Do you compress Backing Vocals differently than Lead vocals?

[deeper]

What are your theories on compressing and submixing background vocals? My questions which follow are in particular regarding background vocals like "la-la's" and "oohs and ahhs" moreso than simple parallel harmonies:

1. Do you use a different compressor to make the backing vocals sound different than the lead? More compression on Bvox, or less than the lead?

2. Do you use different EQ on the backing vocals? Do you roll off highs and lows to keep them from competing with the lead?

3. Do you use the same reverb/delay settings on the Bvox that you use on the lead? Do you try to make Bvox and lead vocals sound like they were recorded in the same space, or do you prefer to separate the Bvox with different reverb selections to make them sound way further back or in a totally different space?

4. And, perhaps most important, if you have 3 backing vocalists, do you usually have them sing doubles? Triples? Even more?

[MiserableSod]

Originally Posted by deeper

1. Do you use a different compressor to make the backing vocals sound different than the lead? More compression on Bvox, or less than the lead?

Sometimes do, sometimes don't. Depends on the track.

Originally Posted by deeper

2. Do you use different EQ on the backing vocals? Do you roll off highs and lows to keep them from competing with the lead?

Sometimes do, sometimes don't. Depends on the track.

Originally Posted by deeper

3. Do you use the same reverb/delay settings on the Bvox that you use on the lead? Do you try to make Bvox and lead vocals sound like they were recorded in the same space, or do you prefer to separate the Bvox with different reverb selections to make them sound way further back or in a totally different space?

Sometimes do, sometimes don't. Depends on the track.

Originally Posted by deeper

4. And, perhaps most important, if you have 3 backing vocalists, do you usually have them sing doubles? Triples? Even more?

Sometimes do, sometimes don't. Depends on the track.

[Levi]

Personally...

1. Yes. For most pop tracks, I treat BGV's like another instrument rather than a vocal. I prefer more dynamics in my lead vocals, BUT, at times I'll automate some dynamics back into my BGV's for "bounce."

2. I tend to roll out a lot more lows in my BGV's than my lead vox. I will often, depending on where BGV's are panned or placed forward/ backward in the mix, add or cut highs... I prefer that "breathy" vocal, so I'll more often add.

3. I usually use different treatments altogether. More often than not, just delays on BGV's, but reverb from time to time. Just personal preference.

4. Unless it's a very intimate, small instrumentation song, I will always stack vocal parts. Minimum of 2 per part, often 3 per part, sometimes 4 per part, all depending on how much other instrumentation/ competition is going on.

Again, just my own practices and opinions. I'll learn from everyone else's answers as well.

[chris carter]

Originally Posted by deeper

What are your theories on compressing and submixing background vocals? My questions which follow are in particular regarding background vocals like "la-la's" and "oohs and ahhs" moreso than simple parallel harmonies:

I think a major factor here is r&b style vox vs. rock style vox. I tend to take somewhat different approaches depending on which. Since you mention "la-la" and "ooh ahh" I'll roll with the more r&b and pop/r&b type vocals.

1. Do you use a different compressor to make the backing vocals sound different than the lead? More compression on Bvox, or less than the lead?

Generally, yes. Often, I tend to use light (or more often than not, only the tracking compression) and then group backup vocals and compress them as a group. The compression I'll use on the group is entirely independent of what settings I might use for the lead.

2. Do you use different EQ on the backing vocals? Do you roll off highs and lows to keep them from competing with the lead?

The first vocal I EQ is generally the lead vocal and I use that as a starting point for all the other vocal tracks (in pop and r&b tunes it's not uncommon for me to have 80 or 100 tracks of vocals... it can get tedious...). I'll start with that on backups most of the time and then tweak from there. The most common difference I'll do EQ-wise is adjust the HPF followed by subtle tweaks in other bands for cutting power. Of course, if I'm goign for an effect, then all bets are off. That said, I consider the compression on backups a bigger issue than the EQ for most records I work on. The same EQ compressed different ways can make it sound like different EQ.

3. Do you use the same reverb/delay settings on the Bvox that you use on the lead? Do you try to make Bvox and lead vocals sound like they were recorded in the same space, or do you prefer to separate the Bvox with different reverb selections to make them sound way further back or in a totally different space?

I almost never use the same reverb and delay settings on backup vox that I use in lead vocals. Actually, I rarely use reverb on backups. On a mix where I have a dozen fx sends for vocal tracks, maybe one or two are reverbs and the rest are typically delays.

4. And, perhaps most important, if you have 3 backing vocalists, do you usually have them sing doubles? Triples? Even more?

I do what's necessary. One of the most common things I say during tracking is "double it". I remember on one session we turned it into a joke by recording me saying it into a little toy recorder thing and I'd just hit that button. In r&b and pop MOST (but not all) backup vocals get doubled or more. Sometimes I will triple a part. Sometimes I will quadruple a part. One of the hardest things for newer producers is knowing when something should be doubled (or more) or not and you really have to think about the texture in the mix. It's not so much a question of "how many voices do I want this to sound like" as it is "what texture do I want this to have". I consider a block of chorus as ONE voice no matter how many doubles or harmony parts there are - the difference is the texture. When I mix outside records from other producers it is common to run into situaitons where a part that really should have been doubled wasn't and then it sticks out like a sore thumb in the mix and I have to find a work-around... that always sucks.

[Unclenny]

Less compression on BVox.

Similar EQ....roll off a bit more a the low end.

I try to put everything in the same reverb room.



All It Left Me

[allencollins]

You use a compressor to fix an instrument's poor dynamics. So if the ld singer has poor dynamics and the backup singer(s) have poor dynamics then yes you would compress them both the same. If the ld singer is sloppier than the backup singer then you would compress him more. 3:1 as opposed to 2:1 or whatever.

It's kinda like asking if you should use the same settings within melodyne on the backups as you do on the lead. Sure if the lead vocals are as out of tune as the backups then yes you would use similar setting.

Compression would be no different. Unless you use a comp for effect. At which time you should ask yourself .... Why am I compressing something that really doesn't need compressing? Because I think I should? Or I really don't have a clue why the device was built in the first place?

I dunno why anyone on earth would compress something 2 different ways. Unless ofcourse they simply need unique settings because one track has worse dynamics that the others. Then again maybe they just don't undersdtand what a comp is or just wants to contribute to the sonic demise as music as we know it.

[dbbubba]

The track or part should tell you how the compression should be set.
There is no set rule for anything.

Stacked BG parts almost compress themselves in some situations.

Compression can also be used to level a track(s) so that they can be heard above other stuff.
As an example... BG vox along with wall of fuzzed out GTRs ae going to require more compression than BG vox in a more "open" production.

[Saudade]

Chris Carter! When's the next X-files movie coming? sorry couldn't help, I'm a big fan...

Ok abt the topic...I feel I am weakest in mixing backing vox, but I'll just chime in what I find doesn't really work for me.

Reverbs - I find it just muds up the sound especially if there are many layers and you tracked in an ambient room. I think start with layering/doubling with the right mic distance in the right room with the right kind of ambience.

Compressing as a group - I find it only brings out even more uneveness in dynamics, so I would say get good vocalists and track them paying close attention to all the dynamics like swells, fades. It will save you a lot of headaches during mixing. Beach Boys spent the most time tracking the vocal harmonies in Pet Sounds. Not fixing in the mix.

EQ'ing - Again I find little can be done to it as group. Backing vox has a special requirement to "fill" out the back ground yet not overwhelm the lead vox. It has to be heard clearly in terms of harmony because it is basically "notes in the chords". If you start HPF etc, you will find that certain notes will sound thin or under-represented and the harmony will be "skewed" because you took out either some of the fundamental or the impt overtones/harmonic content. Notes jutting out are very jarring. So the bext "eq" is still by using the "mic distance" and on/off axis effect. It is by far the most natural. So work hard on your monitor mix during tracking and let your vocalists hear themselves as close as possible as they would appear in the final mix.

[RoundBadge]

No rules but lately on rock bking vox-Neve 2254's just sound "right".

..

[BOWIE]

I compress them much lighter so that they add more "life" to the main track.

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by deeper

1. Do you use a different compressor to make the backing vocals sound different than the lead? More compression on Bvox, or less than the lead?

Depends on the song but....

Yes. MORE Compression. Also MORE tuning! My pop rock BGV sound very "tuned" when soloed, however put in some loud guitars and they fit perfect.

2. Do you use different EQ on the backing vocals? Do you roll off highs and lows to keep them from competing with the lead?

This is dependent on the mix and how it was recorded.

3. Do you use the same reverb/delay settings on the Bvox that you use on the lead? Do you try to make Bvox and lead vocals sound like they were recorded in the same space, or do you prefer to separate the Bvox with different reverb selections to make them sound way further back or in a totally different space?

Sometimes, usually something pretty similar unless going for a specific effect. Depends on the mix/song.

4. And, perhaps most important, if you have 3 backing vocalists, do you usually have them sing doubles? Triples? Even more?

yes Yes YES! For BGV I like quadruples JUST IN CASE. Once the part is figured out and the takes start getting good, I then take 5 good takes and then tune them and keep and extra one for safety.

[Ermz]

1. Do you use a different compressor to make the backing vocals sound different than the lead? More compression on Bvox, or less than the lead?

Yes, always different sub-group for the backings with their own processing chain. Usually more compression, but it really depends. The idea is to think of them as another layer or instrument and NOT the main vocal. So tune them up, effect them up, slam them to hell, whatever works in getting them to sit tight and 'musical'.

2. Do you use different EQ on the backing vocals? Do you roll off highs and lows to keep them from competing with the lead?

I normally high-pass quite a bit higher. If it's a 'gang vocal' bit (think hardcore music) then I'll leave the lows, but ill usually have to control the mid-bass and low mids to make sure the breath pops don't blow the headroom on the mix. I love breathy high-end, but if the BGV are competing with the lead vocal you can just suck out around 3k or so and stop that crucial range from being clouded, whilst still retaining the breathier highs.

3. Do you use the same reverb/delay settings on the Bvox that you use on the lead? Do you try to make Bvox and lead vocals sound like they were recorded in the same space, or do you prefer to separate the Bvox with different reverb selections to make them sound way further back or in a totally different space?

That really depends on the situation at hand. Sometimes you want them to fatten up the main vocal and sound like they were recorded in the same space, but other times you want them to do an entirely different thing.

4. And, perhaps most important, if you have 3 backing vocalists, do you usually have them sing doubles? Triples? Even more?

For sure. More takes means more options during the mix, but you have to commit at some point and say 'okay, that's enough'.

[DesertDawg]

Only thing I can say is a "usual" theme for me in this regard is that "usually" I find myself compressing BG vox more if there's only a couple of tracks of them, and "usually" find myself compressing them less if there are a bunch of tracks of BG vox stacked-up.

[Storyville]

I tend to work in Hip Hop. One of the big differences in rap than in traditional singing is the difference of dynamics. There is faster word movement in rap, and therefore, more dynamic fluctuation. Also rappers tend to move in and out of the mic in unpredictable ways.... just an observation.

I tend to compress vocals pretty boldly. I use backups to add a little more expression and keep that forward motion, so I go pretty lite on the comp.

For the more seasoned emcees who have deliberate dynamic control and good steady breathing, and awareness of their proximity to the mic, I usually get to go the other way around. Less comp on the main vocals, and heavy comp on the backups. I prefer this way.

Why? Moving dynamics capture the ear and sound closer. Distance from a source is actually a psycho-acoustic compressor. It is more difficult to perceive fluctuations in loudness from a distance. Therefore, a smaller crest is more accurate for backup vocals, it psychologically places them further.

Eq, I tend to cut out a bit of presence and ease off a little highs. Distance is known to create a "damping" effect - lows travel farther, mids have a somewhat linear loss of volume over distance, and highs lose their power relatively quickly.

Reverb, again this is about distance. A SHORTER pre-delay and a HIGHER diffusion are designed to create a greater sense of distance. I do dat. Otherwise I use the same type of reverb with the same settings (maybe a touch more of it).

[Stiff]

Depends so much on what kind of backing vocals it is.

For huge-ass viking chants I'll do a great amount of takes (and sometimes double them, then pitch shift them slightly) and often use a limiter instead of a compressor.

For smaller groups it really depends on what's going on with the rest of the song. I'll just try and see what works, but usually I don't end up boosting the same frequencies I've done with the lead vocal.

Maybe it's just for me, but my backings are almost always sung in a very different way than the lead, making them fairly separate without any real mixing.

[decibike]

I use less compression, eq, delay/verb on backing vox, mainly because I different mic techniques on them:
Make the singer step back from the mic when tracking backing vox.
More distance from the mic gives you more room ambience/reverb, room EQ (high end roll off, less presence) or even room compression.

Especially ooh's and aah's sound lovely in an vibey room: hallways, bathrooms... even a dead studio room can offer more colours when using distance.

Less options in the mix, but more character.

[Jake 2.0]

to each his own. I personaly like my backrounds thinner (eq wise) then the lead vox and a bit more compressed then the lead so that their easy to control and dont get in the way of the lead vox.

[deeper]

Thank you for your fine replies. Naturally, each song is different, and differing styles of music call for different treatment of background vocals. But we can learn a lot from each other's approach.

This morning I studied the vocal treatment of Eleanor Rigby. The background vocals are limited to the couplets "Ahhh, look at all the lonely people" sung at only three different places in the song. The group vocals here provide contrast so the lead vocal all by itself sounds sooooo lonely. (If they were singing along with the lead, it would be too warm and lovey.)

The backing "choir" here is three voices with no doubles. If they were doubled or tripled here, they would sound too big for this song. To my ears it sounds like John and Paul are singing the lead together in unison, with George singing a third lower. And the group choir only sings at the intro and after the second chorus (in which the choir part functions as a handy bridge)! I read that later, George Martin pointed out to Paul that this choir part could also occur at the end, over top of his regular lead ("All the lonely people, where do they all come from...", both parts simultaneously! That was an irresistable "cherry on top" for Paul, so he later dubbed in that choir part solo for the end. In all these years, I never noticed that it's only him singing (one voice) that final time. It adds to the loneliness! Besides, if the full trio had sang that part at the end, it would have over-powered the lead. Great choices, George Martin and Paul!

The "loneliness" in the lead vocal performance is brought out by the dry treatment -- little or no reverb. Electronic doubling is used only on the choruses ("All the lonely people, where do they all come from...") A true double, when done well, almost always sounds better than an electronic double -- but in this case it would have detracted from the loneliness, so here I prefer the ADT. And it is NOT used in the verses, but only in each chorus, as a way to fatten the vocal and step up the intensity. More great production choices!

I'm trying to limit my discussion here to the vocal treatment. Don't get me started describing all the strokes of genius apparent in the songwriting!