Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How to keep the energy of the band when adding in the lead vocal?
I would like to create a discussion amongst us that appears
to be a popular challenge for some mixers. How to keep the energy of the band when adding in the lead vocal? kevin |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Don't use their band...ever! Get some session musicians (union scale) with
their own pre-mixers and mikes. Just keep the vocalist and his/her mike and hope Auto-Tune is engaged. Bands can be a pita to get them to agree on something. The session folk are easier to deal with. Of course, ymmv. B~ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
B. Peg wrote:
Don't use their band...ever! Get some session musicians (union scale) with their own pre-mixers and mikes. Just keep the vocalist and his/her mike and hope Auto-Tune is engaged. Bands can be a pita to get them to agree on something. The session folk are easier to deal with. Of course, ymmv. B~ Everyone's a comedian. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly do you mean by "keep the energy?"
What is changing when the lead vocal performs? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
HUH...?
-- Steven Sena XS Sound Recording www.xssound.com wrote in message oups.com... I would like to create a discussion amongst us that appears to be a popular challenge for some mixers. How to keep the energy of the band when adding in the lead vocal? kevin |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com...
I would like to create a discussion amongst us that appears to be a popular challenge for some mixers. How to keep the energy of the band when adding in the lead vocal? kevin Steven Sena wrote: HUH...? He was listening. Now he wants to create discussions. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
kevindoylemusic wrote:
I would like to create a discussion amongst us that appears to be a popular challenge for some mixers. How to keep the energy of the band when adding in the lead vocal? kevin Don't feed the band until after you have a keeper vocal. Cut everything at once and mix it live to stereo. Top, tail, send to mastering. Order pizza. -- ha |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com... I would like to create a discussion amongst us that appears to be a popular challenge for some mixers. How to keep the energy of the band when adding in the lead vocal? Hi Kevin, Bear in mind, there may still be a few folks who aren't sure whether or not this is really *you*. This is due to a small number of extremely aggressive 'supporters' of your previous posts, who had never even posted to Usenet before, but tried to tear a new arse into everyone who had a comment to make that wasn't 100% supportive of those initial posts. We are assuming that they were students since a number of the posts came from the same IP address as the college, or from Yahoo! accounts in Canada. Since you have yet to address any of those posts or any of the requests for clarification that you could actually see them, some of us were beginning to think that your Google groups account might have been hacked, and that there was someone playing the impostor in your stead. OK... Personally, I always make a 100% effort to track the entire ensemble simultaneously, regardless of the size, unless it's just a total impossibility. Even then, I'll make certain that there's some place that I can stash the lead vocalist in order to obtain the best possible 'scratch' track. After all, it's the quality of the performance that matters the most, and there's always the chance that the vocalist may get a take that can actually be used in the mix when all is said and done. As long as the energy of the vocalist was present with the ensemble during the initial recording process, I really don't see why he/she can't repeat that performance if it turns out to be necessary. We talk a lot here about groove... about tracking as much of the band as possible at one time so that they can feed off of each other's energy. That generally gets the best performance on tape with the best 'feel'. This comes up a lot as a topic because so many people these days are trying to record in a space that simply isn't condusive to getting the job done. By that I mean that if the band or ensemble has their act together and are well rehearsed, there's really no reason they shouldn't be able to walk in, set up, play the song, and be done. Fix the errors, overdub the fluff, and you're finished. Unfortunately, you can't do this in a lot of bedrooms, compromises are made, and in the end, it will probably show up in the final result. There is no law in my book that says the lead vocal *must* be cut on a $2000 dollar microphone with a pristine signal chain. Again, it's all about the performance... which is what I suppose has led to your question. Your question, however, implies that it's the "band" which is lacking energy as opposed to the part being overdubbed. I'll take it that you are either concerned that the headphones mix will not contain the energy of the original tracking session, or that you actually mean that the vocalist may have a problem feeling or maintaining that energy. If the parts have been unfortunately layered one or two at a time, there may be little hope of maintaining or creating energy. In either of those cases, where the vocal *must* be re-cut, the energy that was present during the original tracking session has to be adequately reproduced by way of the phones (or other cue mix) during overdubs. If the singer was with the band in the original tracks, this should easily be doable. Keeping the mental attitude of the vocalist up to snuff is just a part of being the 'service' business that we are. g Ya' have to play that one as the cards fall during the session. Sometimes concessions, which we know might not lead to the best quality, have to be made in order to get the best performance. As an example, if you're dealing with a really hard-core rock band of the 'screamer' type, I'd suggest getting the vocalist off of the U-87 and putting a plain old Shure SM-58 in his hand and letting him do his thing. Let him squat, jump, scream, cup the mic, or whatever he's used to doing to get the best performance out. Standing him up in front of a U-87, ensuring that he remain a certain distance from the mic, yadda-yadda, is just going to make this type of person clam up and probably give a mediocre performance. This whole scenarion will of course vary wildly depending on the style of music, the ability of the performer, the capability of the studio, etc., etc., etc.. Overdubs have to be made comfortable for the player or singer... unless you're dealing with a veteran to recording who has long since become comfortable with doing just the reverse. That is, making it easier on the engineer to get *his* job done. Hope this helps get something started.... -- 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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Joe Sensor" wrote in message ... B. Peg wrote: Don't use their band...ever! Get some session musicians (union scale) with their own pre-mixers and mikes. Just keep the vocalist and his/her mike and hope Auto-Tune is engaged. Bands can be a pita to get them to agree on something. The session folk are easier to deal with. Of course, ymmv. B~ Everyone's a comedian. For some reason I'm finding it hard to laugh, but it has to be a joke. Um........... doesn't it ? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
David Morgan wrote:
"Joe Sensor"... B. Peg wrote: Don't use their band...ever! Get some session musicians (union scale) with their own pre-mixers and mikes. Just keep the vocalist and his/her mike and hope Auto-Tune is engaged. Bands can be a pita to get them to agree on something. The session folk are easier to deal with. Of course, ymmv. Everyone's a comedian. For some reason I'm finding it hard to laugh, but it has to be a joke. Um........... doesn't it ? Maybe just replace the drummer. -- ha |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"hank alrich" wrote in message ... David Morgan wrote: "Joe Sensor"... B. Peg wrote: Don't use their band...ever! Get some session musicians (union scale) with their own pre-mixers and mikes. Just keep the vocalist and his/her mike and hope Auto-Tune is engaged. Bands can be a pita to get them to agree on something. The session folk are easier to deal with. Of course, ymmv. Everyone's a comedian. For some reason I'm finding it hard to laugh, but it has to be a joke. Um........... doesn't it ? Maybe just replace the drummer. Oh, I see.... getting back at me for the guitar comment, eh? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote: wrote in message oups.com... I would like to create a discussion amongst us that appears to be a popular challenge for some mixers. How to keep the energy of the band when adding in the lead vocal? Hi Kevin, Bear in mind, there may still be a few folks who aren't sure whether or not this is really *you*. This is due to a small number of extremely aggressive 'supporters' of your previous posts, who had never even posted to Usenet before, but tried to tear a new arse into everyone who had a comment to make that wasn't 100% supportive of those initial posts. We are assuming that they were students since a number of the posts came from the same IP address as the college, or from Yahoo! accounts in Canada. Since you have yet to address any of those posts or any of the requests for clarification that you could actually see them, some of us were beginning to think that your Google groups account might have been hacked, and that there was someone playing the impostor in your stead. OK... Personally, I always make a 100% effort to track the entire ensemble simultaneously, regardless of the size, unless it's just a total impossibility. Even then, I'll make certain that there's some place that I can stash the lead vocalist in order to obtain the best possible 'scratch' track. After all, it's the quality of the performance that matters the most, and there's always the chance that the vocalist may get a take that can actually be used in the mix when all is said and done. As long as the energy of the vocalist was present with the ensemble during the initial recording process, I really don't see why he/she can't repeat that performance if it turns out to be necessary. We talk a lot here about groove... about tracking as much of the band as possible at one time so that they can feed off of each other's energy. That generally gets the best performance on tape with the best 'feel'. This comes up a lot as a topic because so many people these days are trying to record in a space that simply isn't condusive to getting the job done. By that I mean that if the band or ensemble has their act together and are well rehearsed, there's really no reason they shouldn't be able to walk in, set up, play the song, and be done. Fix the errors, overdub the fluff, and you're finished. Unfortunately, you can't do this in a lot of bedrooms, compromises are made, and in the end, it will probably show up in the final result. There is no law in my book that says the lead vocal *must* be cut on a $2000 dollar microphone with a pristine signal chain. Again, it's all about the performance... which is what I suppose has led to your question. Your question, however, implies that it's the "band" which is lacking energy as opposed to the part being overdubbed. I'll take it that you are either concerned that the headphones mix will not contain the energy of the original tracking session, or that you actually mean that the vocalist may have a problem feeling or maintaining that energy. If the parts have been unfortunately layered one or two at a time, there may be little hope of maintaining or creating energy. In either of those cases, where the vocal *must* be re-cut, the energy that was present during the original tracking session has to be adequately reproduced by way of the phones (or other cue mix) during overdubs. If the singer was with the band in the original tracks, this should easily be doable. Keeping the mental attitude of the vocalist up to snuff is just a part of being the 'service' business that we are. g Ya' have to play that one as the cards fall during the session. Sometimes concessions, which we know might not lead to the best quality, have to be made in order to get the best performance. As an example, if you're dealing with a really hard-core rock band of the 'screamer' type, I'd suggest getting the vocalist off of the U-87 and putting a plain old Shure SM-58 in his hand and letting him do his thing. Let him squat, jump, scream, cup the mic, or whatever he's used to doing to get the best performance out. Standing him up in front of a U-87, ensuring that he remain a certain distance from the mic, yadda-yadda, is just going to make this type of person clam up and probably give a mediocre performance. This whole scenarion will of course vary wildly depending on the style of music, the ability of the performer, the capability of the studio, etc., etc., etc.. Overdubs have to be made comfortable for the player or singer... unless you're dealing with a veteran to recording who has long since become comfortable with doing just the reverse. That is, making it easier on the engineer to get *his* job done. Hope this helps get something started.... -- 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 Very Good Observations Dave! These days I farm out some of my work to other engineers due to a busy schedule. I will get a rough mix of the band with guide vocals after they have cut a track where it usually sounds well recorded with lots of energy. When the vocals are finished and it comes time to mixing, I 'll receive a mix where the energy of the bedtrack music is quite distant from the lead vocals, and lacks the original energy of the bedtrack date. There seems to be a somewhat chronic problem in mixing where the band has energy where you can hear the lead vocal clearly. Where do you think they are going wrong? As for my out-of-control students, I have changed all my passwords. This should put an end to their childish chattering. kevin |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
David made good points to which I will add ...
I always try to get a good scratch vocal with the intention that it usable if need be. I go for 3 good live takes in a row. Often the 3rd take will be 'the one'. Pay attention to circadian rhythms. If the band is used to playing gigs at night, they will have betters sessions recorded at night. As far as overdubbing the vocal, the sooner after 'the one' it is done the better chance that the same vibe and feel will remain. Entourage: If the singer is fighting with his girlfriend or owes the drug dealer money, the presence of these folks may be a hinderence. On the other hand most performers feed off of an audience so some supportive folks nearby may be a welcome part of the vibe. Sometime a singer just needs to be 'in the mood'. I wouldn't really encourage drinking (or whatever) but if the singer would like something but gets a sense that it's frowned upon, it's a mood killer. rd |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
As for my out-of-control students, I have changed all my passwords.
This should put an end to their childish chattering Thats all you have to say? You've been hacked, your credibility is certainly in question, made to look like a fool, and thats it? Doesn't sound right to me. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
wrote:
As for my out-of-control students, I have changed all my passwords. This should put an end to their childish chattering Thats all you have to say? You've been hacked, your credibility is certainly in question, made to look like a fool, and thats it? Doesn't sound right to me. This all adds up about like some whacked version of new math... -- ha |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"hank alrich" wrote in message .. . wrote: As for my out-of-control students, I have changed all my passwords. This should put an end to their childish chattering Thats all you have to say? You've been hacked, your credibility is certainly in question, made to look like a fool, and thats it? Doesn't sound right to me. This all adds up about like some whacked version of new math... -- ha For what it's worth, I think we're talking to the real Kevin Doyle at this point. I've exchanged a couple of e-mails with someone that I now believe *is* the Professor. He's animate about not responding to flames or anything off the topic, and that seems to make sense as he probably doesn't have the time to do so. Some of this could get pretty petty. If his passwords are changed, we should lose the nutcase flames. DM |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message
ups.com... These days I farm out some of my work to other engineers due to a busy schedule. I will get a rough mix of the band with guide vocals after they have cut a track where it usually sounds well recorded with lots of energy. When the vocals are finished and it comes time to mixing, I 'll receive a mix where the energy of the bedtrack music is quite distant from the lead vocals, and lacks the original energy of the bedtrack date. There seems to be a somewhat chronic problem in mixing where the band has energy where you can hear the lead vocal clearly. Where do you think they are going wrong? I'm not sure whether you're saying that the lead vocals have less energy than the band tracks, that the band tracks have less energy than the final vocals, or that the rough mix that you get back (with the finished vocals) lacks energy.... But if the rough mixes (with guide vocals) sounded energetic, and the lead vocal is energetic, the problem is in the rough mix. And that's no problem, since you can re-mix from scratch. I find that over-processing (especially over-compressing) is a huge problem, especially in the last 10 years. Remember - transients are your friends... -- Dave Martin DMA, Inc Nashville, TN |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Dave Martin wrote: wrote in message ups.com... These days I farm out some of my work to other engineers due to a busy schedule. I will get a rough mix of the band with guide vocals after they have cut a track where it usually sounds well recorded with lots of energy. When the vocals are finished and it comes time to mixing, I 'll receive a mix where the energy of the bedtrack music is quite distant from the lead vocals, and lacks the original energy of the bedtrack date. There seems to be a somewhat chronic problem in mixing where the band has energy where you can hear the lead vocal clearly. Where do you think they are going wrong? I'm not sure whether you're saying that the lead vocals have less energy than the band tracks, that the band tracks have less energy than the final vocals, or that the rough mix that you get back (with the finished vocals) lacks energy.... But if the rough mixes (with guide vocals) sounded energetic, and the lead vocal is energetic, the problem is in the rough mix. And that's no problem, since you can re-mix from scratch. I find that over-processing (especially over-compressing) is a huge problem, especially in the last 10 years. Remember - transients are your friends... -- Dave Martin DMA, Inc Nashville, TN |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Dave Martin wrote: wrote in message ups.com... These days I farm out some of my work to other engineers due to a busy schedule. I will get a rough mix of the band with guide vocals after they have cut a track where it usually sounds well recorded with lots of energy. When the vocals are finished and it comes time to mixing, I 'll receive a mix where the energy of the bedtrack music is quite distant from the lead vocals, and lacks the original energy of the bedtrack date. There seems to be a somewhat chronic problem in mixing where the band has energy where you can hear the lead vocal clearly. Where do you think they are going wrong? I'm not sure whether you're saying that the lead vocals have less energy than the band tracks, that the band tracks have less energy than the final vocals, or that the rough mix that you get back (with the finished vocals) lacks energy.... But if the rough mixes (with guide vocals) sounded energetic, and the lead vocal is energetic, the problem is in the rough mix. And that's no problem, since you can re-mix from scratch. I find that over-processing (especially over-compressing) is a huge problem, especially in the last 10 years. Remember - transients are your friends... -- Dave Martin DMA, Inc Nashville, TN The difficulty Dave, is that I often prefer the original mixes. All the basic elements are the same in both the monitor and final mix, it's just that the monitor mix seems to kick more. Where are they going wrong? I don't think it's with the density of the overdubs. kevin |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
kevindoylemusicwrote:
The difficulty Dave, is that I often prefer the original mixes. All the basic elements are the same in both the monitor and final mix, it's just that the monitor mix seems to kick more. Where are they going wrong? I don't think it's with the density of the overdubs. I suggest taking the time to examine how your assistants are using compression while mixing. In the heat of battle while tracking and putting up quickly managed rough mixes maybe they're not overdoing the compression. Given time to "mix", maybe they're just mashing the life out of the singing. -- ha |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote: For what it's worth, I think we're talking to the real Kevin Doyle at this point. I've exchanged a couple of e-mails with someone that I now believe *is* the Professor. He's animate about not responding to flames or anything off the topic, and that seems to make sense as he probably doesn't have the time to do so. Some of this could get pretty petty. If his passwords are changed, we should lose the nutcase flames. DM I agree and for the most part resist the urge to get dragged in to any of the downward spirals. As long as the 'amigos' and others have backed off, I'd let it go ... rd |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Don't use their band...ever! Get some session musicians Used to be the norm for country music, IIRC JHH |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ups.com... I will get a rough mix of the band with guide vocals after they have cut a track where it usually sounds well recorded with lots of energy. When the vocals are finished and it comes time to mixing, I'll receive a mix where the energy of the bedtrack music is quite distant from the lead vocals, and lacks the original energy of the bedtrack date. It's pretty common to mix a 'vocal up' and a 'vocal down' version. That alone might get you a different picture of the music bed. There seems to be a somewhat chronic problem in mixing where the band has energy where you can hear the lead vocal clearly. If you didn't fumble on words there, this doesn't sound like a problem. ;-) Energy plus a clear lead vocal (if that's what the style calls for) seems like the goal. Where do you think they are going wrong? If the music bed is weak, I agree with previous observations that it's probably overused processing... more suspect are dynamics control devices. Then again, you could be hearing joke "Nashville Syndrome" stop joke where most of the instruments have been carved up frequency- wise (thinned out would be another view), in order to create a nice hole for the lead vocal to sit in. This isn't always bad, and sometimes it's necessary to asure that each instrument can hold a place/space in the mix without the mix becoming muddy and congested. But, it has often led to some weak-assed sounding instruments Sometimes the session tapes should be guidelines for mixes. When there's not so much time to dwell on one's impression of what the mix 'should' sound like, and you just have to get a real-world monitor mix going and go to work, there's less tweaking and a more 'untouched' version of the session's energy. Those can often be magic moments from an engineering standpoint. I wouldn't know without hearing, and thebn it would just be an opinion, if this is something we can say someone is "doing wrong" - unless you specifically instructed them to do otherwise... it's just a result that you or I might not have been shooting for. What are some things that strike you the most about the 'weak' mixes as being "wrong" ? Could it be just an obnoxiously high vocal level? -- David Morgan (MAMS) www.m-a-m-s DOT com http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message
oups.com... The difficulty Dave, is that I often prefer the original mixes. All the basic elements are the same in both the monitor and final mix, it's just that the monitor mix seems to kick more. Where are they going wrong? I don't think it's with the density of the overdubs. kevin If these are rock tracks you're dealing with, I betcha that you've got the vocal level too hot. If the tracks are energetic without vox, then try putting the lead vox down in the track instead of on top of the track. I'm ignoring some other potential issues with the lead vocal performance (which for the moment, I'll leave as an exercise for the reader), but I've found damn few recordings - especially in the rock field - that can't be improved by turning down the lead vocals... -- Dave Martin DMA, Inc Nashville, TN |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FA: Energy "Take 5" 5.1/6.1 speakers + subwoofer: $9.99 starts the bidding! | Marketplace | |||
Doppler Distoriton? | Tech | |||
Capacitor, how to find out what size? | Car Audio | |||
ENERGY of Canada PRO-22 SPEAKERS, $269 pr. | Marketplace |