There is a (or yet another) discussion in Off Topics about "modern" sounding recordings. I could have posted this there, but it seems more appropriate here...

Some might not be aware that you can find a number of "Vocal Only" videos on YouTube. This can be helpful for those looking to "capture" a similar sound in their recordings.

Since the Ed Sheeran song "Perfect" has been mentioned in one of those threads, here is what the vocal sounds like:




And here is the mixed song:





If this is the style music you are wanting to do... in your current (or next) song mix, solo your vocal and bounce between listening to YOU and then ED.

Do you have similar processing?
There is likely more delay and more reverb and compression - and maybe a little chorus? - on his???

Perhaps someone who wants to make the argument that BIAB can provide something similar would want to capture the vocal and put a BIAB production around it (not to sound "just like the record" but to sound similar).. although the legality of posting that here is suspect. But you could do it for yourself and send it to anyone you wanted to convince...? (just an idea)

Definite step in the right direction. As always, your approach is MUCH better than mine. lol I'm just hoping this opens people minds a little. It's the type of thing I was alluding to when I said "just not there yet." It's all these little things.

Great job in posting this.

I've been doing this for years. PGMusic is nothing short of amazing. While it certainly cannot run with the original in the cost and high quality of every facet of production, at mp3 level - It's like is it real or is it memorex?

Some of the members that have been around a long time will get that on the way home tonight....

Worthy of note is the simplicity of the arrangement; with the exception of the harmony vocals and the session strings of course. But note that there's only a few bars of any lead instrument in the whole song. Just a few bars. Just one instrument.

Yep...reverb, echo, and chorus is what it sounds like in the tails in the top video.

So, the secret, if there is one, to getting good vocals......

I would say that most people treat their vocals as "also ran".... yeah, the song needs a vocal and one take and we're done, maybe two. The only time they sing is when they have a track to record. Heck, we all do this to some degree. The only time I really spent several hours a day practicing singing and playing guitar was when I was a full time musician for a living. Life intrudes on those of us who have to work 8 to 10 hrs a day. If you have the time to sing a few hrs a day, you will notice a change in your voice. Kinda like exercising.... you see results when you do it right and for long enough.

Real singers, the pros, the ones who sound good, are the folks who also study singing. And in particular, their singing. They rehearse and practice singing. They treat it like it's an instrument, which it is. They work in their studios on not only the vocal itself..... tone, inflection, phrasing, projection, strength, characteristics, qualities, but on the actual process of recording. How much reverb makes the vox sound good and how much is too much? Echo? Chorus? And the big ones, EQ & Compression.

For those who are curious and want to sing better vocals, I would recommend getting Melodyne.... not because it can fix stuff but because you can SEE stuff. Most folks don't realize the bad habits they have in their vocals until either a vocal coach points it out or they can look at a Melodyne blob and see it for themselves. Using this ME method helped make me aware of several bad habits I had and was subsequently then, able to fix. If you're pulling a note or holding back.... you can see it on the screen.

The key to getting good with anything whether it's playing guitar, piano, or singing, is to practice perfectly. Lots of people practice, but if you're practicing mistakes, you will make those mistakes perfectly every time.

So.... set up a mic, set down.... no, actually, standup, fire up the DAW and work on just singing with no background instruments. The goal is to learn how to make it sound full and present.

Vocal quality, or what you think you sound like doesn't matter. Unless you are in the very small percentage of people who actually can not carry a tune and honestly sound like a croaking bullfrog trying to court the frog on the next lily pad....... you can learn to sing decently. There are a number of professional singers whose voices are questionable at best, but they are out there singing for a living.

Just do it.

Yup! Melodyne blob study goes a long way to seeing habits.

That misses the point entirely. And goes off on another tangent.

This was not about singing. It's about processing vocals in the current musical landscape.

Personally, I feel the effects choice AND treatment with those effects lends as much to the feeling of "when" a song was made.

Effect sounds do change "with the times." Sometimes in a new way, sometimes to give you a "throw back" type of sound.

I've actually been a bit surprised with some of the videos like what you posted Floyd. I would NOT have know THAT was how the effects sounded. In the mix, they sound so different to me.

Great topic for a post.

I excel at missing the point entirely.

However, no amount of processing...well, almost no amount of processing will salvage a horrid vocal.... depends too on the final result and stated goal of the song.

In my own defense... I did mention something about the effects in the last part of paragraph 2.

Thanks. I'm really enjoying this thread.

The use of delay is very interesting to me and is not something I have tried.

Noel posted a video a few threads down from this about using delay instead of reverb, or with just a very little reverb, apparently that's how the pros do it.

It's something I want to experiment with soon.

Good thread!

Dave,

Am I correct in recalling that you use Reaper? If so, my recommendation is to watch this video first (it explains the effect and how to do it really well)...

http://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=469778#Post469778

and then this video second (this is specific to Reaper and shows how to use Reaper's delay to create slapback)...

http://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=469782#Post469782

Regards,
Noel

Noel,

Yes, I use Reaper but have never tried the readelay.

Watched the video and I'm trying out that stereo slapback delay now on my latest song, “Life ain’t a Cookie Jar”, which currently just has reverb on the vocal, maybe I'll post a new mix.

Thanks!

EDIT: Unable to edit my song description in the showcase, it's been up there too long.
To my ears, which are not the best ears, I'm still learning this stuff, adding the stereo slapback delay and backing off on the reverb is an improvement. I updated the mix on reverbnation but left the one on soundcloud with the original (just reverb) mix if anyone wants to compare them.

Sorry Floyd, didn't mean to hijack your thread

Good Stuff. Thanks Noel, I'll watch those two videos in due course. Busy trying to figure out the VoiceLive 3 Extreme - finally. It has a few slap back delay settings. One it calls Elvis!

Dave,

There is a difference. To my ears, the vocals on Reverbnation sound a little more intimate and a little clearer.

I enjoyed the opportunity to compare. Thanks.

Regards,
Noel

Hi Guys

Well this sounds like a challenge right up my street because I am busy recording this track (with Lebz on guitar) as part of an album to sell at our National Arts Festival in July.

Please note: I always obtain the necessary licenses from CAPASSO for cover songs when I produce these albums to sell at my live shows. Here is my acapella lead vocal. I would love feedback on what you think I could do to improve on it. I will post the finished version a little later.

Thanks for taking the time to listen and comment, Noel, I appreciate the extra set of ears!

I found to get the best results I needed to add EQ in the chain after the delay module to bring down some harsh frequencies that I was not hearing without the delay. I think they were always there, the delay just brought them more to the front.

Anyway, lots of promise and I’m going to experiment more next week with this.

Edit: I've uploaded the new mix to soundcloud now also, I don't think anyone else is interested in listening. Might as well have the best one up there too.

Your vocal sounds good. Even, balanced. Good amount of reverb. (none of the distortion that used to show up).

The final result will, of course, depend on how it sounds with whatever tracks it sits in - it needs a context to really know.

But... compared to the Sheeran vocal, yours is fairly "conventional". That is not a "bad" thing... it is conventional. The Sheeran vocal obviously has a whole different kind of processing going on. I hear something that sounds like a Rotary Speaker plugin has been used on it. There is definitely some delay (or a lot of it), too. I'm not hearing a delay in yours (did you use one?).

I have never gone down this rabbit hole before - the one about "how are current, 'modern' vocals processed". So any comments regarding how those vocals are processed are guesses - and since I have never used a rotary plugin on anything, it is simply based on "I think I hear this"...

Floyd, thanks so much. I don't know how you guys can identify what you are hearing. I suppose it is years and years of practice. I put up some "acoustic treatment" in my studio the other day (some old blankets draped on some speaker stands actually) and could not hear any difference. Lebz said he could hear the difference the minute he walked into the room..sigh...

So here I go down this rabbit hole too... I am just downloading a trial Rotary speaker plugin and will experiment with it and also some delay, I didn't add delay to the first version, only reverb . (I always battle a little with delay).

Almost all vocals (these days) include some delay. Most good delay plugins will include presets specifically labeled for vocals. That is a place to start.

Don't forget, the Rotary Speaker thing was a guess on my part. When you try it, pay attention to the amount on the "mix dial" (or "wet/dry" if it has that). turn that down at first to keep the effect "subtle". (Same with delay) then try higher settings to see how they affect thee vocal - and most importantly, how it sits in the mix.

The only reason you can hear any of his vocal effects in this song is the sparse arrangement. Focus there first, then worry about the vocal effects.

There is a time and place for sparse music and a time and place for dense, heavy, loud music. You've made it clear in the past, Scott, that you prefer the light airy kinds of music. No problems there. But this is a "discussion" about how vocal processing affects the sound of songs these days - how much a part of the "modern sound" is determined by the way the vocals are processed... A sparse production with a thin, light reverb, no compression vocal isn't going to get close to capturing the overall sound presented by these examples.

Okay so here is a first stab at the full mix. I did use a bit of nectar's delay and a Rotary speaker plugin on the lead vocal. I would love to know what you think of it. I am busy with a whole album of 14 songs for our National Arts Festival (all acoustic) so it will be nice to set a base for all the other mixes.

I am not using band-in-a-box (other than to put some drums on so that we can keep time - which are muted in the final mix). I may put some percussion loops on some of the tracks.

We agree on one thing that all kinds of music have their place. As for my stating my preference for light and airy music, I think you might have me confused with someone else. A very brief listen through my soundcloud tracks will reveal that I probably lean the other way than what you are stating is my preference.

The point that I'm making in this thread is that these type of effects on relatively quiet or subdued vocals; like Ed Sheeran's vocals in the example; really only have their place when the arrangement is sparse to begin with. If the mix was any more dense in the example song - say there was a keyboard added in to the mix, or leads throughout, ability to hear the effects on the vocals would quickly fade. The only time this is not the case is when the effects are intentionally over the top and they are not in the case of the example song given.

Floyd, I've listened to your songs, and you do not 'over-arrange'. You show restraint and taste in your use of BIAB and arrangements. It's clear you practice critical listening to existing songs, and apply that learning to your arrangements. Focus on vocal effects would work in your arrangements; not saying that's necessary.

Sorry if you feel I wasn't following the point of the thread.

I did not intend to misrepresent your preferred listening habits. The few songs (of your own) that you have linked to over the years were, as I recall, more on the "airy" side. And any examples of music that you have noted as "things you are listening to" seem to be along those lines as well. I might have missed any references to "heavier" songs...

These discussions - about "modern" music - and what that means and why BIAB users don't produce that - originally referenced mostly Modern Country - which owes a lot to current Pop and R&B/rap/hip-hop... Those songs ARE generally "production intense". Caaron (who I consider a "student" of the modern sound) has implied that a large "problem" in attaining that sound for the home recording group is "missing" the vocal sound that is a big part of what creates the "sparkle" of pro level recordings. Lacking access to mega-bucks equipment for recording and processing vocal makes that a hard nut. We can give it our best try...

The example I provided was based on the fact that I was able to find the Ed Sheeran "vocal only" video and that can be compared with the video of the final product. I readily admit that it is easier to note the vocal processing in the final product because it is a sparse arrangement. It was intended to help people (we in the BIAB community - and especially those attempting to recreate the "modern sound") hear an example of vocal processing that they might not have considered. IF we could find a similar vocal-only recording of a current Country radio song - with the typical BIG explosive bunch-of-guitars chorus - I am fairly certain that it would be way-more-processed than the typical home recordist, too. Probably even more so than the Sheeran vocal - in order to make it "pop" and cut through all those explosive guitars....

I tend to over process (or over produce) everything first to experiment.
Then a couple days later go back and lighten up the processing to fit better.
By experimenting like this I find some unique ideas and some that don't work at all.
To me, that's part of the fun.

/"Let's copy that and try a ring modulator on the reverb of the doubled track!"

This is a fascinating and revealing discussion. It was interesting to see how little reverb was used in the Ed Sheeran. Reverb can easily be over-used as it is flattering to the singer (singers always ask for more reverb!) but it also makes the vocals seem more distant. It is clear that delay has been used as well as compression. There is very little variety of vocal volume so when the voice goes low it is practically as loud as when he is singing at higher pitches and obviously projecting more. Therefore something has been applied to level the vocals. You also have to be careful with levelling as it can take out the expression and variety. There might also be some auto-double tracking applied in the Ed Sheeran example.

Thanks for the thread as it made me think about my own vocal processing methods and maybe revise them a little.

I think here as with the other thread song by Gotye, dynamic processing is used so it changes from one part of the song to another. Chorus vocal is obviousy brighter for one and bgv is damped down with eq. Everybody doubles or triples these days so that's there. I think the whirly could be a double track or more than one mixed in under or with the other main vox tracks. It's okay. I'm not a big fan of that whirly sound whatever it is or the robots plugged in with it. I probably shouldn't even be commenting on this stuff because I prefer retro or at least modern with a retro feel when it comes right down to personal taste. One of the reasons I like Bruno Mars and Adele is through the modern I hear the Motown. Good song though, I like that.

Lovely Joanne. I liked both versions. It would be fascinating to see how it would sound with a heavy dose of AutoTune and some of those multiple delays on the ends of key phrases as seems so popular these days. I'm sure there's lots of other processing stuff that I don't easily hear as well.

Anyway, a great thread.

There has been so much great discussion with this thread. It may be a bit of an ear opener for some. I swear, the world of production is pretty much it's own beast when it comes to a song.

One thing that I didn't see (but may have missed) in all of the discussion of getting a better vocal sound is room treatment. That, in many cases, is the dead give away in a home recording studio. From what I've seen/heard, the little vocal mic barriers don't work all that well. A simple test to see how much of a difference this can make is to take a large comforter (like for a bed) and drape it over yourself and the microphone, then record yourself singing. Many times, you will get a much more full sound than if you are just recording in something like a closet...or for sure an open room. Typically, it will eliminate most of the room noise. It's crazy what this can do for the presence of a vocal regardless of the microphone. If you find that to be the case. There are some simple and inexpensive treatments you can make for vocals that don't have you sweating under the comforter...but it does work. The difference an be staggering. It's one of those fix before the mix things to do. Poor room treatment can really limit the quality of the vocal.

One last thing, I know Floyd was nice enough to point out these vocal only videos are available to listen to. The cool thing is, it's not limited to only vocals. Instruments too!

You know... Pretty much every record Dave Cobb produces is done with the vocals recorded "in the room" - with the band - to get that room sound... Jason Isbell, Chris Stapleton, Anderson East, Sturgill Simpson... just to name a few... When Luke Laird and Shane McAnally (two VERY "current" kinds of guys) produced Kacey Musgraves "Pageant Material" it was done "in the room" at RCA Studio A - with everyone in a circle... to "get the room"...

Thoughts?

Oh! No doubt about it; there are some AMAZING sounding rooms that are amazing for recording. Our home studios though, probably not. lol

A great sounding room is that, a great sounding room...RCA Studio A would be a great example.

Our "recording room" may or may not contain a second refrigerator, a 24x36 Dale Ernhardt framed and signed poster, a running desktop and laptop, open window near a busy street; but we close the door so we can't hear our spouse running the blender. At least the tile floor is cool on our feet. All exaggeration of course.

Even if we feel we have a decent room for recording, I feel it's typically less than desirable for the type of sound you have shown in the video. Typically...no absolutes. Pick a song you really like and do a quick search on youtube for people who have covered the song, and you will hear a a fine selection of audio issues happening before a note is sung. You can instantly hear many issues. I think if we can start with eliminating some of those, it goes a long way in improving the final product.

So we are on the same page. I totally agree that a great room can sound soooo good on a recording. I was more mentioning a simple, inexpensive solution for someone who may be looking for a possible way to get a bit closer to the sound above. I would be curious if anyone tries it and if anything improves. Maybe not. But it is something to try and learn from.

Thoughts, my good man?

I'm headed to get a quilt at this very moment. I'll bet it's dark under there... atmosphere!

I always like trying "the new stuff".

No ruts for me!

Sounds like a song title.

For a human can mean boredom. For a deer, possible death. lol

Important tip I forgot to mention : Do NOT record vocals under any form of blanket if it's a day you have gas. It ruins that atmosphere you spoke of quickly.

Also, candles to see better are a "no no."