minutes fine-tuning using the monitors trying all sorts of things like low-volume, panning left and right to make sure all sounded as balanced as possible given my limited hardware.

So, if anyone can bear another honest review, you can use headphones or speakers at any volume you like now to evaluate. Hopefully, we can then move on to the "muddiness" issue. BTW: my mic is in my signature!

 

[PTravel]

I don't think that will work with my current hardware ... I'm trying to keep my home studio simple, a computer, a mic, and my new monitors. The only other piece of hardware I have is my BOSS VE-20 vocal processor because I like to hear the reverb as I sing.

You do this in your DAW -- you don't need additional hardware to add the slap-back echo.

 

[MrWrenchey]

If you are looking for a vocal slapback effect ala Lennon/Elvis/Sun records, around 80-120 ms is a good starting place to look for a delay setting.

And don't do it via copying a track and sliding the copy in time. Create an aux bus and send your vocal tracks to that aux. Put a delay on the aux, and use the time range that I suggested to dial in the sound you want. Set the delay effect as 100% wet and 0% dry. Each channel's aux send level will individually control its amount of slap per channel in ratio to the other vocal channels. The fader for the aux bus will control the overall blend between the effect and the dry vox.

*sigh*

Is no one reading that he's using Audacity? xD

As most of us know, Audacity isn't even really a "DAW." The only way he can really get the slap-back effect in the DAW would be by duplicating and sliding it. The 80-120 ms definitely makes more sense than the 4ms you said you were using, though... 4ms shouldn't be doing anything more than making the track sound phase-y.

As everyone else said though, I suggest getting Reaper soon. It'll save you more time and effort using a real DAW than it the time and effort it takes to learn to use a real DAW.

 

[jaja714]

*sigh*

Is no one reading that he's using Audacity? xD
: : : :
: : : :
As everyone else said though, I suggest getting Reaper soon. It'll save you more time and effort using a real DAW than it the time and effort it takes to learn to use a real DAW.

Thank you ... and Roger that! I've just installed Reaper 4.51 now and I will evaluate for 60 days. I will convert my "Yes It Is" Audacity project to Reaper using the "Export Multiple" command and ... we'll see.