|
|
Post by jeromemason on May 29, 2014 0:04:47 GMT -6
I got a session today and the vocals were set up in a pretty unique way.
The main vocal had been dup'd, panned hard L/R. On each side they had this Waves SSL CH>La2a>L2007>Waves C-6.
I looked at this and thought "what the hell" but when I hit play.... boy did it sound good. In your face, smooth, full, present and it seemed like it was just larger than what the girl was capable of. I put the same chain on one channel in mono to the same output level, and sure enough, it wasn't near as large, in fact not close. I've never seen this, and I'd like to know why this method seemed to really make this vocal sound huge. I'm sure there's a few of you that may have heard of this or tried it. Maybe someone can understand the significance of placing the plugins in that order, and dup'ng and panning hard L/R like that.
Interested in hearing some thoughts on this one.....
|
|
|
|
Post by henge on May 29, 2014 6:02:39 GMT -6
your sure it's the same lead vocal and not two slightly different ones?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on May 29, 2014 6:34:25 GMT -6
You can also duplicate a vocal track, pan each hard left and right and use a very short delay (or just slide over) on one side to get a broader stereo image. Check for the mono sum tho... cuase sometimes weird things can happen that makes a mix sound like crap in mono.
|
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on May 29, 2014 7:25:28 GMT -6
What happens if you take the same tracks and sum them to mono digitally? I would guess that the acoustical summing sounds bigger and fuller because of acoustic variations in the listening environment and the 7 inches between your ears.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluesprocket on May 29, 2014 7:28:29 GMT -6
You can also duplicate a vocal track, pan each hard left and right and use a very short delay (or just slide over) on one side to get a broader stereo image. Check for the mono sum tho... cuase sometimes weird things can happen that makes a mix sound like crap in mono. Yeah you'd definitely want to be vigilant in checking the mono sum on that. I've seen that trick done, and done it myself, on a number of other sources (guitars, keys, various percussion, BGVs, etc etc). But I don't know if I'd have the balls to do it to a lead vocal. Even though very few people listen to things in mono anymore other than retail paging systems, or on-hold telephone systems, I feel like at the very least the vocal, bass, and rhythm instrument should be just as crisp and clear in mono as it is in stereo. Everything else can get weird, but if the vocal gets funny...yeeeee. Not saying you're wrong that technique can definitely add a lot of width, just offering my opinion (we all know what those are worth). I do find that if you need to make a vocal "big" and in your face that paralleling a smashed version through an 1176 works wonders, just tuck it in right underneath. The grit of the '76 puts some "furr" around the vocal that helps it to stand out and you can start to play with attack and release times so that the top of words get accented a bit more but then sit well into the mix. But it still leaves a pretty natural sounding vocal in the end, just bigger. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 29, 2014 7:50:42 GMT -6
You can also duplicate a vocal track, pan each hard left and right and use a very short delay (or just slide over) on one side to get a broader stereo image. Check for the mono sum tho... cuase sometimes weird things can happen that makes a mix sound like crap in mono. I just did this the other day as an effect to bolster a weak vocalist who wanted to sound like a rockstar. Yeah it's strange in mono but who listens in mono these days? Duplicate the vocal track, add a little low end and a little distortion, a tiny bit of chorus and delay one side about 5ms. It's especially useful in certain areas where you want to accentuate certain words or phrases. The trick is getting just enough of this effect to hear, but not enough to overpower the vocal in mono. |
|
|
|
Post by Ward on May 29, 2014 9:26:46 GMT -6
Funny you both should say that... I shudder before I hit the "mono" switch on the console during the mixing process... and sometimes if it doesn't sound right, I say to myself "Yeah, but who listens to mono anyhow?" Then I smack myself upside the head and fix things like I was taught to.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on May 29, 2014 9:42:26 GMT -6
You can also duplicate a vocal track, pan each hard left and right and use a very short delay (or just slide over) on one side to get a broader stereo image. Check for the mono sum tho... cuase sometimes weird things can happen that makes a mix sound like crap in mono. Yeah you'd definitely want to be vigilant in checking the mono sum on that. I've seen that trick done, and done it myself, on a number of other sources (guitars, keys, various percussion, BGVs, etc etc). But I don't know if I'd have the balls to do it to a lead vocal. Even though very few people listen to things in mono anymore other than retail paging systems, or on-hold telephone systems, I feel like at the very least the vocal, bass, and rhythm instrument should be just as crisp and clear in mono as it is in stereo. Everything else can get weird, but if the vocal gets funny...yeeeee. Not saying you're wrong that technique can definitely add a lot of width, just offering my opinion (we all know what those are worth). I do find that if you need to make a vocal "big" and in your face that paralleling a smashed version through an 1176 works wonders, just tuck it in right underneath. The grit of the '76 puts some "furr" around the vocal that helps it to stand out and you can start to play with attack and release times so that the top of words get accented a bit more but then sit well into the mix. But it still leaves a pretty natural sounding vocal in the end, just bigger. yes fella's, this is called the "Haas effect", it's a form of lossless panning that is more congruent to human hearing and the way we interpret spatial placement of sources(predators 8), basically the "biggest" difference between Haas and panning is, panning loses volume as you turn the knob, and removes the sound from you opposite speaker(not a natural occurrence in the real world) Haas is tantamount to turning your head right or left, doesn't lose power, stays in both speakers, and just changes source location psychoacoustically, and is more natural sounding to humans IMV. That said, i only use it on backing vocals, support percussion, or anything that isn't mission critical that i want to move to spaces between LCR. lead Vox, bass, drum kit, or any instrumentation that is center focus is not an option for me, for the reasons you fella's stated, but of course, rules are meant to be broken, Haas is a GREAT panning effect without the weird to me. here is a cool youtube link explaining/displaying the Haas effect. welcome to the forum bluesprocketT |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on May 29, 2014 9:46:22 GMT -6
also, a little eq/compression manipulation of one side or the other, can exaggerate the effect quite nicely.
|
|
|
|
Post by sceneofdarhyme on May 29, 2014 9:57:01 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by donr on May 29, 2014 18:06:47 GMT -6
>"Yeah, but who listens to mono anyhow?"
I listen to a fair amount of music on a mono JAM bluetooth speaker, which is not too shabby for smartphone or computer use on the road. It sounds pretty damm good, in fact, and you can place it in a room to tailor the bass response to your liking, within the laws of physics.
I had some weird mono results mixing with Waves S1 stereo expander until I got a tip from an engineer who told me you can't exceed 1.25 width on that plug-in without risking mono incompatibility.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on May 29, 2014 19:26:36 GMT -6
>"Yeah, but who listens to mono anyhow?" I listen to a fair amount of music on a mono JAM bluetooth speaker, which is not too shabby for smartphone or computer use on the road. It sounds pretty damm good, in fact, and you can place it in a room to tailor the bass response to your liking, within the laws of physics. I had some weird mono results mixing with Waves S1 stereo expander until I got a tip from an engineer who told me you can't exceed 1.25 width on that plug-in without risking mono incompatibility. Mr. Dharma, just for clarification... is that summed mono or just a single source like the left channel, as most AM radio do? |
|
|
|
Post by Ward on May 29, 2014 19:28:16 GMT -6
BY the way, that is a great tip... and I've found the same thing. The stereo image at 1.59 is simply amazing but it isn't mono compatible, so one has to go to 1.25 or less to get mono compatibility, which gets a BOO from me.
|
|
|
|
Post by donr on May 30, 2014 11:56:52 GMT -6
>"Yeah, but who listens to mono anyhow?" I listen to a fair amount of music on a mono JAM bluetooth speaker, which is not too shabby for smartphone or computer use on the road. It sounds pretty damm good, in fact, and you can place it in a room to tailor the bass response to your liking, within the laws of physics. I had some weird mono results mixing with Waves S1 stereo expander until I got a tip from an engineer who told me you can't exceed 1.25 width on that plug-in without risking mono incompatibility. Mr. Dharma, just for clarification... is that summed mono or just a single source like the left channel, as most AM radio do? The original JAM speaker is summed stereo into mono. The JAM Plus, you can use two and get stereo which is pretty slick, or mono with one. I've got both, the new ones are a little bigger, unfortunately, I like the size of the original. |
|
