|
Wrong forum, but I'll answer.
Firstly, when it comes to recording vocals, I'm deferring to Cryophonic. Those are the best vocals I've ever processed. Very clean, requiring no, if any, automation to correct for levels, on my part.
http://soundcloud.com/deepeddiezilk...ilker-s-r-remix
First, I put in a de-esser dialed dialed in the frequencies of unwanted sibilance that might over-reflect with the reverb. I added compression with a 2:1 to 3.5:1 ratio on my "main" vocal track. The threshold didn't need to be very low relative to the peaks of the vocals I was trying to compress. I just wanted to make sure she kept up with the instruments. Before I put it through reverb, I used EQ to cut abundant frequencies for clarity. I added a very, very nominal amount of reverb to the main track. The vocal track was in mono but reverb was in stereo. Vocals were center panned.
I copied the same clips to a track, below, but lowered the volume by about 10 or so DB and kept it dry as a bone (no compression or de-essing even) and mono, hard center - this helped preserve dynamics and bolster the sound quality of the vocals. Although I am unsure of my personal adherence to its conventional orthodoxy, this is called back-masking and is often used in live performances in addition to the recording studio.
The vocals I used for special effects were treated with the same de-essing and compression and put, in clips, onto a couple of different tracks in order to put them through different processors. I wound up bouncing these tracks and back-masking them - only with effect as I bounced subsequent to putting them through delay and reverb (much more-so than the main track), as well.
___________________
Now with extra singles!
my old stuff, not quite up to snuff - but I still dig it - UPDATED 9/23/2012
|
