Frequency of the voice

[Khassera]

There's a frequency "meter" on our PA. When I sang before, the frequency meter would be all over the place. Now when I sang this weekend (after maybe a month of twang practice) I found I could keep the frequency constantly on 500(k?). Whenever it sat on the 500 it seemed to "cut through" everything. Even the drummer, who's really heavy handed, said he'd never rehearsed with a singer whose voice cuts through like mine did without the vocals being turned all the way up.

 

The technique feels like it "locks in," and the more the frequency sits in one place the easier it feels to sing.

 

In relation to this I have a question: Is the frequency of the vocals always in a certain area, or does it differ with singers/tonality? Is it beneficial to try keep it in one spot?

The songs we did were AIC covers, so for that at least it felt great.

[m.i.r.]

Well your voice covers the entire spectrum with over tones. Just depends on all the factors of the voice and technical ability where there are humps or dips in over tones. More than likely I bet the events you say are related in a way slightly different than you are thinking.

I am betting you might have a slight hump in the 500hz region that your pa is picking up. However, I bet it is picking that up moreso because with more practice, especially twang practice, your tone has gotten more focused. So maybe either the frequency monitor is picking it up more because of the clearer tone and more focused over tones, or because a hump appeared there with your improved vocals.

With that being said, I dont think you cutting through the mix is related to the 500hz bump(though it could be, you may have a hole in the frequency spectrum with your band at 500, that I dont know. But I do know that twang produces a spike between 2000-4000hz range, though usually around 3000hz, same as the singers format in classical. Orchestras usual leave a gap in this area to help the performer cut through with greater ease un amplified. So more than likely your twang made the frequency spike appear, causing you to blast straight through the mix and startle your drummer ha ha.

As far as steadier the meter, the more comfortable singing is. Maybe that is showing a steady tone. Hey that may be a new way to practice and study never know. Could do some research and experimentation there. All the exercises we know now had to get started some way right lol? You could have stumbled across a new exercise...never know. I say its worth looking into

[ronws]

m.i.r. beat me to it. Disregard the 500 thing for the most part. Most singers have, like he said, a ring around the 2.5 kHz area and that is what cuts through.

 

And I have found that proper singing technique usually leads to an easier time singing, as well, as one finds in any kind of training. For example, football players don't train so that they nearly kill themselves on game day. They train so that game day is manageable and repeatable.

[Sleeper256]

I had this same kinda thought earlier this week. Only mine was more about trying to match/compare the frequencies of pro, polished singers isolated stems (foolishly, afterall they still have effects on them) to my completely raw singing. Here's pictures of what I got.

 

http://imgur.com/a/MEom2

 

(Channel EQ is not active in the graph, it's not affecting it.)

 

I'm not sure what to learn from these pictures, but maybe you can detect something as far as focus and such. I just see spikes, and a weird thing that happens is there's always two spikes to the left that seem to appear for every note I sing under 1000hz, but once I go higher in the notes, they merge into one, more rounded hump.

[m.i.r.]

I like your way of thinking on this. However, as you said, the vocal processing of those singers you are comparing to is going to make it an un fair comparison to you. Some of those frequencies may be boosted by the enginner and not singer. For all you know, you may sound better raw than they do. Also, as you already noticed, frequency shifts happen all throughout the range, especially up top.

However, they have been doing stuff like this in the classical world. It does show if a singer will cut through the mix un amplified. Also gives the singer a good idea of where to improve on their format tuning. Cool stuff

[Felipe Carvalho]

Well you can just do a sample and send it over. But if its cutting through better, most likely there is a boost happening on the 3K region.

 

 

You guys can use that on the benefit of the whole band, if the guitarrist sets his gear so that his rhythm channel leaves that area for your voice, with more mid and mid-low content, and on the solo channel he boosts presence, you will have "room" for you during the singing to even use more dynamics, and he will cut through on his solos too.

 

GL!

[ronws]

I had this same kinda thought earlier this week. Only mine was more about trying to match/compare the frequencies of pro, polished singers isolated stems (foolishly, afterall they still have effects on them) to my completely raw singing. Here's pictures of what I got.

 

http://imgur.com/a/MEom2

 

(Channel EQ is not active in the graph, it's not affecting it.)

 

I'm not sure what to learn from these pictures, but maybe you can detect something as far as focus and such. I just see spikes, and a weird thing that happens is there's always two spikes to the left that seem to appear for every note I sing under 1000hz, but once I go higher in the notes, they merge into one, more rounded hump.

Even though I can be a technical guy, I sometimes think of the voice in terms of a motorcycle engine. In the use of a motorcycle with a certain engine size, there is what is called the "power band." This is a range of rpm's that lead to the best translation of engine power to rear wheel horsepower, in whatever gear you are in. I sometimes think voices are the same.

[Steven Fraser]

There's a frequency "meter" on our PA. When I sang before, the frequency meter would be all over the place. Now when I sang this weekend (after maybe a month of twang practice) I found I could keep the frequency constantly on 500(k?). Whenever it sat on the 500 it seemed to "cut through" everything. Even the drummer, who's really heavy handed, said he'd never rehearsed with a singer whose voice cuts through like mine did without the vocals being turned all the way up.

The technique feels like it "locks in," and the more the frequency sits in one place the easier it feels to sing.

In relation to this I have a question: Is the frequency of the vocals always in a certain area, or does it differ with singers/tonality? Is it beneficial to try keep it in one spot?

The songs we did were AIC covers, so for that at least it felt great.

It's not 500k, it's 500. Look at the labels on the meter, they will tell you the range of frequencies represented by the line. On PA systems, very often each line covers 1/3 octave, and has a pot attached to raise or lower that band. In the case of the 500Hz band, it covers all the frequencies from G#4 to E5, which In Hz are 415 to 659. A goodly number of vowels have their first Formant in that region. If your meter does have 1/3 octave bands, you will occasionally get the band to the left, from more closed vowels ( ee, oo, ) and the band to the right for the more open ah.