Getting vocals to the "Front" of your mix.

[Zak with OMG]

Let me go ahead and take a minute to thank everbody on here for being extremely helpful. I only expected a couple of tips, but you guys are drowning me in it. I love it. Thanks so much.

Now back to the topic....I've always heard that If you EQ vocals to much that you can really rape a mix? How can I avoid this, because now I see that I'm going to have to mess with with an EQ to get the vocals to kind of cut through everything else.

BTW....GREAT example with the new CREED cd....I completely agree.

 

[Notuern]

Let me go ahead and take a minute to thank everbody on here for being extremely helpful. I only expected a couple of tips, but you guys are drowning me in it. I love it. Thanks so much.

Now back to the topic....I've always heard that If you EQ vocals to much that you can really rape a mix? How can I avoid this, because now I see that I'm going to have to mess with with an EQ to get the vocals to kind of cut through everything else.

BTW....GREAT example with the new CREED cd....I completely agree.

EQ everything else, not the vocals.
Of course you can EQ the vocals, but be very careful as its easy to f-ck it up completely.

 

[Ermz]

It's easy to EQ the vocals, because if you are having to do anything more than control the presence and lows chances are that something is fundamentally wrong. Vocals can gain a ton of high-end from saturation and exciters, so in some cases you don't even need to high shelf.

Truly the most important thing is to make sure the mix is built around the vocals. You shouldn't need to mangle them with EQ just to get them audible.

 

[mephisto_loh]

I use Rvox from waves and it works perfect for gutural. also don't smash them to much cause you'll take the "presence", just enough so you get a consistent level on vocals. and as Erkan says look for the sweet spot or window the mix in that area so you can sit the voice.

 

[jval]

yeah you shouldn't have to 'mangle' it with EQ. but that just depends on it being a decent chain for the singer, and getting the compression right... and the rest of the mix.
i'm usually not messing with too much eq aside from adding top end and maybe mid like I mentioned. but don't be afraid either... if it needs 9db of 8k then crank that sucker... don't ever stop doing something that sounds good, just because you think it must be wrong.
i would say don't think too hard about eq'ing other tracks to make room for the vocals... just let it come together... but maybe I do this subconsciously because i almost never mute the vocal when mixing.

 

[Line Level Recordings]

hmmm Yours looks different than mine. Come to think of it, yours looks the way it's advertised. Maybe it's just a Mac thing? Just the color it seems.

..you can change the colour in the settings section

 

[Fragle]

tbh i'd stay clear from blindly smashing the vocals with compression just for the sake of it. don't use the compressor(s) to get the levels even, use automation for that. the compressors should be used for setting the tone, the envelope of the vocal. that's the exact reason why something like 1176, la2a, or distressor styled comps are golden for vocals. they all have an unique way of grabbing the sound and shaping the envelope in a way that pushes it right upfront.
set the tone of the vocal with one (or more, depending on the track) of those comps, run some saturation (if neccessary), and if you still feel the levels are all over the place (bad singer and/or bad tracking?) run some limiting, w1 is decent and free.
i say again, i'd stay clear of reducing the dynamic range of the vocals to ZERO just by using compression and limiting. let the vocal breathe a little and automate the levels to be consistent instead.
for starters, the antress modern stuff is great for that. otherwise, waves cla or rcomp/rvox all the way (imho).

edit: but just to make my point clear, the others are perfectly right when they say compression is the key to that upfront vocal sound. i just wanted to add that it's not about smashing the dynamics but altering the envelope of the sound which gets you there.

 

[Morgan C]

^ It really depends on the genre. Rihanna's 'Cold Case Love' (shh) clearly has little compression and it sounds good. But for metal, where everything is so dense and thick? Either compress to fuck or automate every single word until the vocals are at the same volume anyway.. it really makes no difference except the latter will sound reaaaaaaaaally bad.

I despise automation, so I get the vocals sitting nicely, and then I'll use different tracks for different parts (one for the verses, one for chorus, etc.) so that everything sits at a good volume the whole way through. Whenever I've tried to automate each word because I didn't compress enough... erk. CLA has even spoken about this in an interview. If you're automating each word, you're doing something wrong.

 

[Ermz]

I agree. Part of that 'major label sound' seems to be defined by staged over-compression. It's much easier (and more fun) to slam all the dynamics out of the vocal and then automate them back in, as CLA suggests.

 

[greyskull]

1176 on the way in; and then often some more 1176 when i mix.

 

[Jevil]

hmmm Yours looks different than mine. Come to think of it, yours looks the way it's advertised. Maybe it's just a Mac thing? Just the color it seems.

IT IS the pic from the webpage! Mine's colour is like yours.

 

[Fragle]

^ It really depends on the genre. Rihanna's 'Cold Case Love' (shh) clearly has little compression and it sounds good. But for metal, where everything is so dense and thick? Either compress to fuck or automate every single word until the vocals are at the same volume anyway.. it really makes no difference except the latter will sound reaaaaaaaaally bad.

I despise automation, so I get the vocals sitting nicely, and then I'll use different tracks for different parts (one for the verses, one for chorus, etc.) so that everything sits at a good volume the whole way through. Whenever I've tried to automate each word because I didn't compress enough... erk. CLA has even spoken about this in an interview. If you're automating each word, you're doing something wrong.

i didn't talk about subtle compression, mind you. more like in the 10db GR ballpark
i was only saying that wouldn't *neccessarily* compress the vocals until they're dynamically DEAD.
think about it, you'll still have to automate some parts to make them sit right, even with completely undynamic vocals. so why not back it off (slightly), leaving some body and life in there, if you'll have to automate anyways.
automating word for word/syllable for syllable IS a PITA, and i'm sure not advising to do just that.
obviously, this is very dependent on the music...screams/grunts over fast double kicks can take much more compression before sounding too artificial that more melodic stuff like sentenced or whatever.

also, ermz, i wonder where you got that CLA reference from?
to quote sos mag:
"With the vocals you try to get the overall tone for the whole record with the compressors, and then you're chasing the faders to get them really in your face. It's all about automation.""

the way i'm reading this is that you're using the compressors for their sound and some basic leveling, and do the fine tuning by automation. doesn't sound like he's killing the vocals first and then automating the life back in?

 

[AerialThesis]

Sidechaining stuff can help too for really loud masters.

 

[Morgan C]

i didn't talk about subtle compression, mind you. more like in the 10db GR ballpark
i was only saying that wouldn't *neccessarily* compress the vocals until they're dynamically DEAD.
think about it, you'll still have to automate some parts to make them sit right, even with completely undynamic vocals. so why not back it off (slightly), leaving some body and life in there, if you'll have to automate anyways.
automating word for word/syllable for syllable IS a PITA, and i'm sure not advising to do just that.
obviously, this is very dependent on the music...screams/grunts over fast double kicks can take much more compression before sounding too artificial that more melodic stuff like sentenced or whatever.

also, ermz, i wonder where you got that CLA reference from?
to quote sos mag:
"With the vocals you try to get the overall tone for the whole record with the compressors, and then you're chasing the faders to get them really in your face. It's all about automation.""

the way i'm reading this is that you're using the compressors for their sound and some basic leveling, and do the fine tuning by automation. doesn't sound like he's killing the vocals first and then automating the life back in?

Last time I 'only' compressed by about 10dB (got too much room sound in the mic otherwise, but looking back now I should've just accepted that), I had to automate almost every single word to get them to fit and it still didn't fit great.

Last project I did there was like.. a compressor taking off peaks, maybe 3-5dB, a compressor making it all even taking off maybe 10dB and then a final one taking off another 5-10dB. ZERO automation required. It just makes everything work nicer, both saturation/distortion/verb on the vocals, and how the vocal sits in the mix.

And CLA uses about 20dB of compression.. the gain reduction meter is completely filled.


Sure, if you've got a fantastic singer and it fits the style, you shouldn't need much/any. Like this thread on Gearslutz. No compression on that but it sounds great, because it fits the style and the singer is great. But for 99% of the stuff on here, its kinda necessary.

 

[Ermz]

The amount of compression required tends to depend on the density of the mix. Of course some chick singing and playing a single guitar is going to be a ton easier to balance than trying to juggle 6 different vocal tracks in a mix with over 100 tracks.

CLA talks about this when seating the electric or acoustic guitars with the LA-3A plug-in on the video. You're trying to park a ton of tracks, and by virtue of all their simultaneous existence, the parking space for each is naturally very small. Compression lets you nail them where they need to go.

 

[crillemannen]

As some of you wrote. Slam the hell out of the vocals 20-30db gain reduction with an 1176 or LA2 for example, thats the trick. If it dosent sound good use multiple comps but aim for allot of compression.

 

[Fragle]

ok, guess i stand corrected then.

 

[SocialNumb]

..you can change the colour in the settings section

IT IS the pic from the webpage! Mine's colour is like yours.

Right, I get it now.

 

[C_F_H_13]

I agree. Part of that 'major label sound' seems to be defined by staged over-compression. It's much easier (and more fun) to slam all the dynamics out of the vocal and then automate them back in, as CLA suggests.

Yeah that's essentially how I was always taught to do it. My general chain is as follows.

1176 or distressor on the way in (2-3db on the 1176 or 4-5db on the distressor) Both set to 4:1 and a medium attack, fast release.

Waves C4/RVOX/L1 in PT. C4 is a modified version of the "pop vocal" preset. RVOX is just pull the fader down till I get 3-6 db of compression....L1 is a preset I got from a CLA interview from Sound on Sound slightly modified.

If that still isn't enough, i'll through up a parallel compression track with a distressor on nuke with 10-12 db of reduction and tuck that underneath...

After All that I automate,automate,automate and some more automating.

 

[Metaltastic]

Question about different types of compression - I've read in some places that it can be more transparent to have one compressor with a medium attack (medium for me is 5-15 ms), gradual release and low ratio, and then another with a super-quick attack and release, and high ratio (or just drop the pretense and use a limiter ); does anyone here try to compress vocals like this, and if so, which do you prefer to have first? (limiter or comp)