Vocal Automation: By Syllable, Line or Section?

[Line666]

Now I'm aware that every vocal has select parts of the phrase that you're going to want to cut or boost in volume - usually the tail into a delay throw or something but in general I'm wanting to know how people work their vocals on a case per case basis.

Are you automating volume before you add any compression in a syllable per syllable style, are you knocking a few dbs off before you ride it per line or are you just working it differently for the chorus to the verse etc?

Also does anyone know what the big guys are doing in regards to this, I've yet to see it referenced anywhere but since it's something that's held in reverence I'd quite like to hear some facts from guys at the top of their game.

My interest for this is stemmed from my desire to cut my workflow down to more manageable levels, theres so many damn things that you hear on the internet about audio engineering that if you did all them you'd have absolutely no time left so I want to cut it down to what I'd consider to be the "working essentials". I've automated vocals syllable by syllable before and I've not been convinced as much as doing it line for line or section and tweaking certain words.

Opinions?

 

[Skinny Viking]

after very light compression while tracking, more compression (2 stages) during printing / pre-mix setup and then one more layer of super light compression afterwards I generally just tend to automate volume over phrases rather than individual words and certainly not by syllable ... unless there is just something extreme about a single word in a phrase that is completely disappearing or somehow obnoxiously poking out in a phrase I'm usually happy with the results I get that way.

I'll go into a bit more depth if the phrases themselves are more long-winded though

 

[Mikaël-ange]

Beside using volume automation for manual de essing (so kinda word by word), I use volume automation on vocal line by line, section by section (verse, pre hook, hook...etc) for get my vocal to sit where I want in the mix.

Then after that I automate world by world, syllable by syllable if needed.

This second automation fine tuning isn't really used for make sure you can hear the vocal, but more for manipulate emotion and feeling. This way you can really tweak each line, particular world or tail the way you want.

And volume automation are always post compression for me.
But I use compression for tone and automation for dynamic control, emotion and feeling.

Btw, I know it's not a metal song but go listen to "beautiful" by Christina Aguilera. This song is a great lesson about vocal automation imho.

 

[Line666]

Beside using volume automation for manual de essing (so kinda word by word), I use volume automation on vocal line by line, section by section (verse, pre hook, hook...etc) for get my vocal to sit where I want in the mix.

Then after that I automate world by world, syllable by syllable if needed.

This second automation fine tuning isn't really used for make sure you can hear the vocal, but more for manipulate emotion and feeling. This way you can really tweak each line, particular world or tail the way you want.

And volume automation are always post compression for me.
But I use compression for tone and automation for dynamic control, emotion and feeling.

Btw, I know it's not a metal song but go listen to "beautiful" by Christina Aguilera. This song is a great lesson about vocal automation imho.

Firstly, thanks for the replies so far guys, I should clarify for the purposes of this discussion that when I am talking about vocal automation and what is appropriate I'm not really discussing metal or any vocal form without a distinct melodic component; because then you are playing by a different set of rules; its either the classic one dirty track down the middle or the more modern twenty different layered growls all hard panned and then its about more balance than emotional hold.

Beautiful is a good example and it is one of Pensados best and most interesting mixes - not just for the emotional hold but because of the main vocal takes being the scratch takes that were opted for use due to their actual strength over the studio "perfect" takes. I think the click track leakage at the start and towards the final quarter is quite musical as well in its own way. I do think it's a fairly outlying example though in the sense that 99% of vocalists do not have that sort of overall range nor will most have the opportunity to call for it in any particular song. So in that sense how much of it is actually prevalent or necessary in more guitar based genres where emotional intensity is more static during sections?

 

[FarBeyondMetal]

I use a plugin called autogain (similar to vocal rider) and use that to write the main automation, and if there is anything that I don't like I fix it.

 

[JeffTD]

It really depends for me. Sometimes I'll throw on vocal-rider pre-comp to have it even things out a bit, but generally I'm just crushing with compression and then automating on a per-line basis, sometimes with per-word/syllable fine tuning if things are still jumping out at me.

 

[Mikaël-ange]

Firstly, thanks for the replies so far guys, I should clarify for the purposes of this discussion that when I am talking about vocal automation and what is appropriate I'm not really discussing metal or any vocal form without a distinct melodic component; because then you are playing by a different set of rules; its either the classic one dirty track down the middle or the more modern twenty different layered growls all hard panned and then its about more balance than emotional hold.

Beautiful is a good example and it is one of Pensados best and most interesting mixes - not just for the emotional hold but because of the main vocal takes being the scratch takes that were opted for use due to their actual strength over the studio "perfect" takes. I think the click track leakage at the start and towards the final quarter is quite musical as well in its own way. I do think it's a fairly outlying example though in the sense that 99% of vocalists do not have that sort of overall range nor will most have the opportunity to call for it in any particular song. So in that sense how much of it is actually prevalent or necessary in more guitar based genres where emotional intensity is more static during sections?

I agree with you about the fact this mix is one of his best and most interesting.
It's a perfect example about how a mix engineer should approach his art (ego vs song or when is best to not show off as an engineer).
Beside the emotional level and awesome vocal performance, this mix is a course about vocal automation in a sense that, vocal is the focal point of the song; and the whole energy of the song is carried by the vocal.
In this case (and this is my interpretation so be kind), you can clearly separate section of the song hearing the vocal himself (big peak and valley volume wise and by section, this result to energy build up).
So verse is more louder than intro, hook get louder, second verse lower but a few db louder than first verse...etc.
This set the energy of the song.
The hardest part is how to get a natural sounding flow between section, so it doesn't sound like a vocal up/down.

Second interesting part is how Dave treated the vocal line by line, and also the word tail. This is kinda related to harmony and melody but when your melody go down, you lose energy. So you push more the vocal in that area volume wise.
How you approach the vocalist breath is also important imho. Some people tend to lower/remove those. But breath gave you a human and emotional feel.

I don't know if he approach vocal automation this way, but I feel Ben Grosse tend to work that way.
Alter bridge "shed my skin" is also a good example.

For quote Ron Fair: it's all about pimp out the vocal...