Trying to emulate sound of Roger Whitaker recording

[Doc]

I'm listening to a Roger Whitaker Christmas album and trying to ascertain
what I'm hearing, in particular his vocals, with the aspiration of coming as
close as possible with my modest home rig. I'm referring to the overall
effect, or presence of the vocal. The album, at least to my ears, sounds
superb. The instruments are crisp and clear and while plenty hot, you can
clearly hear the vocal, which has this big, warm, yet not overbearing sound
that conversely doesn't drown out the orchestra either.

It's always been my understanding that vocals are virtually always recorded
in mono. I've never seen a picture of a vocalist in a studio in front of
more than one mic. And clearly, his voice is tracked center compared to the
stereo field I can hear from the orchestra, yet it's a sort of an "enhanced
center" like it's coming from everywhere at once.

If I've described this enough for you to get the idea, how do they achieve
this sound? Another way to ask is what's done to the vocal to give it this
big, shimmering sound like that? I've been horsing around with recording for
a while and while can get it sound "good", I never seem to quite be able to
achieve the kind of presence that I'm hearing. Is it more than just reverb,
are there other tricks? And on the subject of reverb, is it likely that it's
added to his original track or done later during mixdown? This album was
recorded in '84 so I'm guessing it's not done digitally.

The tools I have to work with at the moment are a reasonably beefy computer
w/dedicated h/d, SB Audigy card, decent-sounding MXL condensor mic, Cakewalk
PA8, Soundforge 5.0, Alesis Nanoverb and Nanocompressor. Is there any
particular "magic" vocal enhancement software that would make all the
difference? I've heard of a "vocal expander" but have never used one and
don't really know what they do. Ultimately, I'd be recording either to
Karaoke tracks or a midi accompaniment converted to .wav. While I might not
be able to completely duplicate the sound of a major recording studio, I bet
I can come closer.

Thanks for any input.

[David Morgan \(MAMS\)]

"Doc" > wrote in message...

> The tools I have to work with at the moment are a reasonably beefy computer
> w/dedicated h/d, SB Audigy card, decent-sounding MXL condensor mic, Cakewalk
> PA8, Soundforge 5.0, Alesis Nanoverb and Nanocompressor. Is there any
> particular "magic" vocal enhancement software that would make all the
> difference? I've heard of a "vocal expander" but have never used one and
> don't really know what they do. Ultimately, I'd be recording either to
> Karaoke tracks or a midi accompaniment converted to .wav. While I might not
> be able to completely duplicate the sound of a major recording studio, I bet
> I can come closer.
>
> Thanks for any input.


All you're missing is Roger Whitaker.


--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

[David Morgan \(MAMS\)]

"Doc" > wrote in message...

> The tools I have to work with at the moment are a reasonably beefy computer
> w/dedicated h/d, SB Audigy card, decent-sounding MXL condensor mic, Cakewalk
> PA8, Soundforge 5.0, Alesis Nanoverb and Nanocompressor. Is there any
> particular "magic" vocal enhancement software that would make all the
> difference? I've heard of a "vocal expander" but have never used one and
> don't really know what they do. Ultimately, I'd be recording either to
> Karaoke tracks or a midi accompaniment converted to .wav. While I might not
> be able to completely duplicate the sound of a major recording studio, I bet
> I can come closer.
>
> Thanks for any input.


All you're missing is Roger Whitaker.


--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

[Scott Dorsey]

Doc > wrote:
>I'm listening to a Roger Whitaker Christmas album and trying to ascertain
>what I'm hearing, in particular his vocals, with the aspiration of coming as
>close as possible with my modest home rig. I'm referring to the overall
>effect, or presence of the vocal. The album, at least to my ears, sounds
>superb. The instruments are crisp and clear and while plenty hot, you can
>clearly hear the vocal, which has this big, warm, yet not overbearing sound
>that conversely doesn't drown out the orchestra either.

A lot of that has to do with the arrangement. Some of it may have to do
with the degree of projection in the voice. A little bit has to do with
the vocal mike. I don't know what was on the Christmas album but I know
his earlier stuff was very 44B-sounding.

>It's always been my understanding that vocals are virtually always recorded
>in mono. I've never seen a picture of a vocalist in a studio in front of
>more than one mic. And clearly, his voice is tracked center compared to the
>stereo field I can hear from the orchestra, yet it's a sort of an "enhanced
>center" like it's coming from everywhere at once.

Right, this is what fake reverb does for you... and there is a HUGE amount
of fake reverb being used here. Not having the recording in front of me, I
can't tell you if it was a plate or a chamber. But a plate reverb with
acoustic predelay (garden hose, etc) was very common in the late sixties.

>If I've described this enough for you to get the idea, how do they achieve
>this sound? Another way to ask is what's done to the vocal to give it this
>big, shimmering sound like that? I've been horsing around with recording for
>a while and while can get it sound "good", I never seem to quite be able to
>achieve the kind of presence that I'm hearing. Is it more than just reverb,
>are there other tricks? And on the subject of reverb, is it likely that it's
>added to his original track or done later during mixdown? This album was
>recorded in '84 so I'm guessing it's not done digitally.

'84 is way later than any of the Whittaker stuff I have heard. In that era,
I'd have guessed a condenser mike, probably a fancy digital reverb unit like
the QRS or something. And probably outrageous spotmiking on the band.

>The tools I have to work with at the moment are a reasonably beefy computer
>w/dedicated h/d, SB Audigy card, decent-sounding MXL condensor mic, Cakewalk
>PA8, Soundforge 5.0, Alesis Nanoverb and Nanocompressor. Is there any
>particular "magic" vocal enhancement software that would make all the
>difference? I've heard of a "vocal expander" but have never used one and
>don't really know what they do. Ultimately, I'd be recording either to
>Karaoke tracks or a midi accompaniment converted to .wav. While I might not
>be able to completely duplicate the sound of a major recording studio, I bet
>I can come closer.

Well, what you need before anything else is a big room with a band in it.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Doc > wrote:
>I'm listening to a Roger Whitaker Christmas album and trying to ascertain
>what I'm hearing, in particular his vocals, with the aspiration of coming as
>close as possible with my modest home rig. I'm referring to the overall
>effect, or presence of the vocal. The album, at least to my ears, sounds
>superb. The instruments are crisp and clear and while plenty hot, you can
>clearly hear the vocal, which has this big, warm, yet not overbearing sound
>that conversely doesn't drown out the orchestra either.

A lot of that has to do with the arrangement. Some of it may have to do
with the degree of projection in the voice. A little bit has to do with
the vocal mike. I don't know what was on the Christmas album but I know
his earlier stuff was very 44B-sounding.

>It's always been my understanding that vocals are virtually always recorded
>in mono. I've never seen a picture of a vocalist in a studio in front of
>more than one mic. And clearly, his voice is tracked center compared to the
>stereo field I can hear from the orchestra, yet it's a sort of an "enhanced
>center" like it's coming from everywhere at once.

Right, this is what fake reverb does for you... and there is a HUGE amount
of fake reverb being used here. Not having the recording in front of me, I
can't tell you if it was a plate or a chamber. But a plate reverb with
acoustic predelay (garden hose, etc) was very common in the late sixties.

>If I've described this enough for you to get the idea, how do they achieve
>this sound? Another way to ask is what's done to the vocal to give it this
>big, shimmering sound like that? I've been horsing around with recording for
>a while and while can get it sound "good", I never seem to quite be able to
>achieve the kind of presence that I'm hearing. Is it more than just reverb,
>are there other tricks? And on the subject of reverb, is it likely that it's
>added to his original track or done later during mixdown? This album was
>recorded in '84 so I'm guessing it's not done digitally.

'84 is way later than any of the Whittaker stuff I have heard. In that era,
I'd have guessed a condenser mike, probably a fancy digital reverb unit like
the QRS or something. And probably outrageous spotmiking on the band.

>The tools I have to work with at the moment are a reasonably beefy computer
>w/dedicated h/d, SB Audigy card, decent-sounding MXL condensor mic, Cakewalk
>PA8, Soundforge 5.0, Alesis Nanoverb and Nanocompressor. Is there any
>particular "magic" vocal enhancement software that would make all the
>difference? I've heard of a "vocal expander" but have never used one and
>don't really know what they do. Ultimately, I'd be recording either to
>Karaoke tracks or a midi accompaniment converted to .wav. While I might not
>be able to completely duplicate the sound of a major recording studio, I bet
>I can come closer.

Well, what you need before anything else is a big room with a band in it.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Arny Krueger]

"Doc" > wrote in message
nk.net
> I'm listening to a Roger Whitaker Christmas album and trying to
> ascertain what I'm hearing, in particular his vocals, with the
> aspiration of coming as close as possible with my modest home rig.

I work with one of Roger's past backup vocalists - I guess she toured europe
with him. She's got a great voice, if only I could *bottle* it!

I hope this helps! ;-)

[Arny Krueger]

"Doc" > wrote in message
nk.net
> I'm listening to a Roger Whitaker Christmas album and trying to
> ascertain what I'm hearing, in particular his vocals, with the
> aspiration of coming as close as possible with my modest home rig.

I work with one of Roger's past backup vocalists - I guess she toured europe
with him. She's got a great voice, if only I could *bottle* it!

I hope this helps! ;-)