How do peoples sounds so perfect?!

[Terry Wetzel]

Yes YYR123, I did but, I kinda' hate giving up on anything! Sweetwater support has offered to assist me in getting back on track so I'm not burning the bridge just yet. I need some time to cool down and maybe.... who knows. If I sound wishy washy it's an emotional thing and it's just me. Sorry to interupt this thread with my own problems. And, I sgree with Ben Jennsen. Double tracking the vocal is a way to thicken and inhance it. the technique has been around a long time. Just listen to early vocals by Rick Nelson. For myself I prefer the method I stated.

[jryser]

SI/SO for EVERY recorded instrument. Period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hue]

Originally Posted by Terry Wetzel

I sgree with Ben Jennsen. Double tracking the vocal is a way to thicken and inhance it. the technique has been around a long time..

Bull. Double tracking is probably the worst mistake any newb could make. It sounds like crap unless you take the time to do it properly. IT HAS TO BE PERFECT. Something that few people are capable of without a producer(in the traditional sense) pushing them to do it again until it's right. Without that effort it sounds like a cheesy effect.

If you want thick vocals, use the right mic with the right preamp. If you want perfect vocals, you have to sing it perfect. End of story.

Like my old Math teacher used to say GIGO or as jryser said SI SO. Garbage in. Garbage out.

[necjamc]

Originally Posted by hue

Bull. Double tracking is probably the worst mistake any newb could make. It sounds like crap unless you take the time to do it properly. IT HAS TO BE PERFECT. Something that few people are capable of without a producer(in the traditional sense) pushing them to do it again until it's right. Without that effort it sounds like a cheesy effect.

If you want thick vocals, use the right mic with the right preamp. If you want perfect vocals, you have to sing it perfect. End of story.

Like my old Math teacher used to say GIGO or as jryser said SI SO. Garbage in. Garbage out.

I have to agree. We did double tracked lead Vox for my bands last song, and after 100 takes of really really good close matches, there were still parts that sounded like an effect as opposed to just better vocals (swirly was a term used to describe it ). It had it's moments but it's a tough call to make it right. Of course Panning and phase issues ensue when trying to make it sound better not wider etc. Pain in the butt.

[Terry Wetzel]

Originally Posted by hue

Bull. Double tracking is probably the worst mistake any newb could make. It sounds like crap unless you take the time to do it properly. IT HAS TO BE PERFECT. Something that few people are capable of without a producer(in the traditional sense) pushing them to do it again until it's right. Without that effort it sounds like a cheesy effect.

If you want thick vocals, use the right mic with the right preamp. If you want perfect vocals, you have to sing it perfect. End of story.

Like my old Math teacher used to say GIGO or as jryser said SI SO. Garbage in. Garbage out.

[Terry Wetzel]

Yes, taking the time to do it perfectly is essential, if you physicaly double track the vocal. A good singer has little problem duplicating the first track. However, the method I stated, (I.E.) copying an exact duplicate of the first track (as in Pro tools), and then adding delay to the duplicate, doesn't require any intense concentration or stress on the vocalist. You can also adjust the delay effect in the mix to your liking. Of coarse that's just my opinion and my prefference. Each of us are entitled to that. There have been many hit records with so called "cheesy effects"!

[hue]

Originally Posted by Terry Wetzel

There have been many hit records with so called "cheesy effects"!

Okay. Name one. How 'bout Alanis Morrisette? That one stands out. I can't think of any others. Autotune is rampant on many hit records. Do you recommend that as well?

Double tracking in order to "thicken" vocals is incredibly tedious. Doubling via copying the track can introduce phasing which is good or bad depending on your point of view. It also effects the stereo image which also may be good or bad. Either way, this is not as simple as just copy and paste.

The bottom line is, a good vocal track is made using good vocals. A lousy singer will sound lousy no matter what you do to "enhance" the track. It all starts at the source.

Just because we are able to manipulate audio to extreme degrees, it doesn't mean we should. And it shouldn't be encouraged. That is just promoting laziness and acceptance of mediocrity. After all, the OP was talking about Youtube. Youtube! For the most part, most of the videos are done live and so are most of the audio. There is no double tracking or any other tricks for the most part. There are some really respectable singers on youtube and then there are many home "engineers" who try and make things sound "better". And, that is all too apparent when you hear it.

If it takes 100 tries, do it till it's right. You'll get the best that you are capable of and it's the ultimate form of practice.

[hue]

Originally Posted by jryser

SI/SO for EVERY recorded instrument. Period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly.

[formfunction]

Originally Posted by hue

Double tracking in order to "thicken" vocals is incredibly tedious.

It is so common.... and not tedious at all with a good singer, and a good engineer. ... ff

[formfunction]

Originally Posted by hue

Practice. REAL practice. Practicing control. Singing legato, pizzicato. Scales, arpeggios.

that would be interesting, but might make you bulimic. I presume you meant staccato...??