Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

24145333

Collapse
X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76






    Quote Originally Posted by Chumly
    View Post

    I have sung unison and muted my main vocal to obtain the harmonies live in real time with many singers, many different harmony units, over a number of years.




    Yeah, I figured I didn't invent this.



    Any tips? War stories? Amusing anecdotes?
    Jon Chappell
    Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/jon_chappell
    Check out my website: http://jonchappell.com

    Comment


    • #77
      Only that at lower stage volumes what the audience hears may not be what you hope they hear given that (at least for me) my unamplifed voice can project, plus of course how you emulate the other person's phrasing matters to the outcome.



      I've been using various vocal harmonizers in my solo act for so long now (starting with the DigiTech IPS33B way back when) the oddness many people experience with them is in the faded past.



      There is no doubt that a solid sense of relative pitch is required as is the ability to quickly obtain and sustain the given pitch with precision. Many people who think they can sing well realize that a vocal harmonizer can easily exacerbate their technical shortcomings, as you learned with your partner.



      Not to denigrate Dylanesque vocal styings but...pity the poor ears having to listen to the output of a machine tracking that!

      Comment


      • #78
        So are the 3rd and 5th up harmonies that much better than the ones with the HG?

        Comment


        • #79
          Has anybody experimented with using contrapuntal harmonies being fed to the machine via midi? For instance, the song "If I fell" by the beatles, is very contrapuntal and not just parallel thirds or a voice above or below...



          I understand that you can play a midi line and if you sing against that, it will create a voice from the midi line... You can also play the midi line into your sequencer... You'd have to have the sequencer play drums or something as well just to keep time for live performance... This is on page 26 of the manual...

          Comment


          • #80






            Quote Originally Posted by Chumly
            View Post

            There is no doubt that a solid sense of relative pitch is required as is the ability to quickly obtain and sustain the given pitch with precision. Many people who think they can sing well realize that a vocal harmonizer can easily exacerbate their technical shortcomings, as you learned with your partner.




            Very true. You have to "learn" how to best work a vocal harmonizer--even one as good as the VoiceLive 2, with its excellent tracking, humanizing elements (differing degrees of portamento for each voice, for instance), etc. I found in my own singing that while I was good at nailing sustained tones (at the ends of phrases), sometimes the rapidly moving voices in between were, how shall I say, a little "swimmy." The harmonizer had no problem making this painfully evident.








            Not to denigrate Dylanesque vocal stylings but...pity the poor ears having to listen to the output of a machine tracking that!



            Yes, there are some things it just won't work on. (I can't think of a better example than Dylan.) And worse, it makes it screamingly and comically obvious when it doesn't!
            Jon Chappell
            Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/jon_chappell
            Check out my website: http://jonchappell.com

            Comment


            • #81






              Quote Originally Posted by tradivoro1
              View Post

              Has anybody experimented with using contrapuntal harmonies being fed to the machine via midi?




              Yes, I have (see below).








              For instance, the song "If I fell" by the beatles, is very contrapuntal and not just parallel thirds or a voice above or below...



              I understand that you can play a midi line and if you sing against that, it will create a voice from the midi line... You can also play the midi line into your sequencer... You'd have to have the sequencer play drums or something as well just to keep time for live performance... This is on page 26 of the manual...



              You make a good point (no pun intended) about counterpoint. You clearly understand how it works (and I'm here to tell you it works exactly "as advertised"), but for those who would like clarification, here's what we're talking about:



              If you use the audio input (guitar or mp3), as opposed to MIDI, the unit harmonizes in parallel or oblique motion. Oblique motion is where one voice moves and the other remains stationary. For example, if you're singing a C on a C chord, the VL2 will "sing" E a third above. If you keep singing a C while changing chords to F, the VL2 will move its third up to F, the closest chord tone. You stay put, the harmonizer moves, based on the harmonic input (guitar audio, in this case). The converse is also true (the VL2 will sustain while you move).



              One of my first tests was Crosby, Stills & Nash's "Helplessly Hoping." On the line where it goes: "They are three together, they are for____ each other," the word "for" has a chord change from G (the tonic) to F (the flat-seven). But the lead vocal sustains a D note throughout. If you know about harmony and about harmonizers, to hear any unit do this blows you away.



              But to get to counterpoint. Yes, the only way to have the unit not only play counterpoint but any specific, prescribed harmony is to do it through MIDI. But this is still much faster than, say, multi-tracking your own voice. And better. For example, I downloaded some MIDI files of four-part Bach chorales (hymns, which have four independent, contrapuntal voices) and imported them into my DAW. Then I took the MIDI out and patched it into the VoiceLive 2. Listening to my DAW's click track through headphones, I was able to harmonize myself through sequencing (I can't play that many parts simultaneously on keyboard). And what's more, a single voice can't really sing from the lowest bass part to the highest soprano comfortably. So I avoided having to sight-sing four parts, overdubbing on each pass, plus I didn't have to go into Darth Vader mode or Chipmunks on helium to reach the lowest and highest notes.



              And MIDI response is super fast--faster and more reliable even than the audio/pitch detection. (Though that's impressively speedy and accurate in this incarnation of the VoiceLive series.)



              As I said earlier in the review, "re-voxing" (analogous to "re-amping" a guitar) with the VoiceLive 2 has major recording implications, even though the unit is aimed chiefly at the live market.
              Jon Chappell
              Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/jon_chappell
              Check out my website: http://jonchappell.com

              Comment


              • #82






                Quote Originally Posted by Jon Chappell
                View Post

                Very true. You have to "learn" how to best work a vocal harmonizer--even one as good as the VoiceLive 2, with its excellent tracking, humanizing elements (differing degrees of portamento for each voice, for instance), etc. I found in my own singing that while I was good at nailing sustained tones (at the ends of phrases), sometimes the rapidly moving voices in between were, how shall I say, a little "swimmy." The harmonizer had no problem making this painfully evident.







                Yes, there are some things it just won't work on. (I can't think of a better example than Dylan.) And worse, it makes it screamingly and comically obvious when it doesn't!




                Don't be so sure about that. I have a Howlin Wolf/Tom Waits voice and the Harmony G tracks really good when using the upper third.
                Chuck
                www.reverbnation.com/chuckbeatty

                Comment


                • #83






                  Quote Originally Posted by zelmobeaty
                  View Post

                  Don't be so sure about that. I have a Howlin Wolf/Tom Waits voice and the Harmony G tracks really good when using the upper third.




                  I stand corrected. Just goes to show you, you should never assume anything until you've tried it.
                  Jon Chappell
                  Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/jon_chappell
                  Check out my website: http://jonchappell.com

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    That's great to know... I know eventually I'll get this unit, it's definitely geared for the studio (88.1 and 96k sampling modes) as well as live performance, and I'm glad to hear that the guitar tracking unit is capable of doing the harmonic voice leading automatically...



                    I guess now I'll have to start learning palestrina and lasso motets as part of my repertoire... I think it will give me an edge over the guy doing the smoke on the water covers...











                    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Chappell
                    View Post

                    Yes, I have (see below).



                    But to get to counterpoint. Yes, the only way to have the unit not only play counterpoint but any specific, prescribed harmony is to do it through MIDI. But this is still much faster than, say, multi-tracking your own voice. And better. For example, I downloaded some MIDI files of four-part Bach chorales (hymns, which have four independent, contrapuntal voices) and imported them into my DAW. Then I took the MIDI out and patched it into the VoiceLive 2. Listening to my DAW's click track through headphones, I was able to harmonize myself through sequencing (I can't play that many parts simultaneously on keyboard). And what's more, a single voice can't really sing from the lowest bass part to the highest soprano comfortably. So I avoided having to sight-sing four parts, overdubbing on each pass, plus I didn't have to go into Darth Vader mode or Chipmunks on helium to reach the lowest and highest notes.



                    And MIDI response is super fast--faster and more reliable even than the audio/pitch detection. (Though that's impressively speedy and accurate in this incarnation of the VoiceLive series.)



                    As I said earlier in the review, "re-voxing" (analogous to "re-amping" a guitar) with the VoiceLive 2 has major recording implications, even though the unit is aimed chiefly at the live market.




                    Comment


                    • #85






                      Quote Originally Posted by tradivoro1
                      View Post

                      I guess now I'll have to start learning palestrina and lasso motets as part of my repertoire... I think it will give me an edge over the guy doing the smoke on the water covers...




                      OMG, now you're taking me back to music school. Yeah, the VoiceLive 2 absolutely rawks out on sixth species counterpoint.
                      Jon Chappell
                      Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/jon_chappell
                      Check out my website: http://jonchappell.com

                      Comment


                      • #86






                        Quote Originally Posted by zelmobeaty
                        View Post

                        Don't be so sure about that. I have a Howlin Wolf/Tom Waits voice and the Harmony G tracks really good when using the upper third.




                        For what it's worth it was not little 'ol me that said it would not track but only "pity the poor ears having to listen to the output of a machine tracking that!"



                        Having said the above I'll add that if you're happy, then I'm happy you're happy about being happy.

                        Comment


                        • #87






                          Quote Originally Posted by Chumly
                          View Post

                          For what it's worth it was not little 'ol me that said it would not track but only "pity the poor ears having to listen to the output of a machine tracking that!"



                          Having said the above I'll add that if you're happy, then I'm happy you're happy about being happy.




                          Chumly is right.



                          It was I, not he, who made the breach of logic by conflating a "pitiable sound" with "not working." They are two different things, of course. If you're polishing a turd, you don't blame the polish for doing its job well.



                          And I'm not equating Dylan/Wolf/Waits/Chuck with a turd, so no mail, please. And may I say that if Chuck sounds like a cross between Howlin' Wolf and Tom Waits, I'm jealous. And if I could write like Dylan, who cares that my voice sounds like geese farts on a muggy day? Oh, wait--that's Leo Kottke's self-assessment.
                          Jon Chappell
                          Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/jon_chappell
                          Check out my website: http://jonchappell.com

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Actually, I heard your version of danny boy just using the presets and chords and that was very impressive... I could see doing that with a keyboard with a volume off and the midi going into the machine, giving similar results...



                            I know in an irish bar, on st. patrick's day, at the right time of the night, just announce your going to do danny boy acapella... With that version, there won't be a dry eye in the house....

                            Comment


                            • #89






                              Quote Originally Posted by tradivoro1
                              View Post

                              Actually, I heard your version of danny boy just using the presets and chords and that was very impressive... I could see doing that with a keyboard with a volume off and the midi going into the machine, giving similar results...




                              Well, that's almost exactly how I did it, except that I used a guitar. The singer sang, and I strummed chords behind him (adding substitutions to taste, such as the IV minor chord or a I to I7 into a IV--listen to Verse 2 for these--and a bVI/Italian 6th substitution at the final cadence). The VoiceLive 2 allows you to mute the output of the instrument input, so that it still hears it for harmonizing, but doesn't output it. If you used a keyboard with MIDI, you could get even more prescriptive and defined with the harmonies, though as you point out, using just presets produces a result that is pretty darn impressive.








                              I know in an irish bar, on st. patrick's day, at the right time of the night, just announce your going to do danny boy acapella... With that version, there won't be a dry eye in the house....



                              Not to mention all the tips they would shower upon you--or at the least unending offers for a pint of Guinness!
                              Jon Chappell
                              Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/jon_chappell
                              Check out my website: http://jonchappell.com

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                hi all



                                I have owned the original Voicelive for about 5 years and am very happy with it despite some problems. I am very interested in the V2, especially regarding the guitar driven harmonies, an area I didn't fully utilize before.



                                I have developed my own vocal sound involving the thickener on V1, and wondered if the V2 has thickening as I have seen no mention of it? If so would it be in the mod or doubling section, and can it therefore be kicked in despite the preset being used? Is it possible to emulate the presets on V1 near enough? eg Can I get a close simulation for plate2 reverb with the V2?



                                Secondly, I experienced heavy feedback while using the V1 live in a band/small club setting, to the point where it was impossible to use any eq and little compression. This worries me with regards to the auto tone. Can the tone settings be manually overridden for say the eq, whilst still auto gating, compressing etc? And has the V2's propensity towards generating feedback been improved?



                                Finally I had a few problems with the confusing output overload led on V1, sometimes it seemed suggesting there was insufficient processing power for some configurations of the unit. Also the limiter on my machine stopped working. Has the input/output situation now been simplified with auto gain, is there still a limiter and has the output overload been negated? Is there also now enough processing power to cover all eventualities?



                                Thanks for your time and a wonderful unit.



                                cheers



                                J

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X