I just uploaded a new mix of a song I've been working on remixing called "A Rainy Day" (written with Mike Parker) on my SoundClick page at: http://soundclick.com/share?songid=3871853 The original version of this was probably started back on SONAR 3 or 4, but this version is done in SONAR 7, partly to update sounds, partly to rationalize disparate loop timings with each other (via AudioSnap), and partly to add background vocals. It's got Beta Monkey loops on drums, Trilogy on Bass (through Guitar Rig 3), Virtual Guitarist on both acoustic and electric (through Guitar Rig 3) guitars, B4II on organ, and Akoustik Piano on piano. Because VG is loop-based for its parts (you control various aspects by playing MIDI, such as when parts come in and go out, some variations, and held chords, but the underlying licks are in audio loops), one of the issues with the original version was that it was a bit like having three different players (the two guitarists and the drummer) playing their own thing without hearing the other. Of course, I tried to pick parts that were in the ballpark on matching feel, but I was still bugged by sloppiness in the sync between the parts. With AudioSnap, after I rendered the VG parts to audio, I could just lightly quantize the guitar parts against the drums (also audio loops) to get things much tighter, more like they were actually played together. Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic =======================================
Hey Rick, Very nice song. I really like your vocal performance on this one. I don't think the vocals sound too good though. Too much low-mids and the higher end sounds thin. It does sound pretty good though when you sing the higher notes "I wish it would rain." You should separate this from the rest of the vocals so whatever eq you use to combat the low-mid thing doesn't mess with what's good. I also think the song would benefit greatly from some harmonies on the B section and on the bridge. Whatever backing vocals are there should come way up. I like this song - nice job! Neil R "Rick Paul" <> wrote in message news:... >I just uploaded a new mix of a song I've been working on remixing called "A >Rainy Day" (written with Mike Parker) on my SoundClick page at: > > http://soundclick.com/share?songid=3871853 > > The original version of this was probably started back on SONAR 3 or 4, > but this version is done in SONAR 7, partly to update sounds, partly to > rationalize disparate loop timings with each other (via AudioSnap), and > partly to add background vocals. It's got Beta Monkey loops on drums, > Trilogy on Bass (through Guitar Rig 3), Virtual Guitarist on both acoustic > and electric (through Guitar Rig 3) guitars, B4II on organ, and Akoustik > Piano on piano. > > Because VG is loop-based for its parts (you control various aspects by > playing MIDI, such as when parts come in and go out, some variations, and > held chords, but the underlying licks are in audio loops), one of the > issues with the original version was that it was a bit like having three > different players (the two guitarists and the drummer) playing their own > thing without hearing the other. Of course, I tried to pick parts that > were in the ballpark on matching feel, but I was still bugged by > sloppiness in the sync between the parts. With AudioSnap, after I > rendered the VG parts to audio, I could just lightly quantize the guitar > parts against the drums (also audio loops) to get things much tighter, > more like they were actually played together. > > Rick > -- > ======================================= > Rick Paul > Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) > Web: www.RickPaul.info > MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic > ======================================= > >
Thanks for the feedback, Neil. I'm not sure I'm grokking some of your details, though. Specifically: When you say "the higher end sounds thin", do you mean "high notes" or something related to high end EQ? I suspect the latter based on the way you phrased it, but then, when I think about something "sounding thin", with respect to EQ, I think of something that is lacking in the lower end or the lower mids, which you suggest has too much. If you do mean high-end EQ, can you suggest what it would mean to "thicken up" the high-end? Also, when you say the "B section", do you mean the second verse or the end of the verses or ...? (I'm thinking of this song's structure as AABABA or verse/verse/bridge/verse/bridge/verse where the "I wish it would rain" section is the B section or bridge since the hook is in the last line of the verse as in the primary traditional AABA song structure, but I don't think you mean the "I wish it would rain" section as that already has fairly evident harmonies.) Thanks. Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic ======================================= "Neil Rutman" <> wrote in message news:... > Hey Rick, > > Very nice song. I really like your vocal performance on this one. I don't > think the vocals sound too good though. Too much low-mids and the higher > end sounds thin. It does sound pretty good though when you sing the higher > notes "I wish it would rain." You should separate this from the rest of > the vocals so whatever eq you use to combat the low-mid thing doesn't mess > with what's good. I also think the song would benefit greatly from some > harmonies on the B section and on the bridge. Whatever backing vocals are > there should come way up. > > I like this song - nice job! > > Neil R > > "Rick Paul" <> wrote in message > news:... >>I just uploaded a new mix of a song I've been working on remixing called >>"A Rainy Day" (written with Mike Parker) on my SoundClick page at: >> >> http://soundclick.com/share?songid=3871853 >> >> The original version of this was probably started back on SONAR 3 or 4, >> but this version is done in SONAR 7, partly to update sounds, partly to >> rationalize disparate loop timings with each other (via AudioSnap), and >> partly to add background vocals. It's got Beta Monkey loops on drums, >> Trilogy on Bass (through Guitar Rig 3), Virtual Guitarist on both >> acoustic and electric (through Guitar Rig 3) guitars, B4II on organ, and >> Akoustik Piano on piano. >> >> Because VG is loop-based for its parts (you control various aspects by >> playing MIDI, such as when parts come in and go out, some variations, and >> held chords, but the underlying licks are in audio loops), one of the >> issues with the original version was that it was a bit like having three >> different players (the two guitarists and the drummer) playing their own >> thing without hearing the other. Of course, I tried to pick parts that >> were in the ballpark on matching feel, but I was still bugged by >> sloppiness in the sync between the parts. With AudioSnap, after I >> rendered the VG parts to audio, I could just lightly quantize the guitar >> parts against the drums (also audio loops) to get things much tighter, >> more like they were actually played together. >> >> Rick >> -- >> ======================================= >> Rick Paul >> Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) >> Web: www.RickPaul.info >> MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic >> ======================================= >> >> > >
Nice Song Rick. Very enjoyable listen! Steve "Rick Paul" <> wrote in message news:... >I just uploaded a new mix of a song I've been working on remixing called "A Rainy Day" (written with Mike Parker) on my SoundClick >page at: > > http://soundclick.com/share?songid=3871853 > > The original version of this was probably started back on SONAR 3 or 4, but this version is done in SONAR 7, partly to update > sounds, partly to rationalize disparate loop timings with each other (via AudioSnap), and partly to add background vocals. It's > got Beta Monkey loops on drums, Trilogy on Bass (through Guitar Rig 3), Virtual Guitarist on both acoustic and electric (through > Guitar Rig 3) guitars, B4II on organ, and Akoustik Piano on piano. > > Because VG is loop-based for its parts (you control various aspects by playing MIDI, such as when parts come in and go out, some > variations, and held chords, but the underlying licks are in audio loops), one of the issues with the original version was that it > was a bit like having three different players (the two guitarists and the drummer) playing their own thing without hearing the > other. Of course, I tried to pick parts that were in the ballpark on matching feel, but I was still bugged by sloppiness in the > sync between the parts. With AudioSnap, after I rendered the VG parts to audio, I could just lightly quantize the guitar parts > against the drums (also audio loops) to get things much tighter, more like they were actually played together. > > Rick > -- > ======================================= > Rick Paul > Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) > Web: www.RickPaul.info > MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic > ======================================= > >
Rick, Very nice Mix, better than many!! The only thing I heard was - The voice seems to be in a different place/room that the music. This is very easy to do. I have done it many times myself. What causes it is that the voice has a brightness on it to get to clear enough to hear all the words in the song. The aural exciter is part of what it is. I like the vocals because I can understand all of the words, very good! So that leaves only the music to tamper with. You could try to all a short plate to the vocals. It will beed to very low like -25-30, cause they really sound good and you don't want to murk them up! Then all you need to do is to put the aural exciter to a bus that all the music is going to - add just a tiny bit to bring them to the level right behind the vocals. That should help. Or- you coud do nothing and it would still be good! Max Arwood "Rick Paul" <> wrote in message news:... >I just uploaded a new mix of a song I've been working on remixing called "A >Rainy Day" (written with Mike Parker) on my SoundClick page at: > > http://soundclick.com/share?songid=3871853 > > The original version of this was probably started back on SONAR 3 or 4, > but this version is done in SONAR 7, partly to update sounds, partly to > rationalize disparate loop timings with each other (via AudioSnap), and > partly to add background vocals. It's got Beta Monkey loops on drums, > Trilogy on Bass (through Guitar Rig 3), Virtual Guitarist on both acoustic > and electric (through Guitar Rig 3) guitars, B4II on organ, and Akoustik > Piano on piano. > > Because VG is loop-based for its parts (you control various aspects by > playing MIDI, such as when parts come in and go out, some variations, and > held chords, but the underlying licks are in audio loops), one of the > issues with the original version was that it was a bit like having three > different players (the two guitarists and the drummer) playing their own > thing without hearing the other. Of course, I tried to pick parts that > were in the ballpark on matching feel, but I was still bugged by > sloppiness in the sync between the parts. With AudioSnap, after I > rendered the VG parts to audio, I could just lightly quantize the guitar > parts against the drums (also audio loops) to get things much tighter, > more like they were actually played together. > > Rick > -- > ======================================= > Rick Paul > Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) > Web: www.RickPaul.info > MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic > ======================================= > >
Thanks, Steve. Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic ======================================= "Steve Karl" <> wrote in message news:gagsaf$gj5$... > Nice Song Rick. > Very enjoyable listen! > > Steve > > "Rick Paul" <> wrote in message > news:... >>I just uploaded a new mix of a song I've been working on remixing called >>"A Rainy Day" (written with Mike Parker) on my SoundClick page at: >> >> http://soundclick.com/share?songid=3871853 >> >> The original version of this was probably started back on SONAR 3 or 4, >> but this version is done in SONAR 7, partly to update sounds, partly to >> rationalize disparate loop timings with each other (via AudioSnap), and >> partly to add background vocals. It's got Beta Monkey loops on drums, >> Trilogy on Bass (through Guitar Rig 3), Virtual Guitarist on both >> acoustic and electric (through Guitar Rig 3) guitars, B4II on organ, and >> Akoustik Piano on piano. >> >> Because VG is loop-based for its parts (you control various aspects by >> playing MIDI, such as when parts come in and go out, some variations, and >> held chords, but the underlying licks are in audio loops), one of the >> issues with the original version was that it was a bit like having three >> different players (the two guitarists and the drummer) playing their own >> thing without hearing the other. Of course, I tried to pick parts that >> were in the ballpark on matching feel, but I was still bugged by >> sloppiness in the sync between the parts. With AudioSnap, after I >> rendered the VG parts to audio, I could just lightly quantize the guitar >> parts against the drums (also audio loops) to get things much tighter, >> more like they were actually played together. >> >> Rick >> -- >> ======================================= >> Rick Paul >> Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) >> Web: www.RickPaul.info >> MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic >> ======================================= >> >> > >
Thanks for the feedback, Max. You're right that I'm using an aural exciter (DSP FX Aural Activator) on the lead vocal to help it cut through the mix. I'm also using a different main reverb on the vocal (Lexicon Pantheon), but also a tiny bit of the room reverb (PerfectSpace -- I think I'm using one of the Blues Club settings, probably the close position one), but mixed way back to try to lend some sense of being in the same room. In general, all the reverb on the lead vocal is very low level, and it's possible I went a bit lower than usual or something. Neil clarified his comment on the lead vocal's high end to saying it sounded harsh in spots, which could certainly be exacerbated by the aural exciter, though it may just as well be from the specific EQ settings I'm using on the vocal itself or at the mastering stage. In any event, thanks for the suggestions. Between your comments and Neil's, I've got at least a few ideas on things to check into when I revisit this (probably early in the coming week). In fact, there is one thing I was doing late in the game, based on things I'd done to tweak "Halloween" after the comments here, that I may well have messed up that might partially account for what you're hearing and Neil's comment on the high end, but I'm not positive -- I have to look back at the settings. (I'd applied an EQ curve to the vocal reverb that was similar what to what I'd applied as a corrective EQ on the lead vocal itself. However, just thinking back about what I did last time, and the comments here, it may be that I didn't bump the high end on the reverb last time despite having done that on the vocal itself, and I may have bumped the high end of the reverb here.) Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic ======================================= "Max Arwood" <> wrote in message news:2mVyk.153$... > Rick, > Very nice Mix, better than many!! The only thing I heard was - The voice > seems to be in a different place/room that the music. This is very easy > to do. I have done it many times myself. What causes it is that the > voice has a brightness on it to get to clear enough to hear all the words > in the song. The aural exciter is part of what it is. I like the vocals > because I can understand all of the words, very good! So that leaves only > the music to tamper with. You could try to all a short plate to the > vocals. It will beed to very low like -25-30, cause they really sound > good and you don't want to murk them up! Then all you need to do is to > put the aural exciter to a bus that all the music is going to - add just > a tiny bit to bring them to the level right behind the vocals. That > should help. Or- you coud do nothing and it would still be good! > Max Arwood > > "Rick Paul" <> wrote in message > news:... >>I just uploaded a new mix of a song I've been working on remixing called >>"A Rainy Day" (written with Mike Parker) on my SoundClick page at: >> >> http://soundclick.com/share?songid=3871853 >> >> The original version of this was probably started back on SONAR 3 or 4, >> but this version is done in SONAR 7, partly to update sounds, partly to >> rationalize disparate loop timings with each other (via AudioSnap), and >> partly to add background vocals. It's got Beta Monkey loops on drums, >> Trilogy on Bass (through Guitar Rig 3), Virtual Guitarist on both >> acoustic and electric (through Guitar Rig 3) guitars, B4II on organ, and >> Akoustik Piano on piano. >> >> Because VG is loop-based for its parts (you control various aspects by >> playing MIDI, such as when parts come in and go out, some variations, and >> held chords, but the underlying licks are in audio loops), one of the >> issues with the original version was that it was a bit like having three >> different players (the two guitarists and the drummer) playing their own >> thing without hearing the other. Of course, I tried to pick parts that >> were in the ballpark on matching feel, but I was still bugged by >> sloppiness in the sync between the parts. With AudioSnap, after I >> rendered the VG parts to audio, I could just lightly quantize the guitar >> parts against the drums (also audio loops) to get things much tighter, >> more like they were actually played together. >> >> Rick >> -- >> ======================================= >> Rick Paul >> Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) >> Web: www.RickPaul.info >> MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic >> ======================================= >> >> > >
Man, I really got bogged down by admin stuff all last week. Finally got a chance to revisit this mix today. Latest version is at: http://soundclick.com/share?songid=3871853 I actually made a number of tweaks, both based on the comments here and some from a guy I run many of my mixes by who said the mix felt fairly thin to him. I decided to add some thickening on the guitars (chorus on the acoustic and delay/flange on the electric, somewhat subtly, and panned opposite). Then I tweaked the EQ on the lead vocal and vocal delay and reverb, added some room reverb on the lead vocal (usually I do anyway, so I must have forgotten this time), and tweaked the level automation on the BGVs to bring them up in a few areas. Final thing was to tweak the mastering EQ curve a bit as I think I'd overcompensated on the high end in the previous mix. That might have been part of what was making the vocals feel a bit harsh. Hopefully this version turned out better, rather than worse. Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic ======================================= "Neil Rutman" <> wrote in message news:... > Hey Rick, > > Very nice song. I really like your vocal performance on this one. I don't > think the vocals sound too good though. Too much low-mids and the higher > end sounds thin. It does sound pretty good though when you sing the higher > notes "I wish it would rain." You should separate this from the rest of > the vocals so whatever eq you use to combat the low-mid thing doesn't mess > with what's good. I also think the song would benefit greatly from some > harmonies on the B section and on the bridge. Whatever backing vocals are > there should come way up. > > I like this song - nice job! > > Neil R > > "Rick Paul" <> wrote in message > news:... >>I just uploaded a new mix of a song I've been working on remixing called >>"A Rainy Day" (written with Mike Parker) on my SoundClick page at: >> >> http://soundclick.com/share?songid=3871853 >> >> The original version of this was probably started back on SONAR 3 or 4, >> but this version is done in SONAR 7, partly to update sounds, partly to >> rationalize disparate loop timings with each other (via AudioSnap), and >> partly to add background vocals. It's got Beta Monkey loops on drums, >> Trilogy on Bass (through Guitar Rig 3), Virtual Guitarist on both >> acoustic and electric (through Guitar Rig 3) guitars, B4II on organ, and >> Akoustik Piano on piano. >> >> Because VG is loop-based for its parts (you control various aspects by >> playing MIDI, such as when parts come in and go out, some variations, and >> held chords, but the underlying licks are in audio loops), one of the >> issues with the original version was that it was a bit like having three >> different players (the two guitarists and the drummer) playing their own >> thing without hearing the other. Of course, I tried to pick parts that >> were in the ballpark on matching feel, but I was still bugged by >> sloppiness in the sync between the parts. With AudioSnap, after I >> rendered the VG parts to audio, I could just lightly quantize the guitar >> parts against the drums (also audio loops) to get things much tighter, >> more like they were actually played together. >> >> Rick >> -- >> ======================================= >> Rick Paul >> Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) >> Web: www.RickPaul.info >> MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic >> ======================================= >> >> > >
Nice tune Rick! I am liking your stuff. You seem to be in command of recording and writing well crafted songs with good hooks and choruses. Very commercial sounding and that is good. The more people that like your music the better. I have checked out some of your other songs as of late and particularly enjoyed listening to "Tormented Rapture", "Elizabeth Lately", "Halloween", and now this "A Rainy Day". What microphone, preamps and converters are you using on vocals? I keep thinking this dude (you) needs to really look into this department. Obviously you are very busy with all you do in the field of music and it may be a cost thing, but I keep thinking you are singing through an SM58 with moderate and maybe subpar mics, pres and converters. More power to you though if you are making due with what you got cuz I like that and I am not a gearslut either. ;-) I was just thinking that perhaps a better signal chain could improve the overall quality of the sound and reduce the vocal mix corrections that you are currently making. Again, I believe vocals are king and I do not notice an issue with the instrumentation. Also, the BGVs could be more pronounced and maybe recorded a little differently on some of your stuff especially on the hooks and choruses but you seem to be getting it down on this tune. You, Glennbo and Poly really pump out the songs and I am jealous because I swear I have five albums of material that I cannot seem to get recorded. 1. Perfectionist 2. I hate tracking especially now that I want to sing and play all the parts except for BGVs (have got one of the best BGV here in Oregon). 3. I suffer from the "Sophie's Choice Dilemma" because I think of my songs as my babies. Boy I wish I had the drive and work ethic of you guys. Any recommendations would be most appreciated. Best advice I ever read regarding music was in a book called "Just for the Record" by Shad O'Shea written sometime back in the eighties. He said never take *musical advice* from anyone who is not a peer. So what is a peer? Someone you feel is as talented as you or better, otherwise throw the comments, critique, praise, etc. out the window because it doesn't mean doodaa. I am paraphrasing from my autographed copy he personally sent me many moons ago. Also the music industry really sucks these days and even big time Grammy producers and engineers are out of work. Some won't let on to it though. ;-) Anyway, my two cents. HIO "Rick Paul" <> wrote in message news:... > Man, I really got bogged down by admin stuff all last week. Finally got a > chance to revisit this mix today. Latest version is at: > > http://soundclick.com/share?songid=3871853 > > I actually made a number of tweaks, both based on the comments here and > some from a guy I run many of my mixes by who said the mix felt fairly > thin to him. I decided to add some thickening on the guitars (chorus on > the acoustic and delay/flange on the electric, somewhat subtly, and panned > opposite). Then I tweaked the EQ on the lead vocal and vocal delay and > reverb, added some room reverb on the lead vocal (usually I do anyway, so > I must have forgotten this time), and tweaked the level automation on the > BGVs to bring them up in a few areas. Final thing was to tweak the > mastering EQ curve a bit as I think I'd overcompensated on the high end in > the previous mix. That might have been part of what was making the vocals > feel a bit harsh. > > Hopefully this version turned out better, rather than worse. > > Rick > -- > ======================================= > Rick Paul > Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) > Web: www.RickPaul.info > MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic > ======================================= > > "Neil Rutman" <> wrote in message > news:... >> Hey Rick, >> >> Very nice song. I really like your vocal performance on this one. I >> don't think the vocals sound too good though. Too much low-mids and the >> higher end sounds thin. It does sound pretty good though when you sing >> the higher notes "I wish it would rain." You should separate this from >> the rest of the vocals so whatever eq you use to combat the low-mid thing >> doesn't mess with what's good. I also think the song would benefit >> greatly from some harmonies on the B section and on the bridge. Whatever >> backing vocals are there should come way up. >> >> I like this song - nice job! >> >> Neil R >> >> "Rick Paul" <> wrote in message >> news:... >>>I just uploaded a new mix of a song I've been working on remixing called >>>"A Rainy Day" (written with Mike Parker) on my SoundClick page at: >>> >>> http://soundclick.com/share?songid=3871853 >>> >>> The original version of this was probably started back on SONAR 3 or 4, >>> but this version is done in SONAR 7, partly to update sounds, partly to >>> rationalize disparate loop timings with each other (via AudioSnap), and >>> partly to add background vocals. It's got Beta Monkey loops on drums, >>> Trilogy on Bass (through Guitar Rig 3), Virtual Guitarist on both >>> acoustic and electric (through Guitar Rig 3) guitars, B4II on organ, and >>> Akoustik Piano on piano. >>> >>> Because VG is loop-based for its parts (you control various aspects by >>> playing MIDI, such as when parts come in and go out, some variations, >>> and held chords, but the underlying licks are in audio loops), one of >>> the issues with the original version was that it was a bit like having >>> three different players (the two guitarists and the drummer) playing >>> their own thing without hearing the other. Of course, I tried to pick >>> parts that were in the ballpark on matching feel, but I was still bugged >>> by sloppiness in the sync between the parts. With AudioSnap, after I >>> rendered the VG parts to audio, I could just lightly quantize the guitar >>> parts against the drums (also audio loops) to get things much tighter, >>> more like they were actually played together. >>> >>> Rick >>> -- >>> ======================================= >>> Rick Paul >>> Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) >>> Web: www.RickPaul.info >>> MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic >>> ======================================= >>> >>> >> >> > >
"Here In Oregon" <> wrote in message news:... > Nice tune Rick! I am liking your stuff. You seem to be in command of > recording and writing well crafted songs with good hooks and choruses. > Very commercial sounding and that is good. The more people that like your > music the better. I have checked out some of your other songs as of late > and particularly enjoyed listening to "Tormented Rapture", "Elizabeth > Lately", "Halloween", and now this "A Rainy Day". Thanks, HIO. I've been writing songs a long time (on the order of 35 years), and recording, initially just going back and forth with two tape decks to multitrack, for almost as long. I think I'm FINALLY, maybe in the last 2-5 years, starting to get it together a little better on the recording quality front to the degree that I can start to justify putting the results out for end listeners (as opposed to just song demos). Still, every one seems like an uphill battle as I'm really just a singer and piano (and other keys to a degree) player, so everything else has to be emulated somehow. I've also gotten lots of good advice from people who have more experience in the ears department, so hopefully I'm getting a little closer in that category, though I've still got a long way to go. > What microphone, preamps and converters are you using on vocals? I keep Mic is a CAD Equitek E-200, which is decidedly not a good match for my voice though it works quite nicely on most of the female voices I've tried it on thus far. For me, it seems to enhance the worst aspects of my tone. However, I then run that through Antares Mic Modeler (plug-in), which nominally subtracts the characteristics of the mic you're using then adds on the characteristics of whichever other mic model you choose. Lately I've mostly been choosing an AKG C12a, though a fair bit of my earlier stuff was using Neumann U87, and a few have used Neumann U47. I've also used some different ones on BGVs occasionally when trying to get more of a blend of sounds. I certainly can't profess that Mic Modeler makes my E-200 sound anything like any of the more expensive models I'm choosing for the emulation, though I can't profess it doesn't, either -- I don't have one of any of those to try. What I do know is it does seem to nicely counterract the issue I used to have when just using the E-200 itself where I couldn't stand my voice (in fact, it probably sounded better with an SM-58, which is what I was actually using to record prior to about 1995). As for preamp, that is just the TFPro onboard mic preamp that is part of the E-MU 1820M audio interface. Prior to getting that (back in early 2005), I was just using the preamps on a Mackie 32*8 mixer. Of the recordings you mentioned above, "Tormented Rapture" and "Halloween" would likely have been recorded with the Mackie preamps. "A Rainy Day" likely had the lead vocal recorded with the Mackie preamps as well, but I recorded the background vocals recently, so they'd be with the E-MU/TFPro preamp. "Elizabeth, Lately" would be the E-MU/TFPro preamp. > thinking this dude (you) needs to really look into this department. > Obviously you are very busy with all you do in the field of music and it > may be a cost thing, but I keep thinking you are singing through an SM58 > with moderate and maybe subpar mics, pres and converters. More power to > you though if you are making due with what you got cuz I like that and I > am not a gearslut either. ;-) I was just thinking that perhaps a better > signal chain could improve the overall quality of the sound and reduce the > vocal mix corrections that you are currently making. Again, I believe > vocals are king and I do not notice an issue with the instrumentation. Cost definitely is a big issue for me at this point since I am doing this stuff full-time (i.e. no day job), and let's just say that spending money I'm not making is not something that goes down well. I don't know if you had a chance to listen to the recording of "Make Me Feel" (first track at http://www.lala.com/#album/2306124484406511236/) that I referenced the other day in another post, or even "Unsaid" (second track at the same URL). If so, I'd be curious if you heard any difference there. Main reason I ask is that those are both very recent vocal recordings, going through the E-MU preamps, whereas most of the lead vocals on the tracks you mentioned were older ones where I'd been remixing. Also, I do think my vocals have improved a fair bit over the last bunch of years, partly in general and partly just in getting more used to working a mic in a studio setting (I'm really much more comfortable singing while playing the piano than I am standing in front of a mic to overdub vocals). Those recordings also feature Beverly Bremers, and I'm using the same basic chain on her, so it might also help distinguishing between the singer and the recording chain. Beyond that, one thing I've been getting from the comments here on the last few mixes ("Halloween" and "A Rainy Day") is that some of the processing I've been doing as sort of a "standard formula for my voice" may be backfiring, and I've then ended up applying some corrective EQ, with a more transparent EQ plug-in, that is essentially undoing some part of that. In future recordings, I'll need to revisit what I'm doing out of the shoot, but, for now, it has been easier to try and make incremental improvements by the second EQ to partially undo the first one's effects. > Also, the BGVs could be more pronounced and maybe recorded a little > differently on some of your stuff especially on the hooks and choruses but > you seem to be getting it down on this tune. The one big difference on the BGVs here versus "Tormented Rapture" and "Halloween" is the use of the E-MU/TFPro preamps instead of the Mackie 32*8 preamps. > You, Glennbo and Poly really pump out the songs and I am jealous because I > swear I have five albums of material that I cannot seem to get recorded. > 1. Perfectionist 2. I hate tracking especially now that I want to sing > and play all the parts except for BGVs (have got one of the best BGV here > in Oregon). 3. I suffer from the "Sophie's Choice Dilemma" because I > think of my songs as my babies. Boy I wish I had the drive and work ethic > of you guys. Any recommendations would be most appreciated. I hope you won't take this the wrong way, but I had a good laugh at this part. I definitely don't perceive myself as pumping out songs, especially with anywhere near the prolificacy of Glennbo and Poly. Pretty much every recording I make seems to take a month or more of elapsed time, and sometimes even close to that in real time. In some cases, it is simply a matter of my getting embroiled in other things that could make me go a couple of weeks between mix iterations. But I also end up spending a lot of time doing tedious things, like comping vocals and trying to make up for my lack of guitar playing through MIDI editing and even stuff like sequencing MIDI drum loops. That kind of stuff really makes it easy to procrastinate, but it's also true that that is the kind of stuff where new toys that help on the workflow front (e.g. AudioSnap in SONAR 6, which lets me tighten Virtual Guitarist loops against drum loops to make them feel more like they were played together) can help immensely. Even just counting the songs I've got up on my main web site (www.rickpaul.info), which in some cases are demos ranging back to about 1995, I've got on the order of 6 12-song albums' worth of material, and there are actually a number of songs I don't have up there, both newer ones for which I don't have any sort of presentable demo and older ones for which I have demos that I no longer consider presentable. Probably at least 2-3 additional albums' worth before I start veering into the stuff where song quality becomes an issue. I also recognize myself in some of your "excuses". For example, the "perfectionist" part partly affects how long my recordings tend to take to make and has also been a big factor in my not having put out end-listener recordings until recently. (I still haven't finished a full-length album, though I have put out a few singles and EPs that just didn't fit any coherent album concept I have.) On the one hand, I look around me locally, and see some people out there who've already got albums out that they're selling at their shows where I think the recordings I have put together, even as demos, are better. On the other hand, those recordings still aren't up to the standards I see as release-worthy, and I don't want to put out something I myself don't believe in. I have mixed emotions about tracking. I actually enjoy tracking vocals and piano most of the time. Much less so with the other instruments I'm emulating with keyboards, though it just depends on the song, the part, and the type of limitations I have to overcome in context. Basically, I like doing stuff I feel competent at doing, and much less the stuff I don't feel as competent doing. ;-) But I also spend very little time tracking in relationship to the time spent in other parts of the recording. For example, if I'm tracking three part background vocals, with doubles on each, I might spend an hour or two (at most) tracking, with how long, and how many takes, depending partly on if I'm also figuring out the parts in real time, and thus need to allow time for each part to settle in, and on how dense the harmonies are over the course of the song. But then it might take 2-3 days of comping, tuning, and time aligning -- "because I can". The fancy tools might help get a more polished sounding product, but the same sort of thing back in my 8-track reel-to-reel or ADAT days would have taken a lot less time because you just went with what you could overdub in one punch, and having to do a bunch of punching for any part got real tedious real fast, not to mention generally sucked the emotion out of things really quickly if having to play engineer while singing. These days, I don't really have to play engineer while singing. I just put it in loop record mode, then do however many takes I think I need to get the performance I want from the combination of those. But then you pay on the backend as the more parts you record, the longer reviewing the parts during comping takes. As for the "Sophie's Choice" thing, I'm with you there, too, because there are a few of my songs that I think have some of the best commercial potential that still aren't recorded in a presentable form (and there have been rewrites since the work demos, so I can't even just present the piano/vocal work demo). There are times when I pick a song to record based on some perceived priority of which one I think has the most potential for whatever at some given time. However, there are probably even more cases where what gets recorded (or remixed in some cases) when is more or less an accident of fate. For example, with "Halloween", which is a third remix of the original recording made back in 2002 (if I remember correctly), I was just looking around at what "low hanging fruit" songs I might be able to put out as a digital single, where the song didn't fit an album concept I was working on, but where the recording was close enough that I could finish it up with a relatively small amount of work. In that particular case, I mainly needed to remix it, but I also wanted to replace the fiddle part, which was previously done with either a violin from GPO or one that came with KONTAKT or KOMPAKT, with Garritan Stradivari. Thus, I had one part to re-figure out and track (and edit to make more fiddle like than what came out of the playing), plus the remixing. I ended up doing a fair amount of changing of processing on the remixing side of things, for example adding or changing amp simulators since I've got stuff I like better now than when I did the last remix. I've also changed my vocal processing chain (which may or may not have been a good thing). If it seemed like that one came out pretty quickly after whatever one I may have posted previously, it is mainly because most of the actual work on it had been done, in two separate batches, years ago. The first batch had the drum loop sequencing, the piano, and the vocals. The second batch had all the real guitar work (in that case by a real player, Hans Van Even -- I'd had sampled guitars on there in the first batch), and the third batch replaced the fiddle and remixed. In other cases, songs have been picked for even more spurious reasons, like I'm reviewing some software instrument for CakewalkNet and need something that features, say, a cello. So I look at my song catalog for what could use a cello, and pick a song to record that fits the bill -- I think "Elizabeth, Lately" got recorded when it did largely because of the Garitan Gofriller Cello review. That one also happened to be one of my newest songs at the time, so it ended up being recorded earlier than a bunch of songs that had been waiting on the queue way longer. I guess the bottom line on that is, as much as I'd really like to focus on getting some deliverable projects finished (e.g. a full album), I also try not to let myself worry too much about which song gets recorded when. If it comes to it, I suppose even rolling the dice between possibilities gets some song recorded, and getting something recorded is better, and a lot more fun, than sitting around for too long fretting about which one to do first. I'll tell you, though, if I had the budget to be able to go into a studio with other musicians, and have someone else at least doing the engineering, if not also the producing, I'd probably get a lot more out a lot quicker. That is because way too much of my time is spent trying to compensate for things I don't do (e.g. play guitar) or don't do as well/efficiently as others might (e.g. audio engineering, mixing). If I were recording with other people, and only doing the parts I think I do best, I'd probably still end up doing my own vocal comps (unless a producer somehow managed to figure out how to make me as comfortable recording vocals as I am singing while playing piano), but most of the other tedious stuff would probably go out the window. > Best advice I ever read regarding music was in a book called "Just for the > Record" by Shad O'Shea written sometime back in the eighties. He said > never take *musical advice* from anyone who is not a peer. So what is a > peer? Someone you feel is as talented as you or better, otherwise throw > the comments, critique, praise, etc. out the window because it doesn't > mean doodaa. I am paraphrasing from my autographed copy he personally sent > me I guess that makes sense, and I agree to some degree. However, I also find that feedback from anyone, whether considered to be a peer in a particular area nor not, can help in overcoming ivory tower syndrome. I mean, when we do some kind of creative project, we have in our minds what we think we want, and what we think we're achieving, but that doesn't mean it will translate that way to the rest of the world, or even to a single other person. Getting feedback, independent of the quality of the source, can help get a handle on how what we do is translating to others. They may not know how to fix what isn't getting across, and any advice they give in that category may be off base, but just the recognition that there might be an issue in a certain area might be the key to figuring out what truly is going on that isn't translating, and then maybe I can figure out how to address it. Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic =======================================
"Rick Paul" > Thanks, HIO. I've been writing songs a long time (on the order of 35 years) Same here and we must be about the same age. I am 48 and born on Glennbo's birthday and I think he got there first. ;-) Can you believe both Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern were born on our birthdays. What a dichotomy! Ouch! > Mic is a CAD Equitek E-200,.... Snip.... > However, I then run that through Antares Mic Modeler (plug-in) Oh boy, i think we hit the nail on this issue. I knew there was something going on. Anyway, i have never used a mic modeler so please take this with a grain of salt. I try to get good vocals with minimal processing. Guitars too! Bass also! It is amazing to me today how folks over process stuff to the nth degree with all of these software tools. I did a microphone shoot-out a little over a year ago with a whole battery of mics with many ears in a blind shoot-out on me and my background singer's voice. You know what, and believe this or not. Everyone favored the MXL V69 Mogami tube microphone hands down. Now I am told you have to get lucky with these because they vary and I have recorded on $6000.00 microphones. This mic was cheap though; under $400.00 I think. Anyway, my studio is professionally wired one way with all Canare cabling (Over 400 feet) with mostly neutrik and switchcraft connectors. Again, I did a cable shoot-out over twelve years ago in a very controlled environment and came to really appreciate the difference in sound cabling can make. This was a time when everyone was poo pooing the difference cable could make. I reported my findings and research to Usenet and others back then and no one will ever convince me otherwise. On the cheap you cannot beat the Grace 101 as an affordable mic pre but I did a shoot-out on pres also and i likey. I don't know if it would be the ideal match for your vocals though but checking out different pres on your voice could really make a difference. Once you get a good match combination mic/pre you may be set for most of your material. Be forewarned the Grace can reveal whether you have tonsils or not (very transparent). ;-) Shoot,... Celine Dion travels the world usually with her same mic, pre and *voice engineer*. I am also using high end converters. Anyway, that is some of my signal chain and I don't have a problem with how things sound these days except on *acoustic* guitar. Do not likey and i process the shite out of it. Ooops! Of course my electric guitar recordings on both rhythm and lead is top shelf and top secret. ;-) Well,.. maybe I will elaborate if anyone really cares. > I guess that makes sense, and I agree to some degree. However, I also > find that feedback from anyone, whether considered to be a peer in a > particular area nor not, can help in overcoming ivory tower syndrome. What Shad was saying in the book and what I was trying to communicate was not to *not* take feedback from anyone but realize people that are not peers will many times give you bad advice and he gives tons and tons of real world examples on world class singers, songwriters, and musicians. I was classically trained and took voice lessons from a world class teacher. You cannot compare that experience or that training to the average listener's opinion on how you should better yourself in a mix. On another note (no pun intended) I also find if you point out the flaws you hear most people will then see/hear it also. Regarding the ivory tower syndrome, I hope no one thinks I think I am a better person than anyone, and I *do* take advice from everyone, but with a grain of salt unless they are my *peers* which is most everyone on this newsgroup. I have two close friends that are mentally challenged. One is autistic and this guy who looks just like Jim Carrey is a walking music encylopedia and avid music listener. Genius when it comes to bands, songs, years, dates, players, their birthdays, etc. I love it when he comments on my music and he is an authority in some ways, but if he were to give me advice on song order or mix details, I would take it with a grain of salt because he is not a peer on that level. Capiche! <> wrote in message news:... > "Here In Oregon" <> wrote in message > news:... >> Nice tune Rick! I am liking your stuff. You seem to be in command of >> recording and writing well crafted songs with good hooks and choruses. >> Very commercial sounding and that is good. The more people that like >> your music the better. I have checked out some of your other songs as of >> late and particularly enjoyed listening to "Tormented Rapture", >> "Elizabeth Lately", "Halloween", and now this "A Rainy Day". > > Thanks, HIO. I've been writing songs a long time (on the order of 35 > years), and recording, initially just going back and forth with two tape > decks to multitrack, for almost as long. I think I'm FINALLY, maybe in > the last 2-5 years, starting to get it together a little better on the > recording quality front to the degree that I can start to justify putting > the results out for end listeners (as opposed to just song demos). Still, > every one seems like an uphill battle as I'm really just a singer and > piano (and other keys to a degree) player, so everything else has to be > emulated somehow. I've also gotten lots of good advice from people who > have more experience in the ears department, so hopefully I'm getting a > little closer in that category, though I've still got a long way to go. > >> What microphone, preamps and converters are you using on vocals? I keep > > Mic is a CAD Equitek E-200, which is decidedly not a good match for my > voice though it works quite nicely on most of the female voices I've tried > it on thus far. For me, it seems to enhance the worst aspects of my tone. > However, I then run that through Antares Mic Modeler (plug-in), which > nominally subtracts the characteristics of the mic you're using then adds > on the characteristics of whichever other mic model you choose. Lately > I've mostly been choosing an AKG C12a, though a fair bit of my earlier > stuff was using Neumann U87, and a few have used Neumann U47. I've also > used some different ones on BGVs occasionally when trying to get more of a > blend of sounds. I certainly can't profess that Mic Modeler makes my > E-200 sound anything like any of the more expensive models I'm choosing > for the emulation, though I can't profess it doesn't, either -- I don't > have one of any of those to try. What I do know is it does seem to nicely > counterract the issue I used to have when just using the E-200 itself > where I couldn't stand my voice (in fact, it probably sounded better with > an SM-58, which is what I was actually using to record prior to about > 1995). > > As for preamp, that is just the TFPro onboard mic preamp that is part of > the E-MU 1820M audio interface. Prior to getting that (back in early > 2005), I was just using the preamps on a Mackie 32*8 mixer. Of the > recordings you mentioned above, "Tormented Rapture" and "Halloween" would > likely have been recorded with the Mackie preamps. "A Rainy Day" likely > had the lead vocal recorded with the Mackie preamps as well, but I > recorded the background vocals recently, so they'd be with the E-MU/TFPro > preamp. "Elizabeth, Lately" would be the E-MU/TFPro preamp. > >> thinking this dude (you) needs to really look into this department. >> Obviously you are very busy with all you do in the field of music and it >> may be a cost thing, but I keep thinking you are singing through an SM58 >> with moderate and maybe subpar mics, pres and converters. More power to >> you though if you are making due with what you got cuz I like that and I >> am not a gearslut either. ;-) I was just thinking that perhaps a better >> signal chain could improve the overall quality of the sound and reduce >> the vocal mix corrections that you are currently making. Again, I >> believe vocals are king and I do not notice an issue with the >> instrumentation. > > Cost definitely is a big issue for me at this point since I am doing this > stuff full-time (i.e. no day job), and let's just say that spending money > I'm not making is not something that goes down well. > > I don't know if you had a chance to listen to the recording of "Make Me > Feel" (first track at http://www.lala.com/#album/2306124484406511236/) > that I referenced the other day in another post, or even "Unsaid" (second > track at the same URL). If so, I'd be curious if you heard any difference > there. Main reason I ask is that those are both very recent vocal > recordings, going through the E-MU preamps, whereas most of the lead > vocals on the tracks you mentioned were older ones where I'd been > remixing. Also, I do think my vocals have improved a fair bit over the > last bunch of years, partly in general and partly just in getting more > used to working a mic in a studio setting (I'm really much more > comfortable singing while playing the piano than I am standing in front of > a mic to overdub vocals). Those recordings also feature Beverly Bremers, > and I'm using the same basic chain on her, so it might also help > distinguishing between the singer and the recording chain. > > Beyond that, one thing I've been getting from the comments here on the > last few mixes ("Halloween" and "A Rainy Day") is that some of the > processing I've been doing as sort of a "standard formula for my voice" > may be backfiring, and I've then ended up applying some corrective EQ, > with a more transparent EQ plug-in, that is essentially undoing some part > of that. In future recordings, I'll need to revisit what I'm doing out of > the shoot, but, for now, it has been easier to try and make incremental > improvements by the second EQ to partially undo the first one's effects. > >> Also, the BGVs could be more pronounced and maybe recorded a little >> differently on some of your stuff especially on the hooks and choruses >> but you seem to be getting it down on this tune. > > The one big difference on the BGVs here versus "Tormented Rapture" and > "Halloween" is the use of the E-MU/TFPro preamps instead of the Mackie > 32*8 preamps. > >> You, Glennbo and Poly really pump out the songs and I am jealous because >> I swear I have five albums of material that I cannot seem to get >> recorded. 1. Perfectionist 2. I hate tracking especially now that I want >> to sing and play all the parts except for BGVs (have got one of the best >> BGV here in Oregon). 3. I suffer from the "Sophie's Choice Dilemma" >> because I think of my songs as my babies. Boy I wish I had the drive and >> work ethic of you guys. Any recommendations would be most appreciated. > > I hope you won't take this the wrong way, but I had a good laugh at this > part. I definitely don't perceive myself as pumping out songs, especially > with anywhere near the prolificacy of Glennbo and Poly. Pretty much every > recording I make seems to take a month or more of elapsed time, and > sometimes even close to that in real time. In some cases, it is simply a > matter of my getting embroiled in other things that could make me go a > couple of weeks between mix iterations. But I also end up spending a lot > of time doing tedious things, like comping vocals and trying to make up > for my lack of guitar playing through MIDI editing and even stuff like > sequencing MIDI drum loops. That kind of stuff really makes it easy to > procrastinate, but it's also true that that is the kind of stuff where new > toys that help on the workflow front (e.g. AudioSnap in SONAR 6, which > lets me tighten Virtual Guitarist loops against drum loops to make them > feel more like they were played together) can help immensely. > > Even just counting the songs I've got up on my main web site > (www.rickpaul.info), which in some cases are demos ranging back to about > 1995, I've got on the order of 6 12-song albums' worth of material, and > there are actually a number of songs I don't have up there, both newer > ones for which I don't have any sort of presentable demo and older ones > for which I have demos that I no longer consider presentable. Probably at > least 2-3 additional albums' worth before I start veering into the stuff > where song quality becomes an issue. > > I also recognize myself in some of your "excuses". For example, the > "perfectionist" part partly affects how long my recordings tend to take to > make and has also been a big factor in my not having put out end-listener > recordings until recently. (I still haven't finished a full-length album, > though I have put out a few singles and EPs that just didn't fit any > coherent album concept I have.) On the one hand, I look around me > locally, and see some people out there who've already got albums out that > they're selling at their shows where I think the recordings I have put > together, even as demos, are better. On the other hand, those recordings > still aren't up to the standards I see as release-worthy, and I don't want > to put out something I myself don't believe in. > > I have mixed emotions about tracking. I actually enjoy tracking vocals > and piano most of the time. Much less so with the other instruments I'm > emulating with keyboards, though it just depends on the song, the part, > and the type of limitations I have to overcome in context. Basically, I > like doing stuff I feel competent at doing, and much less the stuff I > don't feel as competent doing. ;-) But I also spend very little time > tracking in relationship to the time spent in other parts of the > recording. For example, if I'm tracking three part background vocals, > with doubles on each, I might spend an hour or two (at most) tracking, > with how long, and how many takes, depending partly on if I'm also > figuring out the parts in real time, and thus need to allow time for each > part to settle in, and on how dense the harmonies are over the course of > the song. But then it might take 2-3 days of comping, tuning, and time > aligning -- "because I can". The fancy tools might help get a more > polished sounding product, but the same sort of thing back in my 8-track > reel-to-reel or ADAT days would have taken a lot less time because you > just went with what you could overdub in one punch, and having to do a > bunch of punching for any part got real tedious real fast, not to mention > generally sucked the emotion out of things really quickly if having to > play engineer while singing. These days, I don't really have to play > engineer while singing. I just put it in loop record mode, then do > however many takes I think I need to get the performance I want from the > combination of those. But then you pay on the backend as the more parts > you record, the longer reviewing the parts during comping takes. > > As for the "Sophie's Choice" thing, I'm with you there, too, because there > are a few of my songs that I think have some of the best commercial > potential that still aren't recorded in a presentable form (and there have > been rewrites since the work demos, so I can't even just present the > piano/vocal work demo). There are times when I pick a song to record > based on some perceived priority of which one I think has the most > potential for whatever at some given time. However, there are probably > even more cases where what gets recorded (or remixed in some cases) when > is more or less an accident of fate. > > For example, with "Halloween", which is a third remix of the original > recording made back in 2002 (if I remember correctly), I was just looking > around at what "low hanging fruit" songs I might be able to put out as a > digital single, where the song didn't fit an album concept I was working > on, but where the recording was close enough that I could finish it up > with a relatively small amount of work. In that particular case, I mainly > needed to remix it, but I also wanted to replace the fiddle part, which > was previously done with either a violin from GPO or one that came with > KONTAKT or KOMPAKT, with Garritan Stradivari. Thus, I had one part to > re-figure out and track (and edit to make more fiddle like than what came > out of the playing), plus the remixing. I ended up doing a fair amount of > changing of processing on the remixing side of things, for example adding > or changing amp simulators since I've got stuff I like better now than > when I did the last remix. I've also changed my vocal processing chain > (which may or may not have been a good thing). If it seemed like that one > came out pretty quickly after whatever one I may have posted previously, > it is mainly because most of the actual work on it had been done, in two > separate batches, years ago. The first batch had the drum loop > sequencing, the piano, and the vocals. The second batch had all the real > guitar work (in that case by a real player, Hans Van Even -- I'd had > sampled guitars on there in the first batch), and the third batch replaced > the fiddle and remixed. > > In other cases, songs have been picked for even more spurious reasons, > like I'm reviewing some software instrument for CakewalkNet and need > something that features, say, a cello. So I look at my song catalog for > what could use a cello, and pick a song to record that fits the bill -- I > think "Elizabeth, Lately" got recorded when it did largely because of the > Garitan Gofriller Cello review. That one also happened to be one of my > newest songs at the time, so it ended up being recorded earlier than a > bunch of songs that had been waiting on the queue way longer. > > I guess the bottom line on that is, as much as I'd really like to focus on > getting some deliverable projects finished (e.g. a full album), I also try > not to let myself worry too much about which song gets recorded when. If > it comes to it, I suppose even rolling the dice between possibilities gets > some song recorded, and getting something recorded is better, and a lot > more fun, than sitting around for too long fretting about which one to do > first. > > I'll tell you, though, if I had the budget to be able to go into a studio > with other musicians, and have someone else at least doing the > engineering, if not also the producing, I'd probably get a lot more out a > lot quicker. That is because way too much of my time is spent trying to > compensate for things I don't do (e.g. play guitar) or don't do as > well/efficiently as others might (e.g. audio engineering, mixing). If I > were recording with other people, and only doing the parts I think I do > best, I'd probably still end up doing my own vocal comps (unless a > producer somehow managed to figure out how to make me as comfortable > recording vocals as I am singing while playing piano), but most of the > other tedious stuff would probably go out the window. > >> Best advice I ever read regarding music was in a book called "Just for >> the Record" by Shad O'Shea written sometime back in the eighties. He said >> never take *musical advice* from anyone who is not a peer. So what is a >> peer? Someone you feel is as talented as you or better, otherwise throw >> the comments, critique, praise, etc. out the window because it doesn't >> mean doodaa. I am paraphrasing from my autographed copy he personally >> sent me > > I guess that makes sense, and I agree to some degree. However, I also > find that feedback from anyone, whether considered to be a peer in a > particular area nor not, can help in overcoming ivory tower syndrome. I > mean, when we do some kind of creative project, we have in our minds what > we think we want, and what we think we're achieving, but that doesn't mean > it will translate that way to the rest of the world, or even to a single > other person. Getting feedback, independent of the quality of the source, > can help get a handle on how what we do is translating to others. They > may not know how to fix what isn't getting across, and any advice they > give in that category may be off base, but just the recognition that there > might be an issue in a certain area might be the key to figuring out what > truly is going on that isn't translating, and then maybe I can figure out > how to address it. > > Rick > -- > ======================================= > Rick Paul > Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) > Web: www.RickPaul.info > MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic > ======================================= > >
"Here In Oregon" <> wrote in message news:... > Same here and we must be about the same age. I am 48 and born on Glennbo's You guessed right on the age -- I also just turned 48 in late July. > Oh boy, i think we hit the nail on this issue. I knew there was something > going on. Anyway, i have never used a mic modeler so please take this > with a grain of salt. I try to get good vocals with minimal processing. > Guitars too! Bass also! It is amazing to me today how folks over process > stuff to the nth degree with all of these software tools. Well, I tend to be a processing fool. ;-) Pretty much everything on my stuff has at least one or two plug-ins, and off course all the instrument tracks, with the occasional exception of drums, are softsynths. (Drums are sometimes audio loops instead, as was the case here -- they're Beta Monkey.) Believe me when I say you wouldn't want to hear my voice straight from the E-200, without the Mic Modeler. I'm sure it's not ideal, but it's a big improvement over just that mic on my voice. > I did a microphone shoot-out a little over a year ago with a whole battery > of mics with many ears in a blind shoot-out on me and my background > singer's voice. You know what, and believe this or not. Everyone favored > the MXL > V69 Mogami tube microphone hands down. Now I am told you have to get > lucky with these because they vary and I have recorded on $6000.00 > microphones. This mic was cheap though; under $400.00 I think. One key thing with mics is they really are a personal thing in that something that sounds wonderful on one person may sound horrible on another. I wish I realized that when I got the E-200, as that actually ended up being a step backward for me over the SM-58 until I got Mic Modeler, which was probably about 7 or 8 years later. All I knew at that point was it was a condenser with a larger diaphragm, and those types of mics were supposed to be better for recording vocals than dynamic mics. It led to an extended period of extreme self-consciousness on my vocals, too, though I had no clue it was mic-related, at least in large part, at the time. Ah well, live and learn. > Anyway, my studio is professionally wired one way with all Canare cabling > (Over 400 feet) with mostly neutrik and switchcraft connectors. Again, I > did I suspect you'd be horrified at my studio -- one of those little cubish bedroom things with the computer and everything all in the same room. At least my cable run is only a few feet. ;-) And my computer is fairly quiet despite it's being reasonably heavily configured. > On the cheap you cannot beat the Grace 101 as an affordable mic pre but I > did a shoot-out on pres also and i likey. I don't know if it would be the I have yet to try dedicated mic pres for obvious budgetary reasons, but I can say that, when I switched from my previous audio interface (MOTU 2048 mkII), where I'd been using Mackie 32*8 mic pres, to the E-MU 1820M, where I'm using the built-in TFPro pres and the better A/D converters, people did notice an improvement in my vocal recordings. I really can't say whether it was from the difference in preamps, the higher quality converters, the combination of the two, or something totally unrelated (e.g. coincident timing on some vocal technique improvement). Maybe some day I'll have a real budget to be able to experiment more with mics and preamps, but that's not too likely in the very near term. > Shoot,... Celine Dion travels the world usually with her same mic, pre and > *voice engineer*.[ Well, I always have my voice engineer with me, too. ;-) Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic =======================================
"Rick Paul" > I suspect you'd be horrified at my studio -- one of those little... Well more power to you bro as you are doing a fine job with the tools, room and equipment you have been using.. > Well, I always have my voice engineer with me, too. ;-) Laughing out loud! Also, I have couple of additional comments if you don't mind. Seems to me you have something different going on vocally on "I Can't Say Goodbye". Maybe the key your singing suits you better and your doing something a little different in your vocal chain. Slight vocal strain on a couple of parts at 45-49 and again at 1:49-1:52 but overall I like your vocal sound on this and *again* the song. Kind of reminds me of a song that Brooks and Dunn might sing. Well screw that idea, you do it just fine. ;-) Also, on the beautiful song "Elizabeth Lately" if and ever you were going to record it again for some reason you could substitute the repeated five times "Elizabeth Lately" with "It seems to me lately" a few times like at the very beginning and then again on the third verse but hey I am being real picky and I am biased with the Elizabeth lately lyric anyway and especially today because my baby sister is named Elizabeth who is 45, will be turning 46 on Sept. 28, is pregnant for the first time and they just started to induce labor this morning. HIO <> wrote in message news:... > "Here In Oregon" <> wrote in message > news:... >> Same here and we must be about the same age. I am 48 and born on >> Glennbo's > > You guessed right on the age -- I also just turned 48 in late July. > >> Oh boy, i think we hit the nail on this issue. I knew there was something >> going on. Anyway, i have never used a mic modeler so please take this >> with a grain of salt. I try to get good vocals with minimal processing. >> Guitars too! Bass also! It is amazing to me today how folks over process >> stuff to the nth degree with all of these software tools. > > Well, I tend to be a processing fool. ;-) Pretty much everything on my > stuff has at least one or two plug-ins, and off course all the instrument > tracks, with the occasional exception of drums, are softsynths. (Drums > are sometimes audio loops instead, as was the case here -- they're Beta > Monkey.) > > Believe me when I say you wouldn't want to hear my voice straight from the > E-200, without the Mic Modeler. I'm sure it's not ideal, but it's a big > improvement over just that mic on my voice. > >> I did a microphone shoot-out a little over a year ago with a whole >> battery of mics with many ears in a blind shoot-out on me and my >> background singer's voice. You know what, and believe this or not. >> Everyone favored the MXL >> V69 Mogami tube microphone hands down. Now I am told you have to get >> lucky with these because they vary and I have recorded on $6000.00 >> microphones. This mic was cheap though; under $400.00 I think. > > One key thing with mics is they really are a personal thing in that > something that sounds wonderful on one person may sound horrible on > another. I wish I realized that when I got the E-200, as that actually > ended up being a step backward for me over the SM-58 until I got Mic > Modeler, which was probably about 7 or 8 years later. All I knew at that > point was it was a condenser with a larger diaphragm, and those types of > mics were supposed to be better for recording vocals than dynamic mics. > It led to an extended period of extreme self-consciousness on my vocals, > too, though I had no clue it was mic-related, at least in large part, at > the time. Ah well, live and learn. > >> Anyway, my studio is professionally wired one way with all Canare cabling >> (Over 400 feet) with mostly neutrik and switchcraft connectors. Again, I >> did > > I suspect you'd be horrified at my studio -- one of those little cubish > bedroom things with the computer and everything all in the same room. At > least my cable run is only a few feet. ;-) And my computer is fairly > quiet despite it's being reasonably heavily configured. > >> On the cheap you cannot beat the Grace 101 as an affordable mic pre but I >> did a shoot-out on pres also and i likey. I don't know if it would be >> the > > I have yet to try dedicated mic pres for obvious budgetary reasons, but I > can say that, when I switched from my previous audio interface (MOTU 2048 > mkII), where I'd been using Mackie 32*8 mic pres, to the E-MU 1820M, where > I'm using the built-in TFPro pres and the better A/D converters, people > did notice an improvement in my vocal recordings. I really can't say > whether it was from the difference in preamps, the higher quality > converters, the combination of the two, or something totally unrelated > (e.g. coincident timing on some vocal technique improvement). > > Maybe some day I'll have a real budget to be able to experiment more with > mics and preamps, but that's not too likely in the very near term. > >> Shoot,... Celine Dion travels the world usually with her same mic, pre >> and *voice engineer*.[ > > Well, I always have my voice engineer with me, too. ;-) > > Rick > -- > ======================================= > Rick Paul > Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) > Web: www.RickPaul.info > MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic > ======================================= > >
"Here In Oregon" <> wrote in message news:... > "Rick Paul" > Seems to me you have something different going on vocally on "I Can't Say > Goodbye". > Maybe the key your singing suits you better and your doing something a > little different in your vocal chain. Slight vocal strain on a couple of > parts at 45-49 and again at 1:49-1:52 but overall I like your vocal sound > on this and *again* the song. Kind of reminds me of a song that Brooks and > Dunn might sing. Well screw that idea, you do it just fine. ;-) Thanks. Just looking at the date on the master file for that one, I see it is from November 2004, so has to be from the Mackie 32*8 preamps, then, depending on how much older the vocal is than the recording (I'm pretty sure that version was not my first recording of it, but I don't recall at the moment whether the vocal was one of the things I changed in that version), either using the A/D converters from the MOTU 2048 mkII (probably somewhat more likely) or those from a blackface ADAT. Processing chain would definitely have been different on the effects side, though it would still almost certainly be the CAD E200 mic and Antares Mic Modeler. Most likely during that time I would have used a Neumann U87 model as that was what I'd standardized on for quite awhile before developing a preference for the AKG C12A. Main reason for switching was how sibilant the U87 model was with my voice. Beyond that point in the chain I'd really have to reload the project from my archives to check what was on there. (That is on my list of songs to remix one of these days, as I think there are a number of things I can fix to improve that one that won't take a huge amount of time and hopefully can make an order of magnitude difference.) The only thing I'm positive would have been is the DSP/FX Aural Activator (aural exciter), as that has been part of my standard lead vocal chain for a very long time now. Beyond that, I think it is likely the compressor would have been either Waves Rennaissance (either RVox or RComp -- I mostly use RVox these days) or PSP Audioware (MixPressor). EQ, if any, would have been Waves REQ or PSP MasterQ. That is one area that is a big difference from my recent chain, and something the recent comments are making me rethink for next time around. Lately I've been using the IK's T-RackS EQ plug-in with a decided "character" setting that boosts the warmth and air ranges -- I think the preset is called "Male Vocal Air + Body" or some such thing. Most of the vocal EQ changes I've made in reaction to comments here have actually been aimed at partially reducing some of the things that setting is doing. If I was using a de-esser, it probably would have been Waves RDeEsser (which is what I use now, though lately I've been using a different setting and putting it at the end of my vocal chain instead of quite a bit earlier in the chain), though it's also possible I could have been using the dB-S (from dB audioware) de-esser or even the Sonitus fx:gate in a frequency-dependent ducking mode for that. It's also conceivable at that time I might have been sticking PSP MixSaturator on the end of the vocal chain (e.g. to simulate tracking to tape) as I do remember being big on doing a lot of that kind of thing at one point, though I suspect it would have been a few years earlier. Of course, the other big thing that comes into play is, as you suggest, the key of the song. Also the style of the song, and what I'd call the "male bravado" in the lyric, represent a fairly different attitude for "casting" the vocal. You mentioned Brooks & Dunn, but I'd probably more likely have been thinking Toby Keith, though when I ultimately mixed that version of the recording I know I was going for a bit more of a pop/rock feel -- one specific thing I do remember is that I was using Ozone 3's EQ matching in the mastering stage, and the song I used for my reference curve was "I'll Be There for You" (i.e. the theme from "Friends"), which is pretty bright and in-your-face. > Also, on the beautiful song "Elizabeth Lately" if and ever you were going > to record it again for some reason you could substitute the repeated five > times "Elizabeth Lately" with "It seems to me lately" a few times like at > the very beginning and then again on the third verse but hey I am being > real picky and I am biased with the Elizabeth lately lyric anyway and > especially today because my baby sister is named Elizabeth who is 45, will > be turning 46 on Sept. 28, is pregnant for the first time and they just > started to induce labor this morning. Good luck to your sister. Hopefully everything goes well for her and the baby. Elizabeth is also the wife of the lyricist on that song, Mike Parker, though he insists it is not a true story. Personally, I can't see reducing the number of occurrences of the hook in that song form (basically AABAABA with either an A' or C, depending on your perspective, on the end). Also, in the specific context of this lyric, it seems to me like the repetition of the name is what makes it very personal/intimate, while "it seems to me lately" would be more distant/intellectual. As an aside, one of the things that really drew me into this lyric when Mike first presented it (most of my co-writes with Mike have originated from raw lyrics he's posted for critique on a songwriters mailing list at Yahoogroups -- I only ended up changing 5 words in the final lyric), was the title, and the potential for hearing it as either "Elizabeth Lately" (i.e. like "Lately" is a surname) or the intended "Elizabeth, lately..." (i.e. just addressing Elizabeth with stuff that's recently been going through the singer's mind). Something about that reminded me of some of Paul Simon's Simon and Garfunkel era, relatively poetic lyrics where there were no choruses, and sometimes not really even hooks -- e.g. "Bookends", "For Emily, Wherever I May Find Her", etc. That, in turn, influenced the musical direction I took with it, and also the stripped down piano/vocal/violin/cello presentation in the recording. Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic =======================================
"Rick Paul" > Personally, I can't see reducing the number of occurrences of the hook in > that song form (basically AABAABA with either an A' or C, depending on > your perspective, on the end). What are you talking about? I said nothing about this.
"Here In Oregon" <> wrote in message news:... > "Rick Paul" >> Personally, I can't see reducing the number of occurrences of the hook in >> that song form (basically AABAABA with either an A' or C, depending on >> your perspective, on the end). > > What are you talking about? I said nothing about this. Actually, you did, if I interpreted you correctly. The lyrical hook, "Elizabeth, lately", appears at the start of each of the A sections of the song, and you suggested I "could substitute the repeated five times 'Elizabeth Lately' with 'It seems to me lately' a few times like at the very beginning and then again on the third verse." Maybe when I said ""the hook" you thought I was talking about the musical line or something? Sorry if that was ambiguous. I was specifically talking about the lyrical hook, which I thought would be clear from the context you snipped where I mentioned the emotional distance of "it seems to me lately" versus the more personal/intimate "Elizabeth, lately." Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic =======================================
"Rick Paul" >>> Personally, I can't see reducing the number of occurrences of the hook >>> in that song form (basically AABAABA with either an A' or C, depending >>> on your perspective, on the end). Rick, all i said was that you might consider changing a couple of *LYRICS* a couple of times and i wasn't pushing for the change all that much. I have no idea what you are talking about with number of occurrences of the hook and all of this ABBA stuff. Please, i do not want to call in an interpreter, the police are already outside. Elizabeth (my sister) is still in labor. <> wrote in message news:... > > "Here In Oregon" <> wrote in message > news:... >> "Rick Paul" >>> Personally, I can't see reducing the number of occurrences of the hook >>> in that song form (basically AABAABA with either an A' or C, depending >>> on your perspective, on the end). >> >> What are you talking about? I said nothing about this. > > Actually, you did, if I interpreted you correctly. The lyrical hook, > "Elizabeth, lately", appears at the start of each of the A sections of the > song, and you suggested I "could substitute the repeated five times > 'Elizabeth Lately' with 'It seems to me lately' a few times like at the > very beginning and then again on the third verse." > > Maybe when I said ""the hook" you thought I was talking about the musical > line or something? Sorry if that was ambiguous. I was specifically > talking about the lyrical hook, which I thought would be clear from the > context you snipped where I mentioned the emotional distance of "it seems > to me lately" versus the more personal/intimate "Elizabeth, lately." > > Rick > -- > ======================================= > Rick Paul > Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) > Web: www.RickPaul.info > MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic > ======================================= > > >
"Here In Oregon" <> wrote in message news:... > "Rick Paul" >>>> Personally, I can't see reducing the number of occurrences of the hook >>>> in that song form (basically AABAABA with either an A' or C, depending >>>> on your perspective, on the end). > > Rick, all i said was that you might consider changing a couple of *LYRICS* > a couple of times and i wasn't pushing for the change all that much. > > I have no idea what you are talking about with number of occurrences of > the hook and all of this ABBA stuff. Please, i do not want to call in an > interpreter, the police are already outside. Translation(?): AABA is a song form. Sometimes it's also called verse/verse/bridge/verse where A=verse and B=bridge. Usually the hook (typically the title line) in that form is either the first or last line of each A section, though that's not always the case. In this song, the hook is "Elizabeth, Lately", and it occurs in the first line of each A section. Good luck with those police. ;-) Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic =======================================
Yeah,... I was thinking maybe changing a few lyrics for a broader appeal or something but i think it should be all or nothing after further review. I am getting updates every few hours or so on my sister in labor. Geez this is taking a long time. 24 hours + in labor. With all of the details I am getting I feel I am there. "Here In Oregon" <> wrote in message news:... > > "Rick Paul" >>>> Personally, I can't see reducing the number of occurrences of the hook >>>> in that song form (basically AABAABA with either an A' or C, depending >>>> on your perspective, on the end). > > > Rick, all i said was that you might consider changing a couple of *LYRICS* > a couple of times and i wasn't pushing for the change all that much. > > I have no idea what you are talking about with number of occurrences of > the hook and all of this ABBA stuff. Please, i do not want to call in an > interpreter, the police are already outside. > > Elizabeth (my sister) is still in labor. > > > <> wrote in message > news:... >> >> "Here In Oregon" <> wrote in message >> news:... >>> "Rick Paul" >>>> Personally, I can't see reducing the number of occurrences of the hook >>>> in that song form (basically AABAABA with either an A' or C, depending >>>> on your perspective, on the end). >>> >>> What are you talking about? I said nothing about this. >> >> Actually, you did, if I interpreted you correctly. The lyrical hook, >> "Elizabeth, lately", appears at the start of each of the A sections of >> the song, and you suggested I "could substitute the repeated five times >> 'Elizabeth Lately' with 'It seems to me lately' a few times like at the >> very beginning and then again on the third verse." >> >> Maybe when I said ""the hook" you thought I was talking about the musical >> line or something? Sorry if that was ambiguous. I was specifically >> talking about the lyrical hook, which I thought would be clear from the >> context you snipped where I mentioned the emotional distance of "it seems >> to me lately" versus the more personal/intimate "Elizabeth, lately." >> >> Rick >> -- >> ======================================= >> Rick Paul >> Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) >> Web: www.RickPaul.info >> MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic >> ======================================= >> >> >> > >
"Rick Paul" > Translation(?): AABA is a song form. Sometimes it's also called > verse/verse/bridge/verse where A=verse and B=bridge. Usually the hook > (typically the title line) in that form is either the first or last line > of each A section, though that's not always the case. Rick I understand song structure. Geesh! I think I wrote a book on the subject. ;-) > In this song, the hook is "Elizabeth, Lately", and it occurs in the first > line of each A section. To me that is *not* your songs *hook* my friend. Tell that to your Yahoo songwriter's group! <> wrote in message news:... > > "Here In Oregon" <> wrote in message > news:... >> "Rick Paul" >>>>> Personally, I can't see reducing the number of occurrences of the hook >>>>> in that song form (basically AABAABA with either an A' or C, depending >>>>> on your perspective, on the end). >> >> Rick, all i said was that you might consider changing a couple of >> *LYRICS* a couple of times and i wasn't pushing for the change all that >> much. >> >> I have no idea what you are talking about with number of occurrences of >> the hook and all of this ABBA stuff. Please, i do not want to call in an >> interpreter, the police are already outside. > > Translation(?): AABA is a song form. Sometimes it's also called > verse/verse/bridge/verse where A=verse and B=bridge. Usually the hook > (typically the title line) in that form is either the first or last line > of each A section, though that's not always the case. > > In this song, the hook is "Elizabeth, Lately", and it occurs in the first > line of each A section. > > Good luck with those police. ;-) > > Rick > -- > ======================================= > Rick Paul > Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) > Web: www.RickPaul.info > MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic > ======================================= > >
