Why record vocal on two tracks

  • Thread starter Thread starter juncher
  • Start date Start date
J

juncher

New member
Some of you guys describes the benefits of recording vocals on two tracks (adding depth etc)

Question: What´s the trick? To play with different EQ on the two tracks or do I miss the point?

Regards from Copenhagen

Peter
 
If using two completely different sounding mics that you love, I could see the benifits. Otherwise, I think it's better to double (two takes) the vocals (when you want it obvious and/or natural), or route the vocal into another channel for different processing such as eq or delay. People route FX outputs to channels all the time to eq or delay the FX; plus, they like having control using the fader. Also, that way, it's easy to automate the FX (whether their motorized or out-board VCAs).
 
one of the reasons i do it is to get a fuller sound, but like recording engineer said it has to be different takes. it kind of gives it a chorus/delay effect to it, try i think you'll like it.
 
Another trick if you're digital is to copy the original track to another, but shift it a few frames later. Not enough to be heard as delay, just to fatten. This is better than nothing when the singer just can't get a good double.
 
I like to (digitally) copy the vox and other important reacks (bass/snare/foot) to a 2nd track to add fullness.
But when I move one of them...just a little forward or back, to get the doubling or fuller sound, I get a phase cancellation.
Took me a few HOURS to figure it out on a bass track.
 
I like to put two matching vocal tracks in a song because it adds depth or something. Especially if you sing a little harmony with yourself on some parts.

Tucci
 
My vote goes for the vocal being sung twice. I don't like the idea of making a "copy" of the first vocal because it's the little things that give the sound it's flavor. Most people sing the samr passage the same way so there is usually not a problem. Just make sure you "try" to sing the vocal the same. It will indeed give a fullness to the voice. Like using a mild delay in the Haus zone.

Good luck!!
 
Yo Juncher :(Sounds like an old WW2 German Warplane?)

When you record a vocal on two tracks, quite simply, it gives you more sound to use to mix down; thus, you can pan the vocal, use different EQ's, and the strength of the two or more track vocal lets you get the vocal UP FRONT sound if that's what you like. Take an old Frank Sinatra recording and you will hear UP FRONT vocal sound; of course, Frank had some darn good mics to use way back then.

Cheers,
Green Hornet

[This message has been edited by The Green Hornet (edited 01-11-2000).]
 
Hello Gren Hornet

Juncher is not the name of a german war plane, but the name of a talented danish producer working hard with his rock band and his 4 track Sony MD. Live recording of the band is his speciality.

But still this brave viking has some problems getting the point.

I can understand the reason for recording the same vocal in two takes on two tracks.

I can understand the reason for recording the same vocal in one take, using two different mics on two tracks

I can understand the reason for recording the vocal one track, copying it to another track to be able to play around with EQ, effect, or timing of the two tracks to add a bit of delay.

But I don’t understand how it can add depth ( or put the vocal in front) if we are just talking about having the exact same vocal on two tracks in stead of one.

Have I missed the point. You know, Copenhagen is far away ……

Juncher
 
A Delay - effect or natrual can give the vocal a rich sound like in a chorus effect.

You are not trying to makean exact copy but simulate a chours effect. The very little pitch and time difference, gives you a thicker richer sound.

A delay will let you vocals have presence but ALSO add a
a ambience to the sound.

As to Depth - a delay makes your brain think it's in a larger room. We reconize a room size ( when we close our eyes ) by the reflections or repeats.

As delay combines with the original sound, the harmonics of each part combine also, and so if a note was a little flat or sharp, it will help hide the problem, thickens, makes it sound bigger,




[This message has been edited by Shailat (edited 01-12-2000).]
 
Hey Juncher :) Of Rock Band not flying machine.

You missed one point:

Record the vocal ONE TIME WITH ONE MIC BUT PUT IT ON TWO OR MORE TRACKS.

Most recording boxes will do 4 or more tracks at the same time. So, if you want to "pffatten-up" your vocal, say for one of those groovy blonds from your hometown, put her voice on a couple of tracks the first take. [or until you get the first good take]

Cheers,
Green Hornet PS: Junker: you need an 8 track box - you can do more without bouncing.
GH

[This message has been edited by The Green Hornet (edited 01-13-2000).]
 
Green Hornet, I agree with Juncher.

In the case you describe (one vocal recorded exactly the same to two tracks) what are you getting that you can't get with one? I can pan one track when mixing, turn up the volume (to the noise floor limit of course) to make it stronger, or whatever with one track. Having the exact same vocal on two tracks and doing nothing different with one track as opposed to the other during the mix wouldn't seem to buy me anything at all except maybe a backup track.

BillS
 
Hey Hey BSutton:

What you will find you will get is DEPTH, a bigger voice footprint.

However, your gear may be better than my MD-8; therefore you might not require the extra boost without really overdoing the volume.

Also found that using my mic preamp in various ways increases the up front sound; like, lessen the input knob and increase the output knob. A cleaner richer voice is the result. I have recorded a vocalist on 4 tracks and man, that's fun to play with.

Green Hornet
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top