Liz Phair, Hillary Duff, Avril vocal chains..

[XHipHop]

Anyone know what was used? To me they all have some similar "hair" on the vocals when they get aggressive or breathy (sansamp PT plugin?)...it's a very cool sound and I was just wondering where it comes from. And then in the next part it can be airy and clean. Just a very good rock sound for females I'd like to conquer. I'm only familiar with their radio songs, by the way.

[thethrillfactor]

What do they all have in common?

The Matrix and Tom Lord Alge(Rob Chiarelli on Hillary).

Its part performance,talent, production and great mixers.

I bet you the vocal tracking chains are pretty basic.

Its all in the mix and TLA and Rob Chiarelli are great at it.

[robmix]

I also hear that the BLUE Bottle was the mic used on Hillary so that may also be a contributing factor.


Rob

[stealthbalance]

i just worked with the matrix , and scott spock now uses the blue bottle for 90% of the lead vocals they record.
as for the vocal sound , you are really hearing what the mixer did . if you like that tla sound , try 2 to 4 compressors all equalling about 40 db of compression and you will get a lot closer. maybe try a vacrac limiter on stun , it really is quite creamy sounding. or an 1176 so that the gain reduction meter never comes off the pegged position except for in the spaces. also put the eq you use pre compressors. pay close attention to the 200hz area , as when i go for that type of sound , i tend to pull down or completely eliminate that frequency ( extremely tight Q though so you almost dont hear it much at all . the compressors post that eq will work much better as they will not be reacting off of all that mud.
just a suggestion.
s

[mattssons]

Read an article about the matrix team some time ago.

Most of Avrils stuff was recorded in house outside L.A

The chain was a Neumann U87- neve1272- distessor- d.a.w from what i remember..You could probably fin this article if you search for avril, matrix etc.


yours / Toby

[jbuntz]

Originally posted by mattssons
Read an article about the matrix team some time ago.

Most of Avrils stuff was recorded in house outside L.A

The chain was a Neumann U87- neve1272- distessor- d.a.w from what i remember..You could probably fin this article if you search for avril, matrix etc.


yours / Toby

I wonder if the Neve was a Brent Avril.







Sorry. I couldn't resist.

[echorec]

Originally posted by jbuntz
I wonder if the Neve was a Brent Avril.

[Sender]

Alot of Avril's first record was done by David Leonard.

[juniorhifikit]

I recorded Liz with a TLM 103 (because that's all there was) with the Neotek console's pre through an 1176. She just sounds like Liz.







Sorry to say this on Gearslutz: gear is highly over rated.

[GYang]

Originally Posted by juniorhifikit

I
Sorry to say this on Gearslutz: gear is highly over rated.

Fully agree, as quite often extremely good songs were done with good, but definitely not highest end gear (Joemeek, Rode mics, SPL outboards, ITB mixing etc.). I talk about rock and pop here.
High end result definitely depends more on ears, brain and correct imagination.

[max cooper]

Originally Posted by juniorhifikit

Sorry to say this on Gearslutz: gear is highly over rated.

You'll never get the prices down that way.

[Kestral]

Originally Posted by juniorhifikit

I recorded Liz with a TLM 103 (because that's all there was) with the Neotek console's pre through an 1176. She just sounds like Liz.

Sorry to say this on Gearslutz: gear is highly over rated.

I disagree completely. Listen to Liz's self-titled album. She used The Matrix for some of the songs and Michael Penn on the others. The sound quality gap is huge. The Matrix songs sound punchy and upfront whereas the Penn songs sound weak and flabby.

I don't know what Avril/Duff/Phair use, but I do know that whenever I use this chain on a female vocalist I get that punchy smooth yet distressed upfront sound:

U47 (long body chrome top) -> Neve 1073 -> Urei 1176 (silverface bluebadge) -> LA2A (original rev 2, not reissue) -> Apogee converter -> Pro Tools

[ALifeOfRhyme]

I'm doing a record for a label right now on a fem artist and they(label) want that sound on this record, which as most of you reading this know, its a combo of things(mic chain, voice, room, mix/mastering)....
But a good starting point for someone who is clueless would be a tube mic (i use a vint. U87 or a Blue Bottle (and no, not the baby). a solid state pre like a API or Neve, distressor/1176 compression. Mix through SSL. squash the overall mix with compression. Pop-Rock. ...oh ya, auto tune the vocal(graphic mode always!)...
(auto tune is as much a part of Pop/rock as compression is, or locking the drums).

Now all you need is a hit song! (Thats the hard part)
....I want candy! boom boom boom

[Kestral]

Originally Posted by ALifeOfRhyme

But a good starting point for someone who is clueless would be a tube mic (i use a vint. U87 or a Blue Bottle (and no, not the baby)

U87s are not tube mics

[Jamz]

Originally Posted by juniorhifikit

Sorry to say this on Gearslutz: gear is highly over rated.

Originally Posted by GYang

Fully agree, ...High end result definitely depends more on ears, brain and correct imagination.

Perhaps not as much fun to discuss and it certainlty won't sell gear...but it is the truth.

[rickrock305]

Originally Posted by Kestral

U87s are not tube mics

alot of them have been modified into tube mics. We have a Klaus Heyne modified tube 87, and it is a beauty! Very versatile...but we also have a 67 so i gotta say that one gets used a lot more.

[cdog]

I would go with a nice airy mic (U195) and a fast mic pre (GML).

You can then compress it to hell in the mix if you want.

But you can't recover transient information in the mix if you torched it on the way in.

[Shan]

Originally Posted by ALifeOfRhyme

Now all you need is a hit song! (Thats the hard part)
....I want candy! boom boom boom

And then you need ALOT of money to promote that hit song and put it out in public. (Thats the harder part)

Shane

[chetatkinsdiet]

Most big time studios use similar chains. If you read a book like Behind the Glass, the vocal chains are all very similar. Some sort of Neumann...U47, U67, U87, etc...maybe another mice like the Blue Bottle....whatever. A nice LDC mic nonetheless. Run that through a nice pre into an 1176 and that's your chain.
90% of the time, that's it.

later,
m

[ALifeOfRhyme]

kestral,
I am aware of that, thanks though, I was merely stating at the end of the "tube mic" comment, what I typically use.....
I bet your a engineer primarily, eh......

[Kestral]

Originally Posted by ALifeOfRhyme

kestral,
I am aware of that, thanks though, I was merely stating at the end of the "tube mic" comment, what I typically use.....
I bet your a engineer primarily, eh......

No prob, sorry for being a little harsh there. The early morning crankiness wasn't shaken off yet

I'm a songwriter/producer (that also gets asked quite often to mix), not an engineer but I have lots of friends who are stellar engineers and have learned a lot through osmosis (probably just enough to be dangerous )

[ALifeOfRhyme]

ha,
I hear ya, no hard feelings here- I only said that because most engineers "I" know are some what on the critical side...very analytical, exact types......I was just guessing cuz that sounded like something an engineer would say.....(looking for a flaw!)......

(writer/producer here too)....props! ....

& nothing personal to any engineers out there ofcourse I love you all!! ....sometimes.........

"be cool on your stool"

[jonnyclueless]

Originally Posted by Kestral

I disagree completely. Listen to Liz's self-titled album. She used The Matrix for some of the songs and Michael Penn on the others. The sound quality gap is huge. The Matrix songs sound punchy and upfront whereas the Penn songs sound weak and flabby.

I couldn't respectfully disagree more. The matrix songs to me sounds so squashed it's almost unlistenable. I like the songs, but they are hard to enjoy because of the severe compression and distortion. The Micheal Penn ones are much more tasteful for me. Maybe the apparant volume is greater, but if you match the levels, the matrix ones sounds smaller, restricted, and have no dynamics at all. Oh yeah, and the autotune has gone way overboard on the matrix songs. They could have at least used graphical mode, but it's clearly set on automatic mode and to extreme settings. I agree it's a huge sonic gap, but I think Micheal's production is a level above the matrix. If only the songs were...

I think consumers should be offerd a version of CDs that haven't been so limitted. Like how they used to have special edition CDs that were right from the masters. Maybe a version where the mastering engineer backs off the limiters.

[Kestral]

Originally Posted by jonnyclueless

I couldn't respectfully disagree more. The matrix songs to me sounds so squashed it's almost unlistenable. I like the songs, but they are hard to enjoy because of the severe compression and distortion. The Micheal Penn ones are much more tasteful for me. Maybe the apparant volume is greater, but if you match the levels, the matrix ones sounds smaller, restricted, and have no dynamics at all. Oh yeah, and the autotune has gone way overboard on the matrix songs. They could have at least used graphical mode, but it's clearly set on automatic mode and to extreme settings. I agree it's a huge sonic gap, but I think Micheal's production is a level above the matrix. If only the songs were...

I think consumers should be offerd a version of CDs that haven't been so limitted. Like how they used to have special edition CDs that were right from the masters. Maybe a version where the mastering engineer backs off the limiters.

If you listen to old Sinatra/Elvis/Beatles tracks, they also sound smaller and restricted. That's what makes them work so well over radio, and that's why people like them, becuase that's what sounds pleasant to normal average people.

I am so sick of this elitist "if it's compressed in any way it's no good" snobbery. Save it for the gay classical/jazz snobs and those idiot audiophiles that spend a thousand bucks for a foot of cable and use gear even more "hi-fi" than the gear used to record the damn music in the first place

F--k dynamics. Too much if it makes things sound scattered, flat, dull. Recordings sound limited and restricted because that is the SOUND of recordings that over the course of time since recording has been invented, people have deemed them pleasant sounding.

And no more belly aching about Green Day's American Idiot. It sounds f'ing brilliant on the stereo, on the radio, on an iPod, on little crappy radio speakers. It's compressed as hell and I love it.

Sorry but the Michael Penn stuff sounds like flat boring amateur recordings compared to the Matrix tracks. The fact that none of the Penn stuff made it to radio only confirms it.

[Ziggy!!]

oh yes! what a great "compress the fu*king snot out of it and make it as ridiculously loud as possible" age we live in! Since volume is the essence of a great album.

[XHipHop]

wow, old thread!

For the record, when i recorded a local female popstar wannabe, i used this chain:

ADK Vienna Edition -> Neve 1081 -> La3a -> Motu HD192

I mixed it using Neotek Elite EQ with a 1176 on the insert pushing it really hard.

[oceantracks]

I really laughed at this, not because I thought it was bad advice, but because it's really true. The MATRIX stuff is about as cool as it gets for pop tracks. There some things going on in the Duff material that is just wonderful. Great guitars, drums, and great vocal mixes. Sometimes there's 3 part harmony backings that you can just about only feel they are down so low during the choruses. Someone else would have shoved them down your throat.

And it's true, a lot of high end audio dealers expect you to buy gear that is truly better than the geår the records were made*on. Pretty funny.



TH

Originally Posted by Kestral

If you listen to old Sinatra/Elvis/Beatles tracks, they also sound smaller and restricted. That's what makes them work so well over radio, and that's why people like them, becuase that's what sounds pleasant to normal average people.

I am so sick of this elitist "if it's compressed in any way it's no good" snobbery. Save it for the gay classical/jazz snobs and those idiot audiophiles that spend a thousand bucks for a foot of cable and use gear even more "hi-fi" than the gear used to record the damn music in the first place

F--k dynamics. Too much if it makes things sound scattered, flat, dull. Recordings sound limited and restricted because that is the SOUND of recordings that over the course of time since recording has been invented, people have deemed them pleasant sounding.

And no more belly aching about Green Day's American Idiot. It sounds f'ing brilliant on the stereo, on the radio, on an iPod, on little crappy radio speakers. It's compressed as hell and I love it.

Sorry but the Michael Penn stuff sounds like flat boring amateur recordings compared to the Matrix tracks. The fact that none of the Penn stuff made it to radio only confirms it.

[juniorhifikit]

I would think in this current economic climate of the music biz, most people would be happy answering phones or cleaning toilets for The Matrix or John Shanks. I personally find their work to be the tops in pop music.

[jonnyclueless]

Originally Posted by Kestral

If you listen to old Sinatra/Elvis/Beatles tracks, they also sound smaller and restricted. That's what makes them work so well over radio, and that's why people like them, becuase that's what sounds pleasant to normal average people.

I am so sick of this elitist "if it's compressed in any way it's no good" snobbery. Save it for the gay classical/jazz snobs and those idiot audiophiles that spend a thousand bucks for a foot of cable and use gear even more "hi-fi" than the gear used to record the damn music in the first place

F--k dynamics. Too much if it makes things sound scattered, flat, dull. Recordings sound limited and restricted because that is the SOUND of recordings that over the course of time since recording has been invented, people have deemed them pleasant sounding.

And no more belly aching about Green Day's American Idiot. It sounds f'ing brilliant on the stereo, on the radio, on an iPod, on little crappy radio speakers. It's compressed as hell and I love it.

Sorry but the Michael Penn stuff sounds like flat boring amateur recordings compared to the Matrix tracks. The fact that none of the Penn stuff made it to radio only confirms it.

First off, the beatles and elvis, etc DO NOT sound like that. Not by any means. They worked well on ardio because they were good songs and sounded good, notbecause they were limitted to death. And it's NOT what people find pelasing, they aren't even given a choice. They may be fooled by the loudness, we all are. But they also become fatiqued and have a hard time listening through an album, just like us. They just might not know why.

2ndly, this is not an elitist attitude. It's a complaint about shitty sound. Expecting people to just roll over and accept it is snobbery. It has nothing to do with being an audiofile. It has to do with ruining the music. Whats wrong is to follow a trend which is based on marketting people trying to get a hotter signal to make their song louder than everyone elses. THAT has nothng to do with making it sound better. Forget the fact that it clearly does not make it sound better.

F dynamics? I don't think you understand dynamics. There is a difference between shaping a sound with compression and dynamics. The dynamics are what keep a song interesting. When you do away with the dynamics, the music becomes manotinous and listeners stop paying attention. Noticed how record sales are in the toilet and radio is dying? It's not onlt the bad songs being put out.

Green day sounds amazing to you (and to me) because you are listening to it compared to everything else that is smashed to hell on the radio. But play it next to something from a decade ago, and match the volume. I guarantee you you will feel seasick after listening to the modern mix. And for what it's worth, Green Day themselves are not happy with CLAs mixes (I personally like the job he did).

If it helps, I used to think just like you, until I started to do some real listening comparisons. Loudness can really fool people, but it is just a trick.

[Tim]

Originally Posted by juniorhifikit

Sorry to say this on Gearslutz: gear is highly over rated.

Yeah.
It's all in the AutoTune!