vocal levels in modern rock music - opinions sought

[black_wolf]

hey guys

i am currently mixing my bands first ep (zeppelin style rock) and i am seeking opinions on vocal levels.

i have cut a significant chunk of the low mids out of the vocal so that it sits well in the mix.

i did the fist mix down of the ep. some people said the vocals sounded great and others said they wanted to hear the vocals right out front so they could sing along. so i boosted them up and i did not like them so high in the mix.

so i loaded in some tracks from wolfmother, the black keys, led zeppelin and rem to reference against.

i found the wolfmother vocals to be way to high in the mix, the black keys to be a bit high and zeppelin/rem vocal tracks to both sit in the mix really well. i thought the rem vocal mixes sat the best, but at times you cant hear what michael is saying - which is a complaint of my mixes

in terms of radio playability - do you think should i ignore criticism and go for what i think sounds good (vocal as equal instrument in the mix) or go for vocal much louder than other instruments.

thanks

-black_wolf

[Black Dirt]

i'm not working at a level where mainstream radio play is an issue - tho' things i have mixed get played on college radio and listener supported

i have "memphis ears" - i like the vocal to sit back with the band. "modern" vocals irk me. i like to figure out lyrics rather than get hit over the head with them...

i think it is all a matter of taste - i would do what makes the band and you happy

[Stepwise Sound]

hey blackwolf,

the areas I generally focus on, as far as Vocal EQ is concerned, is

200 Hz (presence) low 400-1000 Hz mids (muddyness) and 5khz (clarity, intelligibility).

Here's what I often do to fit vocals in: dip 5 khz on all instruments! It doesn't have to be a huge cut, but you are making room for the vocals.

Then take a listen. Are the vocals now cutting, clearer than before, etc.? Now try boosting the 5KHz slightly on the vocals. Better? It should be fitting nicely in that hole you created.

Okay now add appropriate ammount of compression. Reverb if you like to taste but I have been using hardly any recently.

Whenever I hear comments or think "hmm this isn't sitting right" -- and you try raising it or lowering it and it still isn't sitting right, to me this means something isn't right with the EQ!

[usamike]

Originally Posted by black_wolf

hey guys
i thought the rem vocal mixes sat the best, but at times you cant hear what michael is saying - which is a complaint of my mixes

I think Michael Stipe's singing and lyrics (which I love BTW) are difficult to understand regardless of the mix.

[Stepwise Sound]

I think Michael Stipe's singing and lyrics (which I love BTW) are difficult to understand regardless of the mix.

Agreed.

[Karloff70]

Originally Posted by Black Dirt

i have "memphis ears" - i like the vocal to sit back with the band. "modern" vocals irk me. i like to figure out lyrics rather than get hit over the head with them...

i think it is all a matter of taste - i would do what makes the band and you happy

Ditto! I think Mick Jagger once said something along the lines of that he used to run home with his first singles and play them again and again, trying to work out what the vocal was saying. And that it was part of the fun, and if he'd understood everything the first time it would have ruined it......

I like to 'feel' a vocal more than anything else.....who can make out all the lyric on a (=any) Radiohead track without the lyric sheet??

Make it sit the way YOU like it geezer....

[GeorgeHayduke]

Originally Posted by Black Dirt

i have "memphis ears" - i like the vocal to sit back with the band.

I like that expression!

[chris carter]

If you like the vocal level you have, but people complain about not being able to hear certain words, then the answer is just to do a little automation on those words. Then play it for those same people and see what they say.

[dropblacksky]

One other thing to consider since you mentioned it is your own band... I've found that bands who "self produce" often mix the vocals too low because they already know all the lyrics. They get tricked by their brain into thinking the vocals are clear when they are actually a bit buried.

[black_wolf]

thanks for all the replies guys - i appreciate it

a lot of food for thought there

thanks
-black_wolf

[aof21]

also, try listening to the mix really loud in your car or on a couple different consumer level playback systems. when you turn it up really loud is the vocal so loud its hurting your ears but the rest of the mix still isn't rocking that hard? then maybe the vocal is too high or not mixed correctly.

[days]

Originally Posted by Karloff70

Ditto! I think Mick Jagger once said something along the lines of that he used to run home with his first singles and play them again and again, trying to work out what the vocal was saying. And that it was part of the fun, and if he'd understood everything the first time it would have ruined it.....

Jagger also said that he would always tell his producers to keep his vocals low in the mix because he felt that doing this gave the listener a "less satisfying" experience. To Jagger, this was actually a good thing. His reasoning was that if you left the listener less than fully satisfied, he or she would keep coming back for more, playing the record more often than if he or she had been fully satisfied. I actually believe that this is true.

This same principle can be demonstrated when you compare the experience of listening to an extremely accessible pop song to that of listening to a well-constructed but less accessible pop song. That Top 40 hit that you hum along to the first time you hear gets old pretty fast, but that pop song with unexpected twists and turns that at least partially eludes you upon first listen, will tend to draw you back for more listens. (For example, "I Want To Hold Your Hand" versus "Across the Universe.")

As I played the rough mixes of the songs in my recently-completed project for friends, I kept hearing, "You've got to make the vocals louder." I eventually gave in, and followed their advice. In retrospect, I wish I hadn't. A little mystery can be a good thing.

[RKrizman]

I think on any given song you have to find where in the music/singing lies the emotion of the song, and emphasize that.

-R

[Karloff70]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

I think on any given song you have to find where in the music/singing lies the emotion of the song, and emphasize that.

-R

music/singing=balance=bingo.....let the thing be one, and if that means you can't understand the lyrics until you've read them, then so be it.

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by days

Jagger also said that he would always tell his producers to keep his vocals low in the mix because he felt that doing this gave the listener a "less satisfying" experience. To Jagger, this was actually a good thing. His reasoning was that if you left the listener less than fully satisfied, he or she would keep coming back for more, playing the record more often than if he or she had been fully satisfied. I actually believe that this is true.

I think this works with singers that just ooze confidence and swagger/attitude and Sir Mick surely qualifies. Otis Redding comes to mind as well . I love that expression 'Memphis ears'! There's this story that Stax was sending the master of Otis Redding's 'Dock of the Bay' to Jerry Wexler in New York and that he complained about the vocal being too low in the mix. Jim Stewart then told him 'That's the way we do it in Memphis' or something.

If you listen to Led Zeppelin you realize that the 'frequency makeup' of the instruments is just perfect. Plant sang in a high range mostly with extreme power, so often the voice could actually sit back a bit in the mix and still come through perfectly.

in most cases I don't like 'buried' vocals though, if the singer is a bit insecure and wants to be more 'inside' the band in the mix...well, what will happen then is the vocal becoming even more insecure. So pay attention to the arrangement and lsiten to the texture of the voice, some voices have just the right amount of midrange to cut through without much effort, others need help with EQ or just by being moer outfront.

Also remember that something HAS to be in the foreground, and in 99% of the cases it's the vocal that tells the story so bring it out!

[black_wolf]

hey guys

i have been going through my itunes library to compare to different artists.

i found that the QOTS album lullabies to paralyze has a very similar texture to the way i have mixed this ep.

compared to lullabies to paralyze my vocal levels sit in the mix at a similar level and have a similar legibility and also at about 30% pan left right, similarly my drums are mixed quite high and very wide. even the overall compression is very similar.

on songs like "I Never Came" you cant understand a word of the vocals in a lot of the song. if people dont complain about the mixing on this album then screw it im going to leave my vocals as they are.

i would be interested in peoples opinions on the vocal mixing on lullabies to paralyze.

doorknocker
yeah you are right about plant - magic freq balance that lets the vocal sit back in the mix - unfortunatly i dont sing like plant.. lol

thanks again for the the replies.
-black_wolf

[nickynicknick]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

I think on any given song you have to find where in the music/singing lies the emotion of the song, and emphasize that.

-R

Yes...I also believe there is a sweet spot where the balance between the two are the most effective....kinda why I don't like vocal ups/downs sorta defeats the purpose of mixing...a little off topic but a lot of artists don't think there is a sweet spot and that is valid....to me there is a sweet spot between every and all elements in a mix..if you are really feeling it then its good....if everybody except you is saying the same thing then you should probably take a break and relisten

Nick

[GeorgeJ]

Great post guys - Keep it going - I'm in learn/sponge mode..

[Bguzaldo]

Sometimes when I cant get a vocal to sit right I'll send the drums and Bass to one Buss, the guitars to another Buss and the vox to another Buss, and do some simple EQing and notching out to get the Vocals to sit. Bump the drums and bass around 80-100hz subtract the 5k-20k range in the guitars. And remember if its getting to muddy or cluttered look to cut the low frequencys seeing as they are physically bigger and take up more room.Try not to mix the vocals with them solo'd cuz this isn't gonna tell you shit about how it sits. That was a big mistake of mine for awhile. I've mixed snares that sounded TERRIBLE solo'd but great in a mix and that's what counts. Trust your ears, let go of whatever "rules" you think you gotta follow, and always experiment.

Hope that helps a little,
-Barrett

[Black Dirt]

Originally Posted by doorknocker

I think this works with singers that just ooze confidence and swagger/attitude and Sir Mick surely qualifies. Otis Redding comes to mind as well . I love that expression 'Memphis ears'! There's this story that Stax was sending the master of Otis Redding's 'Dock of the Bay' to Jerry Wexler in New York and that he complained about the vocal being too low in the mix. Jim Stewart then told him 'That's the way we do it in Memphis' or something.

cropper said he mixed that song with tears in his eyes and there was no way he was gonna remix it... i got the "memphis ears" thing from that story - stewart, cropper or dunn said it - can't remember who, but it has stuck with me forever...

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by Black Dirt

cropper said he mixed that song with tears in his eyes and there was no way he was gonna remix it... i got the "memphis ears" thing from that story - stewart, cropper or dunn said it - can't remember who, but it has stuck with me forever...

Yes, it's a very touching story! I think I read it in Guralnick's book 'Sweet Soul Music'.

'Dock of the bay' is perfect, such a great song and Cropper's part is genius. There's another great story about that: They did the recording and someone (maybe Jim Stewart?) said 'One note is clashing!' to which Cropper replied 'It was written to clash!' Of course he was refering to his guitar lick on the chorus where he lets a F-sharp note hang over a E chord. Beautiful!

I just love that dry Stax sound, it perfectly suits the music and is totally resistent to changing trends in audio production.

[speakercoil]

Originally Posted by Karloff70

Ditto! I think Mick Jagger once said something along the lines of that he used to run home with his first singles and play them again and again, trying to work out what the vocal was saying. And that it was part of the fun, and if he'd understood everything the first time it would have ruined it......

I like to 'feel' a vocal more than anything else.....who can make out all the lyric on a (=any) Radiohead track without the lyric sheet??

Make it sit the way YOU like it geezer....

Exactly... I have listened to Radiohead tracks time and time again to try and figure out some of the lyrics... I could just search on google, but **** that... It's not as much fun. I only do that if I am gonna cover a song.

Other good examples like Yorke, Stipe, Isaac Brock, and such, who cannot be understood no matter where the vocal sits is Dave Matthews. I heard a story from Carter where he said for years he would be singing the wrong back up words to lots of the songs, because he couldn't even understand what Dave was singing. Dave then chimed in and said HE didn't even know what he was signing half the time (as a joke to refer to him constantly forgetting and changing lyrics).

I think at the end of the day it depends on the song. Is the vocal supposed to be the main focus? I find in slower songs IE a Ryan Adams tune or something with a soft vocal, it is perfect to put it up front... It can give you that chills down your spine effect when they milk certain notes... But on other songs/artists the vocal is more of an instrument than a delivery device for words IE Radiohead... In that case place it where it sits naturally.

I find with my own vocals I have one of those voices where it is impossible to hear what the hell I am saying... I find it interesting, because younger crowds don't seem to care... While the 40+ crowd seems to make a constant complaint... I will get constantly from them "I love the music and your voice, but I can't understand a word you are saying! You need to annuciate more!" Upon which I tell them they have no idea what they are talking about, and it's not the point to understand it clearly... They look at me with A LOT of confussion after I tell them that.

Overall, I think you should place it where it feels right. I spent about 2-3 years in Nashville, so I am sick of the "mixing around the vocal" attitude everyone has there... Screw that! I always mix the vocal last. Otherwise it will never fit right for me... I end up catering too much to vocal and forget that this is music I am mixing, not a f'ing commercial or TV Show... The MUSIC is the important part, and the instruments are just as (if not more) important than the vocal. This doesn't matter if the lyric is brilliant or not...

Which brings me to one last point... I think what kills me the most about this over-emphasis on placing vocals up front is that the songs that do it tend to have the worst lyrics... So I sit there shaking my head going.. "I would be trying to HIDE that, not emphasize it!"

-Grant

[Macky]

Originally Posted by usamike

I think Michael Stipe's singing and lyrics (which I love BTW) are difficult to understand regardless of the mix.

Hey and i thought i was the only one.
He,s a great singer and writer despite this.
The "Sidewinder" song got me for years, until i stumbled on the lyrics........ what i heard as.....
Morning in Transalvania.......... was actually..
"Call me when you try to wake her"
"Call me when you try to wake her"

[Karloff70]

Originally Posted by speakercoil

Which brings me to one last point... I think what kills me the most about this over-emphasis on placing vocals up front is that the songs that do it tend to have the worst lyrics... So I sit there shaking my head going.. "I would be trying to HIDE that, not emphasize it!"

-Grant

LOL

[vonrichter]

There is a nasty trend these days that puts the vocals so high they obliterate the rest of the mix. It's impossible to get sucked into such a mix... they sound flat and 2D, demoish.

Of course you want it loud enough to be heard, but please do not sacrifice your drums and so on for that, ESPECIALLY since you said its 'Zep style.

[dudekai]

I, for one, don't need to hear every word clearly in rock mixes. It's, after all, sloppy, loud, swaggery, raaawwwwwk. How else could I get- "...beef fries and gravy, way up in the sky..." from a song by The Cult. Even if it isn't real loud rock, I like some mystery. Let me have my beef fries and gravy once in a while.