Vocals sound great thru headphones, not so after recording - why?

Posted on

Member Since: Jul 06, 2002

I don't understand why my takes sound so bad, being that the DELTA 1010 supposedly houses the best A/D converters around.

I use an AKG C414 cond mic, a Blue Tube preamp, Roland dig reverb, and the Delta. From this rig i ought to get a better sound than i do - post recording. In my headphones the sound is rich, full, and 'larger than life'. Yet after i record, say a vocal line, the take sounds harsh and thin. Using 2 cond mics makes it sound better, but vocals are supposed to be in the middle of the mix.
I just don't understand it. I've spend so much on all of this. I know i can use mastering plugins to warm up the wav clips, but too much of that and the noise floor rises, correct? I want the recording to sound as good as it does in my monitors/headphones.

So, does anyone know how to get a good recorded
sound - capturing the lush/rich sounds you hear in the monitor/headphones? Do i have to buy an expensive
preamp or other hardware (funds are low, but i will if
i HAVE too)?

Thanx a ton for any help!

My stuff:
Optimized P4
Sonar 2
AKG C414, AT4050
Blue Tube
Roland SRV-3030D
Delta 1010
padded room

P.S. I have a 'thin' voice to begin with (kinda trebly).

[ Back to Top ]


Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Oct 06, 2002 05:43 am

I don't see a compressor in your list...are you compressing the vocals. If not, that would be a very good place to start.

...bringing sexy back
Member
Since: Jul 01, 2002


Oct 06, 2002 09:58 am

padded room eh? i could use one of those some days....and those suits with tied up backwards arms...

Member
Since: Jul 06, 2002


Oct 06, 2002 12:53 pm

..sometimes i feel as though im wearing one of those jackets when i sing :)


Contributor
Since: Sep 09, 2002


Oct 06, 2002 10:43 pm

do you have a snippet of audio you could upload to some webspace so i could listen? sometimes that's the best diagnosis. -j

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Oct 07, 2002 10:41 pm

It sound's like you are not getting the signal into the PC at a high enough level. If you are adding more gain when you warm it up with a pluggin and the noise floor is louder, that is a sign that you are not recording the take at a hot enough level. And as dB said, a compressor is a life saver in your situation.

Brother in Christ
Member
Since: Jun 12, 2002


Oct 08, 2002 02:12 pm

I have a couple of questions and a couple of thoughts. First, how are you monitoring to your headphones? Are you monitoring post Delta or Pre? You may be listening to a direct feed from the mic pre and not from what the Delta is actually recording. The other thing is that all that you hear of your own voice is not only coming from the headphones. Some of it is direct vibration in your head. That's why people have so much trouble recognizing their own voice on a recording. Try listening to someone else sing and see if it's that much of a difference. You may be expecting your voice to sound different than it actually does based on how you percieve your voice to sound. I like dB's suggestion of using a compressor as well. It seems that recording a hotter signal helps in getting a full sound. A compressor will help you get the recording level up with out going over the top into distortion.

Just some thoughts.

Blessings, Terry

Member
Since: Jul 06, 2002


Oct 11, 2002 11:23 pm


Wow, you guys were right. My recording signal is too low. I'll either get closer to the mic or turn up the preamp gain - duhhh. Also, i didnt know a compressor was that important. I thought it just squashed high peaks and raised low valleys (a volume regulator so to speak).
But if it actually adds something to the sound (fullness, punchiness, etc) then i'm getting one :)
Anyway thanx a bunch for the help!

Art

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Oct 12, 2002 09:09 am

Quote:
I thought it just squashed high peaks and raised low valleys


Uuummmm, ya, it JUST does that ;-)

Makes it pretty important in my book, it give you a much more even signal; to start working with. I would never record a vocal track without a compressor.

Contributor
Since: Sep 09, 2002


Oct 12, 2002 05:04 pm

Why can't I just compress the signal once it's already in the digital realm? Will I be bringing up the noise floor of some other techincal reason? Or do you just prefer the warmth and character of analog equipment? -j

Member
Since: Jul 06, 2002


Oct 12, 2002 10:42 pm

..i was wondering the same thing Jamie.
Thanx for the info dB! I'm still learning about all of this and have indeed learned much here as well as a few other forums. How does one support this forum dB?

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Oct 12, 2002 10:53 pm

OK, first, supporting this forum...if you buy gear, please buy it through our sponsors, like Musician's Friend and others, and buy through the link on this site, it will give us commission on sales, also, buy donating through the donation link in theleft column of each page. And thanks for your support!

As far as compression after the recording...really it is best to record vocal (or anything that needs compression) with some compression right away so your original signal is more managable later.

I have had a few occassions where a really powerful singer will be laying tracks and if the singer is not compressed right away, the resulting track will be totally unusable afterward.

The primary advantage of doing it right away is doing at least enough to mask the times the mouth moves to and from the mic during the natural movement of a person while singing, a compressor can make that invisible. Also, the subtle (and not so subtle) dynamics of a voice can sometimes be captured when you least want it, such as one catching their breath, swallowing and other things...which can be done with a gate, and compressors and gates are often bundled in one unit as they work together well.

There is much more, I could go on for days, but a forum isn't really the place to do it. The bottom line is, dynamic effect like compression, limiting and gating are best at least started beofre the recording hits the media, be it tape, hard drive or whatever...because more often than not, afterward is too late to save a recording.

Member
Since: Jul 06, 2002


Oct 12, 2002 11:21 pm

..ohhh ok.
Well then, that fits me since i power sing many times (heavy metal). My partner and i, who also knows little about equip & recording, are presently doing 'easy listening' stuff, but will do some 'neo-classical metal' later, so i'm going to buy a compressor. I indeed get tired of having to use the 3db cut on Sonar alot. Thanx again..

Art

Member
Since: Jul 06, 2002


Oct 13, 2002 12:32 am

Does a compressor also RAISE the volume of quite parts? If so, it seems they should call it a volume or signal balancer, or something like that.
Ok, that's all my questions on a compressor :-)

Art

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Oct 13, 2002 08:06 am

yup, they limit loud sounds and raise quiet ones...which by definition is "compression", but I agree, it's not the most intuitive name :-)

And yes, when you get back to doing some metal and such, you will grow a strong fondness of compression.

Member
Since: Jul 06, 2002


Oct 13, 2002 06:43 pm

Cool. I'm good to go. Thanx to all..

Art

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002


Oct 15, 2002 09:30 pm

The part's of a compressor that do the raising and limiting are called, expander and limiter. A lot of compressor's nowaday's come complete with expander, limiter and gate onboard for just the purpose's you speak of. They make the unit much more functional then the standered compressor alone. Although, when you get into the high dollar compressor's, you can hear a world of differance in the subtle adjustment's used on most compressor's.

Member
Since: Jul 06, 2002


Oct 16, 2002 12:57 pm

So a limiter is really the same thing as a compressor, right?
It 'limits' the signal from clipping?

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


Oct 16, 2002 01:01 pm

Sort of, a limiter does not raise the lower level though, a limiter just limits...it makes a ceiling that the signal can't break through (theoritically)

Member
Since: Oct 25, 2002


Oct 25, 2002 01:09 pm

I don't know if this page is even active now or not... didn't notice the date of the last reply.... but I'll post anyway...

EQ can always go a long way too. Try the following to start, then tweak to your heart's content:

Give a little bit of a boost at 125 and 25o Hz, with a medium Q. This helps raise some of the more subtle "chesty" fundamentals of voice frequencies, and can help correct for that "harsh, thin" sound you mentioned. I read this somewhere, but I don't remember now where it was... in any case, it's useful.

Lots of enunciation is around 2-4 kHz. IF your vocal is hard to understand, and you want the consanants to come out a bit more, try a boost right around 3khz. Try a slightly higher Q (narrower peak) on this one, because you want to be careful not to bring up too much in the 5khz range, because that's where "sibilance" often lives (the annoying SSSSS sound on the vocalist's 'S').

Related Forum Topics:



If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.