|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 10, 2019 20:24:24 GMT -6
It was revelation when I got to compare a vintage U47, U67, M49 and a C12. I expected the U47 to be king, but the U67 fit me better. If you can, do try some mics at a studio. I would bet you're most compatible with a U47 style mic though.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Sept 10, 2019 22:18:12 GMT -6
All the same, listening to the audio and/or videos-of those on this thread-, has helped me listen better. (like those on this thread!)
BTW Todd, I think you have a very smooth Lyric Tenor. Having any harshness, is the last thing I'd think of.
I do have have somewhat of a sibilance issue though, so can relate. Chris
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Sept 11, 2019 10:44:29 GMT -6
I agree with notneeson. Forget what people are telling you and get into a studio where you can try a handful of different mics. Once you pin point a mic you really like you can figure out what your budget can afford and head in that direction. If it's a trip to VK that works fine too. mike did that not too long ago and I know it helped him out greatly. Listening to your clips below I hear some "ss" sounds that stand out a bit on all tracks. I don't necessarily hear harshness. I think you can solve that with some mic positioning as I mentioned earlier, and a de-esser as needed. As I listen to them I feel that it's immediately clear the ADK is the highest quality microphone of the bunch, but there is something about the way the Peluso records your voice that I really like. That's why I asked about the higher end 47s. I think they would bring more weight and dimension with a similar feel as the Peluso.
I owned the 2247SE for years, so I know it well. I also had the pleasure of putting it side by side with a Wagner U47W and a FleA 47 on different occasions. The FleA has a surprisingly nice and balanced top end. Many good U47s do. They both have a big bottom end; the Wagner more so than the FleA, but definitely in the same vein. 47s and 49s have a similar sound. 47s compress the sound a little more and have a bigger low end. They also tend to have a more open top end. People often think the 49 is more open, but it's not. It's slightly brighter character comes from an earlier roll off in the bottom end that cuts out some of the mud and from a better dynamic range. The 49 might actually sound nice on your tenor voice. I have found it works well on voices that don't need as much beef in the bottom end. Female alto/mezzo voices are especially nice on it. You'd want to try both to really hear what works. Both of these are colored and enhance the voice a bit. My guess is the 47 would add some real weight and a bigger than life character on your voice. The 49 would be a bit more neutral and it would be about personal preference. I have two FleA 49s here and can't speak highly enough about them and the communication and customer service I've received from Ivan at FleA.
My favorite mics to use on my voice are 49s and 67s. I'm a huge U67 fan; Mr. Natural. Big, warm, cutting, neutral. In fact I'm eying a 67 style purchase as we speak. I tend to reach for my 67 style mics when working on a Broadway type recording for a vocal that seems big sits solidly in the mix and a part of the track, and a 49 on the classical crossover style vocals that need to sound enormous and larger than life. 67s do not necessarily sound bigger than life like the 47 or 49, they seem to enhance the voice, but in the right way as not to sound false or overly colored. 67s are also great at taming a bit of sibilance.
It's important to look for a microphone that gives you most of what you are looking for in a vocal and is missing most of what you'd want to clean up. A darker Neumann style mic might give you all of the warmth and weight you are looking for, not have as bad of a problem with your "ss" sound, but need a little air from a pultec style EQ for some clarity. That's ok. It's also ok if in a busy mix you need to EQ out some of that weight. That is literally how I use my FleA 49.
My experience with 251s is a bit limited. I had the CM251, which is probably a lot like your Peluso 22 251 and not in the same league as your ADK. I also have a BLUE B0 Cap for my Bottle Rocket Stage II, but in my opinion that's closer to a C12 than a 251. When Emily and I were trying out and researching microphones we adored a Korby Kat 251 on her voice. I tend to choose the Bock 251 when I hear shootouts of high end 251 style mics and have tried to get one in here to try for a while to no avail. I love what your ADK is doing though. It just might be a little bright on your "ss." One thing you'll find with the 251 and C12 style mics is you don't have to keep the vocal as loud in the mix as you would with a 47 or 49. The vocal can come down a bit and will still cut really well. So make sure you don't focus on the meters when comparing these mics you have with each other. Focus on the sound and blend of the mix. You might find the ADK to be jumping out a bit. Just lower the volume a little. This is just something I have found working with these types of mics.
BTW, you mentioned in your clips you rolled everything off at 100 hz. If you want a fuller sound, do it earlier. I usually start at 70 hz. If it's an American song book crooner style piece I may only roll off at 50 hz, if at all. If it's a really busy piece I may go to the 100 hz. I've seen a lot of tutorials where the instructors roll everything off automatically at 100 hz as a rule. That works for specific styles a music and may or may not work on yours. Make sure you play around with it.
Anyway, hopefully some of this rant makes sense.... This might be a shiny quarter instead of just 2 cents.
|
|
|
Post by mike on Sept 11, 2019 11:41:03 GMT -6
I agree with notneeson . Forget what people are telling you and get into a studio where you can try a handful of different mics. Once you pin point a mic you really like you can figure out what your budget can afford and head in that direction. If it's a trip to VK that works fine too. mike did that not too long ago and I know it helped him out greatly. ^^This ^^ Vinnie like usual makes allot of great points, but the first one is what I'd do if I were you......not only will going to VK or a studio's mic locker to sing through them all help you zero in on what fits your voice, it will help to remove the doubt or wonder about the other mic's you've read about, heard clips of online but keep wondering how they will all fit you even after you've bought your first, second or third guess choice as the expensive way to sort what fits you best. And the second part of that is it is as much relief for your mind as your wallet after learning what they all sound like on your voice and which mic's you no longer need to think about also. I'd encourage you to find a place if you can, to be able to track a phrase or three of your vocal that you feel best represents your style through each of the mic's,...take those clips home with you and compare the same phrase on your mic's and preamps at home to learn which of the test mic's are really a significant or marginal upgrade or neither by sounding not better but just different on you. The other thing this would do is give you a chance to hear the comparison clips through more than 1 source or set of headphones at the time, allowing you more time to thoroughly discern what's really worth spending your money on or not FWIW. If you choose to do this, I'd suggest going with an open mind and taking your time. My experience was like Martin's in that, some of my preconceived thoughts of what mic would fit my voice best was different than I expected in some ways,.... which led me to spending more time with those mic's than others I wish I had spent a little more time with. Good Luck!
|
|
|
Post by teejay on Sept 11, 2019 12:38:32 GMT -6
Thanks so much for the detailed response, Vincent. Really appreciate it. I need to consider how I may get to VK or a well-equipped studio that's within reasonable distance and has reasonable rates.
To give you a point of reference on what I'm targeting, here's a link to a song by 4Him that I often cover, and is what I could record/post here for a comparison. Of the four guys, Mark Harris is the one I believe I have many (not all) vocal similarities with, and whose sonics I'm trying to use as my template. I think I also have a propensity for some of the stronger upper-mid freq's you hear in Marty Magehee's voice, which are really evident in his second section. They mix up the lead, so here's a breakdown:
0:20-0:30, 0:51-1:41 Mark Harris 0:30-0:50, 1:41-1:52 Marty Magehee
It's all Andy Chrisman after 1:52. He has a great tenor voice, but not like mine at all.
In the voices I hear the warmth you reference, with good clarity, smooth but evident highs, and some mid-forwardness that is present but not harsh. I obviously don't know where the rolloffs are, but doesn't sound like there is much down there. This is the "sound" I'm trying to achieve. Warm, smooth, full, present...not muddy/crisp/thin/harsh. Granted, I know this was likely recorded on vintage mics, in a perfect room, and engineered by the best. Finding the right mic or correctly leveraging the ADK to provide the best opportunity to achieve as much of that as possible during tracking vs. trying to manipulate or massively eq afterward is the goal.
I have the CD and the YouTube version does it no justice, but hopefully gives you the idea.
|
|
|
Post by teejay on Sept 11, 2019 12:53:07 GMT -6
Thanks as well, Mike. Great info to hear from personal experience. I know you and the others here are right that the best way to do this is to get somewhere. One option I do have is to take a 2.5 hour drive over to Chandler's facility. About the time the REDD mic was coming out I inquired with Wade about the TG preamp, and that led to some mic discussion. He invited me to come over to his place to demo his C12, U67, and M49. I was not able to take him up on the offer at the time, but perhaps he'd still be open to it. May give me a chance to demo his REDD and TG mic as well. What I wouldn't get is a chance to demo a vintage or good 47, but maybe there's a workaround for that. It's either demo Wade's locker or head to VK where I wouldn't be demoing vintage, but may have more options to demo...and versions I'd be able to purchase.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Sept 11, 2019 16:59:05 GMT -6
Hearing the sample I see why people steered you in the direction of a 251. I think you could get this sound with a 251 or a 47 with some creative processing.
Just to give you an idea of what a little processing can do, check the files below. I added a little de-essing, compression using a UAD LA2A, and some basic EQ via the UAD SSL 4k strip. The compression is no more than -6dB at the largest peaks. EQ was mostly just a rolloff around 70hz, with the exception of the Peluso where I added a small boost at 9k and a small cut at 300hz. Had I been actually mix the track I might have found I needed a little more EQ here and there, but this was just a general clean up; a little compression and a little EQ.
ADK 251:
Peluso 2247SE:
V13:
|
|
|
Post by teejay on Sept 11, 2019 17:38:37 GMT -6
Wow! Very kind of you to take the time to do that, Vincent, and to provide the screen shots and explanation as well. Very helpful, and in large-part what I was hoping for in the initial posting of this thread. The examples sound great. I'm going to see if I can mirror those settings in my DAW. I don't have UAD, but do have some Waves and native Reaper plugs I'll use.
Definitely sounds smoother. Not sure if that's the combo or one plug in particular, but some of those harsher upper mids are glossed over.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Sept 11, 2019 20:56:29 GMT -6
Todd, any level of interest in a ribbon-possibly? Chris
|
|
|
Post by shoe on Sept 13, 2019 21:17:51 GMT -6
I'm curious what you're using for the backing tracks. Are these midi-based and controlling a sampling synthesizer? The reason I ask is that I don't hear as much of an issue with the sound of your vocals as much as I think the tracks might not quite blend with the voice as much as they could. So, to me, it seems like maybe working on making the tracks "match" a little more might mean that you don't have to do much at all different with your vocals.
|
|
|
Post by teejay on Sept 15, 2019 20:12:19 GMT -6
Chris - I'd consider it. Have only had very limited experience with an inexpensive ribbon.
Shoe - The backing tracks are finished/mixed tracks manufactured primarily for live performance, but can be used for recording after paying some licensing fees. Sometimes the companies use real instruments, and sometimes they use midi-driven samples. It's a variety with some sounding much better than others. The manufacturers told me they are already mastered, which presents another challenge when it comes to finishing the process. Several of the companies offer their own recording studios/services, and my understanding is that then you have access to the stems/individual instrument tracks for more tweaking. However, when you use the tracks on your own for home recording you simply get the finished mix, so making any adjustments impacts the entire mix. If you dip 4k for example, it's across every instrument. I've tried doing some of that, but probably not with the focus that you are referencing. Worth taking another look at. Thanks for the suggestion.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Sept 15, 2019 20:45:46 GMT -6
FWIW Samar's AL-95 as the Brits say... "Punched above its weight", when I tried/sang through it. Actually any of Mark Fouxman's microphones sounded first rate to me, that I've tried. Chris
|
|
|
Post by mike on Sept 15, 2019 20:49:06 GMT -6
Shoe - The backing tracks are finished/mixed tracks manufactured primarily for live performance, but can be used for recording after paying some licensing fees. Sometimes the companies use real instruments, and sometimes they use midi-driven samples. It's a variety with some sounding much better than others. The manufacturers told me they are already mastered, which presents another challenge when it comes to finishing the process. Several of the companies offer their own recording studios/services, and my understanding is that then you have access to the stems/individual instrument tracks for more tweaking. However, when you use the tracks on your own for home recording you simply get the finished mix, so making any adjustments impacts the entire mix. If you dip 4k for example, it's across every instrument. I've tried doing some of that, but probably not with the focus that you are referencing. Worth taking another look at. Thanks for the suggestion.
If you could get one of your Co's to get you individual quality stems, so you can process and mix each instrument accordingly, it should give you more control over the space you choose to make for your vocal in the mix, while making your backing track instruments and the overall track sound stronger. I honestly think being able to do that well may make a bigger impact than another mic if you can only do one. Trying to carve out a space for a vocal and not being able to process different instruments differently is a pretty limiting difference from when you can I think. My 2 cents FWIW
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Sept 15, 2019 20:56:13 GMT -6
The backing tracks are finished/mixed tracks manufactured primarily for live performance, but can be used for recording after paying some licensing fees. Sometimes the companies use real instruments, and sometimes they use midi-driven samples. It's a variety with some sounding much better than others. The manufacturers told me they are already mastered, which presents another challenge when it comes to finishing the process. Several of the companies offer their own recording studios/services, and my understanding is that then you have access to the stems/individual instrument tracks for more tweaking. However, when you use the tracks on your own for home recording you simply get the finished mix, so making any adjustments impacts the entire mix. If you dip 4k for example, it's across every instrument. I've tried doing some of that, but probably not with the focus that you are referencing. Worth taking another look at. Thanks for the suggestion. Most of my debut album was done with background tracks, with only "Be My Love" and "Granada" done with full track mixes. It's doable. It's all about the mix and choice of background tracks you use. I let go of a few songs I couldn't find decent tracks for. You cannot fix a horrible background track. The biggest issue you may have is renewing it if it sells well. I'm heading for my second renewal...
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 16, 2019 1:36:02 GMT -6
Shoe - The backing tracks are finished/mixed tracks manufactured primarily for live performance, but can be used for recording after paying some licensing fees. Sometimes the companies use real instruments, and sometimes they use midi-driven samples. It's a variety with some sounding much better than others. The manufacturers told me they are already mastered, which presents another challenge when it comes to finishing the process. Several of the companies offer their own recording studios/services, and my understanding is that then you have access to the stems/individual instrument tracks for more tweaking. However, when you use the tracks on your own for home recording you simply get the finished mix, so making any adjustments impacts the entire mix. If you dip 4k for example, it's across every instrument. I've tried doing some of that, but probably not with the focus that you are referencing. Worth taking another look at. Thanks for the suggestion.
If you could get one of your Co's to get you individual quality stems, so you can process and mix each instrument accordingly, it should give you more control over the space you choose to make for your vocal in the mix, while making your backing track instruments and the overall track sound stronger. I honestly think being able to do that well may make a bigger impact than another mic if you can only do one. Trying to carve out a space for a vocal and not being able to process different instruments differently is a pretty limiting difference from when you can I think. My 2 cents FWIW
Stems are sub mixes, not tracks. You can't process each instument individually.
|
|
|
Post by mike on Sept 16, 2019 7:38:05 GMT -6
If you could get one of your Co's to get you individual quality stems, so you can process and mix each instrument accordingly, it should give you more control over the space you choose to make for your vocal in the mix, while making your backing track instruments and the overall track sound stronger. I honestly think being able to do that well may make a bigger impact than another mic if you can only do one. Trying to carve out a space for a vocal and not being able to process different instruments differently is a pretty limiting difference from when you can I think. My 2 cents FWIW
Stems are sub mixes, not tracks. You can't process each instument individually. Yes, I know John, and thought it goes without saying here. I was replying to him bringing up the topic in general of possibly being able to get more individual instrument control with the words he used of ""stems/individual instrument tracks" he said were typically made available for live performance. So whether some songs are individual instrument tracks or others separated stems of Drums, bass, Guitars etc. is all he could get, he would still have more control than a stereo backing track mix being able to process them differently and something I thought could make as much or more difference than a new mic possibly for him.
|
|
|
Post by shoe on Sept 16, 2019 18:30:34 GMT -6
Shoe - The backing tracks are finished/mixed tracks manufactured primarily for live performance, but can be used for recording after paying some licensing fees. Sometimes the companies use real instruments, and sometimes they use midi-driven samples. It's a variety with some sounding much better than others. The manufacturers told me they are already mastered, which presents another challenge when it comes to finishing the process. Several of the companies offer their own recording studios/services, and my understanding is that then you have access to the stems/individual instrument tracks for more tweaking. However, when you use the tracks on your own for home recording you simply get the finished mix, so making any adjustments impacts the entire mix. If you dip 4k for example, it's across every instrument. I've tried doing some of that, but probably not with the focus that you are referencing. Worth taking another look at. Thanks for the suggestion.
If you could get one of your Co's to get you individual quality stems, so you can process and mix each instrument accordingly, it should give you more control over the space you choose to make for your vocal in the mix, while making your backing track instruments and the overallĀ track sound stronger. I honestly think being able to do that well may make a bigger impact than another mic if you can only do one. Trying to carve out a space for a vocal and not being able to process different instruments differently is a pretty limiting difference from when you can I think. My 2 cents FWIW
Yeah, that's what I was getting at. I think the vocals can be made to fit with the backing track more if there's a bit more done to the backing tracks to make them "match" more closely for lack of a better word. Knowing it's mostly stereo backing tracks that are pre-mastered does make that tougher. Still, though, I wonder if you wouldn't benefit from some light bus processing through a piece of gear with some "color," like maybe a pair of preamps with some color, or an EQ plus and some light master bus compression for some "glue" (though I dislike these buzzwords). I wouldn't mind taking a stab at it through some of my gear to see if it helps. I don't know what todd has at his own disposal, though.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Sept 16, 2019 20:54:43 GMT -6
Interesting if Bob Ohlsson could add his thoughts on this.
SOP at Motown many times, was to make the complete backing track, then try various vocalists on it. Chris
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Sept 16, 2019 21:22:37 GMT -6
Interesting if Bob Ohlsson could add his thoughts on this. SOP at Motown many times, was to make the complete backing track, then try various vocalists on it. Chris That's pretty cool! So many geniuses behind the stars, it's not so and so it's MOTOWN
|
|
|
Post by donr on Sept 17, 2019 7:21:57 GMT -6
Interesting if Bob Ohlsson could add his thoughts on this. SOP at Motown many times, was to make the complete backing track, then try various vocalists on it. Chris That's pretty cool! So many geniuses behind the stars, it's not so and so it's MOTOWN According to people close to the Hip hop and RnB scene, this is the way it's largely done today. The Demo IS the track, and if an artist hears it and likes it, they just sing/rap to the original recording.
|
|
|
Post by teejay on Sept 17, 2019 8:15:50 GMT -6
Really appreciate the thoughts, feedback, and consideration for possibly taking a quick stab at mixing.
- I have used one of four manufacturers: Praise Hymn (one of the suppliers who offered their studio as well - looks like they've shut their website down), Daywind (In Nashville...I am an acquaintance of the VP of Music Publishing, Rick Shelton), Christian World Soundtraks (Oklahoma), and Wordtracks (no more website for them either). I've got my own theories as to why the resources are drying up, and unfortunately that means less options and more challenges going forward. I'll contact CW and DW to see if they offer individual tracks.
- Shoe, I have - Preamps: Roll Music Tubule, MA5, P1, DRS1-500, GAP Pre73 | EQ: Kush Electra 500 series | Compressors: IGS OneLA, DBX 560A | Board: Soundcraft Spirit M4. I was just looking at Martin's post yesterday regarding his question on the SSL Six, and wondering if that may be a better way to go with its onboard track and bus compression.
I'll make every effort to record in the next few days and make the vocal and backing tracks available as separate files to anyone interested.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 17, 2019 9:02:03 GMT -6
If you're tracking and mixing yourself, simplifying is a good idea. When you have clients, you need certain tings you might not choose for yourself. It can be fun, but sometimes a drag on your time to have all those choices in preamps, EQ's and compressors. It's always about trying to get pro sounds on a budget, that's why I still think a U47 sound will be the most compatible for your voice.
I think it's likely the SSL Six will sound better than the Spirit. If you don't need all those extra channels, I'd seriously think about trading over all that outboard. I know the Six has limitations, but I think it promises to make things much easier for me. An SSL compressor in and out on the 2 bus should be cool, even if it's preset.
My thoughts on the Six all come down to my idea that a board will get better results than a good preamp into my DAW. I really like the preamps I have, but don't necessarily LOVE them, if you know what I mean.
|
|
|
Post by teejay on Sept 17, 2019 9:38:03 GMT -6
If you're tracking and mixing yourself, simplifying is a good idea. When you have clients, you need certain tings you might not choose for yourself. It can be fun, but sometimes a drag on your time to have all those choices in preamps, EQ's and compressors. It's always about trying to get pro sounds on a budget, that's why I still think a U47 sound will be the most compatible for your voice. I think it's likely the SSL Six will sound better than the Spirit. If you don't need all those extra channels, I'd seriously think about trading over all that outboard. I know the Six has limitations, but I think it promises to make things much easier for me. An SSL compressor in and out on the 2 bus should be cool, even if it's preset. My thoughts on the Six all come down to my idea that a board will get better results than a good preamp into my DAW. I really like the preamps I have, but don't necessarily LOVE them, if you know what I mean. I know exactly what you mean, Martin. Too many mics and too many preamps for just myself have caused analysis paralysis. The 500 rack just begs to be filled, and while having "gear" is fun and cool, it's not been productive for me when trying to hone in on one thing. Whether that's the options or my inability to leverage what I have, the result is the same. When I hauled out my Spirit M4 a few weeks ago and plugged my Z-251 and 2247SE into the onboard pres my mind told me there was no way they'd sound as good as my expensive outboards. I was really only looking to experiment with the onboard eq. But the M4 pres sound really good, and in a way (perhaps in reality it's sonic deficiency) they don't enhance my issues as much. I WANT to love my outboards more than the M4 pres, but the fact that I've done mostly testing/tweaking and not much recording with the outboards tells me I don't. While this thread started out as vocal eq, I may be getting a much better perspective. Right mic, minimize options, work on backing tracks, process the bus.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 17, 2019 10:18:54 GMT -6
Todd said, "Too many mics and too many preamps for just myself have caused analysis paralysis. The 500 rack just begs to be filled, and while having "gear" is fun and cool, it's not been productive for me when trying to hone in on one thing".
I so get that. When I had my analogue home studio decades back, I plugged a U87 into the board, adding just a little DBX 160 going in for protection and was done. Reverb and delay were on busses, mixing was easy, mostly about levels, I barely needed EQ and used it sparingly. The thing was, the U87 just worked on everything, no need to fix in the mix or dial out sibilance and EQ, it just sounded right. So it all begins with finding the right mic for your voice. After that, you could probably plug into almost anything and sound good. So, if you actually go into something nice like the SSL, you should sound really good.
I was watching this cool interview with Butch Walker and noticed he had the Chandler REDD, the Soyuz 0-17, and a pair of Soyuz 0-13's for overheads. Clearly he didn't feel the need for a classic vintage mic, although I'm sure he can afford one. His tastes obviously parallels mine and helps to validate my choices. So you don't have to worry about not having a vintage Neuman, just choose well.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Sept 17, 2019 11:59:50 GMT -6
While a U47 style microphone, is my fave of all LDC's... I still think the Z-251 will sound great for Todd's voice.
Regarding a ribbon, I realize it's the bit of "projection", on my part, as I'm planning to add a nice vocal ribbon mic in 2020. Chris
|
|