Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Hi all!
Is there anyone knowing what are the actual frequencies we should Heighten/Lower in an EQ for the vocals to sound crisper and to get out of the mix clearly. Most of the time I cut the bass below the 100Hz range and up it a bit in the 15-22k range. But I'm not sure it is the best thing to do. I use a precision 200 AKG microphone. (If it might be useful) Thanks |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
"Julien Bernier" wrote ...
Is there anyone knowing what are the actual frequencies we should Heighten/Lower in an EQ for the vocals to sound crisper and to get out of the mix clearly. Most of the time I cut the bass below the 100Hz range and up it a bit in the 15-22k range. But I'm not sure it is the best thing to do. I use a precision 200 AKG microphone. (If it might be useful) IMHO, nobody's voice puts out anything useful in a complex mix at 15-22KHz. Half the listeners can't even hear those freqs. |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Richard Crowley wrote: IMHO, nobody's voice puts out anything useful in a complex mix at 15-22KHz. Half the listeners can't even hear those freqs. Boosting in the 15 kHz range (which of course starts boosting at a lower frequency) is what's often called "giving air" to a mix with EQ. There are certain throat noises up in that range that can make a voice sound different when boosted. You might like it, you might not, or you mic may never pick anything up in that range. |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Well, I know I could add some mids, but my voice sounds too "nosy" when
I do that. How can I compensate? I tried reducing a bit on the mid-side, but then my voice gets lost in the mix. |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
In article .com, "Julien Bernier" wrote:
Hi all! Is there anyone knowing what are the actual frequencies we should Heighten/Lower in an EQ for the vocals to sound crisper and to get out of the mix clearly. Most of the time I cut the bass below the 100Hz range and up it a bit in the 15-22k range. But I'm not sure it is the best thing to do. I use a precision 200 AKG microphone. (If it might be useful) Thanks You should be able to figure this out yourself. I would first try toggling the 3.5 kHz, and then up around 7 kHz if needed. greg greg |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Julien Bernier wrote:
Well, I know I could add some mids, but my voice sounds too "nosy" when I do that. How can I compensate? Reduce the mids on something else in the mix. Anahata |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Anahata wrote:
Reduce the mids on something else in the mix. PS I meant instead of boosting the mids in your vocal. Or maybe a little of both... Anahata |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Richard Crowley wrote:
"Julien Bernier" wrote ... Is there anyone knowing what are the actual frequencies we should Heighten/Lower in an EQ for the vocals to sound crisper and to get out of the mix clearly. Most of the time I cut the bass below the 100Hz range and up it a bit in the 15-22k range. But I'm not sure it is the best thing to do. I use a precision 200 AKG microphone. (If it might be useful) IMHO, nobody's voice puts out anything useful in a complex mix at 15-22KHz. Half the listeners can't even hear those freqs. Note that when you use a simple second-order filter like on typical console EQ, you can set the sweep to 22 KHz and still be making a substantial change at 8 KHz. My advice to new folks is to spend some time with the equalizer boosting various frequencies and getting a sense of what each of the ranges sound like. THEN, when you actually want to equalize, try first only cutting, never boosting. Think about what you need to take away, never what you need to add. Once you get a good feel for how to get the sound you want using _only_ cutting, then learn what you can do with boost. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Julien Bernier wrote:
Well, I know I could add some mids, but my voice sounds too "nosy" when I do that. How can I compensate? I tried reducing a bit on the mid-side, but then my voice gets lost in the mix. Set the filter pretty tight, and set it to full boost. Sweep the frequency control back and forth until you find where that nasal sound is, then turn the knob from boost to cut. Widen up the filter a little bit until it starts to sound right. My suggestion, though, is that maybe you would be better off with a different microphone that better suits your voice. Do as much EQ with the microphone itself and the mike placement. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Thanks Scott.
I found your hints to be very interesting: Ie: Cutting instead of Boosting. I find it is a lot easier to test when I do it that way. I spent some time just equalizing my voice for it to sound just like I'd like it to. I'll think about buying some HARDWARE EQ's because as of now I think it pretty sucks to use digital EQs. You don't have the feel of playing with frequencies very well and I want to TOUCH something. What EQ would you consider as a pro? I don't want to spend 1k$, but if more money = more quality, I'd prefer a costy one over a cheap sounding one. I don't want metallic sounds. (ie: Digital effects on my Alto mixer). That's another thing... where can I get good reverb sounds? Everything I listen to sounds like a tin can! Thanks a lot! |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Julien Bernier wrote:
I found your hints to be very interesting: Ie: Cutting instead of Boosting. I find it is a lot easier to test when I do it that way. I spent some time just equalizing my voice for it to sound just like I'd like it to. I'll think about buying some HARDWARE EQ's because as of now I think it pretty sucks to use digital EQs. You don't have the feel of playing with frequencies very well and I want to TOUCH something. What EQ would you consider as a pro? I don't want to spend 1k$, but if more money = more quality, I'd prefer a costy one over a cheap sounding one. I don't want metallic sounds. (ie: Digital effects on my Alto mixer). Take a look at the Spec parametric EQ. It's under $1k and sounds decent. Also look for a used Orban 622. They are a little grainy by modern standards but a whole lot more powerful than typical console EQ and sell for pretty reasonable prices. For a while, dbx was selling a decent parametric that actually came from the Orban guys. I forget the part number on it, but again it should turn up at reasonable prices used. That's another thing... where can I get good reverb sounds? Everything I listen to sounds like a tin can! From a good room! --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Take a look at the Spec parametric EQ. It's under $1k and sounds decent. Also look for a used Orban 622. They are a little grainy by modern standards but a whole lot more powerful than typical console EQ and sell for pretty reasonable prices. err.. Speck. I can't spell today either. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Cool! thanks!
About a "good room". I know I only have a home studio, but I want to get the best I can from it. So from what you are saying, If I need a hall reverb, I have to put my microphone in a hall? I'll try it just for fun tonight. The problem is outdoor and ambiant noise outside of my typical room. I don't want to unplug my fridge and die from "insert disease here". |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Julien Bernier wrote:
About a "good room". I know I only have a home studio, but I want to get the best I can from it. So from what you are saying, If I need a hall reverb, I have to put my microphone in a hall? I'll try it just for fun tonight. The problem is outdoor and ambiant noise outside of my typical room. I don't want to unplug my fridge and die from "insert disease here". Most of the time when people use reverb, it's to hide problems from tracking in rooms that aren't right for what they want to do. SOMETIMES they use reverb more heavy-handedly as an obvious effect. A lot of that can be done with careful tracking, or re-recording with an echo chamber. Not all of it, though. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
So what you are saying is I should try to record a song without
"reverb" and see how it sounds? But sometimes, a small room like mine (I'd say 15*12') doesn't give an "heavy" feel for the drums and the vocals. the reverb time is too low and we almost don't hear it. Can I fix this? |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Julien Bernier wrote:
So what you are saying is I should try to record a song without "reverb" and see how it sounds? But sometimes, a small room like mine (I'd say 15*12') doesn't give an "heavy" feel for the drums and the vocals. the reverb time is too low and we almost don't hear it. Can I fix this? With a bigger room. Sometimes you might be able to do tricks like use an adjacent hallway and add some room mikes in the hallway and bring them in, if you're stuck in a small place. But there really is no way to get a _good_ drum sound without a large room. Electronics reverb can help fake it, but it's never as good as the real thing. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Thanks for the reply Scott.
I'll try a thing or two tonight. Like the hall recording you spoke of. Thanks again |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
On 13 Sep 2006 11:06:13 -0700, "Julien Bernier"
wrote: Thanks for the reply Scott. I'll try a thing or two tonight. Like the hall recording you spoke of. Thanks again I'm just getting a whole new meaning of "hall" reverb :-) |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
:\
|
#20
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
"Julien Bernier" wrote in message
oups.com I found your hints to be very interesting: Ie: Cutting instead of Boosting. I find it is a lot easier to test when I do it that way. I spent some time just equalizing my voice for it to sound just like I'd like it to. Cutting instead of boosting helps you avoid problems with clipping due to boosting. I'll think about buying some HARDWARE EQ's because as of now I think it pretty sucks to use digital EQs. That is a strange thing to say. You don't have the feel of playing with frequencies very well and I want to TOUCH something. The way any eq, digital or analog works is that you change various adjustments, listen to the results, and adjust again until you get what you want. That's true whether the Eq is analog or digital, hardware or software. What EQ would you consider as a pro? The most powerful and flexible Eqs around are the ones that are implemented as software, such as those in DAW software like Audition. They are also the most economical. |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
GregS wrote: In article .com, "Julien Bernier" wrote: Hi all! Is there anyone knowing what are the actual frequencies we should Heighten/Lower in an EQ for the vocals to sound crisper and to get out of the mix clearly. Most of the time I cut the bass below the 100Hz range and up it a bit in the 15-22k range. But I'm not sure it is the best thing to do. I use a precision 200 AKG microphone. (If it might be useful) Thanks You should be able to figure this out yourself. I would first try toggling the 3.5 kHz, and then up around 7 kHz if needed. greg greg Agreed but try the entire 2.5-4k area also play with cuts in the 400Hz area and turn down the suck button Kevin T |
#22
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
|
#23
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Julien Bernier wrote: The WHAT button? ---- www.soundclick.com/g1mike listen to songs recorded in my home studio! =D You know when the guitarists girlfriend complains the sound sucks you grab a dummy knob marked SUX and turn it down. she replies 'Now thats better" Kevin T |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Oh, only knew about the STFU button
|
#25
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
http://www.thepengwins.com/assets/soundman-farside.gif
"Jimmy's Last Day as a Sound Man" Gary Larsen Far Side Julien Bernier wrote: The WHAT button? ---- www.soundclick.com/g1mike listen to songs recorded in my home studio! =D |
#26
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
That's another thing... where can I get good reverb sounds?
Everything I listen to sounds like a tin can! From a good room! Should fake reverb ever be applied to outdoor recordings? This guy I know played me a recording he made of a singer outdoors and he had put a LOT of reverb on it. |
#27
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
In article om,
wrote: That's another thing... where can I get good reverb sounds? Everything I listen to sounds like a tin can! From a good room! Should fake reverb ever be applied to outdoor recordings? This guy I know played me a recording he made of a singer outdoors and he had put a LOT of reverb on it. People do this when they have outdoor recordings that they don't want to sound like outdoor recordings. However, in general when reverb is added heavily to vocals, it's an effect and not an attempt to reproduce an actual environment. And more often than not it's an attempt to hide something wrong with the performance or recording. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#28
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
|
#29
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
wrote in message ps.com... That's another thing... where can I get good reverb sounds? Everything I listen to sounds like a tin can! Maybe you should move your listening sessions out of that tin can. ;-) From a good room! Should fake reverb ever be applied to outdoor recordings? Only if it really makes things sound better. A performer's voice recorded with very little reverb can be very unnatural. Most performance spaces have quite a bit of reverb, so usually the natural way to hear a performer's voice is with a fair amount of reverb. Even just close-micing in a fairly lively room can remove enough reverb to be unnatural. In my way of hearing things, a voice without enough reverb sounds "hot" and "biting" even if the singer's voice is really pretty good. Of course, if the singer is mediocre or worse, a low-reverb track can make all the singer's failings just that much more apparent. Reverb, even just moderate natural reverb cuts singers some slack. Many if not most need it! This guy I know played me a recording he made of a singer outdoors and he had put a LOT of reverb on it. Rule of thumb - if the reverb is so strong that you hear it distinctly, it is too much. If you can hear reverb as an added effect, it is too much. |
#30
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Arny Krueger wrote: wrote in message ps.com... SNIP Rule of thumb - if the reverb is so strong that you hear it distinctly, it is too much. If you can hear reverb as an added effect, it is too much. I agree, but I had a customer last week who sang 50's style country and he wanted the vocals absolutely dripping with reverb. I got the mix so that it was dripping with reverb and he wanted more. He was absolutely in love with the sound of the tails. Kind of reminded me of the amount of reverb that Andy Williams used. |
#31
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
|
#32
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
I rarely use my reverb plugins at more than 5-15% anyway. More than
that, it sounds kitch and the more you go up, the more 80's you go. Same with the drums too... my 2 cents. |
#33
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
On 26 Sep 2006 07:48:03 -0700, "Julien Bernier"
wrote: I rarely use my reverb plugins at more than 5-15% anyway. More than that, it sounds kitch and the more you go up, the more 80's you go. Perhaps I'm older than you, but I always thought of "too much reverb" as being a '60's thing, as in "Wipe Out" or Phil Spector's numerous wall-of-sound type songs. I do remember Duran Duran on the radio around the start of the '80's. Perhaps that's when I started listening more to the classical music stations. Same with the drums too... my 2 cents. |
#34
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
In article ,
Ben Bradley wrote: On 26 Sep 2006 07:48:03 -0700, "Julien Bernier" wrote: I rarely use my reverb plugins at more than 5-15% anyway. More than that, it sounds kitch and the more you go up, the more 80's you go. Perhaps I'm older than you, but I always thought of "too much reverb" as being a '60's thing, as in "Wipe Out" or Phil Spector's numerous wall-of-sound type songs. The sixties thing, though, is more of a clangy sounding reverb. Throw the overheads on a spring and then compress the crap after it to exaggerate the spring decay. The eighties thing is a more hollow and mellow sounding reverb. Get one of those Yamaha digital boxes and then compress the crap after it... I do remember Duran Duran on the radio around the start of the '80's. Perhaps that's when I started listening more to the classical music stations. "This new album has sold a lot of phonographs. I know it's made me want to sell mine." --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#35
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Scott Dorsey wrote:
"This new album has sold a lot of phonographs. I know it's made me want to sell mine." Lol I might just be too young to had one. I listen to a lot of 60's/70's songs though. We can clearly see the reverb thing on some of these year's records. So much influence I got from these bands.... The Doors, Donovan, The Beatles, Pink Floyd (atom earth mother's cool) Alan Parson's project Cat Stevens Al Stewart(just Year of the cat :P) Michael Jackson - Thriller album only (is it really 70's? more like the 80's stuff debut) 70's/60's compil... there was a lot of "one hits" bands Anyway, out of context... |
#36
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 09:55:12 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:
"This new album has sold a lot of phonographs. I know it's made me want to sell mine." I've often wondered what Scott Dorsey's home stereo consists of. We know he has Maggies and a Citation II in the studio. We also know he thinks RCA connectors are an abomination. And since he still masters for vinyl & has his own lathe, it's a good bet he has a really nice turntable. Care to fill in the blanks Scott? (If I'm being nosy, just tell me to go to hell & I'll apologize.) |
#37
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
Agent 86 wrote:
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 09:55:12 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote: "This new album has sold a lot of phonographs. I know it's made me want to sell mine." I've often wondered what Scott Dorsey's home stereo consists of. We know he has Maggies and a Citation II in the studio. We also know he thinks RCA connectors are an abomination. And since he still masters for vinyl & has his own lathe, it's a good bet he has a really nice turntable. Care to fill in the blanks Scott? (If I'm being nosy, just tell me to go to hell & I'll apologize.) Right now everything is in total disarray because we have moved to a house that is mostly under construction. So I do most of my listening on the Maggies and try to avoid the birds. Citation II, passive preamp, HHB 800 with that goofy Monster Cable DAC for CDs, Thorens TD126 with homebrew INA103-based preamp for LPs. The Sony transcription table (SME arm, and MUCH nicer than the Thorens) is in a closet somewhere. I also have a set of NHT Super Ones and a set of A-20s for remote recording work and I think Melissa has a single M-00 attached to her computer with a resistive summing network (since she has hearing only from one ear anyway). There's a lot of other junk around here. I think if I had my way, I might take something a little more analytic than the Maggies for mixing even though they are great for listening. But, I think I'd still stick with planars. Maybe some of the newer Magnepans. Right now I am not mastering for vinyl because I don't have the platform for the lathe finished for the new place yet. And there are loud parrot sounds everywhere all the time. Since I don't track here it's pretty much just an annoyance, but it can be very annoying. Also the projection booth for the home theatre has been half-framed for the past month now. Someday it will all be back to normal and I will actually have a home stereo and a mixdown studio but right now I sort of have pieces of either without having either one complete. Perhaps six months. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#38
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Frequency range of the voice
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 20:57:02 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Someday it will all be back to normal and I will actually have a home stereo and a mixdown studio but right now I sort of have pieces of either without having either one complete. Perhaps six months. --scott Thanks, and good luck with the move. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
rec.audio.car FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (caution, this is HUGE) | Car Audio | |||
It's amazing what you can find when you look. | Audio Opinions | |||
Note to Trevor | Audio Opinions | |||
Some Recording Techniques | Pro Audio | |||
Artists cut out the record biz | Pro Audio |