Vocal session in home studio: how to improve my signal chain

[Jake James]

Hello Community;

I am self-producing an album of soul music between my modest home studio and my friend's small commercial studio. I have been moving slowly every step of the way, studying, experimenting and learning to get the best sound possible given my limited funds and know-how, and my existing gear. I know I have recorded an instrument right (for my tastes) when on playback it seems to jumps out of the speaker at me rather than sitting flat. So far so good.

As the all-important vocal sessions approach, I realize I will need a lot of time to explore possibilities and get the best takes I can deliver. Even at the good price my friend gives me, I cannot afford to explore the vocal process in a real studio. I have to do it at home.

Here is my signal chain. Despite being centred around 10-year-old technology, I have managed to record some great bass, percussion and synth tracks. Drums and guitar, however, were underwhelming and only came to life in a real studio, largely due to room sound. I expect it will be the same for vocals, and I will work hard to acoustically treat my recording space. Advice in this would be appreciated, but not necessary as there is a lot of info available already online. But if anyone with experience can tell me what equipment to rent in order to maximize the quality of my signal chain, or has ideas of how to optimize what I already have, it would be of great help.

-->Midas Venice desk for preamps and eq
Sounds great to my ear, but perhaps for this crucial step I can do better with a single channel dedicated preamp?

-->DBX 266XL compressor
Used as a limiter to prevent clipping, and only the gentlest compression, if any

-->Focusrite Saffire 56, firewire into late 2009 iMac running Logic Pro X
I have rented a Lynx Aurora in the past and failed to hear a quality difference in the converters. Is this just my untrained ear? I have been told that technology has reached a point where even mid-range converters like on my old Saffire do not interfere with the signal chain. Opinions?

I will also need to rent a mic that handles baritone vocals better than my AKG 414 XLII, which I find makes female vocals shine but is thin for my voice. Personally, I have always liked the tonality of the SM7b. My friend suggested I try a tube mic. What of close micing with a dynamic for proximity and blending with a condenser placed a foot behind for air? Is this ever done?

Here is the list of gear I can rent from my neighbourhood pro-audio store. Suggestions outside of this list are welcome as well. There are many other places I can rent from, but it is convenient to get everything from one source.

http://www.karisma.ca/location.htm

Thanks in advance!

[James Perrett]

You don't need more gear (apart from maybe a mic). In fact I probably wouldn't even bother with using the Venice or the Dbx and go straight into the Focusrite. Room treatment is essential and will be the biggest improvement that you can make. After that you could try different mics but also try your 414 in different positions. Renting mics is a good idea although I'd advise against renting anything too expensive as you'll probably end up wanting to buy the most expensive mic on the list!

[Sam Spoons]

Has your mate got a decent mic locker (and, especially, does he have an SM7B)? If so a couple of hours in his place auditioning mics to find the one that suits your voice may be money well spent (and probably cost you less than hiring in several mics to try).

+1 for room treatment (which you have addressed) it makes much more difference than any hardware you could buy.

[Bob Bickerton]

It's already been said. Forget the Midas and DBX, go straight in using the Focusrite and focus your attention on mic selection and positioning, acoustic treatment, but most of all the performance!

If the room isn't great then working a nice dynamic close (like the SM7B) will help attenuate the room sound.

And don't mess around with two mics, just keep it simple and focus on the performance - at the end of the day, that is what your audience will notice.

Bob

[Jack Ruston]

An SM7 is one of the most effective vocal mics regardless of cost. It can often be better than a U47, C12 or 251. If you know that you like that mic on your voice, look no further. Just crack on with the performance side. Once you have a mic that's working pretty well on your voice, it's 99% performance. Don't get sidetracked renting and trying loads of microphones unless there's a problem. Treat the room well, find a good position, and sing close.

People DO sometimes use a second mic further back, but in a domestic environment, or a smaller studio, it's going to wind up sounding quite coloured. I don't think I'd bother with that approach personally.

Don't let the technicalities sidetrack you too much. SM7...clean signal path...plenty of gain with that mic...close positioning....take the foam off but use a pop shield. Try one and see what you get.

J

[Jack Ruston]

...Also, your cue mix and headphone level is critical. Your voice should be the same level as it would be without the cans on. Adjust the track to that. If using the Midas pre enables you to monitor your vocal in analogue before it hits the converter, definitely use that approach. Avoid hearing any latency at all, even from a zero latency cue function on the converter.

[ef37a]

It's already been said. Forget the Midas and DBX, go straight in using the Focusrite and focus your attention on mic selection and positioning, acoustic treatment, but most of all the performance!

If the room isn't great then working a nice dynamic close (like the SM7B) will help attenuate the room sound.

And don't mess around with two mics, just keep it simple and focus on the performance - at the end of the day, that is what your audience will notice.

Bob

I ask in all ignorance Bob. Will the Saffy 56 be quiet enough for an SM7b? We don't know how loud the chap will be and if there are any soft "intimate" tracks maybe look at a Cloudlifter or similar?

Dave.

[Bob Bickerton]

Not familiar with the 56, but if worked fairly close, like a stage mic, I’d have thought there’d be enough signal.

Bob

[ef37a]

Not familiar with the 56, but if worked fairly close, like a stage mic, I’d have thought there’d be enough signal.

Bob

I am sure you are right Bob. Just that the 56 is getting on a bit now and mic pres in interfaces have improved quite a bit in just the last five years.

Ooo! Just thought. There are some nice ribbons about now at sensible prices and a bit hotter than a 7b.

Dave.

[Wonks]

The Liquid Saffire 56 was the flagship Focusrite interface when it was new, so they won't have skimped on the pre-amps.

The mic inputs have a gain range of +13 to+60dB and an EIN of 128dB. Plus the pre-amp emulations could be used by the OP to help tune his voice.

Sam Inglis said this of the Focusrite preamps on the Saffire 40 Pro (of which the 56 is basically the same but with two liquid pre-amp channels),

"Like their rivals, Focusrite lay much stress on the quality of the preamps in the Saffire Pro 40, and they certainly deliver decent performance for the money. No figures are quoted for the amount of gain on offer, but there's slightly more available here than on M‑Audio's Profire 2626, and comfortably enough to let you use dynamic mics for applications such as strummed acoustic guitar. What's more, the preamps remain whisper‑quiet and perfectly usable even when you turn the gain knob to maximum, which can't be said for a lot of budget gear."

https://customer.focusrite.com/sites/customer/files/focusrite/downloads/7092/userguidels56eng_0.pdf

[Jake James]

OP here;

Thanks everyone for the advice, particularly the vote of confidence for working with what I've got. I will take it to heart and focus my time and money on treatment and mic selection.

My friend has an interesting locker, including a ribbon and some boutique numbers. No SM7, however, so this might be my rental (or purchase ). Pop filter off, windscreen on, noted. I will audition what he's got first. Doubtful he would charge for that, and would probably do a short term trade for my 414.

I had been leaning towards renting the SPL GainStation1, which I have worked with before and liked, but might just let you all talk me into saving some money. Once I have the mic, I will A/B the Midas pres against the Saffire and go from there. If the Saffire does it well enough, I might just haul my computer and interface to a better room rather than treat this one. My old university has sound modules in the basement they would probably let me use.

Given that my setup is potentially mobile, anyone have suggestions for an exotic kind of room that might yield better results than a budget DIY treatment? I am not opposed to recording guerilla style somewhere out in the world, in a room that is naturally dead, or conversely one with a beautiful reverb. I have no deadline and this project is also a learning experience for me. I must admit that I have always wanted to try something like the gated multi-mic style Tony Visconti used on Bowie's Heroes, knowing I can use just the close mic if I don't like the colour. The style I am performing does demand a big open vocal sound. Again, perhaps I just need to be talked out of over-complicating my life

Thanks again! What an amazing resource, having so many pros willing to help an indie effort!

[Tim Gillett]

...
I will also need to rent a mic that handles baritone vocals better than my AKG 414 XLII, which I find makes female vocals shine but is thin for my voice. Personally, I have always liked the tonality of the SM7b... :

Re mics, I'd be surprised if the AKG 414 XLII was not suitable for capturing your (baritone) voice. It's a fine, versatile mic, able to capture all types of voice.

To compare two mics "apples with apples" has to be done with knowledge and care, especially when using relatively close distances from the mouth. For one, do you understand proximity effect?

Tim.

[Bob Bickerton]

For one, do you understand proximity effect?

The OP made reference to proximity effect in his first post.

At the risk of opening the flood gates......... yes, the C414 will be able to record a baritone voice (or pretty much any source) but an alternative microphone may sound better on his particular voice, which is something the OP is exploring.

I prefer an SM7B on my (baritone) voice over a C414 and almost as much as a U87.

Bob

[CS70]

Again, perhaps I just need to be talked out of over-complicating my life !

You do

It’s not difficult to record a great take in a room with DIY acoustic treatments, so long you know what to DIY. Treat the room, select a good mic, sing an amazing performance, mix it well, that’s it.

Especially for vocals, it really aint the gear: it’s your singing. You want a big and open vocal sound? Sing big and open

Happy new year!

[Jack Ruston]

Re the room - Unless there's something really wrong with yours, use that. Why? Because you have more control of the environment. You can spend more time worrying about the performance and less time worrying about the room and the setup.

Re exotic rooms - that's a studio.

Re the unusual mic techniques etc - A distraction.

I PROMISE you - this is 99% about your performance. The rest of it is basically a sideshow. As long as the mic suits you, and the room isn't destroying your sound in some obvious way, it's about that communication between you and the listener. If that doesn't work, people won't even last the first verse. Your song, and your delivery is what is going to engage them. I know that's a big mountain to face sometimes, but that's the reality. I've recorded loads of wonderful SOUNDING vocals, that nobody will ever hear, because they're just not that interesting.

J

[Mike Stranks]

Re the room - Unless there's something really wrong with yours, use that. Why? Because you have more control of the environment. You can spend more time worrying about the performance and less time worrying about the room and the setup.

Re exotic rooms - that's a studio.

Re the unusual mic techniques etc - A distraction.

I PROMISE you - this is 99% about your performance. The rest of it is basically a sideshow. As long as the mic suits you, and the room isn't destroying your sound in some obvious way, it's about that communication between you and the listener. If that doesn't work, people won't even last the first verse. Your song, and your delivery is what is going to engage them. I know that's a big mountain to face sometimes, but that's the reality. I've recorded loads of wonderful SOUNDING vocals, that nobody will ever hear, because they're just not that interesting.

J

I've lost count of the number of times I've asked vocalists, "Do you believe it? Well make the listener believe it to."

The singer Vicki Carr (in the 60's) was known for living her songs as she sang them. So much so that in those with sadness and pathos she'd often have tears streaming down her checks as she sang.

That's extreme, but it's that kind of commitment that vocalists need to bring to their recordings and performances.

[CS70]

How true. The first times you sing a song, you kinda are into it - that's why you're singing it.. you feel it, you live it, it's a quite deep emotional experience. Especially if it's your own, you know what has moved you to write exactly these words and these notes, and that propels the result to stellar levels.

However, once you've rehearsed and played it many times, and you know it much better and you don't need to read the lyrics etc... it can damn hard to re-create that emotional feeling! It's really annoying Sure, certain mannerisms (vocal techniques, breathing, the approach to the delivery) become part of the muscle memory and you can probably do them, but it's so much more powerful when you're feeling them. That's what the audience responds to.

I've experienced myself being (way) less than 100% satisfied with the recorded result because I knew in a different, non-studio situation I would sing the lines much better, much more freely, with much more emotional impact.

That's the hardest bit of recording vocals. So to the OP: stop worrying, set up a quick base in the right tempo and record your vocals _fast_! You can redo the whole base afterwords, but nothing beats a fresh, meaningful vocal take.

[James Perrett]

In the same vein, I know that Kate Bush used to bring objects along to decorate the studio to create the right atmosphere for the song she was working on. An old client of mine used to dress up when he sang vocals to give him the right feel for the song.

Another tip is to record everything right from the start - it wasn't so easy in the days of analogue multitracks as you were often limited in the number of spare tracks when it was time to record the lead vocals but these days you can keep every good take and choose between them later.

[Bob Bickerton]

Yes, all manner of atmospheric enhancements can be used but beware candles! Having a smoke alarm go off mid-take is not conducive to a successful take as I once found out with a client

Bob

[Exalted Wombat]

I know I have recorded an instrument right (for my tastes) when on playback it seems to jumps out of the speaker at me rather than sitting flat.

You may be falling into the trap of over-polishing individual instrument sounds. When everyone's a soloist, the mix can suffer.

[Tim Gillett]

For one, do you understand proximity effect?

The OP made reference to proximity effect in his first post.

At the risk of opening the flood gates......... yes, the C414 will be able to record a baritone voice (or pretty much any source) but an alternative microphone may sound better on his particular voice, which is something the OP is exploring.

I prefer an SM7B on my (baritone) voice over a C414 and almost as much as a U87.

Bob

As we know, using proximity effect its easy to make mic A sound more bassy or less bassy than mic B. And that doesn't take into account post production choices.

[Bob Bickerton]

As we know, using proximity effect its easy to make mic A sound more bassy or less bassy than mic B. And that doesn't take into account post production choices.

Quite, which is not to say you can emulate the frequency response of two differing microphones simply by using proximity effect!

Because different microphones have different frequency responses they will represent sources in different ways, thus if we have range of mics to choose from it makes perfect sense to select a microphone which suits the source best - prior to post production choices.

I’m worried this’ll take off again, so I’ll duck out at this point and report it to the mods

Bob

[awjoe]

Getting a good vocal take is a matter of attending to what people have pointed out, and I like Mike's reminder about the singer believing and living the song. And here's an approach that works for me, so it might work for you as well. I have the luxury of leaving the mic set up and being able to leave it there and come back to it periodically, so that's exactly what I do. Do two or three takes, go away and ride my bike. Come back and make lunch, and then another couple of takes. Work on the house. Go shopping. Brush the cat. Another couple of takes. I know when I've got a keeper. I do it that way because I find the first or second take in any round are usually the only ones that have that veracity and vitality that Mike talked about. I find it a waste of time to do more than three takes - it starts to lose life. It helps to be well-rehearsed, too. Hope it helps.

[Hugh Robjohns]

I’m worried this’ll take off again, so I’ll duck out at this point and report it to the mods

Noted, Bob.

[Martin Walker]

You may be falling into the trap of over-polishing individual instrument sounds. When everyone's a soloist, the mix can suffer.

So true - I used to be guilty of that when I was creating multi-track music by playing it all myself, as it was so easy to keep doing more takes until everything sounded perfect. But then you can get a sterile feel if you're not careful.

Nowadays I collaborate with another musician who's very much a 'live' player (warts and all) and I think we complement each other well to ensure there's plenty of life in the mix

Martin