Your top tip for recording vocals (1 Viewer)

[Serpico]

For me the vocal is the most important part of the songs I record, but it's also the most difficult to get sounding right. Outside of the actual performance of the vocalist what kind of things do you always do to make your vocals sound good.
I've got an AKG C-1000 condenser mic going through a dbx preamp and a compressor with about 4/5-1 ratio of comp. I have a little vocal booth made with hanging blankets surrounding it and the mic is suspened above so you got to tilt your head back a little to sing.
I always double track the vocals (always a pain in the bollox) but I find that I always have to process the shit out of them when mixing. I'd like to get a nice clean 'natural' sound but maybe that means spending upwards of 1000euro on a mic.
What d'you reckon?

 

[Charlie Bucket]

For me the vocal is the most important part of the songs I record, but it's also the most difficult to get sounding right. Outside of the actual performance of the vocalist what kind of things do you always do to make your vocals sound good.
I've got an AKG C-1000 condenser mic going through a dbx preamp and a compressor with about 4/5-1 ratio of comp. I have a little vocal booth made with hanging blankets surrounding it and the mic is suspened above so you got to tilt your head back a little to sing.
I always double track the vocals (always a pain in the bollox) but I find that I always have to process the shit out of them when mixing. I'd like to get a nice clean 'natural' sound but maybe that means spending upwards of 1000euro on a mic.
What d'you reckon?

heavens to betsy yr taking a lot of precautions and then ending up fixing it in the mix for yr troubles?? first off what kinda music are you recording? are the vocals strident, gentle, screamed or barely intoned? the chaps on here who do this for a living (the studio boffins) might disagree me cause expensive mic's and a soundproof room are par for the course for what they do but the most important things in my experience in recording vocals are...

being comfortable - preferably recording in a space that you are familiar with and feel relaxed in..

being in the right headspace & at ease with the song (altho a little anticipation can add edge)...

having a hot drink (hot lemon and honey) to loosen up the chords before you go singin - also maybe some vocal excercises if yr into that sorta stuff (or a wine/whisky and a few smokes if yr from the tom waits school...)

and then as long as whatever technology you are using has the ability to capture whatever you sing, the main criteria is how you perfrom the vocal...hopefully some of this will help!!

 

[aoboa]

One bit of advice:
Don't use a C1000 for vocals unless you're after that particular sound.
Get a decent budget large diaphram mic.

 

[Serpico]

I have an SM58 but I am always drawn to the C1000 when it comes to vocals. What kind of characteristics would a large diaphragm mic have over the C1000? Thinking of throwing a hundred euro or so at a Studio Projects C1, would it make a noticeable difference? Nice 1.

 

[RED(tape)MENACE]

Yeah, as Al said.
A C1000 would be way down my list of choices for vocals.
Maybe try recording your vocal without compression.
Then, when it comes time to mix, start with the vocal and get a nice natural sound that you like.
Once you have that, make the rest of the track fit around the vocal rather than vice versa.

Check the mic recommendations thread for some C1000 alternatives.

 

[Goodbye]

I used to squeeze lemon juice down the old pie hole just before a "take"

But quitting smoking is the best thing I ever did for my voice...

And never EVER perform with a cold... Takes ages to get back to normal

And only sing when you are ready

First sessions I ever did, it was all about the mike up high and tilting back...
I never felt comfortable doing that. Depending on the song, I've sat down AND faced the floor.
Play around a bit. I prefer to add effects and compression afterwards. Record dry.

 

[aoboa]

I have an SM58 but I am always drawn to the C1000 when it comes to vocals. What kind of characteristics would a large diaphragm mic have over the C1000? Thinking of throwing a hundred euro or so at a Studio Projects C1, would it make a noticeable difference? Nice 1.

It really depends on the mic but generally:
Small diaphragm mics tend to be a bit more detailed, particularly in the high end. They do work really well on some vocals.
Large diaphragm are less sensitive on the high end and give a rounder warmer sound.

I'd actually use the 58 rather than that C1000 for vocals if they were my choices.

 

[Pantone247]

start with the vocal and get a nice natural sound that you like. Once you have that, make the rest of the track fit around the vocal rather than vice versa.

I agree with this, I do a scrath vocal very early on these days, and sit stuff around it. I didn't always and used to be EQing the shit out of the vox to make it fit, it'd end up all treeble and hiss... nicht gut...

I'd actually use the 58 rather than that C1000 for vocals if they were my choices.

I use a 57 a good bit on my vocals, so long as you're not doing anything fancy (it hates ba-ba-bas, can't handle the prcussive sound) it's a good solid sound

 

[RED(tape)MENACE]

I use a 57 a good bit on my vocals, so long as you're not doing anything fancy (it hates ba-ba-bas, can't handle the prcussive sound) it's a good solid sound

Pop Shield!

 

[Goodbye]

Seriously lads... Lemon juice

 

[Serpico]

Ta very much all. I went and got the preamp and the compressor out of the way and just went straight into the multitrack with both mics and must say I still prefer the C-1000s to the SM58. I'm adding the compression after the fact and its much better now. The level off the SM58 was quite a bit weaker than the C-1000s so I had to use the preamp which may colour the sound and that may be why I preferred the C-1000s. Anyway, thank you all, helpful and informative as always.
Got the new thomann catalogue today and they have some lovely bundles with some of the mics mentioned on the other thread. Alas, I must keep my spending down till I start hitting the charts...or busking.

 

[Lord Damian]

a bit different of a conundrum here...i did a bit of recording on the weekend and only had 8 tracks (yes, i know, but i prefer living in the dark ages thank you)..anyhow, after all was said and done it only left 1 track for vox...i norm,ally like to double track but with only one track available that's not possible...any ideas of what kind of effect i can throw on there (just a splash) that will help thicken the sound? using a budget Apex tube mic with a bit of compression which sounds lovely so far, in case anyone was interested.

 

[ernesto]

a bit different of a conundrum here...i did a bit of recording on the weekend and only had 8 tracks (yes, i know, but i prefer living in the dark ages thank you)..anyhow, after all was said and done it only left 1 track for vox...i norm,ally like to double track but with only one track available that's not possible...any ideas of what kind of effect i can throw on there (just a splash) that will help thicken the sound? using a budget Apex tube mic with a bit of compression which sounds lovely so far, in case anyone was interested.

tiny bit of delay? with the fx level up and feedback minimized to one repeat?

you could even send your wet signal through a diff eq or more fx before mixing with the dry signal.

 

[egg_]

I'm still convinced the best way to record vocals is without headphones - I've never managed to pull off any of those out-of-phase tricks well enough to make it workable, but by jaykers I'm some load more comfortable singing without em

 

[RED(tape)MENACE]

Workable as in no bleed, or workable as in some bleed?
Some bleed can be ok depending.
Have you tried using wedges?

 

[Lord Damian]

tiny bit of delay? with the fx level up and feedback minimized to one repeat?

you could even send your wet signal through a diff eq or more fx before mixing with the dry signal.

thanks Ernesto, for the first part...not sure exactly what the last part means though, but no worries.

 

[Goodbye]

You know the way in some of the big studio's they run mike cables through bowls of water and then others across paper towels.
Thats what he means. Google it sher.

 

[ogy]

if the delay has a modulation setting set it to around 1hz and use a very short delay
apparently some abbey road dude invented this trick for John Lennon and its called Automatic Double Tracking or ADT for short
("im not arsed with this doubletracking anymore. you there! invent me something!")

 

[Goodbye]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_double_tracking

Artificial double tracking (ADT) was an electronic system designed to augment the sound of voices and instruments during the recording process. It used linked tape recorders to create an instant and simultaneous duplication of sound which could then be captured on tape.
During the 1950s it was discovered that doubletracking lead vocals in popular song recordings gave them a much stronger and more appealing sound (especially for singers with weak or light voices). First pairs of tape recorders were used, then later multitrack recording machines, to produce the effect. Until the invention of ADT it was necessary to record the vocal tracks twice; a process which was both tedious and exacting, and might require several takes and rewinds.
ADT was invented specially for The Beatles on April 6, 1966 by Ken Townsend, a recording engineer employed at EMI's Abbey Road Studios, mainly at the instigation of John Lennon. Lennon hated the tedium of doubletracking during sessions, and regularly expressed a desire for a technical alternative.
In essence, Townsend's system used two studio tape decks which were connected to the recording console, and to each other. As a vocal was being recorded onto the first tape machine, specially installed connections simultaneously fed the signal from the record head of the first deck into the record head of the second deck, onto the tape, out from the playback head of the second deck and back into the record head of the first. If the playback heads of the two decks were precisely the same distance from their respective record heads, the voices would be recorded in perfect unison.
However, the doubletracking effect relied on the almost inaudible millisecond delays between the guide vocal and the doubletracked vocal. This was achieved naturally in the old system, because it was in practice impossible for even the best singer to precisely duplicate a previous vocal. By adjusting a variable speed oscillator (VSO) that controlled the speed of the motor on the second tape deck, the tape would run slightly slower than on the first deck. With this slight delay now introduced, the signal coming out of the playback head on the first deck would be audibly 'doubled', but the delay was not enough to cause the vocals to be noticeably out of sync or out of tune.
The Beatles were thrilled by Townsend's invention and used it throughout the Revolver album, and on many of their subsequent recordings. Lennon dubbed the technique 'flanging' after producer George Martin jokingly told him it was produced using a "double-bifurcated sploshing flange". Only years later did Martin learn that another technique, also called flanging, was already in use; the term referred to an engineer's pressing the flange of a tape spool as it ran, causing the recording to be delayed.
A similar technique to ADT is doubling echo, which uses short delays to mimic the doubletracking effect. With the advent of digital recording, tape- and analog-based delay methods are largely obsolete.

 

[Gino Padula]

A mic stand is no bad thing and is not that expensive at all. It's necessary for the pop shield and it's good for mic-ing up amps too.

I usually hate the sound of my own voice when I play stuff back. It's a tough thing, recording vocals.

Also, I find it's good to have the vocals as high as possible in my headphones.