Jump to content

Recording vocals in a plain old room


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Hiya,

 

This is going to sound a bit silly but will ask anyways..

 

I am starting to get into a little recording for people, and will be needing to record some vocals. All I have is an SM58 from my band days and a mic stand :)

 

If you were going to recommend one good vocal mic, what would it be? (preferably under $300-350 US)

 

And finally, my project studio is in a room with a high ceiling sloping on one side - are there any easy things to minimise noise?

 

Thanks in advance for any assistance ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have an NTK, and it's a nice tube mic for the price. Depending on your voice, it might be exactly the wrong mic to use. And, depending on your voice, an SM58 might be exactly the right mic to use.

 

Price isn't the major factor in selecting an appropriate mic for a task.

 

If your voice is harsh or sibilant, go for the 58. I found myself turning to the Shure dynamics so often in preference to my condensor mics, that I got a Shure SM7b - a Large Diaphragm Dynamic. (Essentially the same mic that was used to record the Thriller album, for what it's worth).

 

Consider this: SM57, 58, Beta 57, 58, SM7 & RE20's - all these are dynamic mics that have been used for lead vocals on many classic albums. That was in the days of mag tape. With todays DAW's, with their bright digital sound, I think it makes even more sense to turn to these warm dynamic mics, rather than the cheap bright condensor mics. All depends on the voice of course, but generally I think the recommendation for eveyone to automatically buy an LCD for vocals is just misleading. The recording magazines are supported by their advertisers, and they will say whatever gets the money from their advertisers.

 

However - quality of preamp becomes more important when using dynamic mics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

As far as the room - high sloping ceiling is good. (Much better than low flat ceiling for acoustics).

 

Some acoustic treatment will be necessary for any room. Usually bass trapping is necessary. Don't go crazy with egg cartons - they look cool but they don't work. Get a few books on acoustics before you do anything - knowledge in this area will pay off.

 

Depending on vocal style, the room sound may or may not be that useful to you. Certainly for rap, you probably want an absolutely dry vocal. Use lots of foam. For most other styles, dry is very good because you can always add artifical delay & reverb.

 

Some people love fibrglass for absorbtion. I hate stuff with a passion. You don't want fibreglass in your lungs. Make sure it is hermetically sealed if you go there. I like thick foam. And carved patterns serve no purpose other than to raise the price and to remove good foam.

 

Getting a great performance is the main thing, so room temperature and lighting, and furniture are all important. There is nothing more intimidating that being a performer in a fishbowl with nowhere to hide. Some people might like that, but many don't. Make them feel special.

 

Idea: a frame standing inside the room, containing foam and maybe covered in stylish drapes might provide the absorbtion, sense of security and opulance that might make your performers feel more comfortable and sound better too.

 

 

Headphones or speakers? Don't rule out speakers. You can try the phase reverse trick to minimise bleed - but for some performers, a hand-held stage mic with monitors blaring might actually deliver the killer performance, and stuff the bleed.

 

Get the best mic preamp and A/D converters you can afford - the vocal is where the money is. But ultimately, use what you have - the performance is everything.

 

I don't believe in compression while tracking. But you might consider tracking two channels of the same vocal, one 6dB hotter than the other. That gives you choice later on to avoid clipped or under-recorded bits.

 

Reverb in the monitor mix might help your vocalists pitch better - or not. It's their choice, and generally the better singers don't want so much reverb.

 

Getting the singer comfortable is more important than most other things. Have water on hand - not too cold.

 

The first take is often gold, and if you haven't nailed it after take 3, go home. For this reason, you need to be recording long before the artist knows they are on. Do a take to 'test the mic', another 'to warm up' - do another 'for levels' - then another 'for practice'.

 

Then, when you ask them to do their first 'real take' - watch them clam up, sing too loud, and generally balls it up.

 

Oh - and if you schedule a date for a vocal session, they will always get a cold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by greendoor

As far as the room - high sloping ceiling is good. (Much better than low flat ceiling for acoustics).


Some acoustic treatment will be necessary for any room. Usually bass trapping is necessary. Don't go crazy with egg cartons - they look cool but they don't work. Get a few books on acoustics before you do anything - knowledge in this area will pay off.


Depending on vocal style, the room sound may or may not be that useful to you. Certainly for rap, you probably want an absolutely dry vocal. Use lots of foam. For most other styles, dry is very good because you can always add artifical delay & reverb.


Some people love fibrglass for absorbtion. I hate stuff with a passion. You don't want fibreglass in your lungs. Make sure it is hermetically sealed if you go there. I like thick foam. And carved patterns serve no purpose other than to raise the price and to remove good foam.


Getting a great performance is the main thing, so room temperature and lighting, and furniture are all important. There is nothing more intimidating that being a performer in a fishbowl with nowhere to hide. Some people might like that, but many don't. Make them feel special.


Idea: a frame standing inside the room, containing foam and maybe covered in stylish drapes might provide the absorbtion, sense of security and opulance that might make your performers feel more comfortable and sound better too.



Headphones or speakers? Don't rule out speakers. You can try the phase reverse trick to minimise bleed - but for some performers, a hand-held stage mic with monitors blaring might actually deliver the killer performance, and stuff the bleed.


Get the best mic preamp and A/D converters you can afford - the vocal is where the money is. But ultimately, use what you have - the performance is everything.


I don't believe in compression while tracking. But you might consider tracking two channels of the same vocal, one 6dB hotter than the other. That gives you choice later on to avoid clipped or under-recorded bits.


Reverb in the monitor mix might help your vocalists pitch better - or not. It's their choice, and generally the better singers don't want so much reverb.


Getting the singer comfortable is more important than most other things. Have water on hand - not too cold.


The first take is often gold, and if you haven't nailed it after take 3, go home. For this reason, you need to be recording long before the artist knows they are on. Do a take to 'test the mic', another 'to warm up' - do another 'for levels' - then another 'for practice'.


Then, when you ask them to do their first 'real take' - watch them clam up, sing too loud, and generally balls it up.


Oh - and if you schedule a date for a vocal session, they will always get a cold.

 

Greendoor - thanks so much for the comprehensive reply - much appreciated! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Packing blankets from Home Depot and mic stands work well for a quick voice booth if you're trying to just record voice you could get away with that. Why treat the whole room when you can create your own mini room?

 

Set the booms flat so the whole stand makes a T. Put 1 behind, 1 to the left, one to the right... a total of 3. The sloping ceiling will reflect the ceiling reflection away from the mic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I am starting to get into a little recording for people, and will be needing to record some vocals. All I have is an SM58 from my band days and a mic stand


If you were going to recommend one good vocal mic, what would it be? (preferably under $300-350 US)

 

 

IMO, there's nothing wrong with the mic you've got. I'd at least start with that until, you've figured out what it is that your 58 isn't doing for you that another mic will.

 

One thing you'll find is that something like a large-diaphragm condenser - while having a pleasing sound on many vocals - will likely open up a whole can of worms that your 58 won't (recording space, acoustics, mic technique, background noise). You'll also find there are many people who'll put in a better performance with a 58 as they're used to it, but put a 'studio' condenser in front of them and it's a whole new ballgame which can be to the detriment of the performance.

 

There's a lot of great vocal tracks that have been recorded with the venerable SM58.

 

-Daniel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

am i the only one that thinks this thread ended up...extremely...backwards?

 

seriously...if you can make it to your second hand counting how many hit records have an SM58 for lead vocals, off the top of your head, you need to stop listening to bad records.

 

in the 300-400 dollar range, do some research on the folowing large diaphragm condensers, which will also be useful on things other than vocal tracks.

 

1) Groove Tubes GT55, or multi-pattern GT57

2) Shure KSM27

3) Audio Technica AT4040

4) Preowned Rode NTK

5) Preowned Blue Bluebird

 

unless some freak-sonic-{censored} is going on in your room, you will never want to plug an SM58 into a recorder ever again. if a singer feels comfortable with a 58 and that's all they'll use, get a Shure Beta87A handheld condenser for 250 and then get an Audio Technica AT3035 for everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What I am saying is that even when you have a whole range of microphones to choose from, the price of them has nothing to do with which one you should choose.

 

IMO - people who say an SM58 is crap probably don't own a great mic preamp. If you are just plugging into the cheap mic pre's in most recorders, then I understand why you wouldn't appreciate it. You probably would really hate a ribbon mic too.

 

The thing about cheap condensor mics is that they have a hot, bright output - and that can fool a beginner into think that it sounds better than a dynamic mic. It certainly fooled me for far too long. Something i've learned is to stop judging mic's by how loud, or how bright, or even how low their noise floor is. Some of the highly prized vintage mics have low output, plenty of noise and maybe even a dark sound. But it's what they do on certain source material WITH THE RIGHT PREAMP that makes them highly sought after.

 

So if budget is a concern, the SM58 is a great vocal mic - but you might need a great preamp. If you are serious about vocals, there is no getting around this.

 

For semi applications, a cheap condensor mic is louder, brighter and quieter, and you might get better recordings with cheap gear simply because you don't have to work your cheap mic preamp so hard. But I find that many cheap condensor mic's have some nasty high mids that really annoy after a while. Harsh or sibilant voices can sound really bad, and no amount of eq can really fix it. The condensors also tend to pick up more room sound. Even though my room is acoustically designed, with sloping roof and skewed walls, and plenty of bass trapping and foam and diffusion - sometimes I just want a dry vocal sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

seriously...if you can make it to your second hand counting how many hit records have an SM58 for lead vocals, off the top of your head, you need to stop listening to bad records.

Well that's a matter of taste. Many great vocals have been recorded with dynamic mic's. I haven't been counting, but I believe Bono and Jagger are famous for using '58's on their hits. Johny Rotten used one for Never Mind the Bollocks, which is the ultimate punk classic album. He could have used any mike, but that was what worked. I have heard that many rap artists have used a 58, and apparantly Eminem's first album used one. If you also include the SM7, then you have to include all the hit's off Thriller - which is probably still in the best selling list.

 

That's not the point. Can you give me a list of how many hits have been made with cheap condensor mics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by Lee Knight

Packing blankets from Home Depot and mic stands work well for a quick voice booth if you're trying to just record voice you could get away with that. Why treat the whole room when you can create your own mini room?


Set the booms flat so the whole stand makes a T. Put 1 behind, 1 to the left, one to the right... a total of 3. The sloping ceiling will reflect the ceiling reflection away from the mic.

 

 

I don't mean to hi-jack this thread, but could you please elaborate a bit more on this, as it is interesting for my application aswell. Like, how big should the room be? I guess this would produce very dry (too dry?) vocals, depending on the kind of blankets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by Flaat



I don't mean to hi-jack this thread, but could you please elaborate a bit more on this, as it is interesting for my application aswell. Like, how big should the room be? I guess this would produce very dry (too dry?) vocals, depending on the kind of blankets?

 

I too would be interested in more info on this ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Assuming you want a dry vocal booth (most people do) then I think it's a great idea to make some form of absorbant wall to sing in front of. To kill the most reflections, you might need absorbant sides and a top too. I actually read about one engineer on a classic hit recording who got the singer to wear a piece of foam on her head!

 

A quick setup with mic stands and booms would do. Other people put a lot of foam on the walls and ceiling to kill reflections. Walls are actually the least effect place to put foam, but it's a convenience and aesthetic thing.

 

Absorbants work best at 1/4 wavelength of the frequency in question. Imagine a sine wave. Where are the zero crossings? Obviously walls are going to be zero crossing - that's where the air molecules are at zero velocity. Absorbant foam or fiberglass is at maximum effectiveness at 1/4 wavelength, where the air molecules are moving fastest. So foam mounted on the wall is least effective - the thicker it is, the more frequencies it can have a chance of killing. But to kill the bass (the 'room boom' sound) you need the foam further out into the room.

 

So it makes sense to build a little frame to hang the absorbant matterial from, where it can do the most good. I was always impressed with the large semi-room-like movable gobo's at Abbey Road. They provided a shield to wrap around the artist - they had window in which would be a bit of a compromise.

 

So build something to suit your budget - blankets hanging off mic stands would work. Something with nice drapes on it might look (and sound) better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Better is always a relative thing. I have a Rode NTK, and I like it but would never suggest is as a main studio mic for everything.

 

Different voices (and different genres) suit different microphones. Each singer should really find out which mic flatters their voice the most. Maybe it's a tube LCD. Maybe its a hand-held dynamic.

 

I think an SM58 is probably not going to suck on most voices. Whereas with a cheap chinese mic, you run a high risk that it will suck on a lot of voices. Especially the harsh, sibilant voices that I seem to have to deal with. But they might be exactly right for some voices.

 

I see a lot of people giving rave reviews about a cheap LCD mic they've bought - check out the Harmony Central mic reviews. You can rule out the first 1 or 2 reviews, because they will be from the agent selling the things. But when I see people with, say, a Rode NT2 saying how great it is for everything, I have to question what they have seriously compared it with. With no other reference to compare with, you might think it's ok. If you compare it to, say, a Rode NT2000, an NT2 starts to sound very harsh. And - for some voices - if you compare with an SM57 or 58, you might wonder why you want a condensor at all.

 

On acoustic guitars or cymbals, certainly you will want a condensor. You basically need a good mic collection of all the classics - then you just use whatever sounds good. Regardless of price.

 

But in the scheme of things, I'll probablly be selling my cheap condensor mic's long before I sell my dynamics. Anyone want to buy a pair of C1000S? Good for jamming doors open or driving in nails ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Originally posted by Kiwiburger

Absorbants work best at 1/4 wavelength of the frequency in question. Imagine a sine wave. Where are the zero crossings?

Obviously walls are going to be zero crossing - that's where the air molecules are at zero velocity.

 

 

I'm not too sure about this statement; waves will be reflected off the wall with the same phase as when the waves meet the wall.

 

A wall does not imply a node for all frequencies; although certainly the standing waves created in a room will have nodes/anti-nodes where the walls are for that particular frequency. If that's what you were referring to, my apologies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes I agree - the vibrations in the air are an extremely complex mix. But the main problems in a room are the nodes, caused by the wall dimensions, and that's mainly what I was thinking about relating to the overall effectiveness of foam in a room.

 

I have a lot of 4" foam on my walls - and I know it was far more effective when it was sitting in a pile in the middle of the room. I had to buy more.

 

That's an interesting point about what happens when a direct sound hits a wall. Obviously the air molecules hit the wall and rebound, so at the exact wall interface, the velocity of the molecule has reach zero. What effect does that have on the waveform? I'm guessing it would be sort of a zero point? Anyway - the lower the velocity, the less impact absorbtion has - which is basically the point I was making.

 

I guess the elasticity of the wall is a big factor in the sound - which is probably why tile rooms are brighter than wood ... I'm thinking about building a real echo chamber, and this might be an important factor ... hmmm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...