Contemporary Pop songs(Bruno Mars & John Legend)

[aravindmadis]

Hi Folks..

Trying some contemporary pop this time.  I had fun doing these.  The John Legend song was relatively easier except for the falsetto(just cannot figure how to slide into a smooth falsetto).  The Bruno Mars song was quite difficult.  The final mix in "Just the way you are" is not upto mark.  I just can't get my head around using compression correctly.  Any tips would be appreciated.. 

Yes, my production sucks!  I am going to make a conscious effort to make it better next time!

 

[MDEW]

It's coming along quite nicely.......... I do not need to point out the things you mentioned yourself..... Falsetto switch and Compression problems........

You came in strong with the Bruno Mars at the beginning and towards the end you softened up a bit.  Good Job over all...............

 

[ronws]

I liked both. As for compression, that is the reason the later part of "Just the Way You Are" sounds diminished in presence. Re mix and see if you can have compressor perform gain after compression. Then you can re-balance the volume of the vocal track against everything else. You can also lower the threshold so that more of the vocal is evened out. Soft knee. And even though the song is uptempo, it is double-time to the meter of the vocal, so use a slow release time.

[aravindmadis]

MDEW/Ronws.  I have corrected the compression issue in "Just the way you are".  I think this version sounds much better mix wise.. 

[ronws]

9 hours ago, aravindmadis said:

MDEW/Ronws.  I have corrected the compression issue in "Just the way you are".  I think this version sounds much better mix wise.. 

I agree, it sounds more consistent, like you clicked on "make-up gain after compression."

And did you imagine a few years ago that you could sing a Bruno Mars song and have it sound like you have been singing that way a long time, like you had a mail box in that range?

[aravindmadis]

2 hours ago, ronws said:

I agree, it sounds more consistent, like you clicked on "make-up gain after compression."

And did you imagine a few years ago that you could sing a Bruno Mars song and have it sound like you have been singing that way a long time, like you had a mail box in that range?

Haha.. No way. I can say that it has taken me several years of hard work to get to this level, but I think I can improve a lot over the next several years also.  Every song always brings to the fore, faults in my technique and tonal deficiencies which keep me motivated.  

I have never heard of Bruno Mars till a year ago. This particular song I heard it first time only a few days before I recorded my version and it is not music that I hear regularly.  It sounded very catchy and I couldn't get the song out of my head.  I was curious to see how my voice would sound singing this style and range.  Normally I take a song that I think is challenging, just get an idea of the core melody and improvise from there.  I don't want to or can't sound like Bruno does, but I definitely want to pick up the good things in his singing.  

[KillerKu]

This is a good direction. I can give you a few different ideas for compression. Something I like to do is use a lighter compression (lower ratio, maybe 2/1) with a slower attack time as a primary compressor. The reason why the attack time is slow is so consonants don't get eaten and some dynamic range is preserved.

Then I will set a second compressor at a higher volume more serving as a milder 'limiter.' This will have a faster attack time to catch huge spikes in the really loud parts. I've found when using a single compressor it will often 'squash' the dynamic range and/or have a tendency to eat consonants.

Some producers ride volume for every word, but I like to keep the original 'vocal dynamics' intact for the most part.  

The other thing you might benefit from is a richer reverb. It still sounds pretty dry. And possibly some kind of double tracking. Delay can work in a pinch. What you'd do is have one main track of vocals without delay, and have one track of vocals with delay but quietly playing (imperceptible to most people) and panned.

Microphones are generally mono recording devices. Imagine if you are in the same room with someone, you'll hear the voice in both ears from a different wavelength, different angles, and there will be lots of reverberation/reflection throughout the room. When the voice goes straight into the mic, it's like if it were possible to have both of your ears right at someone's mouth. A lot of the production tricks are to simulate those other qualities where each ear would be hearing a different reflection pattern than a single mono mouth in each ear.

In particular softer/headier voices generally use more production to give them a bit more 'space.' It's been done for a very long time. I listen to a lot of Thom Yorke, and if I had a raw vocal of his it would sound tiny. But even his smallest voices can sound 'wide and encompassing' due to techniques like that.

For the technique thing, keep singing. You've made huge progress since arriving here. It will keep happening.

[Xamedhi]

I don't know if I'm an obsessive, perfectionist or what, really... I have a compression setting for everything I sing, and then change it when I want to do some backing choruses, or whispery effects and stuff... But the main thing is almost always static.
What I do, is shape the spikes, or the vocals that stand out more compared to the music. I amplify by 0.2dB and -0.2dB for example, select parts, giving shape to them, like drawing on the DAW, until I'm pleased with the sound and how it mixes with the musical track. Am I being too hands on with the thing? lol Is this a common practice?

[Gneetapp]

14 minutes ago, Xamedhi said:

I don't know if I'm an obsessive, perfectionist or what, really... I have a compression setting for everything I sing, and then change it when I want to do some backing choruses, or whispery effects and stuff... But the main thing is almost always static.
What I do, is shape the spikes, or the vocals that stand out more compared to the music. I amplify by 0.2dB and -0.2dB for example, select parts, giving shape to them, like drawing on the DAW, until I'm pleased with the sound and how it mixes with the musical track. Am I being too hands on with the thing? lol Is this a common practice?

It is almost like what people call "riding the fader" throughout the song...he he

[Xamedhi]

I liked them a lot, aravind. The only things I would point out is that your voice to me sounds more interesting on the mid-high range, where you can lean more into your voice. I feel like you have more control there and are able to use dynamics better. And also I noticed you changed the "when I see your face" line, that line alone makes the song for me on the original, so it was kind of weird to listen to it like that

[Xamedhi]

11 minutes ago, Gneetapp said:

It is almost like what people call "riding the fader" throughout the song...he he

Oh, I had no idea that term existed. Looked it up and is very similar to what I do. EDIT: haha   http://www.homestudiocorner.com/a-case-against-riding-the-fader/
What that guy says he does ( Clip Gain ) is more like what I do, though.

Aravind, I think you could practice some more on the timing and phrasing on All of me. The music has very clear accentuations, and you can really use that to your advantage to make your singing more interesting. People like the dancy rythms of this pop stuff a lot  

[Gneetapp]

5 minutes ago, Xamedhi said:

Oh, I had no idea that term existed. Looked it up and is very similar to what I do. EDIT: haha   http://www.homestudiocorner.com/a-case-against-riding-the-fader/
What that guy says he does ( Clip Gain ) is more like what I do, though.

Aravind, I think you could practice some more on the timing and phrasing on All of me. The music has very clear accentuations, and you can really use that to your advantage to make your singing more interesting. People like the dancy rythms of this pop stuff a lot  

I've read in some recording tutorial that you can also normalize your vocals or song, but instead of doing it in one move, you actually identify the different parts of the song and normalize each part in separate. This way you don't lose the dynamics of the recording...

[aravindmadis]

13 hours ago, Xamedhi said:

I liked them a lot, aravind. The only things I would point out is that your voice to me sounds more interesting on the mid-high range, where you can lean more into your voice. I feel like you have more control there and are able to use dynamics better. And also I noticed you changed the "when I see your face" line, that line alone makes the song for me on the original, so it was kind of weird to listen to it like that

Thanks man.. I actually never realized the change of the melody on the "when I see your face" line.  I am trying to experiment with new songs and genres. I don't want to do an exact replica of the original, since I want to see how my voice will suit the melody line and range.  I make it a point only to listen to the core direction of the melody and try to sing it my way.  I am training myself to sing original stuff and felt that this was one way for me to do this!  So at some points I do inadvertently, end up altering the melody in a way that people may not like to or relate to!  

When you say mid high range, what lines in this song are you referring to?  I might consider to explore that stuff further.  Thank you for your comment.  

[aravindmadis]

12 hours ago, Gneetapp said:

I've read in some recording tutorial that you can also normalize your vocals or song, but instead of doing it in one move, you actually identify the different parts of the song and normalize each part in separate. This way you don't lose the dynamics of the recording...

Compression is something I just cannot seem to get a good understanding off.  I do something very similar to what you describe here.  If I feel that certain parts of the song are low volume, I just normalize that portion and increase the volume.  I am surely doing something really wrong with my mixing, cause my wife keeps saying that the highest parts and the most powerful parts of the song seem a bit muffled in the recordings and that I sound way better in person.  Maybe I should stop reading free stuff on internet and sign up for a formal sound engineering course LOL!! 

[ronws]

Normalizing is the worst thing to do, don't do it, step away from it,have your wife slap your hands until they are red for even trying to do it. Leave it alone. The reason is normalizing is like a limiter, it raises everything in a track to the pre-set limit you choose. That gets rid of dynamics and usually places the track very close to digital clipping. Trust me, you don't want that. If you do want that, I can no longer be your friend. (Union rules) 

What a compressor does is reduce the loudness difference between the highest volume notes and the lowest volume notes. Not the pitch, the volume or perceived loudness. Once a level of loudness has past a set point you have decided (the threshold) it will then reduce the output volume. How much? That depends on the ratio that you set. Most times, for vocals, 2:1 works, or something close to that. I usually prefer to err on the side of less, rather than more, but I could be wrong. Since this reduces the dynamic range of least loud note to most loud note, it has the effect of making the least loud more prominent, almost equal with the loudest. 

As for the sound of your voice at different parts of the range, your wife may be right. Or not. She is hearing you acoustically in whatever room you are in and that is always going to be different than how we hear you through an edited recording. It could be that other things you are doing in editing are changing some of the sound qualities of your voice. It could be that you are singing these songs and sounding american and that is a sound she finds to be "muffled," whether it is, or not. That if you sing something traditional, then you sound "better."

So much of what a person hears is affected more by psychology than by actual comparison of pitches, tonal quality, etcetera. And who knows, maybe your voice sounds brighter in person, maybe it sounds brighter in traditional music and that you are doing something to sound different and more american.

For example, I find some local singing styles from other parts of the world to be hypernasal, to the point of bringing on nausea. I can imagine others would be equally sickened by the sound of my voice. And if others are not sickened by the sound of my voice, then I have not worked hard enough and need to double down (to borrow a phrase from the gamblers in Vegas.)

\m/

 

 

[ronws]

Compressor functions

ratio: how much the sound in decibels is reduced in volume

threshold; The level of loudness at which point the compressor will then "compress" or reduce the level coming out

knee (soft or hard) - how sudden is the change to compressed signal

attack - how fast, in time, usually milliseconds, a compressor begins to act

release - how fast, usually in milliseconds, a compressor releases or quits compressing

option (make up gain after compression) - the compressor increases gain after compressing the signal or track to a usable volume.

[Gneetapp]

3 hours ago, ronws said:

Compressor functions

ratio: how much the sound in decibels is reduced in volume

threshold; The level of loudness at which point the compressor will then "compress" or reduce the level coming out

knee (soft or hard) - how sudden is the change to compressed signal

attack - how fast, in time, usually milliseconds, a compressor begins to act

release - how fast, usually in milliseconds, a compressor releases or quits compressing

option (make up gain after compression) - the compressor increases gain after compressing the signal or track to a usable volume.

Well said Ronws! If I just may add something: as compressors decrease the difference between loud and soft parts of the audio, you would want to use the lightest compressor in soft singing, such as ballads, and probably stronger settings in hard rock type of vocals. Cheers

[Xamedhi]

18 hours ago, aravindmadis said:

Thanks man.. I actually never realized the change of the melody on the "when I see your face" line.  I am trying to experiment with new songs and genres. I don't want to do an exact replica of the original, since I want to see how my voice will suit the melody line and range.  I make it a point only to listen to the core direction of the melody and try to sing it my way.  I am training myself to sing original stuff and felt that this was one way for me to do this!  So at some points I do inadvertently, end up altering the melody in a way that people may not like to or relate to!  

When you say mid high range, what lines in this song are you referring to?  I might consider to explore that stuff further.  Thank you for your comment.  

Its cool that you experiment with other genres   I don't mind the changes though, but my ear is very used to it. I liked the change in that line, because it sounds more metal-ish, it also feels better in my throat to do it the way you did it here than the original version, lol
Keep making covers like this

As for the other thing, I think it's just a matter of taste, really. I like a lot more how your voice sounds on the "when I see your face" line and the lines that follow.  It's the kind of timbre you get in that zone, where the sound goes more "intense curbing" than overdrive. Like in All of Me between 3:24 to 3:36..  And I think that is it, that I like more your curbing tone that your overdrive sound.

EDIT: Your voice kind of darkens a bit more, and becomes thicker and warmer. In your lower range it is a smaller voice, and is too bright and metallic for my taste in a song like All of Me or the lower parts of "Two much love will kill you"

[aravindmadis]

3 hours ago, Xamedhi said:

Its cool that you experiment with other genres   I don't mind the changes though, but my ear is very used to it. I liked the change in that line, because it sounds more metal-ish, it also feels better in my throat to do it the way you did it here than the original version, lol
Keep making covers like this

As for the other thing, I think it's just a matter of taste, really. I like a lot more how your voice sounds on the "when I see your face" line and the lines that follow.  It's the kind of timbre you get in that zone, where the sound goes more "intense curbing" than overdrive. Like in All of Me between 3:24 to 3:36..  And I think that is it, that I like more your curbing tone that your overdrive sound.

EDIT: Your voice kind of darkens a bit more, and becomes thicker and warmer. In your lower range it is a smaller voice, and is too bright and metallic for my taste in a song like All of Me or the lower parts of "Two much love will kill you"

Thanks.  that makes a lot of sense.  It sounds to me like I get a darker sound in Curbing in comparison to overdrive or even neutral.  I will keep that in mind.  I usually sing lower parts in neutral coz they sound good to me!  I have never experimented with curbing with my middle voice!  

Plus I tend to really really buckle down and focus on the tough parts of the song and do not focus as hard singing lower parts from a tonality standpoint.  Guess this is a mental adjustment I need to make..  

[Xamedhi]

The cool thing about the more "curbing" like tract positioning, in my experience anyway, is that you can add more volume and play a lot with dynamics and retain the chilled or calm feeling of a ballad. Think Adele for example.

Now if you play with vowels that have a more closed mouth, you will find that opening your mouth downwards bit by bit while keeping the same vowel ( there may be some adjustments inside, by the tongue or other parts, which is fine ) will enable you to add more intensity to the sound, more energy, and it will sound bigger.
This is how I found to start liking the lower parts of songs haha, because I too was all about the middle and the higher parts, the more energetic ones. And this way I am able to use more energy lower, and sound bigger, and also... make these parts more interesting to me. If I don't find them interesting how will I make them interesting for others? haha

If you try that, please tell me how it went, man !   Cheers