What does a quality vocal track need done to it?

[JoshXR]

Hey all,

 

I have been recording for a while, but I figured I would ask here.

 

What effects/processing should always be added to a basic vocal track?

 

I have been EQing, Compressing, and doubling the vocal track, and applying reverb to the vocal.

 

I know this varies song to song, but what would the basics be? and any recommendations?

 

Thank you!

 

 

 

P.S. Does anyone know what was done to the vocals on Muse's song, Supermassive Blackhole? Some interesting stuff here....

 

 

 

[TimOBrien]

What ever it needs.

 

This is going to depend on what you're trying to accomplish, the singer, the room, the equipment and so on.

 

If it was clear-cut, we'd have one button to fix everything....

[JoshXR]

 

What ever it needs. This is going to depend on what you're trying to accomplish, the singer, the room, the equipment and so on. If it was clear-cut, we'd have one button to fix everything....

 

 

Well, let's just say it's a basic, straight forward rock song, like AC/DC?

 

Or, to be more specific, what about Iron Maiden with Bruce Dickinson? It sounds like there might be a vocal delay? something really thickens up his vocals...same with Judas Priest and Dio.

[Majoria]

There is no such thing as something that always has to be done because you may get exactly what you want with the original tracking. I would highly encourage you to get as close to what you really want on the original raw track. You shouldn't need to heavily modify a good track unless you want obvious special effects.

 

I've released some songs where there was absolutely nothing done to the lead vocal. That is the exception but possible.

 

Some of the more common effects are delay or reverb, eq, and multiple tracks.

[Zooey]

I can't tell from your post, but are you artificially doubling the track by copying it? You mention it in the same sentence as EQ and compression, so I thought that might be the case.

 

If so, don't do that. Sing it twice.

[WRGKMC]

Unlike instruments which can have simular tone, like one strat sounding simular than another, every voice is unique. You can use the same mics and preamps as say the singer from iron maden and sound completely different.

The way I look at it is there are some that have the ability to do impersonations, the same way as someone would impersonate someones speaking voice. Because the voice requiers a whole lot more than just tone, they're few and far between.

 

 

The only suggestion I have is you want to match tone is to import a track from the artist you want to mimick, then use it as an A/B reference for adjusting the vocals. This method will not however nessasarily be whats best for the track.

 

When I mix, I always mix whats best for making the track sound the best it can within the mix. If it just happens to come out sounding like someone else using simular effects, so be it. If not it will at least make the singer sound as good as I can be. If theres something lacking in a singers voice keeping them from sounding close to someone else, it cant be syntisized by layering effects on. It merely masks they're true tonal qualities. If the person has a voice thats close in range, has simular pronuncination of words, dynamics, Performance and mic technique, then using simular reverbs comp, EQ can help get the vocals close to others.

[Phil O'Keefe]

The basics? A great singer, matched up with a mic that "works" for their voice and is emphasizing the characteristics of it that you want to highlight for the song, a complementary mic preamp... with the singer and microphone in a good sounding acoustical environment and spaced the appropriate distance from each other.

 

Pretty much everything else is either a enhancement tool or a corrective tool.

[Phil O'Keefe]

A few of those "corrective and enhancement" tools and techniques include:

 

Compression - to smooth out variations in level, to change the attack / envelope characteristics

 

EQ - To adjust the frequency spectrum of the sound - to help the voice "cut through" a mix, to help reduce sibilance and / or plosives, to "carve out" frequencies to help "make room" for other things in the mix (high pass filters are commonly used to get rid of "room noise" stuff below the frequency range of the actual vocals - start at ~75 to 150Hz)

 

Depth of field / time based processing - Delays and reverbs to give the vocals a sense of space

 

Vocal "stacking" - Commonly used in many genres; having the singer re-sing the part as closely as possible to the original performance on a second track. Sometimes a single double is used, sometimes it is multiple takes; sometimes they are mixed at equal volume levels, sometimes they are mixed "behind" the primary vocal (at a lower level).

 

Distortion - Sometimes applied to the "main" vocal, sometimes to a double; sometimes created in the mix (via plugins, outboard processors, etc.), sometimes done in tracking (running the vocal into a cheap carbon mic, or into a dirty guitar amp and miking that, or with an overdriven mic preamp, compressor, etc. etc.). As with guitar dirt, each method will sound somewhat different...

 

Other things, like flanging and other "effects" are used on vocals too. The sky's the limit really, and there are no "rules".

 

One thing I do like is the "parallel processing" concept. Instead of sticking a compressor "in line" on the vocal track's insert point, a lot of the time I like to run an aux send and stick the compressor on one of the aux return's insert points. That way, I can "mix" or blend the amount of unprocessed vocal and the processed vocal. This approach works well for compression, distortion, and certainly for things like reverb and delay... it can work with EQ too, but I prefer having it on the main track's insert unless I'm using it for an "effect" or I want to bandpass the aux return's signal for some reason - such as removing low frequency "gunk" from a reverb (say... below 300Hz or so) or to pull out over-zesty highs from that verb (say, above 8kHz...); but like with all of this stuff, there really are no rules. You have to use what sounds musical and what feels appropriate for the song.

[Synonym Music]

 

Hey all, I have been recording for a while, but I figured I would ask here. What effects/processing should always be added to a basic vocal track? I have been EQing, Compressing, and doubling the vocal track, and applying reverb to the vocal. I know this varies song to song, but what would the basics be? and any recommendations? Thank you!

 

EQing and compressing are the basics. Those are always there. Reverbs, delays, parallel compression etc. are not basics and I never use them on every vocal.

 

P.S. Does anyone know what was done to the vocals on Muse's song, Supermassive Blackhole? Some interesting stuff here.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xsp3_a-PMTw

 

Really? It doesn't sound like anything unusual to me. Falsetto with double tracking.

[WRGKMC]

 

One thing I do like is the "parallel processing" concept. Instead of sticking a compressor "in line" on the vocal track's insert point, a lot of the time I like to run an aux send and stick the compressor on one of the aux return's insert points. That way, I can "mix" or blend the amount of unprocessed vocal and the processed vocal. This approach works well for compression, distortion, and certainly for things like reverb and delay

 

 

Thats an old Motown trick Phil brings up. Its a technique called the Exciting Compressor. heres an article that explains its roots. http://www.recordinginstitute.com/R2KREQ/excomp.htm

 

"The Motown 1960?s Exciting Compressor

 

With the Motown mix approach there were problems. If you wanted the lyrics to be heard you had to use a lot of compression on the vocal so that the the softer words could still be heard over the higher-level music. In addition you boosted the

[twostone]

 

Thats an old Motown trick Phil brings up. Its a technique called the Exciting Compressor. heres an article that explains its roots. http://www.recordinginstitute.com/R2KREQ/excomp.htm   "The Motown 1960?s Exciting Compressor   With the Motown mix approach there were problems. If you wanted the lyrics to be heard you had to use a lot of compression on the vocal so that the the softer words could still be heard over the higher-level music. In addition you boosted the

[Zooey]

It's a cool technique but not groundbreaking or unique to Motown. It's been described as parallel compression, "New York" style compression, and there's even a chapter on using that technique for mastering in Bob Katz' book. I forget what he calls it.

[WRGKMC]

Its common since it was first used but at the time it was a very new live sound that projected well on crappy AM radio speakers which was the most common place you'd hear all pop music. You'd never hear it on FM that had much better audio quality till many years later.

 

Most other recordings you'd hear at the time had the vocals up front with the music as a backup. As with all aspects of recording though, its good to try all techniques you come across. Even if you dont like or use it, you'll at least be knowlegable of what it can do, or you can incorporate partial aspects of it to develop new and unique mixing techniques.

[KyleDMastering]

Again there is no formula, but usually a combination of the following in an "as much or as little as needed" fashion (edit - in no particular order)

 

Compresssion - to balance the dynamics

DeEsser - to help tame excessive sibilance and or as a dynamic eq

EQ - To carve space and/or enhance the tonal characteristics of the track (telephone fx anyone?)

Reverb - to give space?

Delay - Space/Bigness

 

These are really general descriptions, but I feel the first step is to know what you want to hear and then understanding the tools - and their uses - which will help you get your tracks to where they need to be.