I've recently produced two of the best tunes I've ever done by following the structure of other tunes that I loved. I had parts that were mine, I arranged them following the reference tracks and got close to the 'feel' and all that intangible stuff. Also, with active listening I got all the inspiration for amazing transitions and all that other good stuff. The tones are all mine, but the inspiration was real!
Great stuff Joe. One thing I'd like to see more of is making these changes in the context of the mix, rather than in solo. I appreciate the medium of RUclips, and whatever playback we are using, will have a great impact on what we are hearing, but it's your mindset that is absolute gold. Just tell us what you are hearing and why you are making the moves. If we hear it...BONUS! I know from my own experience that our learning curve will determine what we are hearing more than the codecs, and I am a great believer of saving & rewatching something. And when I finally get it...and hear it! ...that's when things fall into place. Peace and respect. Thanks :)
people say "mixing in solo", but its an oxymoron. you can tone shape or sound design in solo but it has no relation to how it mixes with the rest of the song. (not saying dont use solo - solo is good for as long as your ears can remember the context in detail)
I love how much you bounce back and forth between tech/nique and then the psychological pitfalls. Anyone can do the former, but knowing when and how to address the latter is what makes someone a real educator and mentor. 🙌🏻
so i mix alot of new gen rap and you are 1000% right , this whole time i wanted that thick warm vocal but EVERY single one of my favorite artists have a thinner vocal and i never really noticed i guess because im feeling the song more then listening
This is a great argument for why the Waves Silk Vocal is an amazing plugin. It has a great interface for instantly managing the low end on a vocal in very musical and mix-worthy ways. Can't recommend it enough.
I got it for free on black friday last year? Few years ago? I couldn't agree more. Even the raw to pro vocal cleans it up so nicely and makes the rest of my processing easier.
You’re 💯 right. It’s definitely better thinner with some saturation. If it’s thick in the mix, it messes with the dynamics and sounds like karaoke vox.
@@ThreadBomb it’s possible. I’ve had some bad arrangements in the past. But nowadays I’m doing proper panning and eq and sometimes the vox sill don’t sit very well. I thought it might’ve been the dynamic mic I was using, so I switched to a condenser. While it sounds great, it was missing that glue. So I learned about saturation and that was it. Now I just need to figure out how to mix backing harmonies. Any suggestions?
I couldn't agree more about the "borrowing" not "copying". It's the whole Ed Sheeran thing he dealt with. It's not like almost all hits are some version of: I, IV, V, vi variations. If you want a good laugh search "axis of awesome 4 chords". Thanks Joe! Reworked some EQ on a song of mine you've heard. Much better, but still working on it!
A favorite story of mine that James Murphy from LCD Soundsystem told... he met David Bowie, who was one of his idols. He told Bowie something along the lines of "you've been such a huge influence on me, but I've definitely stolen a few ideas from you." David Bowie's reply "You can't steal from a thief, darling!" As inimitable as the great David Bowie was, he was more than willing to admit he "stole" plenty of tricks from his own musical heroes.
Great idea. One interesting thing in Logic Pro11 is the stem separation. You can isolate the vocal and see how it sounds as a learning tool. Taken further, you could even do a “Match EQ” and see what it looks like. If you can’t learn from others, you’re not going to be an artist. You’ll be stuck. Master what others do and take it further
Found this very interesting. I use a Neumann 87 mic for my vocal and I’ve never used EQ on it. I’ve always just allowed it, with my vocal, like an elephant, to sit wherever it likes and I’ll fit the rest of the track around it - but then I don’t do mixes either - I mix as I go. Sounds like I might be missing a trick - Never too old to learn
I only live record vocals and guitars in my songs so they have the only strong EQ issues. Samples can need EQ adjustments as well to create headroom or fit in your mix better. With vocals/guitars I always try to clear up issues at the track level before doing any bus EQ moves beyond the standard low/high roll off. Also when scooping at the 200-500hz range to get rid off unneeded noise for clarity you have to be careful to only do it to the point before it starts heavily effecting tonality. Also if guitars/vocals are sounding too abrasive/trebily the solution is usually a 0.5-1.5 db scoop at 1500-2000hz but if they don't have enough aggression/detail then the opposite. This comment wasn't meant for you because you already know this but for your viewers that are mixing novices.
Great advice as always! First time I stumbled over "thin" lead vocals was on the "Greatest Showman" OST. Great songs, sung really well but with almost nothing happening in the lows and low mids. But it works perfectly imho.
Thanks so much man, your videos are always informative, useful and easy to follow. I record my wife's vocals a lot and she always says they sound too thin so that 2.6k area should really help when I'm next mixing. Thanks again.
Great video, Joe! You have a video titled Notch City from 7 years ago that shows more fixing of the devil’s frequencies that have been bugging me lately!
Vocal sound is dependant on the final sonic objective. For me the most important thing about mic selection is using a mic that ACCURATELY captures as much detail that way I can take away or boost thigns with confidence. You can boost something thats not there... If I have options then I use a mic that is as close to the final tone I am aiming for... Getting it in the analog domain will get you best results in the box, because you'll be doing less to it.
Great video Joe. I've seen your other vidoeos on EQ and thought it was maybe more of the same, but I always learn new things from you. I have a stupid question... I understand the concept of Dynamic EQ but how do you do actually apply it? Is there a particular plugin, or is it just a different method of using the same EQ plugins? Do you have any videos on Dynamic EQ? I'm mixing a song now and would really like to understand it as I think it'll help my vocals.
Would you mind to share the settings of your speech voice when you're talking for your RUclips videos, from start to finish (eq/compression, etc). I would love to watch a video guide of you sharing this tutorial.
Hello!! Amazing video!! Maybe the 2.60kHz devil frequency that you mention has something to do with the human ear resonant freqeuncy range that is between 2-4kHz. Right?
As someone with a bassier voice, I've learned to cut the low end out of my live and recorded mixes. When mixing other people, it would always blow my mind at how well their voices cut through a mix, and mine just didn't. Until I started cutting the 200-600 range.
Thanks, Joe. Very helpful. Could you slow down the “siblance” part, and maybe do a quick lesson on how you use that “dynamic” EQ and slid the low band to the high band ….too fast for this fellow LOL. Appreciate
Hello, I definitely prefer the sound of the voices in the 70's (Free, Rolling Stones...Led zep...) and not only because I was young, or because they are great singers. It's also because today all this brilliance annoys me a little, year after year I have the impression that we are losing the warm meat in favor of an icy sound. So on the one hand we run after the analog sound and on the other we cut this low mid which characterizes it. I am confused. But since I know that you are good at what you do, that I have enough confidence in your judgment, will you explain to me how this is not contradictory?
A lot more female singers today and they use a massive, massive DI'd drums n' synth track, get into head voices a lot to get their track "outside" of that. This kind of turbo-boosted direct injection back-track power didn't exist in the analogue era - "Rolling in the deep", "Born that way" etc Kati Peri, that kind of thing. When she's "up there" in Firework or Tiger, there's not a lot going on in the frequency range - it's all "push" of a thin sound. The material is colder too. Not much point in looking for warmth in "Nothing Sweet about Me", "Raise your glass" etc. Loads of examples, it's mostly break-up songs, "I'm so strong, don't need any lousy man, pick myself up and go alone"......that kind of thing.
Would you say the 2.6 devil freq is lips and tongue? I try to think of the eq as a layout of chest,throat,tonsils,nasal,lips/tongue,space. .jjst helps me communicate to a singer when trying to direct an idea/target expression. Idk..just my way.
I was watching from a spoken word perspective. Interesting that the devil frequency is 2.6kHz - the Sennheiser MKH 416, one of the most popular spoken word mics of all time, has a pretty sharp peak at 2.5kHz. It helps with clarity of diction, and gives it its distinct sound. A -3dB notch makes it sound like a regular condenser. I guess we now know why it's not used for singing!
Hey Joe, before you cut at the 2.6 Hz that really hurt my ears even on just my laptop speakers being as I am wearing hearing aids. Thank you for your advice.
Learn from others... the way you apply it will be what makes you unique. I've been doing Queens of the Stone Age karaoke and having my wife sing her celine dion and Sarah brightman stuff. Gives me a lot of ways to make mistakes and learn.
I generally find I have to "thin out" almost everything in the mix. That goes for vocals doubly. When I hear a microphone with a lot of low mids, it doesn't sound "warm" to me. It sounds like a problem that will need to be fixed.
Keep your low signal variable turn down all the way if you can in the same with your high and that will but you still got to have base manipulation or compression at low volume low well well
about the modeling other artists :i i wish i was good enough to actually listen and know how something is made well enough to be able to do the same also be careful with notching or pulling down, cause the problem might be just a specific note and it's harmonics, not the whole vocal use dynamic eq just to be safe
Hi Joe. Idea for a mixer work around video. I have a mackie cfx 12 mixer. It doesn't hve a compressor. I have a compressor but its a guitar pedal. Can you show us how you would use this in the event, you were forced too? Thanks
Things to add. EQ is the first thing to do on a vocal and it's a straightforward matter to "sweep" the frequencies to find those areas of unpleasant colouration. You may possess more than one mic, more than one input. It's very useful to use them because your signal is so different in different parts of your singing range BUT - the mics have to be of similar characteristics - preferably a pair. What differs is the input gain - one passage being under recorded, the other is saturating and vice versa when you come to the "big moment" that so many songs have. Lots of ways to create a single track from a dual-recorded single take and all of this gives a far better result than compression - which you do afterwards anyway but - not so much. The dynamic range of an average voice is beyond what a compressor can do without colouring so pro studios commonly do this. It frees up the performance NO END. For a home studio, about £250.00 is about the most you can reasonably spend on a mic. No point in spending fortunes to pick up next door's "whatever", your ticking clock, the underfloor rumbling or the dog four miles away that won't shut up. All the stuff that's going on unnoticed by your ears but.... So.....two decent condenser mics at around £100.00 each is a better spend than one gold-plated Neumann that's just going to give you noise-reduction headaches or even a single two-hundred quid mic. I use a Rhode NT1. None of it turns you into prime Rod Stewart.
I don’t love the advice to sweep with EQ to find things that don’t sound good. Nothing sounds good when you boost and sweep with an EQ. It’s better to identify the problem you were trying to solve before you reach for an EQ.
@@HomeStudioCorner I bow to your experience. Of course the first thing is to take a good recording of a good performance and of course boosting sounds awful. I do this with the voice and almost all acoustic instruments because I find there's always an area of intense colouration, a "boxiness", in addition to the normal removal of lows and mids. It's exactly the same as giving all the bands of an old-fashioned graphic equalizer a whizz one-by-one to figure out "where things are" and then put them back to unity. I never think of this as a "problem" - it's much the same as shifting the vocal to the top end as a matter-of-course and it's about identifying where "not" to push it. It has nothing to do with finalising a good sound or rectifying faulty recordings - as you say, it doesn't sound good. I don't usually bother much about hertz, frequencies etc, I don't look at the screen much either, I have it apart from the monitors and listen in the old-fashioned "analogue studio" way. Given a good take - the first thing I do is the EQ solo then with the other tracks - before applying anything else. I might adjust the EQ later but I get it "ball park" first. I'm more inclined to use a reference recording than check the screen - tbh. I tend to orchestrate material and it will very frequently leave a single voice unaccompanied or very simply accompanied. It's as well (I find) to steer clear of processing as much as practical but of course it has to play it's part. The point is, an ambient constant backing requires more processing and it's a hiding place which nominally simpler recordings don't have. Thanks for a great video. The results speak worlds.
Question of the day. Different songs etc - a folksy fragment of a tune. Does one sing as though the voice is an instrument - precise, on key, tail off the phrases in a musically coherent manner or - does one give priority to saying something in the delivery as well as the text? What would Leonard Cohen, Tom Petty or Mark Knopfler done with it?
I had a question about EQ. For example, I am analyzing a track for the frequencies it is generating and I see nothing above 10khz. Should I still apply a low pass filter to those empty frequencies? Is there still some kind of energy being sent to my speakers even though there is no information there to be transferred? Will doing so improve my headroom and clarity when I go to mix?
I used a Blue Bluebird for vocals and never had a good vocal. I bought more channels, and added the Blue Encore 100 vocal mic with the Blue Bluebird pulled away and forgotten about, just in the room. I can only sing into a vocal mic. Two channels were a million times better than one. Especially with the Blue Bluebird pulled at least three feet away.
If you are mixing a song where there are acapella parts, or close to acapella, do you automate the EQ to return some of the low-mids during those parts?
Vocals need their own place in the mix like every other instrument. Thats what eq does. Everything I'm recording is just vocals and acoustic guitar. I use a ribbon mic for vocals and just roll off the lows. Works for me.
Always so helpful! BTW you are a pretty good vocalist.. and speaking of borrowing from other artists, Your vocals remind me of "Chris Gaines." (that iis meant as a compliment!)
Pro male vocals are actually a kot more thin than youd think. Vocal really stick out at the 1.5-4k range. Especially if you have the vocals sidechained....
I can save u a lot of those steps in the low end with the cuts ur doing by high passing at a higher db like 25 and just dial the eq shelf for the optimum perceived warmth and do the same up top. Prototypically I’m in the 240ish area in the bottom and 8K up top and then compress or just use an EQP and cut ur bottom and the trash at 4 or 5K keeping in mind that the compression is now magnifying the edge of each “cut” and with those wide Q’s ur using ur essentially taking a lot of characters of the voice that makes let’s say a 2A compressor or 76, create the magic it imparts. Sincerely Artie! Me and my writing partners work and my voice and mixing can be peep’d at Kasio Jones here on RUclips. Pop by, hit the videos tab for all 14 sides we have posted and I’ll thank u in advance🎶🙏
High pass, cut nasty frequencies, cut nasal frequencies, boost some highs ,1 to 2k to cut through the mix compression, saturation, parallel channel if needed
I wonder why we keep getting told there has to be a "formula", a "right way", to eq, mix, master, etc..... Music is art. I believe there is only one way to it > the way I want it to be. If the world doesn't like it, who cares. It's what I wanted it to "sound" like. I can appreciate some people want to be "commercial" and make money, but I wish all these videos trying to tell me how I should do things would tell me: "if you want to be like everybody else, do the things I'm about to tell you". Just my humble opinion, not judging 😁
Why do you not chain the negative EQ before the Compression? Seems like you are pushing the unnecessary frequencies first through the compressors only to then take them out again.
like I always say, if I like the sound, I compress first. If it needs to be fixed, I fix it with EQ first. I liked the sound, so I compressed it. then I used EQ to deal with any problems compression caused.
Hi Joe, I got your video on vocal EQing as an "apology" for you sending me a survey for your Gold Members that I am not. Not sure if that was your way of getting my attention or a legit apology. But either way I got a lot from what you sent me. I'm using a Tascam DP 32 sd and I don't have all of the additional gear you have or the great mics you're using. The 32 sd has some built in EQ and other effects to improve vocals. I've been playing around with song writing and recording since the late 60's and early 70's using a couple of 4 track reel to reel decks at first going back and forth to get added tracks. I'm 76 now and still having fun with music now using the digital gear. Your video made it abundantly clear that I still have a lot to learn regarding mixing and mastering!! Thanks for sending your video. Bob Love, L.A.
I come here every now and then, using still Studio 1,3. But this Joe Guy is so much of not a "seller". He´s just a normal human being, explaining things. Thats enough for learning for me. Cool Guy.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
▶︎▶︎ Free 5-Step Mix Guide here: www.5stepmix.com
Good 👍 👍
I've discovered my vocals sound better when I turn them down 600 db.
😂
same :D
Vocals? What are those 🤷🏼♂️
Very nice to discover something that is only possible in dreams.
@@inrayda what do you mean?
I've recently produced two of the best tunes I've ever done by following the structure of other tunes that I loved. I had parts that were mine, I arranged them following the reference tracks and got close to the 'feel' and all that intangible stuff. Also, with active listening I got all the inspiration for amazing transitions and all that other good stuff. The tones are all mine, but the inspiration was real!
id like to listen to them
Great stuff Joe. One thing I'd like to see more of is making these changes in the context of the mix, rather than in solo. I appreciate the medium of RUclips, and whatever playback we are using, will have a great impact on what we are hearing, but it's your mindset that is absolute gold. Just tell us what you are hearing and why you are making the moves. If we hear it...BONUS! I know from my own experience that our learning curve will determine what we are hearing more than the codecs, and I am a great believer of saving & rewatching something. And when I finally get it...and hear it! ...that's when things fall into place. Peace and respect. Thanks :)
people say "mixing in solo", but its an oxymoron. you can tone shape or sound design in solo but it has no relation to how it mixes with the rest of the song. (not saying dont use solo - solo is good for as long as your ears can remember the context in detail)
I love how much you bounce back and forth between tech/nique and then the psychological pitfalls. Anyone can do the former, but knowing when and how to address the latter is what makes someone a real educator and mentor. 🙌🏻
so i mix alot of new gen rap and you are 1000% right , this whole time i wanted that thick warm vocal but EVERY single one of my favorite artists have a thinner vocal and i never really noticed i guess because im feeling the song more then listening
This is a great argument for why the Waves Silk Vocal is an amazing plugin. It has a great interface for instantly managing the low end on a vocal in very musical and mix-worthy ways. Can't recommend it enough.
I got it for free on black friday last year? Few years ago? I couldn't agree more. Even the raw to pro vocal cleans it up so nicely and makes the rest of my processing easier.
You’re 💯 right. It’s definitely better thinner with some saturation. If it’s thick in the mix, it messes with the dynamics and sounds like karaoke vox.
Or maybe your instrumental arrangement is the problem.
@@ThreadBomb it’s possible. I’ve had some bad arrangements in the past. But nowadays I’m doing proper panning and eq and sometimes the vox sill don’t sit very well. I thought it might’ve been the dynamic mic I was using, so I switched to a condenser. While it sounds great, it was missing that glue. So I learned about saturation and that was it. Now I just need to figure out how to mix backing harmonies. Any suggestions?
I couldn't agree more about the "borrowing" not "copying". It's the whole Ed Sheeran thing he dealt with. It's not like almost all hits are some version of: I, IV, V, vi variations. If you want a good laugh search "axis of awesome 4 chords". Thanks Joe! Reworked some EQ on a song of mine you've heard. Much better, but still working on it!
A favorite story of mine that James Murphy from LCD Soundsystem told... he met David Bowie, who was one of his idols. He told Bowie something along the lines of "you've been such a huge influence on me, but I've definitely stolen a few ideas from you." David Bowie's reply "You can't steal from a thief, darling!" As inimitable as the great David Bowie was, he was more than willing to admit he "stole" plenty of tricks from his own musical heroes.
Great idea. One interesting thing in Logic Pro11 is the stem separation. You can isolate the vocal and see how it sounds as a learning tool. Taken further, you could even do a “Match EQ” and see what it looks like.
If you can’t learn from others, you’re not going to be an artist. You’ll be stuck. Master what others do and take it further
Found this very interesting. I use a Neumann 87 mic for my vocal and I’ve never used EQ on it. I’ve always just allowed it, with my vocal, like an elephant, to sit wherever it likes and I’ll fit the rest of the track around it - but then I don’t do mixes either - I mix as I go. Sounds like I might be missing a trick - Never too old to learn
Awesome advice, amazing what a different those little high mid notches make. Love that devils frequency term, I'm having that. Thanks Joe.
Great advice - and really beautiful songwriting and singing too, Joe. Thank you.
Great song.
This couldn't have come at a better time!! Thanks Joe!
nice the vocal sample was amazing i like how so free, a bit of crispyness and how bright it is
A great mix starts with great sounds
Absolutely. All the epic music recorded on analog tape.
Which starts with great playing!
You've helped me gain confidence in my ears. Thanks! I steal from every style I can get my hands on. Especially stuff that groove.
very informative. Thanks. Love the sound of the acoustic guit/s
you got a new subscriber my guy ! keep going 🙏🏼
I only live record vocals and guitars in my songs so they have the only strong EQ issues. Samples can need EQ adjustments as well to create headroom or fit in your mix better. With vocals/guitars I always try to clear up issues at the track level before doing any bus EQ moves beyond the standard low/high roll off. Also when scooping at the 200-500hz range to get rid off unneeded noise for clarity you have to be careful to only do it to the point before it starts heavily effecting tonality. Also if guitars/vocals are sounding too abrasive/trebily the solution is usually a 0.5-1.5 db scoop at 1500-2000hz but if they don't have enough aggression/detail then the opposite. This comment wasn't meant for you because you already know this but for your viewers that are mixing novices.
That's exactly what I needed. I am working with vocals similar to this and those highs driving me crazy.
I'll try your method. Thanks.
Thank you Joe. I'm learning to mix my vocals and your a huge help brother. Props
I'm not against copying someone's process if i need to figure it out myself, i consider that an art in itself
Great advice as always! First time I stumbled over "thin" lead vocals was on the "Greatest Showman" OST. Great songs, sung really well but with almost nothing happening in the lows and low mids. But it works perfectly imho.
Thanks so much man, your videos are always informative, useful and easy to follow. I record my wife's vocals a lot and she always says they sound too thin so that 2.6k area should really help when I'm next mixing. Thanks again.
When and how can we use compression on eq's, maybe you should make a vidoe on that. By the way your videos are very helpful.
mannnn i love you seriously u dont know how much ive struggled with this may the lord bless u
Great video, Joe! You have a video titled Notch City from 7 years ago that shows more fixing of the devil’s frequencies that have been bugging me lately!
Vocal sound is dependant on the final sonic objective. For me the most important thing about mic selection is using a mic that ACCURATELY captures as much detail that way I can take away or boost thigns with confidence. You can boost something thats not there... If I have options then I use a mic that is as close to the final tone I am aiming for... Getting it in the analog domain will get you best results in the box, because you'll be doing less to it.
Oh damn!!! You nailed it!!! Just what I was needing in one of my vocal mixes. Thank you thank you thank you.
Wow! Is this your voice Joe? It's gorgeous. Thanks for uploading.
Man Joe everytime you give me something new to chew on. God bless you man. Really appreciate your videos.
Great video Joe. I've seen your other vidoeos on EQ and thought it was maybe more of the same, but I always learn new things from you. I have a stupid question... I understand the concept of Dynamic EQ but how do you do actually apply it? Is there a particular plugin, or is it just a different method of using the same EQ plugins? Do you have any videos on Dynamic EQ? I'm mixing a song now and would really like to understand it as I think it'll help my vocals.
Would you mind to share the settings of your speech voice when you're talking for your RUclips videos, from start to finish (eq/compression, etc). I would love to watch a video guide of you sharing this tutorial.
Hello!! Amazing video!! Maybe the 2.60kHz devil frequency that you mention has something to do with the human ear resonant freqeuncy range that is between 2-4kHz. Right?
Wow Thank you so much, I didn't even know I struggled in these areas! massive help Joe! God Bless you Sir!
As someone with a bassier voice, I've learned to cut the low end out of my live and recorded mixes. When mixing other people, it would always blow my mind at how well their voices cut through a mix, and mine just didn't. Until I started cutting the 200-600 range.
Joe is sharp knows his stuffand has great ears
Thanks, Joe. Very helpful. Could you slow down the “siblance” part, and maybe do a quick lesson on how you use that “dynamic” EQ and slid the low band to the high band ….too fast for this fellow LOL. Appreciate
Hello, I definitely prefer the sound of the voices in the 70's (Free, Rolling Stones...Led zep...) and not only because I was young, or because they are great singers. It's also because today all this brilliance annoys me a little, year after year I have the impression that we are losing the warm meat in favor of an icy sound.
So on the one hand we run after the analog sound and on the other we cut this low mid which characterizes it.
I am confused. But since I know that you are good at what you do, that I have enough confidence in your judgment, will you explain to me how this is not contradictory?
A lot more female singers today and they use a massive, massive DI'd drums n' synth track, get into head voices a lot to get their track "outside" of that. This kind of turbo-boosted direct injection back-track power didn't exist in the analogue era - "Rolling in the deep", "Born that way" etc
Kati Peri, that kind of thing. When she's "up there" in Firework or Tiger, there's not a lot going on in the frequency range - it's all "push" of a thin sound. The material is colder too. Not much point in looking for warmth in "Nothing Sweet about Me", "Raise your glass" etc. Loads of examples, it's mostly break-up songs, "I'm so strong, don't need any lousy man, pick myself up and go alone"......that kind of thing.
Very nice vocals tutorial. The pro EQ is very nice 🙂
Goosebump Alert.
You are absolutely correct. You hit the nail on the head 👌❤🙏
Great tip. But I really like the acoustic guitar sound. So good.
Would you say the 2.6 devil freq is lips and tongue? I try to think of the eq as a layout of chest,throat,tonsils,nasal,lips/tongue,space. .jjst helps me communicate to a singer when trying to direct an idea/target expression. Idk..just my way.
I was watching from a spoken word perspective. Interesting that the devil frequency is 2.6kHz - the Sennheiser MKH 416, one of the most popular spoken word mics of all time, has a pretty sharp peak at 2.5kHz. It helps with clarity of diction, and gives it its distinct sound. A -3dB notch makes it sound like a regular condenser.
I guess we now know why it's not used for singing!
Hey Joe, before you cut at the 2.6 Hz that really hurt my ears even on just my laptop speakers being as I am wearing hearing aids. Thank you for your advice.
Absolutely awesome video
This Video has added alot of change to my mixing..... thanks so much Joe
Learn from others... the way you apply it will be what makes you unique. I've been doing Queens of the Stone Age karaoke and having my wife sing her celine dion and Sarah brightman stuff. Gives me a lot of ways to make mistakes and learn.
those are some great EQ tips there
I generally find I have to "thin out" almost everything in the mix. That goes for vocals doubly. When I hear a microphone with a lot of low mids, it doesn't sound "warm" to me. It sounds like a problem that will need to be fixed.
what a voice you have!!
Hopefully I’ll get it right now :) thanks
Great information
Amazing
Keep your low signal variable turn down all the way if you can in the same with your high and that will but you still got to have base manipulation or compression at low volume low well well
Love your videos man. Its just so easy to follow. Thanks!
about the modeling other artists :i i wish i was good enough to actually listen and know how something is made well enough to be able to do the same
also be careful with notching or pulling down, cause the problem might be just a specific note and it's harmonics, not the whole vocal use dynamic eq just to be safe
Hi Joe. Idea for a mixer work around video. I have a mackie cfx 12 mixer. It doesn't hve a compressor. I have a compressor but its a guitar pedal. Can you show us how you would use this in the event, you were forced too? Thanks
Things to add. EQ is the first thing to do on a vocal and it's a straightforward matter to "sweep" the frequencies to find those areas of unpleasant colouration.
You may possess more than one mic, more than one input. It's very useful to use them because your signal is so different in different parts of your singing range BUT - the mics have to be of similar characteristics - preferably a pair. What differs is the input gain - one passage being under recorded, the other is saturating and vice versa when you come to the "big moment" that so many songs have. Lots of ways to create a single track from a dual-recorded single take and all of this gives a far better result than compression - which you do afterwards anyway but - not so much. The dynamic range of an average voice is beyond what a compressor can do without colouring so pro studios commonly do this.
It frees up the performance NO END.
For a home studio, about £250.00 is about the most you can reasonably spend on a mic. No point in spending fortunes to pick up next door's "whatever", your ticking clock, the underfloor rumbling or the dog four miles away that won't shut up. All the stuff that's going on unnoticed by your ears but....
So.....two decent condenser mics at around £100.00 each is a better spend than one gold-plated Neumann that's just going to give you noise-reduction headaches or even a single two-hundred quid mic. I use a Rhode NT1.
None of it turns you into prime Rod Stewart.
I don’t love the advice to sweep with EQ to find things that don’t sound good. Nothing sounds good when you boost and sweep with an EQ. It’s better to identify the problem you were trying to solve before you reach for an EQ.
@@HomeStudioCorner I bow to your experience. Of course the first thing is to take a good recording of a good performance and of course boosting sounds awful. I do this with the voice and almost all acoustic instruments because I find there's always an area of intense colouration, a "boxiness", in addition to the normal removal of lows and mids. It's exactly the same as giving all the bands of an old-fashioned graphic equalizer a whizz one-by-one to figure out "where things are" and then put them back to unity. I never think of this as a "problem" - it's much the same as shifting the vocal to the top end as a matter-of-course and it's about identifying where "not" to push it. It has nothing to do with finalising a good sound or rectifying faulty recordings - as you say, it doesn't sound good.
I don't usually bother much about hertz, frequencies etc, I don't look at the screen much either, I have it apart from the monitors and listen in the old-fashioned "analogue studio" way. Given a good take - the first thing I do is the EQ solo then with the other tracks - before applying anything else. I might adjust the EQ later but I get it "ball park" first. I'm more inclined to use a reference recording than check the screen - tbh.
I tend to orchestrate material and it will very frequently leave a single voice unaccompanied or very simply accompanied. It's as well (I find) to steer clear of processing as much as practical but of course it has to play it's part. The point is, an ambient constant backing requires more processing and it's a hiding place which nominally simpler recordings don't have.
Thanks for a great video. The results speak worlds.
Where did you get your pro Eq3 from was a Daw factory plug in or third party place that’s thr best eq I’ve seen
It's the one that comes free with Presonus Studio One.
Question of the day. Different songs etc - a folksy fragment of a tune. Does one sing as though the voice is an instrument - precise, on key, tail off the phrases in a musically coherent manner or - does one give priority to saying something in the delivery as well as the text? What would Leonard Cohen, Tom Petty or Mark Knopfler done with it?
I don’t think there’s an answer to your question. Every singer needs to discover their own voice and their own unique style and delivery.
Thanks Joe. That was helpful.
Joe, can you please make a video on how to use Dynamic EQ and Deesser? I've seen it here and it sounds convincing, I'm just not sure I can handle it.
should be one or more of these videos on the Presonus channel.
I got the 5 step mix.saves lot of time
Practice with that brightness in the you'll realize the more you practice the higher you can get with it
I had a question about EQ. For example, I am analyzing a track for the frequencies it is generating and I see nothing above 10khz. Should I still apply a low pass filter to those empty frequencies? Is there still some kind of energy being sent to my speakers even though there is no information there to be transferred? Will doing so improve my headroom and clarity when I go to mix?
No. This is an example of making up problems and then making up solutions to those made up problems.
I used a Blue Bluebird for vocals and never had a good vocal. I bought more channels, and added the Blue Encore 100 vocal mic with the Blue Bluebird pulled away and forgotten about, just in the room. I can only sing into a vocal mic. Two channels were a million times better than one. Especially with the Blue Bluebird pulled at least three feet away.
excellent !!! bravo ......
Cool song! What progression/ chords are you running?
If you are mixing a song where there are acapella parts, or close to acapella, do you automate the EQ to return some of the low-mids during those parts?
Good info. Thanks
So i'd like to know. do you eq vocals with the beat off? because i learned from YT accademy that you must always eq with the beat on
Vocals need their own place in the mix like every other instrument. Thats what eq does. Everything I'm recording is just vocals and acoustic guitar. I use a ribbon mic for vocals and just roll off the lows. Works for me.
👍👍👍👍 excellent !!!!! bravo.....
Thanks for all the info, love the videos
Great content as ALWAYS!
What is the EQ plug-in you’re using?
Stock studio one eq
good stuff
Always so helpful! BTW you are a pretty good vocalist.. and speaking of borrowing from other artists, Your vocals remind me of "Chris Gaines." (that iis meant as a compliment!)
More like Garth Brooks
@@BukanIbuMu Garth and Chris.. the same person??
I like your thoughts! Which PC do you use? 😂
Pro male vocals are actually a kot more thin than youd think. Vocal really stick out at the 1.5-4k range. Especially if you have the vocals sidechained....
I can save u a lot of those steps in the low end with the cuts ur doing by high passing at a higher db like 25 and just dial the eq shelf for the optimum perceived warmth and do the same up top. Prototypically I’m in the 240ish area in the bottom and 8K up top and then compress or just use an EQP and cut ur bottom and the trash at 4 or 5K keeping in mind that the compression is now magnifying the edge of each “cut” and with those wide Q’s ur using ur essentially taking a lot of characters of the voice that makes let’s say a 2A compressor or 76, create the magic it imparts. Sincerely Artie! Me and my writing partners work and my voice and mixing can be peep’d at Kasio Jones here on RUclips. Pop by, hit the videos tab for all 14 sides we have posted and I’ll thank u in advance🎶🙏
Dynamic? My eq doesn't do that. But my settings look very similar to yours.👍 studio one 5 artist.
FYI, It looks like the HPF is not engaged. Have never used it but just based on my understanding of the UI it looks like it's off.
Well as someone with a bass voice I’ve always rolled back the low end. It interferes too much with the high end of the bass.
High pass, cut nasty frequencies, cut nasal frequencies, boost some highs ,1 to 2k to cut through the mix compression, saturation, parallel channel if needed
I wonder why we keep getting told there has to be a "formula", a "right way", to eq, mix, master, etc.....
Music is art. I believe there is only one way to it > the way I want it to be. If the world doesn't like it, who cares. It's what I wanted it to "sound" like.
I can appreciate some people want to be "commercial" and make money, but I wish all these videos trying to tell me how I should do things would tell me: "if you want to be like everybody else, do the things I'm about to tell you".
Just my humble opinion, not judging 😁
you do have a fantastic voice though. certianly for radio and voicovers
I can almost hear it breaking but it still needs to be thinner and the bases got to be more aggressive and more in the background
Why do you not chain the negative EQ before the Compression? Seems like you are pushing the unnecessary frequencies first through the compressors only to then take them out again.
like I always say, if I like the sound, I compress first. If it needs to be fixed, I fix it with EQ first. I liked the sound, so I compressed it. then I used EQ to deal with any problems compression caused.
@@HomeStudioCorner Okok, so did the 2.6 and 4.2 issues come up only after the compression?
yeah maybe
Hi Joe, I got your video on vocal EQing as an "apology" for you sending me a survey for your Gold Members that I am not. Not sure if that was your way of getting my attention or a legit apology. But either way I got a lot from what you sent me. I'm using a Tascam DP 32 sd and I don't have all of the additional gear you have or the great mics you're using. The 32 sd has some built in EQ and other effects to improve vocals. I've been playing around with song writing and recording since the late 60's and early 70's using a couple of 4 track reel to reel decks at first going back and forth to get added tracks. I'm 76 now and still having fun with music now using the digital gear. Your video made it abundantly clear that I still have a lot to learn regarding mixing and mastering!! Thanks for sending your video. Bob Love, L.A.
Goosebumps alert haha 😂
thanks for the goosebumps
screw the techniques... let's talk about THAT song.... am loving it... how can I hear the full version @homestudiocorner ?
Maybe I need 2 eq for cut bad soundz ?
Great EQ tips. Here's one from me - get rid of your dependency on autotune.
I come here every now and then, using still Studio 1,3. But this Joe Guy is so much of not a "seller". He´s just a normal human being, explaining things. Thats enough for learning for me. Cool Guy.