Vocal Effects

[Mustang]

Recently I had a long chat with some folks in the industry about what I feel is over use of vocal effects. Now this post isn't meant to put anyone down or anything in that regard. Just to get some good debate going and see others views as well as express my own.

See to me many vocalist use way to many effects. Which I do feel there is a need for effects. But if you have a great voice thats powerful keep it more clear and raw. Show it off and just use small amounts to add "color" to the vocals. I want to truly be able to hear every word they are singing.

There's alot of bands in the industry currently that I feel are amazing, but are not getting the notice because people get upset by the issues with vocals. Sadly alot of folks get star struck when they meet such people and don't want to tell them how they feel. Just off the top of my head I can list five progmetal bands that have done this in the last year.

I just feel the most important thing a vocalist/band can do is find the right mix of raw vocals and effects. But remember when in doubt throw the effects out. Keep it raw and keep it real. There's enough passion and emotion in a truly gifted vocalist to show what they want you to hear with out a huge amount of effects. I want to hear a voice and not a computer sounding voice or one thats words almost get jumbled or unclear due to even a simple delay or more.

Look back to the old school metal bands. They didn't have a ton of effects and many are still thought of as some of the best vocalist ever to this day.


That's my view now whats yours ?

 

[sh0kr0k]

As long as the melodies and harmonies sound good, I don't care how many effects the vocalist uses. I also don't care how many effects a guitarist (or bassist) uses, so maybe my thoughts don't count.

 

[Pellaz]

I agree to a large degree.

If a singer's voice is good, it shouldn't need too much accompaniment to rule. And it's a damned shame when a good singer's voice is buried under a lot of effects.

Case in point: my friend Jason Miller, who sings for the band Godhead.

My first introduction to them was with a CD called Power Tool Stigmata. Great CD, still one of my faves, and his voice is seldom if ever processed on it. He has a splendid voice.

They followed that one with a CD entitled 2,000 Years of Human Error, wide-released on the Subhuman imprint (it was Marilyn Manson's nascent record label). Jason's voice is often overlaid or processed on that CD, and it's like looking at the Sun through a bubbly translucent window...you can sense the talent, but you can also sense that there's more you can't hear.

More recently they cut Evolver and The Shadow Line, wherein the annoying processing is -- thankfully! -- almost completely absent.


I hear a lot of weird effects and processing in pop music these days....I guess some producers think it's cute or something. Bleah.

 

[adaher]

Actually, I think there were more vocal effects back in the day, although that might be because I was listening to a different selection of bands.

To me, a voice should sound human except occasionally to add flavor to a part of a song.

 

[TheWhisper]

It is all in the context, for me anyway. As long as it fits the song, melody, emotion being conveyed and and the overall attitude of the song/lyric being presented then I'm fine with effects. Though, they can certainly detract from the performance and overall enjoyment of a song/album.

As with everything in music, it's all subjective and up to the individual listener to decide what is 'too much'.

 

[DreamNeonBlack]

I seldom use more than some delay and a slight touch of chorus on my vocals. Too many effects and it annoys me. BUT, on the flip side, imagine on CGs trancendance would have sounded without the tons of effects on Midnight's voice. He is drowning in Delay on some stuff, but it works.

It is a balance between song/singer and the effect the band is trying to get across on the song. Sometimes it works, other times it doesn't.

 

[Judas_C]

I think that there are a lot of practices in the curent recording climate that would surprise many people. I'm a Commercial and Electronic Music Major with a concentration in the recroding aspects of things and effects, especially on vocals are just the norm. On any vocal track, no matter how good the vocalist is, expect to have the track to have reverb, chorus, and generally some degree of delay. This is simply because today's technology is so advanced that there are many nuances in the human voice that are picked up and recorded that aren't pleasing to the ear. This doesn't even bring into account the ability to pitch correct any vocal line recorded. I have been having issues dealing with these "surprises" as I feel if you can't perform on your own you shouldn't be "fixing' your mistakes. But as I said before even the vocal tracks that you think are "clean" and un-effected, they're not. That's just my two cents, take it for what it's worth.

 

[Perditions Ghost]

I don't mind vocal effects - if used tastefully, when they should be, instead of in excess.

This topic is one of the reasons I didn't really like Behemoth's "Demigod" album (Though every other Behemoth fan I know seems to hail it as their best work...). For a good portion of the album, Nergal layers his vocals, so for quite awhile you have 99 Nergals growling at you.

I don't think it's used tastefully on that album, and it distracted me from enjoying it fully. Now, however, on The Apostasy, it was used much less. So, when you suddenly have 99 Nergals growling at you, it has much more effect and much more impact.

 

[DreamNeonBlack]

See, I have more of a problem with the use of 1000000 layers on the vocals than just effects. It is ok, when your doing something like a Queen song, where there are tons of harmonies layered on top of Harmony. But, I hate when the vocalist just layers his lead over and over again. Yes, it CAN work but often just sounds like trash to my ears.

I guess it is all a preference thing in the end and should be taken in the context of the artist/song. Over doing anything is usually not good.

 

[Burnout]

The shining example of over using vocal effects that I can think of would be Disillusion's last album, Gloria. Andy Schmidt has an amazing voice, but it was buried under so many effects it basically ruined his performance on all but two songs on the disc.

I think Nils uses vocal effects quite tastefully on Pagan's Mind discs and Steve Wilson and Mikael Akerfeldt also manage to use them tastefully.

 

[sh0kr0k]

Judas C is absolutely correct. I have a similar degree to his major that also focuses on the recording studio arts. It is unlikely that you will ever hear a track that is not somehow manipulated, compressed, polished, or is truly "raw" unless you are in the studio as it's recorded. You can't even get a true "dry mix" at a live show, something else that is virtually impossible due to limitations and settings of the equipment. Pretty much once it leaves the vocalist's mouth and enters the wires of machinery, the sound is affected. By the time the end product reaches you the consumer, you are hearing the "wet mix" that has been correct, snipped, quantized, and otherwise adjusted so that you hear what the band and producer want you to hear. The same goes for the other instruments and yet I don't see any threads saying, "I think guitarists use too many effects and should sound like nothing but a clean, non-amplified, unprocessed, non-overdriven sound otherwise it ruins the music, but maybe they can use it sometimes" .. because that would be ridiculous, in my opinion. In my book, the post-production is part of the art of making music, but I guess I'm biased. =)