Hi,

I recorded to a Korg32xd 96k down to mp3. I used a U87 on Vox to a Dav preamp and used the internal processing of the 32xd for mixing and comp-eq-effects.

Need some input on the vocal compression eq and effects, please.

Up until now I've only recorded jazz instrumentals and I don't sing, so your opinion on the vocal chain would be greatly appreciated.


http://iacmusic.com/artist.aspx?ID=94280
Thanks for the feedback.

2db, the chain's fine. I'd concentrate on piecing together an overall tighter vocal performance. There's some pitch problems in some places. And lines here and there that could use a better take.

Not sure if you're using Melodyne, but it's an excellent tool for pitch correction.

Technically, the only thing I'd recommend is giving her voice more support by tucking her into the music bed more. Offhand, I'd start with cutting @ around 3K a dB or two, and also bringing down the level of her vocal just a bit. Still giving an upfront vocal sound, but one that's more glued in with everything else.

Since you don't want to smash that kind of performance with too much compression, riding the lead vocal levels - where needed - in automix could also help smooth things out.

My 2¢.

Sounds fine to me too, definitely more performance issues than recording.

Thanks Dan-!!

She is due to debut some of her CD tomorrow so I really appreciate your input.

Dan, when I go from a 96k recording down to an mp3 the whole opulence and eq go weird, is there any thing I could do to improve that cross over?

I also noticed reverb tends to intensify and build up.

thanks
-jim

quote:

Dan, when I go from a 96k recording down to an mp3 the whole opulence and eq go weird, is there any thing I could do to improve that cross over?

Other than using high quality dither and mp3 algortihms...and maybe starting with 88.2 instead of 96...

I don't know. My Mp3s never seem to "change" accept to sound generally not as 3d and somehow grungier. I've never listened back to an mp3 and thought it changed my mix in specific ways--more like it's just a lesser version to begin with. I would question that the original mix was "all that"...it could be that lowering the fidelity just makes you more aware of things that were issues to begin with.

the sound is fine enough for me. way too loud, a little thin perhaps if were to tuck back into the track.

I know you wanted a voc chain critique but none of that will matter whatsoever without a vocal performance worth listening to. The singer has a nice tone and obviously has some feel for singing this kind of vibe. weird phrasing on sustaining the words to try and fit the tempo. adding what Seth Riggs calls the "amateur H" to the changing intervals on sustained words..."meeeeheeee" for example insted of just "me". "allhall", "saHaved" etc. That would be the first thing I'd chime in with at the session. Pitch isn't really bad, but you'd better nail the opening lines. Just needs to be produced with a more detailed ear for quality control. Gear stuff is fine, which is usually always the case, with me anyways.

Vocal chain sounds fine to me as well. I agree with previous comments about performance and pitch which both need some work. And yes, bring the vocal down in the mix.

Sounds pretty good. I think the compression might be a bit heavy as I'm hearing it effect sibilance.

Also, there's some editing needed I think. Couple of smacks and overall extraneous noises that could be edited. Now this said, it's much harder to edit in the Korg than a DAW.

But overall, it's not too bad and she has a nice voice.

quote:

Originally posted by Dot:
2db, the chain's fine. I'd concentrate on piecing together an overall tighter vocal performance. There's some pitch problems in some places. And lines here and there that could use a better take.

Not sure if you're using Melodyne, but it's an excellent tool for pitch correction.

Technically, the only thing I'd recommend is giving her voice more support by tucking her into the music bed more. Offhand, I'd start with cutting @ around 3K a dB or two, and also bringing down the level of her vocal just a bit. Still giving an upfront vocal sound, but one that's more glued in with everything else.

Since you don't want to smash that kind of performance with too much compression, riding the lead vocal levels - where needed - in automix could also help smooth things out.

My 2¢.

Dot do you know of a stand alone unit like Melodyne? I use a Korg 32xd which is not software base unit.

Thanks very much for your critique.

-jim

quote:

Originally posted by 2db:

quote:

Originally posted by Dot:
2db, the chain's fine. I'd concentrate on piecing together an overall tighter vocal performance. There's some pitch problems in some places. And lines here and there that could use a better take.

Not sure if you're using Melodyne, but it's an excellent tool for pitch correction.

Technically, the only thing I'd recommend is giving her voice more support by tucking her into the music bed more. Offhand, I'd start with cutting @ around 3K a dB or two, and also bringing down the level of her vocal just a bit. Still giving an upfront vocal sound, but one that's more glued in with everything else.

Since you don't want to smash that kind of performance with too much compression, riding the lead vocal levels - where needed - in automix could also help smooth things out.

My 2¢.

Dot do you know of a stand alone unit like Melodyne? I use a Korg 32xd which is not a software base unit.

Thanks very much for your critique.

-jim

...

Doesn't the Korg import/export WAV files?

You can use Meldoyne or Autotune on a computer and import it back in.

Answer is...yes, there is a hardware version of Autotune. It's not really as powerful as the software, but...

I'll throw in my two cents...pitch is the least of her concerns. Kel and I rarely see eye to eye on phrasing, but we do here--it's pretty bad. And her use of almost exclusively head tone during what should be a the song's climax is just awful. She needs to learn to belt it.

My experience with tuning software is that it won't make a bad vocal good. It's good at fixing a note or two in a good vocal-making it better. I think people look at At and the like as if it will make a poor vocal good...IMO, it won't.

Thanks Popmann and Kel for your honest critique of the vocalist. I will recommend Ashley take the recording to a vocal coach and work on phrasing and pitch.

Rather then try to fix the problems with auto tune I will have her re-due her tracks.

In your opinion for her next take would you suggest I do perhaps the same or something differently on the choice of mic, preamp, comp, eq and effects?

Thanks
-jim

Jim,

If you had a Mic choice with a bit less Midrange, I would try that.

RE: Compression
I work on LOTS of Christian records.
This vocal is actually very undercompressed by Nashville standards (which I don't totally agree with).

Most singers don't have enough control to cut a vocal with light compression and still have it 'sit in the mix'.
Thing is, it has been taken to a SILLY extreme level.

I recently mixed an album with the vocals pretty loud and what I thought was heavy compression. The singers commented that their vocals sounded 'small' and I asked them to send me examples of what they wanted....they did...it was REALLY heavy expansion/compression.
Like where the breathing was louder than the singing!

Anyway...
If you don't have access to a different Mic, do you have Multiband compression?
You can set it to compress the upper Mids more heavily than the rest of the Frequs. That way when she leans into the Honky sounding notes, they will be tamed (I would set it to reduce at least 3db when needed).
I have found MultiBand Compression to be more helpful than EQ.

jmp

If a U87 is not normally honky on female vox then it is likely I created the the mid problem by my eq choices. Which could mean my monitors are deceiving me at least on vocals.

Have you used any of these mikes on female vox with great success? My large condenser/ribbon:
U87, AEA R84, m160, m130, 414b, umt70s, m930, 441, 421, RE20, c535, tlm49, and K-2.

Unfortunately I don't have a multi-band compressor.

Thanks for your input, John.

-jim

Stick with the U87...just pull down 3k a a bit. I don't think the sound is close to "bad"...it's a little honky, which I've always found U87s have a tendency to be anyway.

Certainly, the 414 will be the opposite of that...so, you could try that...but, I think it would sound fine with a little cut.

Some very good info so far, Talking only about conversion. as POP suggested if you start with 88.2 then convert to 44.1 this is a much easer conversion mathematically speaking and all else being equal ,should have less artifacts . then convert to MP3 and if you can, choose 192 MP3 . I am not familiar with the Korg unit but are you starting with your bit rate @ 16 or 24 ? If you are starting with 24 bit, then the best sequence would be to do the 88.2 to 44. 1 first, then convert from 24 to 16. Then do the conversion to MP3 this should give you the cleanest MP3, just slightly less dynamic than the original

Thanks I did a remix see if this compares any better of a mix and eq.

Of course the vocal is the same...
http://iacmusic.com/artist.aspx?ID=94280


Thanks again
-jim