Will the 610 pre fatten up and add presence to a vocal?

[Stoneroses6300]

As I'm coming to vocal part of the recording I'm doing, the vocalist has a bit of a thinner voice, so I'm ready to pick up a pre to strengthen it and make it sound fuller in semi-busy mixes...The solo 610 is in my price range...Let me know if this is the right application...Thank you

[RBowlin]

I have the UA 610 (rackmount) which is supposed to be fairly close in sound to the solo 610 (tube version). I've used a few different condensor mics on my baritone voice and it all sounded pretty thin. Then, I read Warren and Joel talking about the CAD Trion 8000. I bought one, plugged it in to the 610 and all I can say is "WOW!" That mic on my voice in my room thru the 610 gave me
the nice thick sound I've been looking for. Of course YMMV.

-Rich

[gainstages]

there are a lot of choices, and really, it just depends on the voice and how you set it up. even with voices that are similar (such as thin sounding) i find that one preamp or compressor will work nicely on one voice, but not the other. this is because of a number of things, such as their singing technique, the shape of their mouth, their pitch range, etc etc. yeah, it should help a bit. on of my most common tricks for fattening vocals though is to layer a couple of takes in such a way that you really can't hear the extra tracks, but if you remove them, then you notice the vocal suddenly get thin and weak. it can be a little tricky to get just the right balance. try changing the pitch of some of the tracks a few cents.

another trick i use is to take a send off of the vocal, compress the heck out of it with a warm sounding compressor, roll back the highs and mids a bit with a nice eq, and then layer that in behind the original vocal track. it fattens it up a bit, and gives it more impact.

you probably already have the gear you need to do these things.

one more favorite trick of mine - using a Distressor or my FATSO (both from empirical labs) - it seems to help a lot in getting a lifeless, weak, or thin vocal to have some more personality.

the 610 should help though, and you'll find other good uses for it as well.

good luck.

[woomanmoomin]

How about an appropriate tube mic or dynamic to fatten up the vocal?

[Stoneroses6300]

I have both...A 57 and a moded solidtube...still looking for added bigness that doesnt soley rely on compression which easily when pushed degrades the quality of the signal...

[johnwayne]

An sm7 may be just what you need. I been using one lately and it is awesome. It definitely gives you a fatter sound.

[azwun25]

i had an m610 (rack) and loved it. However it gets hairy when pushed hard. I use my Germanium on vocals now and i couldn't be happier. the m610 is not gonna have the forward mid-range for the "presence" you speak of.

[Unclenny]

Originally Posted by gainstages

another trick i use is to take a send off of the vocal, compress the heck out of it with a warm sounding compressor, roll back the highs and mids a bit with a nice eq, and then layer that in behind the original vocal track. it fattens it up a bit, and gives it more impact.

I like to add in a short delay to the above recipe.

[Stoneroses6300]

Originally Posted by RBowlin

I have the UA 610 (rackmount) which is supposed to be fairly close in sound to the solo 610 (tube version). I've used a few different condensor mics on my baritone voice and it all sounded pretty thin. Then, I read Warren and Joel talking about the CAD Trion 8000. I bought one, plugged it in to the 610 and all I can say is "WOW!" That mic on my voice in my room thru the 610 gave me
the nice thick sound I've been looking for. Of course YMMV.

-Rich

Is the rackmount version not tube? What is differences between the rackmount and solo?

[azwun25]

Originally Posted by Stoneroses6300

Is the rackmount version not tube?

it is tube

[TheSweetener]

Just today I compared a few preamps and I was suprised how hifi the LA610 sounded. After having read a lot of posts here, I expected it to be a lot more "vintage" sounding. I expected rather cloudy highs and a fat lowend, but that did not hapen.
It's a cool preamp and far more versatile than I thought. The lo impedence settings sounded quite different and more vintage, but don't expect too much "colourful wonders" from the 610.

[Stoneroses6300]

Originally Posted by azwun25

i had an m610 (rack) and loved it. However it gets hairy when pushed hard. I use my Germanium on vocals now and i couldn't be happier. the m610 is not gonna have the forward mid-range for the "presence" you speak of.

I was looking at the Germanium awhile ago. I have it stuck in my head that tubes=vintage...I am starting to realize though, that I just dislike sounds that don't have that vintage sound to it. I've come to realize that my favorite sounding mic is a 57 for different things and condensors usually piss me off with their super clean hyped high frequency sound (non-tube condensors)...Maybe it was because of the music I grew up on, but I will simply say that vintage sound is exactly what I'm looking for. It's dead obvious to me especially on acoustic guitar, when it sounds super clean and pricise, and when it sounds more colored and full which is what I desire...

Whatever pre I get for vocals, I would like it to work well on acoustic guitar too, to get that vintage sound (like the acoustic guitar on the redwalls album that I was stating in a previous post)...

[emrr]

the 610 types are among the last tube designs offered in the 'good ole' days', and IMO don't sound anything at all like what most people picture in their heads as 'tube sound'. You have to roll further back into the 1940's-1950's to find that. The late-50's and '60's era pre's I have all sound pretty damn fast clean and transparent.