Vocals and Levels

[z694u]

Okay, so here It is. I have come back to music as a hobby, something I really enjoy doing, and have been introduced to this wonderful "new?" world of digital recording. This is good because all the bands, and projects I've been invlolved with over the last 13 years or so have left me with nothing to show for it. I have no recordings or nothing...now I have a chance to capture some dreams on CD...who needs record companies anyway..hehehe just kiddin...

Get to the point already will ya....

Ok, ok ok...

So I am using a PII 300 with the standard SoundBlaster 64 soundcard, a Sure57 through a basic mixer (volume adjustments only). I am recording everythang on N-Trax ( A friend told me about it and it resparked my interest, now I understand there are some other programs to try...but that'll be the next project!)

I have read some of the other postings and understand that my mic is not really the best one fer the job, but it's the best one I have to work with right now.

Here is my problem-----Yea yea....get to it!

Most of the tracks sound fine, either recorded direct, or mic'd, but the vocals sound thin...Yucky thin...( Now I know why they used to turn my mic wayyyyyy down), I know I a'int the best singer in the world, but I tried eveything to make it sound good. I sang up high, down low, up close, back far, ( I never tried standing on my head yet though..hmmm) I even took the cover of the mic, (I am sure it is not a wise idea to sing into the exposed diaphragm...Oooops!) Still..thin thin thin.

Anyone got any ideas???
Also...dare I add.....

I am recording at 44100?I think? and keeping the levels just out of the Yellow. I am guessin that what I want to do. Green good, Yellow not so good, RED BAD...so....when I get to mix it all down... I'm guessin I want to peak in the yellow only...not ride the yellow and peak in the RED.
(Sorry for not usin dB's...I'm still learnin all them meanings too).

Am I on the right track?

Any help would of course be appreciated, thanx...until then, I'll keep experiementing and see what happens.

Wayne Morecombe
z694u@hotmail.com

 

[Rev E]

Wayne,

It sounds like you're on the right track. I think that most of what you're hearing may be a combination of the 1) mixer's preamps, 2) the soundcard's preamps, 3) your speakers/headphones that you monitor with, 4) your cables and 5) your perception of what you think you should sound like.

Point by point 1) Preamps - Better preamps will get you a fuller/cleaner sound. A tube preamp may be what you're after. You may want to consider the ART Tube MP (~$99)

2) Generic Soundcard - You're using the preamps in a generic soundcard, so to a certain degree, you get what you pay for. Expect no miracles here. These preamps are real noisy and unsuitable for serious recording work, but you should work with what you have. Either change this card to a prosumer or professional soundcard like (Turtle Beach cards, Card D, Echo Audio Darla, Gina, Delta soundcards, etc) or deal with the fact that the sound quality will be flawed.

3) Monitors - What are you monitoring with? The speakers that came with your computer? Real studio monitors? Headphones? If you aren't using studio monitors, your sound playback will be severely altered from the beginning. Here's a test, play a commercial CD in your computer and listen to how a mix sounds in you monitoring setup. This will give you an idea of what things actually sound like through them.

4) Cables - the cheap stuff is noisy and less than desireable

5) Perception is probably the biggest area of concern for the self-recording musician. We often don't really know what we sound like, because we hear ourselves from behind our ears and not in front of our mouth like others hear us. So what you may be describing as "thin" may be how you really sound. You've got to get more comfortable with this in order to have future success. Go back to point 3 and listen to other CD's through your system. Try to listen to some vocal heavy pieces. You notice that there is quite a lot of "thinning-out" of the vocals. Now compare it to yours. Are yours thinner? If not, then your vocals are fine and you should just move on and try to mix them properly.

Hope this helps,
Rev E

 

[dobro]

Yeah, you're on the right track, Wayne - you're paying attention to what you're doing.

Not completely sure what you mean by 'thin', but a bit of EQ craft, reverb, and above all, a better mic would make a world of difference.

As for mics, the flavor of the month around here is the Rode NT-1. People have been known to fall off their chairs the first time they listen to a Rode after using SM-57s and such. Maybe about $300 where you are, but I don't live in Van...

 

[Emeric]

If you do decide to get an NT-1, compare your local price to the U.S. price. When I bought one they were $450 in Canada before taxes, and $199 USD. After all shipping/exchange rate and taxes paid it worked out to around $350 Canadian.

BTW, I ordered mine from 8thstreet.com.



[This message has been edited by Emeric (edited 05-09-2000).]

 

[Jim Marquard]

Hi Wayne,

I read your question yesterday and thought that most of the responses were pretty much on the right track, so no reason to write one myself. Then last night, I'm home recording, just some acoustic guitar and then tracking a vocal. Mainly doing guide tracks. Well, I think to myself, "Man, these vocals are thin." I then listen to some other songs that I've worked on that have good, upfront vocals and start to wonder, "Now, how did I get that?" Thinking a bit, I remember that I did these vocals by either doing a "double" track, recording an identical vocal again on another track. This always thickens a vocal. I also have recorded vocal and sent it through a processor to artificially double the vocal--sometimes known as articial tape delay (invented and used alot by the folks who engineered the sessions for the Beatles). You can get this effect using a delay of 15-35ms and maybe a touch of chorus or light flange. No reverb--you'll add reverb later (usually during the final mixdown). Again, a nice thick vocal that is easier to do than actual double tracking, though not near as good. You might want to give something of this sort a try. If you take time to listen to some albums, you will be able to hear how often a vocal doubling is used. If you happen to be a Beatles fan (or not), buy the anthology albums (especially 2 and 3) and a couple of albums with those songs on them and compare how different they are in terms of the vocal effect--you will know which have been doubled.

Peace, Jim