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.
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.
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.
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.
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!"
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome Make your sound your own!
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.
Windows 10 Home 20H2 Build 19042.487 BIAB 2021 (Build 818) Intel(R) Core(TM), i3-4160, CPU @3.60 GHz RAM 16 GB, 64 Bit X64-based processor Zoom UAC-2 (USB 3 interface-built in midi) VoiceLive 3 Extreme, Sputnik Valve Condenser Mic
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!
Chad (Hope that makes it easier)
TEMPO TANTRUM: What a lead singer has when they can't stay in time.
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"...
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?
Chad (Hope that makes it easier)
TEMPO TANTRUM: What a lead singer has when they can't stay in time.
I'm headed to get a quilt at this very moment. I'll bet it's dark under there... atmosphere!
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."
Chad (Hope that makes it easier)
TEMPO TANTRUM: What a lead singer has when they can't stay in time.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® users: Build 904 now available!
If you're already using Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®, make sure to grab the latest update! Build 904 is now available for download and includes the newest additions and enhancements from our team.
PowerTracks 2026 is here—bringing powerful new enhancements designed to make your production workflow faster, smoother, and more intuitive than ever.
The enhanced Mixer now shows Track Type and Instrument icons for instant track recognition, while a new grid option simplifies editing views. Non-floating windows adopt a modern title bar style, replacing the legacy blue bar.
The Master Volume is now applied at the end of the audio chain for consistent levels and full-signal master effects.
Tablature now includes a “Save bends when saving XML” option for improved compatibility with PG Music tools. Plus, you can instantly match all track heights with a simple Ctrl-release after resizing, and Add2 chords from MGU/SGU files are now fully supported... and more!
Get started today—first-time packages start at just $49.
Already using PowerTracks Pro Audio? Upgrade for as little as $29 and enjoy the latest improvements!
Band-in-a-Box 2026 for Windows Special Offers End Tomorrow (January 15th, 2026) at 11:59 PM PST!
Time really is running out! Save up to 50% on Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows® upgrades and receive a FREE Bonus PAK—only when you order by 11:59 PM PST on Thursday, January 15, 2026!
We've added many major new features and new content in a redesigned Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows®!
Version 2026 introduces a modernized GUI redesign across the program, with updated toolbars, refreshed windows, smoother workflows, and a new Dark Mode option. There’s also a new side toolbar for quicker access to commonly used windows, and the new Multi-View feature lets you arrange multiple windows as layered panels without overlap, making it easier to customize your workspace.
Another exciting new addition is the new AI-Notes feature, which can transcribe polyphonic audio into MIDI. You can view the results in notation or play them back as MIDI, and choose whether to process an entire track or focus on specific parts like drums, bass, guitars/piano, or vocals. There's over 100 new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows®.
There's an amazing collection of new content too, including 202 RealTracks, new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two RealDrums Stems sets, XPro Styles PAK 10, Xtra Styles PAK 21, and much more!
Upgrade your Band-in-a-Box for Windows to save up to 50% on most Band-in-a-Box® 2026 upgrade packages!
Plus, when you order your Band-in-a-Box® 2026 upgrade during our special, you'll receive a Free Bonus PAK of exciting new add-ons.
If you need any help deciding which package is the best option for you, just let us know. We are here to help!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows® Special Offers Extended Until January 15, 2026!
Good news! You still have time to upgrade to the latest version of Band-in-a-Box® for Windows® and save. Our Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows® special now runs through January 15, 2025!
We've packed Band-in-a-Box® 2026 with major new features, enhancements, and an incredible lineup of new content! The program now sports a sleek, modern GUI redesign across the entire interface, including updated toolbars, refreshed windows, smoother workflows, a new dark mode option, and more. The brand-new side toolbar provides quicker access to key windows, while the new Multi-View feature lets you arrange multiple windows as layered panels without overlap, creating a flexible, clutter-free workspace. We have an amazing new “AI-Notes” feature. This transcribes polyphonic audio into MIDI so you can view it in notation or play it back as MIDI. You can process an entire track (all pitched instruments and drums) or focus on individual parts like drums, bass, guitars/piano, or vocals. There's an amazing collection of new content too, including 202 RealTracks, new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two RealDrums Stems sets, XPro Styles PAK 10, Xtra Styles PAK 21, and much more!
There are over 100 new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows®.
When you order purchase Band-in-a-Box® 2026 before 11:59 PM PST on January 15th, you'll also receive a Free Bonus PAK packed with exciting new add-ons.
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows® today! Check out the Band-in-a-Box® packages page for all the purchase options available.
One of our representatives will be happy to help you over the phone. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday, and 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST Saturday. We are closed Sunday. You can also send us your questions via email.
One of our representatives will be happy to help you on our Live Chat or by email. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday; 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST (GMT -8) Saturday; Closed Sunday.
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean