Vocal harmonizing....

WOW.

Hey guys and gals.

Yesterday I went to a "band" practice (just to see if I start learning to play the electric by playing cover songs) and the REAL guitarist of the band brought over his vocal harmonizer. It's this one:

http://www.zzounds.com/item--TCEVOICEWORKS

and holy cow.

After the practice, I stayed playing with it for like an hour.

I could not believe the sound that was coming out of this thing. I actually sounded like I could sing!! hehehehe You just had to program the Key of the song you were playing and your set. Of course it has more features but I'm no rocket scientist so I could not figure them out

Anyway, as you can see, the price tag is quite up there.

I notice that there were a couple of them (cheaper) but I was wondering if you use these equipments on your songs or if you do it the old way (i.e. one track main vocal, another your second, etc..).

Also, if you use these type of harmonizers, is there one cheaper but as good as the one I posted?

Thanks.

I've got the exact same model and I love it myself.

'Cause I couldn't carry a tune in a bucket.

Both. I have an Digitech Vocalist that is more than a decade old at this point, and I still use it a lot. For a while I'd use it for all my background vocals, but now I much prefer to multitrack my own voice--the end result is a more pleasing natural sound. For harmonizing with the lead vocal, I do it the natural way (well...as natural as overdubbing can be), while all the "ooohs" and "aaahs" in the background, I use the Digitech for, and it works very well. The only problem is that long held notes tend to drift out of tune, but again, it's an old model. Maybe they've improved the technology since then. I'm actually pretty sure there is a superior software version by now that does everything you need it to do and more.

Another problem is that, at least with my device, it's tough to get good stereo seperation between voices, but I actually wouldn't want that anyway. I prefer to hear all the voices in the same place in the stereo field--they blend much better that way, at least to my ears. I just adjust the levels, record the entire signal to one track, and I'm good.

I just do one million takes without the technology. Cheapskate method. Can get annoying though.

lol

This is what I TRY to do!

So, is there any software that actually does this?!?!

Or is it the power of a good DSP that makes this harmonizing happen?

hey, I have a question. Would my ME-50 with it's built in harmonizer be able to work for vox? It works for guitars but I don't know if it's designed for vox at all, I have yet to try it. If it doesn't, is there a tweak I could do that'd make it work?

Good question, give it a try and let us know.

i'm going to come off as a TOTAL {censored}ING ELITISTASSHOLE here, but i'm with samtrips......even more so, though. i'd feel like a {censored} if my harmony came from a computer chip....i'd lose quite a bit of respect for myself, man. (i'm not gunning to make anyone feel bad here, but it's just completely against what i think a true musician should be doing....i do, however, have lofty standards)

plus, harmony's supposed to work as an enhancement for specific situations...you have to feel it out....every great musician {who writes harmonies} has done this in the past. yeah....you can theoretically harmonize with about 20 different pitches depending on that particular musical moment, but to get your ear on point enough where you can pick it out instead of having it 'dialed in' on a rack-mountable {censored}box is the whole idea.

plus, usually the harmonies that come out of those machines are stagnant....there's INFINITE possibilities in phrasing when you approach harmony....how the 2nd/3rd voices are expressed....are they different from each other? are they literally singing the same thing as the lead voice? are they working in counterpoint? this is the {censored} good harmony is made of - not predictable 'one size fits all' bull{censored} enhancements to a diatonic melody line. a falsetto harmony vs full voice can TOTALLY make it in the right situation. a whisper....yadda yadda yadda.....

sorry if i sound like a dick...it just feels disengenuous to me...paint-by-numbers bull{censored} for people who are too lazy for trial and error. (really....i know i sound combative....maybe i am a little bit on these 'easy ways out')

to quote trashmore: I R SORRY

EAGLE: sigue bregando con tu voz. olvidate de esta mierda. rock en espa

I used to use a vocalizer for harmony, but we no longer use it. I don't use an autotuner in the studio either. Our band philosophy is that nothing goes on the CD that we can't pull off live. No extra guitars, no guest keyboardists, no doubling and tripling parts, just lay it down like it's a live show.

Ya man... Indeed! This is the same reason I don't respect anyone who buys guitar strings pre-wound, rather than winding their own.... Using a reverb to simulate a large room vs. actually recording in one? Cheating... And what's with these guitar tuners? If you can't tune it by ear, you shouldn't be playing it. That's what I think. I'll be back later, after I've chopped down the tree I intend to make my next solid body guitar from - anything other than making your own isn't what music should be all about - anyone can buy a guitar.... Seriously, some people have noooo integrity whatsoever.... Backatcha!

so, vocal harmony writing is equivalent to adding reverb, huh? super-duper, kid

are you serious? none of what you said is musical content.....HARMONY IS. having a box do the work for you is treating it like an effect that should be plugged in. it's not - that's gay. it's a HUGELY SUBSTANCIAL part of song arranging; something that some people put much more emphasis into than others, obviously.

for your next album, why don't you just get a guitar patch and have it do the guitar work for you, since that seems pretty much in line with the sentiment YOU'RE expressing here. (aside from almost outright saying that harmony = window dressing.....) you wouldn't even haev to take your instrument out of its case!

in line with your hyperbolic rant on MY opinion - why don't you just record your guitar, then PLUG IN everything else! it'd be great!!!! the bass is just a guitar effect, anyway. the drums - another guitar effect! YOU'RE SINGING? {censored}ing why? that can be plugged in in the mix! here's my method: we can just get a plug-in like the fruity 'sound-font' player, type the lyrics into it and then drop THAT track into antares auto-tune and make our melody!!!! AND THEN WE'LL HARMONIZE IT!!! it'll be such great work!!!!! after all, production is being a musician!!!!! if you want, i'll even help you produce the album!!!! via computer!!!! i won't even have to be there!!!!!!!!!! i'll get credit, though!!! i deserve credit!!!!!

no, my friend......back at YOU.

i have NO problem with an artist using the tracks available in teh studio to create a bigger sound. if i can record a beautiful string arrangement, but can't get it in my live shows, i'm still going to arrange it (or plug it into my ACME harmonizer/arranger box that does {announcer voice HERE} all the hard work for me!!!!! )

point is, it's okay.....that's still creative content. (although i TOTALLY respect you for your stance - it's genuine)

well-crafted vocal harmonies ARE NOT EFFECTS. that's all i'm saying

I don't disagree with you, I like the rich, full sound in some tunes. It's just not our thing.

Yea.. I'm serious here. It's pretty clear that what music is to you and what music is to me, are two completely different things. That's all. To you it's an acrobatic competition where the end result is used to 'show off' how immense the talent of the musician is, and to me it's about the experience of the song and what feeling it gives to the listener. Both approaches are valid.

And believe me - if they made a good convincing guitar patch, and I needed it to pull off and idea, I'd {censored}ing use it in a minute... To me, the song>everything else. I could give a {censored} as to HOW a performance made it to tape. Opinions on this vary, so I'd be more than happy to be the minority in this regard...

I just took a way more fundamental approach to the issue in my reply than you did in yours, that's all. It's all about where you draw the line on using technology.

Have you ever used a compressor or limiter when recording a vocal? That's cheating. You should have better voice and microphone control to limit your transients by mouth positioning... A compressor is cheating. Where do you draw the line?

Where do you draw the line? Maybe I draw the line in a different place all together...

That is a valid opinion.

Where do you draw the line? Maybe I draw the line in a different place all together...

so, in fifteen years, when 'band in a box' can do it all for you, will you forget about playing your instruments altogether?

having listened to your music, you really have so much more musical substance than i hear in your stance on this issue. i'm confused

you know....for me, too the song>everything else. (believe it or not; despite my apparently acrobatic cock-rock)

but without creativity in the arrangement, the song can get lost......i think writing good songs has alot to do with breaking new ground....not predictable {censored} that we've heard a million times before. that's what all these processors do. they do 'the standard' approach. if the song really means more than everything else, then it deserves to be looked at and examined from more creative angles

Hey bud, I didn't mean to be insulting. I apologize. I've heard your music, and I think it's very good! I was just saying that we might have fundamentally different views on what music 'is' - Which is cool, as it's a big world and more opinions are better than fewer.

What I meant by 'acrobatic' was that to you, I'd assume the ideal of the musician actually being able to perform the work to genuinely be important. As in, it's more valid if the physical part of the musician is actually able to produce with his hands the music that was in his head. I might be wrong in that, but I didn't get that from just this thread. This is what lead to the 'acrobat' comment. It had nothing whatsoever to do with your music, which I dig.

My stance is that a harmonizer is just a piece of technology. I don't use one, instead recording all of my harmonies live and natural. But, if I found the end result of the effect on someone else's recording to be enjoyable, and it was good enough to match their vision of what the sound was supposed to be, then I'd embrace it for the song.

I think there are a lot of things that are 'musical content' that aren't the result of the musicians own talent. Tube amps, Synth tones, chorus pedals, etc. It's the talent of the musician to select the right sound to match their vision, and to that end, the harmony generators are just another tool to get a sound. I can do a fake chorus by just doing a few guitar takes - but I don't. I just slap a chorus on. It's a 'fake' shortcut, but it's a tool at my disposal.

But, like I said - my opinion on this is way outside of the norm. I'm a freak in regards to what I feel about music, and I'll admit that.

If the time comes when Band-in-a-box could sound like a room full of studio musicians, I'd use it in a second! I seriously can see no difference between hiring studio musicians to perform my work, and having a computer musician play it. See? Weird, I am...

oh man... I'm sorry you misconstrued my comments. It wasn't about your music. I explained above, but I really didn't mean anything negative by it in regards to your music friend.....

lol....sorry...i realized how much i sounded like a little bitch. guess i'm just frustrated for waiting on some mixes for months now. (no...he's not adding ANY harmony to my mixes!....yes...he DID ask!)

i get your point. i can't subscribe to it personally, but i get it...and i agree with what you're saying in theory; just not in practice. i guess i do believe that with every song i write, i grow as a musician...and if i lean on technological advances too much, it'd inhibit my growth - somehow cluttering me up and making my music hit a plateau.

that's just for me - and i can't discredit you for taking the song>everything else argument to its fundamental level. for me, though, without the trial and error that inevitably will get codified with a harmonizer, i have a hard time believing that the song will be at its best.....but here we are full-circle, huh? lol

much respect,

g

Congrats on 1000 posts!

Hey, no problem man. It's all good. One thing we all are is passionate about music - and that's what makes it work!

Ya man... Indeed!

This is the same reason I don't respect anyone who buys guitar strings pre-wound, rather than winding their own....

Using a reverb to simulate a large room vs. actually recording in one? Cheating...

And what's with these guitar tuners? If you can't tune it by ear, you shouldn't be playing it. That's what I think.

I'll be back later, after I've chopped down the tree I intend to make my next solid body guitar from - anything other than making your own isn't what music should be all about - anyone can buy a guitar.... Seriously, some people have noooo integrity whatsoever....

hahaha funny

I used to have one of those Digitech Vocalists...pretty cool, though I'd get more wrapped up in finding the right harmony than working on the song at times. I ended up selling it and moving to recording all the voices myself so I can hear how much I suck and hopefully takes steps to improve my vocals.

But technology is always evolving and integrating into the creative process. Nine Inch Nails are a great example of this. Trent Reznor & Co. bust out this amazing stuff in the studio with all the latest toys, but when they hit the stage they bring more "human" to the live show. Real drums where the studio was sequenced, etc. Very cool.

While 90% of the time, overdubbing vocal tracks and recording harmonies yourself will sound more natural, better, and be more interesting, there are time where the box is more useful. If you run into a range issue, or if you run into a tone issue, where there's something you're trying to do but can't reach it at that note, using a harmonizer to get the proper effect is not what I would call "cheating" at all. In that situation it's a tool that makes it possible to do things that are otherwise very difficult or time-consuming, and in that regard it's pretty much the same thing as a capo, right?

My two cents anyhow.

And no, I still haven't tested my ME-50 to see if it does vocal harmonization. I've been busy recording up some demos so I can post em here, and I've been doing the guitars first, sending it off to my drummer so he can mix in a drumtrack, then we'll worry about vocals cause it's a pain in the ass to sing without a full musical background in my opinion.