Vocal recording questions.

How do you sing? Are you able to narrow your voice, ie bring your voice/tone into your upper throat and higher? Or do you mainly sing from your stomach and chest region? As a singer I can tell you it makes a huge difference... it's not always about the room or gear. There are vocal channnel strips like Voxformer that will allow you to narrow and focus the sound but just like with any instrument, the source is the most important part when it comes to a really great take.

Thanks for the advice, I don't really sing, it's more talking/singing if you know what I mean.
I'll try singing from the throat and see if it helps, as I do sing from the chest.
I really wish I could sing as my mixing and song writing is getting alot better.
Wish there was a good singing VST, I did try LOLA once from Yamaha which was interesting.
I'll keep practicing.

Cheers
Steve.

Speaking only as an intermediate singer/performer:
 
Bro: The signal chain must have a dutiful pre-amp.  Everything else revolves around the pre (for me).

Also, practice practice practice ruins my vox, though I'm certain it works for Zuma, Mark Baxter, and others.  I just do my required vocal warm ups (5-10 minutes) and try to stay inspired. 

Albeit, multiple takes will win the day for me, 95% of the time.  Still I'll end up Melodyning the 1st or 2nd take.  With kids, its the 5th or 6th take as I end up injecting my vibe.  They require much melodyne.

Pitch imperfections are my greatest enemy; I always hated "lay lady lay" (Dylan) and developing puberty vocs against perfectly tuned guitars.  Though Dylan was extremely popular back in the day.

Double voxing to make up for pitch imperfections ... not for most of us.

A good sound-interface is usually terrible for me (like my RME ff400 sucks for my vox); a sound interface alone may do in a pinch only ... for 'on-the-road' laptops and backing vocs, IMHO.

A most popular amongst pros may be the Avalon 737 sp (with its vac tube replaceables), with to its side-chain compressor and EQ knobs.  IIRC, Michael Jackson used it.  Its a $2500 expense, IIRC.

Mics are a completely different animal.  But it wouldn't hurt to start out with a good conden$or mic, like the U-87, if you have the cash.  Many vocs sound great with it (like males and boys). 

Later you can add a cheaper AKG condensor for $1000 to give you lush untamed vocal timbres

So a typical introductory signal chain might be the U-87 + Avalon --> a high impedance inlet on any sound card.  You can save the low impedence inlets for those inexpensive but excellent dynamic mics that Danny mentions.

With the mic set to cardioid or hyper-cardioid, a vocal booth may be unnecessary.

HPF my vox above 180Hz and I've enhanced my brightness (preferably enveloped for choruses)

It's the room.

Bad rooms help sell a lot of expensive microphones, preamps and equalizers.

But when it comes to using acoustical transducers (microphones), 80% of your problems are going to be acoustical in nature, and the remaining 20% are technique. A good engineer in a good room can make a good recording with just about any microphone you toss at him.

If you record in your bedroom, there isn't much you can do about the room acoustics, especially in the low mids. Blankets, mattresses, fiberglass gobos all help with frequencies above 1-2KHz or so. They will make the room sound dead, but none of those things will help you in the 300-800Hz range unless you take the treatments to an extreme that isn't practical in a bedroom studio.

There are things you can do, though. Sing at least 10" back from the mic. Don't turn the mic gain up any higher than you absolutely have to. Experiment with different mic positions - make sure the live side of the mic is pointed away from the nearest wall(s) or corner. Use the HPF if your mic has one. Try omni mode if you have it - it may help or it might make things worse, you have to experiment to find out. If your room has a closet full of coats, open the doors and sing in front of it. If you have a long-enough cable, run it out into a larger room. Become best friends with a good multiband compressor.

Just don't go out and buy a new preamp - or worse, a new mic - thinking it will solve anything.

With utmost respect to Bit, James, and Danny: Sorry to rock the boat guys, but many novice and intermediate vox artists like myself are extremely inspired by good Pre's. 

I wish someone had shoved the Avalon Pre down my noob throat long before failing with Ethan Winer's clunky vocal booths (though I still try to avoid early reflections).  That was $300 of junk in my noob-hands.

Pre's vs Room Acoustics has always been a battleground amongst home producers, each vainly arguing the benefits of one and belittling the other  -- haha!  Observe home producers trolling against each other on this: http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/414247-how-important-good-preamp.html

A good pre has been the single greatest investment I've ever made for my humble vox-centric productions as well as my humble vox.  JMO.  My productions are not that pro-sounding yet ... just intermediate level.

A good pre for me helps in the following:  limits vocal peaks, prevents clipping, dampens/gates out noise, compresses, equalizes, and de-esses, and excites ... all at the crtical source

... great for my novice singers and intermediates: and I now mouse around with clip-gain envelopes a lot less ...

There are many pre's to choose from, I merely recommended a dutiful and popular one.

Pre's do afford 'some' vintage tube or solidstate colorations/saturations at the source.  I've purchased several German and Russian vintage tube$ for my Avalon that probably were of no significance.

As far as mic technique goes, IIRC, I've seen Doug Rogers (co-author of EWQL samplers) sing directly into a bare-mic placed on his computer desk (on a desktop mic stand) -- hahaha! 

Are there really any rules?  I'm glad you guys who sing without a good pre are doing well!  But, a good pre was the best investment for my vocals and recordings.

To each his own I guess.

Expensive mics and pres only do that last 5% (unless you have the cheapest of cheap). If it doesn't sound right by a long shot, changing your gear will do nothing. You hear guys saying "this new mic is AMAZING! It sounds so much better than the other one I have!!!" But, put it into perspective. Sure, it might sound amazing and much better, but the difference in the full scheme of the sound, it might be only 5% of the sound you're hearing. 70% might be the source and 25% the room and techniques. Obviously these numbers are just a very rough ball park, but put it in perspective. When you blind test this kinda thing, the techniques used, room quality and source quality can be often picked up by many different people, but picking which used the better mic or pre-amp, a much smaller amount of people can hear it.

Don't buy more gear. Get the techniques correct first. You'll learn so much more, save money, and get a better result.

As for your issue, it could be a number of things, so probably not really worth commenting on, other than that it's highly unlikely to be your gear, but the source or techniques or room. Or a combination. Your best bet is to post a sample so we can hear which of these it is.

I don't sing, but my wife does it for me.  And her jazz band has to re-write about half the old standards to accomodate her range.  Like Guitar sez above, the key is the key to get a good vocal sound.  Just as arrangement is the key to getting a good mix.

So record yourself just singing an old favorite and find where it fits your voice.  Then re-key every song to that.  Unless you are a trained opera singer, finding the range that makes it easy to sing is the first thing to do.

As far as the room, it is hard (read expensive) to tune a room to get one flat.  It is a little easier to get one with character.  You can make it better, or just move to another room that sounds better.  As Bit notes, there are probably some overs at certain frequencies that are making your voice sound "boxy."

You can change rooms to see if that one interacts with your voice better.  You can start saving for room treatment or making gobos, etc.  Even a reflex-style can help.  Unless the room is small the singer out to the room from a dead corner usually gives acceptable results.

A mic can help a little, but not change the physics.  A good preamp can really, really help once the room is sorted out, too.  But no matter how much lipstick you put on a pig, you ain't gonna wanna make out with it (well, us normal people anyway).

@

Have you ever actually seen any objective tests of the Reflexion Filter by a disinterested third party? I haven't found any, although subjective reviews and testimonials abound.

The manufacturer's explanation can be read here. It sounds like a reasonable explanation, especially if you know little about acoustics. But in reality it doesn't matter how many layers of diffusion and absorption you stack up, the effectiveness of any acoustical device is still dependent on its physical dimensions relative to the wavelengths you're trying to treat. No matter how efficient the absorber is, a 1-inch thick barrier is not going to have a measurable effect on frequencies below about 4KHz. In my experience, acoustical issues in vocal recordings are much more problematic below 1KHz.

A university in Shanghai did test it, and SE proudly displays the results. The tests were "independent", meaning SE did not influence the results. It is not known, however, whether SE paid for the tests or if the entire test results have been made public. If they have, I've not been able to find the actual test results online.

The Tongji University test apparently did not actually address the question of whether the filter was effective, only whether it colored the sound. Or at least, that's the only part of the test included on SE's website.

The good news is it appears to not color the sound. That's good to know, that at least it doesn't make anything sound worse. But it begs the question: how can it be completely transparent AND still do what it's supposed to do? That would only be possible if it had completely linear absorption properties.

There has been a public war of words between SE and Ethan Winer, who sells a similar competing product. At least Ethan's marketing material shows actual absorption measurements, which look reasonable with about 12db reduction above 1KHz. The controversy is that Ethan's tests of the SE product show coloration that SE denies exists, and SE claims that the RealTraps product actually has more coloration.

A 12db reduction off the backside of a mic can't hurt, especially when added to the 5 to 20db backside rejection already provided by a typical cardioid pickup pattern. But I am put off by the marketing for these products, which play up voodoo over science.

I have to say there's some great advice here. I know I don't like the sound of my room I use for mixing It's small and square.
I have full rolls of insulation from floor to ceiling in each corner and about seven broadband traps plus foam panels on the wall which is why it's so dead sounding.
When I recorded vocals I was facing a wall and was close to the Mic.
I will try recording in different positions and rooms, then see which one needs less EQ to fit into my mix.
I'm using a Focusrite Twin Track Pro as my pre-amp, but don't think this is the issue.
I also have an Ik multimedia iMic for my Ipad which I got for recording ideas, I suppose this would be handy for recording in different rooms and listening to the differences.

Cheers
Steve.

Steve, facing the wall is one problem.  Getting too close is another.  You are getting reflections back into the mic - and as Bit said most abosorbers only go down so far.  Lower Midrange stuff and below is bouncing back w/ all the high end sucked out.  And you are likely getting more bass from the proximity effect.  Even Barry White had some overtones ;-)

Before blowing a lot of money try singing out into the room.  It sounds like the back corner is well covered, but you can add the quilt too.  Now your voice is going out into the room and some reflections are coming back, off the back wall and into the mic.  It should give a little more air to the sound rather than a dead muffle build up of bass, esp. if your ceiling is bare.  Once the room sound is more acceptable, a good preamp will allow you to back off the mic.  Those pricey tuned rooms in a big studio let the singer back off the mic more, bringing in more air and solving the proximity build up.  That requires a better mic preamp that doesn't bunch up the control and provides lots of gain.  It is a viscious circle of more expensive equipment, but also how it all fits together.  You don't need a great and big room (as others above have posted), but an adequate room.

@

this thread is incredible. all this 'advise' on nothing. 
Descriptions of a sound are far different than THE sound.
But hey, I'll chime in. compress it with like a 4.05 ratio and lower the threshhold till about 3.5 db gain reduction. Plug in an eq and high pass at about 200 hz., a little bump at 5k, and then melodyne the bageesus out of it. 
It will be perfect. 

I think you've already spotted this relatively simple problem, Steve. 
You've probably been singing too close to your mic. 

The sE Electronics sE2200a Condenser, like so many others in that price range, is deliberately bright, so the only way you could be suffering from a dull, muddy sound on a cardioid pattern is if you're too close to the diaphragm. Being close to a wall will definitely effect the sound as well (like colouring, combing, ambience, phase) but not to the extent of dulling your voice completely.  


So, like you've already suggested, try different mic positions & distances from the mic, & you should find more clarity. And keep your fingers crossed that the sE Electronics sE2200a Condenser is actually the mic for you & your unique voice.  

Sorry I am only just able to provide an example, but been away from home (work work work).
Anyway I don't normally do tracks with singing on as you will hear why shortly, but do like writing songs.
Unfortunately this is my first one and the example has been treated with melodyne, I deleted the originals.
There's also the completed track on sound cloud which used these rubbish vocals.
Anyway here's the link,

http://soundcloud.com/digital-dream-division/vocal-example-output-to

Cheers
Steve.

jamesyoyo

steve@psbnoe.wanadoo


I have to say there's some great advice here. I know I don't like the sound of my room I use for mixing It's small and square.
I have full rolls of insulation from floor to ceiling in each corner and about seven broadband traps plus foam panels on the wall which is why it's so dead sounding.
When I recorded vocals I was facing a wall and was close to the Mic.
I will try recording in different positions and rooms, then see which one needs less EQ to fit into my mix.
I'm using a Focusrite Twin Track Pro as my pre-amp, but don't think this is the issue.
I also have an Ik multimedia iMic for my Ipad which I got for recording ideas, I suppose this would be handy for recording in different rooms and listening to the differences.

Cheers
Steve.

Steve,
PM me and send over a wav of your vocal. I will take a look at adding some plugin magic to perhaps get where you want to go.
 
Thanks for the very kind offer. I'm doing a new track now and haven't done the vocals yet, if I still can't sort it after all this advice I'll let you know.
 
Cheers
Steve.