Vocal recording: How many tracks is standard?

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Even the Spartans have a lesson to teach.

I don't disagree with that. I just think you and I have learned entirely different lessons from them regarding pride.

Real pride, the kind that is not the narcissitic pride of the Spartans and of the 7 Deadly Sins includes self-respect, respect for the task at hand, a belief in the quality of ones work and work ethic, and recognition of one's true abilities and limitations when it comes to actually accomplishing that task.

You want to talk reality? The reality is that most of the people reading these words right now simply do not have the capacity to be servicable recording artists, engineers or musicians. Some of them, with hard work and patience can eventually reach such goals, sure, but most of them never will no matter how hard they try and no matter what gear they try to use to make up for it.

I'm not being snotty or snobbish when I say that, I'll never have "the right stuff" to be a good NBA player or a good military man either, and I'm not being snobbish against myself when I say that, either. They take certain abilities that I simply can never achieve. I'll never have the physical attributes necessary for a successful career in the NBA and I'll never have the artificial authoritarian ethic required to be a good soldier. But I RESPECT both professions very seriously, and I would never insult either one by pretending that I should even consider myself as good as them in their areas of expertise. I don't have that kind of pride or ego.

It's no different with music. Just because one CAN record - meaning that they have access to the record button - doesn't mean they should, and they should have the proper RESPECT for the music not to try and fool themselves or anybody else about their abilities when the reality is they can't even sing a song (or play the rhythm track, or whatever the instrument of their choice) all the way through.

Gee, but with this gear and that software, and a little serendipity, I can pass off a hit record or two? So what? Give me some bionic legs that make me an extra foot taller and allow me to jump high enough to slam dunk a basketball, and I could score a few points at Madison Square Garden too. But that sure would not be an achievement I'd be proud of or one that I would consider worth the effort, whether the fans liked it or not.

Because it's not just about scoring the points, it's about having the natural ability and work ethic to do so. Otherwise, it's not a sport. And with us, it's not just about making hit records, it's about having the ability and work ethic to do so. Otherwise it's not music.

G.

 

[tateros]

It's no different with music. Just because one CAN record - meaning that they have access to the record button - doesn't mean they should, and they should have the proper RESPECT for the music not to try and fool themselves or anybody else about their abilities when the reality is they can't even sing a song (or play the rhythm track, or whatever the instrument of their choice) all the way through.

If one can record & has the desire to record, than hell yea they should go for it, whether they suck at it or not.

If I feel like shooting hoops, do I not have respect for the game just because I'm using a KFC bucket & a piece of foil rolled into a ball?

Although you may see it differently, I love music with every fiber of my being. I love creating it, polishing it, learning about it, reading about it here in this excellent newfound forum & just plain old listening to it. So a reason as simple as not being a particularly good recording artist is not going to stop that fire I have for hitting that record button time and time again. The way I see it, I have too much respect for it to stop trying.

 

[RockNSoul]

Cool,

Thanks to everyone whos put time and thought into this post!

I was just wondering about "doubling" the voice and what not and I now understand theres no normal here and that everything has its place.

I'm leaving a few songs here that have a little bit of what I'm going for.
If you think you know that they may be using reverb, compression or may be "doubling the vocals in a certain part, it would be great to hear your thoughts.......

STP: (Melow) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-BM-GgDVCE

Gary Puckett: (Soft) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDDF1T9EYfo

STP: (HEAVY) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvPmSqKVUnk

Sublime: (damn good) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCqjooCosw0

Thanks again,
-Chase

 

[aidan_m]

Cool,

Thanks to everyone whos put time and thought into this post!

I was just wondering about "doubling" the voice and what not and I now understand theres no normal here and that everything has its place.

I'm leaving a few songs here that have a little bit of what I'm going for.
If you think you know that they may be using reverb, compression or may be "doubling the vocals in a certain part, it would be great to hear your thoughts.......

STP: (Melow) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-BM-GgDVCE

Gary Puckett: (Soft) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDDF1T9EYfo

STP: (HEAVY) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvPmSqKVUnk

Sublime: (damn good) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCqjooCosw0

Thanks again,
-Chase

Had a listen to all 4 and would have to say very little processing and very good vocalist/performances.

 

[RockNSoul]

Thanks for taking the time to listen. That's what I thought it was.

-Chase

 

[pointfive]

A question of method:

Is it a good idea to record the same take with different mics? I often do this with, say, a ribbon and LDC. Then I mix the two tracks to taste.

I feel I do this largely because I'm still experimenting with my microphones, getting familiar with what sounds like what. In keeping with the original thrust of the thread though, is it "standard"?

 

[TyphoidHippo]

A question of method:

Is it a good idea to record the same take with different mics? I often do this with, say, a ribbon and LDC. Then I mix the two tracks to taste. A question of method:I feel I do this largely because I'm still experimenting with my microphones, getting familiar with what sounds like what.

If it sounds good... it's a good idea, heh. I've done it before, but I eventually stopped doing it, because I found that it didn't really add anything to the sound, and it also took longer (never a plus, if it can be avoided without sacrificing anything of value, in my opinion).

In keeping with the original thrust of the thread though, is it "standard"?

No.

 

[second skin]

i tend to record in sections. i'll generally get the singer to do an entire pass of the song which gets them in the groove and makes me familiar with the vocal if i have not heard it before. if they seem like they can nail it i'll do it again all the way through and keep what i can.

usually though i'll end up doing songs in sections. once i get a good pass of a section i'll imediately have the singer double it. since they just sang it perfectly once it is usually pretty easy to get a good double this way. pretty much all background vocals get doubled and sometimes tripled.

i do not always use the doubles and when i do they are very low in the mix. almost the the point of being inaudible but just loud enough that if you mute the track you can notice a difference.

i also tend to pick and choose where i have a double. sometimes it can take away from the song, but i like to have it available in case we want it.


there should never be absolutes.

 

[tateros]

A question of method:

Is it a good idea to record the same take with different mics?

In keeping with the original thrust of the thread though, is it "standard"?

From what I've read, if you use two mics, one is to mic the room & one to mic your vocal. So you can place one close to you & one further away, still facing you.

So if you have a great sounding room, mic away. If not, there's no point.

In my case one mic would sound like my voice+cars passing by my garage & the other would sound like loud cars passing by my garage.

I apologize if I'm wrong.

 

[Monkey Allen]

Double tracking the vocals is pretty good. Can iron out any thin bits from the one take. I mean don't just copy and paste one tack...sing it twice.

 

[pointfive]

From what I've read, if you use two mics, one is to mic the room & one to mic your vocal. So you can place one close to you & one further away, still facing you.

So if you have a great sounding room, mic away. If not, there's no point.

The reason I've done it is because I have mics of different characters, each less than ideal.

I often use a Rode NT-1A and a Nady RSM2, through the mic pres in my mixer (Mackie 1402 VLZ). The NT-1A is too bright, while the RSM2 sounds warm, but muffled. With a mixture of the two, the result is decent.

I guess if I had a very nice mic and pre, I wouldn't need this approach.

And typhoid, yeah... it does take me longer which is a pain. That's a good point. If I was recording someone other than myself, this would be a real consideration.

 

[shfiguy]

no such thing as "standard"

​

you'll know when you've "hit it". then you'll listen for a few days and realize you didn't and you'll want to go back and improve it. when you evaluate your recording ............do it thru studio monitors, not headphones. If you have slipped in pitch or vocal quality you won't hear it on the headphones. Too much of the whole mix pounding your ears. I'm not an expert but I've been doing it a long time.
Good luck.

 

[soundchaser59]

The number of lead vocal tracks used is inversely proportional to how well the lead vocalist can actually sing.

G.

ROTFLMAO!!!


You know you have found the best singer when you realize he/she only needs one track to sound good.

 

[soundchaser59]

.....I now understand theres no normal here

Nor anywhere else, for that matter.

Use as many mics as you want on any given take. At the very least you will be able to A/B/C/D between 3 or 4 tracks to hear which mic best suits that particular voice. It's way better than asking the singer to do it again because you want to try a different mic. (assuming you have enough inputs/tracks/mics to do that) It's also better - in my always so humble opinion! - than merely cloning a track, if you want to try some of the "advanced concept" stuff mentioned in posts up above.

It seems more and more odd to me that some posters in these forums tell people to "go by the book" or tell people what is and is not standard practice, etc., but few like to reveal what they actually do with their own tracks in their own studios. Fortunately, there are just as many who will say, "If it sounds good, then it's the right thing to do." I think we on these forums would love to have more studio smoke and mirrors and tricks and contortions to experiment with, seeing as how so few of us have access to the really gifted singers and gifted engineers who can get grammy winning takes the first take on one track with one mic.

Dont overlook the value of reading a book like "Behind The Glass" so you can get a feel for how often the rules and the standards go out the window......or how unlikely are the ways that some of those standards came into existence. I have often done things that everybody told me not to do. When they hear the song 6 months later, nobody says "Awwwww Noooo Man! You did it anyway, didn't you? Whatdya do that for? We told you not to do that!" Make some coffee and try all the things that everybody above told you not to do. Either way you learn things. And someday we will be asking you, "How did you get that vocal sound on that one song?"