Members gruven65 Posted December 23, 2012 Members Share Posted December 23, 2012 I had my wife record some video of our gig last night. Watching the video, I noticed I was singing a little sharp all night, except in one song when the battery failed in my in-ears. What might be the cause of the in ear monitor driving me sharp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tlbonehead Posted December 23, 2012 Members Share Posted December 23, 2012 Originally Posted by gruven65 I had my wife record some video of our gig last night. Watching the video, I noticed I was singing a little sharp all night, except in one song when the battery failed in my in-ears. What might be the cause of the in ear monitor driving me sharp? no idea, unless you didn't have any instruments in them to gauge your pitch, or the main instrument you were referencing was slightly sharp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gruven65 Posted December 23, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 23, 2012 Originally Posted by tlbonehead no idea, unless you didn't have any instruments in them to gauge your pitch, or the main instrument you were referencing was slightly sharp? The info I'm finding in searches is conflicting. Some say too much vocal in the mix causes one to sing sharp; some say not enough vocal causes one to sing sharp. I probably had too much vocal in the mix, so your comment about there not being enough of the instruments in the mix for me find pitch, makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members abzurd Posted December 23, 2012 Members Share Posted December 23, 2012 Maybe your skull is sharp (bone conduction).... Seriously though, in ear monitoring is very different because you are hearing a boatload of your own voice through your skull. Try talking or singing then cover your hears and keep doing it. It's pretty different. Maybe you're just thrown by having to overcome that in your mix. Do you keep the mix very low? I've found I really have to have me at a decent volume with some crispness in the EQ to get over the mud that's in my head (literally). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Randyman Posted December 23, 2012 Members Share Posted December 23, 2012 Originally Posted by abzurd Maybe your skull is sharp (bone conduction).... Seriously though, in ear monitoring is very different because you are hearing a boatload of your own voice through your skull. Try talking or singing then cover your hears and keep doing it. It's pretty different. Maybe you're just thrown by having to overcome that in your mix. Do you keep the mix very low? I've found I really have to have me at a decent volume with some crispness in the EQ to get over the mud that's in my head (literally). Huh! I would think though that the "mud" would be in correct intonation, but I suppose it mostly just smears what you're hearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bobby1Note Posted December 23, 2012 Members Share Posted December 23, 2012 I don't use IEM's, but when I'm recording tracks with closed-back headphones, I find my pitch control is spot-on; more so than when I'm not using cans. That's probably due to the fact that I can hear myself more easily. Back in the day, I used to see singers who would cup one hand, and place the heel of their palm next to the side of their mouth, with the fingertips placed next to the ear. Again, this was so they could hear themselves more clearly, and focus more on their part if they were singing harmony. One notable example of this technique was Robin Gibb of the BeeGee's.http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...v=-UZjJj9Einw#!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EU-8xEd8WU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted December 23, 2012 Members Share Posted December 23, 2012 Originally Posted by Bobby1Note I don't use IEM's, but when I'm recording tracks with closed-back headphones, I find my pitch control is spot-on; more so than when I'm not using cans. That's probably due to the fact that I can hear myself more easily.Back in the day, I used to see singers who would cup one hand, and place the heel of their palm next to the side of their mouth, with the fingertips placed next to the ear. Again, this was so they could hear themselves more clearly, and focus more on their part if they were singing harmony. One notable example of this technique was Robin Gibb of the BeeGee's.http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...v=-UZjJj9Einw#!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EU-8xEd8WU That is my experience as well.What I have noticed is that my vocals suffer if my guitar part is complex and/or I haven't had time to learn my guitar part so well that I can play it without any thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gruven65 Posted December 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 Originally Posted by abzurd Maybe your skull is sharp You saying I have a pointed head?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members srspud Posted December 24, 2012 Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 Look up the recent Premier Guitar interview with Neal Schon. He mentions this problem too and for that reason has a special way that he uses IEMs. He says many artists he's worked with using them are off pitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gruven65 Posted December 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 Originally Posted by srspud Look up the recent Premier Guitar interview with Neal Schon. Couldn't find it. You sure it was Premier Guitar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members whataracket Posted December 24, 2012 Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 I'm not sure about the pitch issue, but it sounds like you may not have your IEM vocal feed eq'd to complement the voice sound transmitted through your head when your ears are plugged. You want to USE that sound rather than fight it with the IEM sound. You do this by adjusting the IEM vocal channel eq to significantly reduce the level of the frequencies that you are already hearing through your head. You then balance the IEM vocal feed and the head-transmitted sound to get a natural sounding vocal monitor sound at your eardrums. So, how do you do this without messing up the sound of your vocals in the FOH mix and other peoples' monitors? You have too split your vocals into two mixer input channels and use one for the FOH and other monitor feeds and the other for your IEM feed. (There are several ways you can do this - I use a custom made splitter cable plugged into the channel inserts.) You then use the channel eq on the IEM channel to make the adjustments I described. Of course, you need a channel eq with one or preferably two sweepable mid adjustments. Having a natural vocal sound at your ears may help with the pitch issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members srspud Posted December 24, 2012 Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 It's in here someplace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gruven65 Posted December 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 Thanks. It's right about 13:10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mutha Goose Posted December 24, 2012 Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 Originally Posted by abzurd Maybe your skull is sharp (bone conduction).... Seriously though, in ear monitoring is very different because you are hearing a boatload of your own voice through your skull. Try talking or singing then cover your hears and keep doing it. It's pretty different. Maybe you're just thrown by having to overcome that in your mix. Do you keep the mix very low? I've found I really have to have me at a decent volume with some crispness in the EQ to get over the mud that's in my head (literally). Exactly! What you hear through bone conduction will be slightly flat. So you go sharp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bobby1Note Posted December 24, 2012 Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 Are you by any chance running reverb into your IEM mix? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members whataracket Posted December 24, 2012 Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 Originally Posted by Mutha Goose Exactly! What you hear through bone conduction will be slightly flat. So you go sharp. I don't understand why it would be flat, from a physics point of view, but I agree that it provides poor pitch feedback. I've always thought that was because it's so upper-bass heavy and there are almost no overtones. Can you explain what would make it flat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gruven65 Posted December 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 Originally Posted by Bobby1Note Are you by any chance running reverb into your IEM mix? Yes, there is reverb in the IEM mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Crownman Posted December 24, 2012 Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 Originally Posted by gruven65 Yes, there is reverb in the IEM mix. In my opinion, that reverb is probably the cause. Every person I've worked with that had fx in their in ears had problems with pitch. Took out the fx and pitch was fine. So that's where I would start if I were you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tlbonehead Posted December 24, 2012 Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 Originally Posted by gruven65 Yes, there is reverb in the IEM mix. why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted December 24, 2012 Members Share Posted December 24, 2012 Originally Posted by tlbonehead why? Because I selfishly want to enjoy my own performance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bobby1Note Posted December 25, 2012 Members Share Posted December 25, 2012 That's probably the cause then; that's why I asked. Reverb in your monitor tends to "sweeten" the sound of the vocal, and even though you're singing slightly off-pitch, the reverb will make it sound fine in the monitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gruven65 Posted December 25, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 25, 2012 Originally Posted by tlbonehead why? Only because I wanted to try it. I had never done it that way in the past, but worked with others who preferred a "wet" mix. Oddly, it didn't seem to affect the other singers at all. Originally Posted by Crownman In my opinion, that reverb is probably the cause. Every person I've worked with that had fx in their in ears had problems with pitch. Took out the fx and pitch was fine. So that's where I would start if I were you. That's what I'll do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nousername Posted December 26, 2012 Members Share Posted December 26, 2012 Oh man, Neal looks SOOOO bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rodclement Posted December 26, 2012 Members Share Posted December 26, 2012 Do you practice with them in? A lot of people practice with wedges and play live with in ears and never find the correct mix, some sing sharp, some sing to low, etc. Practice as close to your live rig as possible so you get used to hearing yourself in that situation and your problem should/could go away. Also as mentioned, make sure your reference instrument is tuned properly. Rod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mutha Goose Posted December 26, 2012 Members Share Posted December 26, 2012 Originally Posted by whataracket I don't understand why it would be flat, from a physics point of view, but I agree that it provides poor pitch feedback. I've always thought that was because it's so upper-bass heavy and there are almost no overtones. Can you explain what would make it flat? I'm sorry, it goes slightly sharp. To understand why we have to look at two areas of study: Wave theory, and psycho-accoustics.Wavelength, speed and magnitude are affected by the density of the transmission medium. If a wave encounters a boundary of a higher density (air to bone in this case), a portion of that wave will be reflected back (reflective losses) and a portion will continue through the boundary material (transmitted). The transmitted wave will will be of lower magnitude and will travel slower slower resulting in a shorter wavelength for a given frequency (which is not affected by variations in density). This conducted wave that is now shorter in length and is directly conducted into the cochlea. The cochlea is actually wavelength sensitive, not frequency sensitive. The easiest model for this is antenna theory.The hairs within the cochlea respond to wavelengths in proportions to their lengths, much like an antenna can be tuned for the wave length of a specific carrier frequency for maximum sensitivity. Antenna matching can be thrown off by changes in temperature and elevation. So sensitive systems need to be tuned for their environments to compensate for this variation in wavelength. Both are effects of air density's influence on wavelength as the carrier frequency is constant. Bringing this back to the ear; the conversion of acoustic energy to neural transmission is a function of the wave's length, not it's frequency. In general we think of wavelength and frequency as being just the inverse of each other, so this subtly typically doesn't matter. But there is a difference. And as a result, a shorter wavelength will be interpreted as a higher frequency.Of course, I am simplifying... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.