What Mic-Preamp for Christina Aguilera type of voice?

[tenereefa]

I am working with a female singer (christina aguilera style) that sings very loud and high. Her voice is in the louder and higher parts extremly harsh---lots of agressive midrange....
Need a mic-Preamp solution cause i dont want to EQ too much...

I am thinking about a combination of tlm49 and millenia or DAV (more money i cant spend now)
Hope u recommend the DAV -- much cheaper...

Or maybe im totally wrong any suggestions?





ah..i got Apogee converters into RME 9652 - Nuendo ....

[absrec]

If Christina came to my studio and all I had to work with was my own gear, I would most likely use the following chain:

AKG 414B-ULS - API 312 - Distressor 10:1 - Avedis E15 Eq - Apogee AD8000

Obviously, experimentation is a great thing if you have the time, but this or a similar chain should get you by.

-Aaron

[Jules]

Try a few pre's, every singer is indevidual... If you are going to be working on one singer for a long time, it would be worth trying a few out..

[T.RayBullard]

you wont regret using DAV over millennia.....DAV stands head and shoulders above it. I have two Milennias HV-3s that never get used since I bought my DAV channels.
For this type of voice I use coles 4038 or Royer sf12. Ribbons are great for female voice.

Originally Posted by tenereefa

I am working with a female singer (christina aguilera style) that sings very loud and high. Her voice is in the louder and higher parts extremly harsh---lots of agressive midrange....
Need a mic-Preamp solution cause i dont want to EQ too much...

I am thinking about a combination of tlm49 and millenia or DAV (more money i cant spend now)
Hope u recommend the DAV -- much cheaper...

Or maybe im totally wrong any suggestions?





ah..i got Apogee converters into RME 9652 - Nuendo ....

[mr.gefell]

Originally Posted by tenereefa

I am working with a female singer (christina aguilera style) that sings very loud and high. Her voice is in the louder and higher parts extremly harsh---lots of agressive midrange....
Need a mic-Preamp solution cause i dont want to EQ too much...

I am thinking about a combination of tlm49 and millenia or DAV (more money i cant spend now)
Hope u recommend the DAV -- much cheaper...

Or maybe im totally wrong any suggestions?





ah..i got Apogee converters into RME 9652 - Nuendo ....

Christina chain is telefunken Elam 251 >avalon M5>PT , her producer is Oscar ramirez.

[horseface]

Originally Posted by absrec

If Christina came to my studio and all I had to work with was my own gear, I would most likely use the following chain:

AKG 414B-ULS - API 312 - Distressor 10:1 - Avedis E15 Eq - Apogee AD8000

Obviously, experimentation is a great thing if you have the time, but this or a similar chain should get you by.

-Aaron

If she came to my studio, I'm lock her in a cupboard with escaped convicts or mental patients to stop her from polluting the musical landscape.

[Hershal Pearlma]

Christina worked with me.

her producer was Ron Fair

The chain was:

Neumann Elam 251 > Brent Averill 312 > Anthony Demaria Labs LA2 style compressor > Apogee A/D convertor.

Also her frequent visits to the washroom really stunk up the place.

[u b k]

what i want to know is, do you want your production to sound like christina? if you do, the 251 is the way to go.

but i got the sense maybe you want to soften and mitigate the harsher aspects? if so, run the other way. ribbon is good if it can handle the spl.


gregoire
del
ubk
.

[Relax]

Originally Posted by Hershal Pearlma

Also her frequent visits to the washroom really stunk up the place.

eeeewwwwwwwwwwwwww

[uncle duncan]

I guess you gotta decied whether to go for 'air' or 'meat'. The 251 is kinda airy, the ribbon would be more meaty. But the important thing is to make sure she's wearing chaps.

[tenereefa]

Thakns for the replies...

I already tried the 414 into my api 3124 ... faaar to much midrange
Same as the U87 (im going to sell it i think...)

Best results are the 414 into the SPL goldmike2 ...but still to harsh..

The Elam 251 is to expensive for me now....would love to buy one...

Nobody likes the tlm49????

I have no expierience with ribbons ... maybe i should try...

But im still with my TLM49 - DAV idea...



any way i keep on trying...

[mr.gefell]

Originally Posted by tenereefa

Thakns for the replies...

I already tried the 414 into my api 3124 ... faaar to much midrange
Same as the U87 (im going to sell it i think...)

Best results are the 414 into the SPL goldmike2 ...but still to harsh..

The Elam 251 is to expensive for me now....would love to buy one...

Nobody likes the tlm49????

I have no expierience with ribbons ... maybe i should try...

But im still with my TLM49 - DAV idea...



any way i keep on trying...

try this one

http://cgi.ebay.com/JZ-2-Recording-c...QQcmdZViewItem

[TonyBelmont]

Why not check out the Peluso 251 or the new P12. I've gotten good results with both of those mics and they are dirt cheap for what you get.

[Dave Derr]

Originally Posted by tenereefa

I am working with a female singer (christina aguilera style) that sings very loud and high. Her voice is in the louder and higher parts extremly harsh---lots of agressive midrange....
Need a mic-Preamp solution cause i dont want to EQ too much...

There are sooo many factors that affect the tonal quality. The singer and his/her mic technique is the first. The mic pre, compressor and eq all follow.

Having a vocal go from airy and soft to loud and shrill is an incredibly common phenomena. There are many ways to alleviate it, but the best is to start with the front end... the singer. Suggesting to soften the edge for the high notes isn't always going to work soooo... Moving the singer around the mic to find the most pleasant position is very important. Always keep in mind that moving a mic closer to the source will add bottom, and attenuate highs due to the proximity affect, and the phase dispersion. This is especially true on a large diaphram or ribbon mic. Sometimes moving the mic higher or lower will catch more "body" and less sibilence and "shrill".

Search for a mic that controls the midrange area 2Khz - 5KHz and complements the singer. It should be said that often the most pleasant "un-EQ'd" mic isn't always the best mic when its all said and done.

When tracking, its good to use as little EQ as possible, unless you are an experienced mix engineer and feel totally sure how its going to fit in later. But if you do eq, make it gentle and make GOOD notes. Pulling 3K - 4K a couple db in a womans voice can often smooth it out, making the low end and high end come forward. Adding some top zing is common also, above 10K. "Body" in a womans voice is often found around 300Hz.

Its not a bad idea to compress a little to control peaks, but in the quiet digital age, this can be done later without bringing up noise etc. Often people will compress (or not compress) what the singer hears differently from what goes to tape/hd. Not compressing what the singer hears, may make them adjust some of the harsh areas since they come screaming thru their monitor mix. But it can work against you too if it makes them move back from the mic, thinning their voice further.

Finally in mixdown, splitting the high harsh lines off to another track and applying a different EQ is a time tested success story. I have heard of people splitting a vocal track off onto 5 or 6 tracks or more... equing and using different affects and compression on them. This is sooo much easier today with DAWs than it was in the old days where you brought them up on all these different automated channels. Also, many great classic vocal sounds were achieved by riding the EQ as the song was mixed. Mutt Lange among others would spend hours having an engineer practice riding the EQ, often pulling out those midrange freqs that got irritating in certain vocal lines. Good Mastering engineers do this quite often after the record is mixed, trying to smooth out one or two problem areas with a quick EQ move.

Sorry for butting in but I was in need of a break and saw this thread. Ive had my share of overly dynamic singers.

[robmix]

Originally Posted by mr.gefell

Christina chain is telefunken Elam 251 >avalon M5>PT , her producer is Oscar ramirez.

Oscar is her Pro Tools guy and engineer. The vocal chain I saw him use everytime I visited them during the last record was 251 -> BAE 1272 -> EAR 660 -> PT.

When I've produced and engineered for Christina I've use a variety of chains.

First record, pop clean sound: Sony C800G -> BAE 1272 -> DBX 165 -> tape

Second record, more grit: 251 -> Neve 1073 -> EAR 660 -> PT

Various projects since the second record: 251 -> Wunder PEQ-1 -> EAR 660 -> PT

From the second record on we've tried to keep the vocal chain the same no matter who's producing. The only real variation that I know of has been 1272 vs. 1073 and other Neve-alikes. And I think Linda has used some different mics, but I can't confirm that.


.

[absrec]

Originally Posted by Hershal Pearlma

Christina worked with me.

her producer was Ron Fair

The chain was:

Neumann Elam 251 > Brent Averill 312 > Anthony Demaria Labs LA2 style compressor > Apogee A/D convertor.

The funny thing is that I was close. The even funnier thing is that I was still about $20,000 off!

[absrec]

Originally Posted by robmix

Oscar is her Pro Tools guy and engineer. The vocal chain I saw him use everytime I visited them during the last record was 251 -> BAE 1272 -> EAR 660 -> PT.

When I've produced and engineered for Christina I've use a variety of chains.

Her demo: AT 4033 -> Neve 3405 -> TL Audio C1 -> tape

First record, pop clean sound: Sony C800G -> BAE 1272 -> DBX 165 -> tape

Second record, more grit: 251 -> Neve 1073 -> EAR 660 -> PT

Various projects since the second record Second record: 251 -> Wunder PEQ-1 -> EAR 660 -> PT

From the second record on we've tried to keep the vocal chain the same no matter who's producing. The only real variation that I know of has been 1272 vs. 1073 and other Neve-alikes.


.

A local tech here in town has a line of pres that were apparently used on her voice on the first record. Who knows? Maybe they used a variety of chains for different things.

[Sqye]

Originally Posted by Dave Derr

There are sooo many factors that affect the tonal quality. The singer and his/her mic technique is the first. The mic pre, compressor and eq all follow.

Having a vocal go from airy and soft to loud and shrill is an incredibly common phenomena. There are many ways to alleviate it, but the best is to start with the front end... the singer. Suggesting to soften the edge for the high notes isn't always going to work soooo... Moving the singer around the mic to find the most pleasant position is very important. Always keep in mind that moving a mic closer to the source will add bottom, and attenuate highs due to the proximity affect, and the phase dispersion. This is especially true on a large diaphram or ribbon mic. Sometimes moving the mic higher or lower will catch more "body" and less sibilence and "shrill".

Search for a mic that controls the midrange area 2Khz - 5KHz and complements the singer. It should be said that often the most pleasant "un-EQ'd" mic isn't always the best mic when its all said and done.

When tracking, its good to use as little EQ as possible, unless you are an experienced mix engineer and feel totally sure how its going to fit in later. But if you do eq, make it gentle and make GOOD notes. Pulling 3K - 4K a couple db in a womans voice can often smooth it out, making the low end and high end come forward. Adding some top zing is common also, above 10K. "Body" in a womans voice is often found around 300Hz.

Its not a bad idea to compress a little to control peaks, but in the quiet digital age, this can be done later without bringing up noise etc. Often people will compress (or not compress) what the singer hears differently from what goes to tape/hd. Not compressing what the singer hears, may make them adjust some of the harsh areas since they come screaming thru their monitor mix. But it can work against you too if it makes them move back from the mic, thinning their voice further.

Finally in mixdown, splitting the high harsh lines off to another track and applying a different EQ is a time tested success story. I have heard of people splitting a vocal track off onto 5 or 6 tracks or more... equing and using different affects and compression on them. This is sooo much easier today with DAWs than it was in the old days where you brought them up on all these different automated channels. Also, many great classic vocal sounds were achieved by riding the EQ as the song was mixed. Mutt Lange among others would spend hours having an engineer practice riding the EQ, often pulling out those midrange freqs that got irritating in certain vocal lines. Good Mastering engineers do this quite often after the record is mixed, trying to smooth out one or two problem areas with a quick EQ move.

Sorry for butting in but I was in need of a break and saw this thread. Ive had my share of overly dynamic singers.

Nicely articulated. Thanks for the detailed post

And thanks for the real deal, robmix.

[wwittman]

If Christina came to Abbey Road in the 1960's they'd record her on their EMI desk.

if she came to the Record Plant they would have recorded her on their API or Spectra Sonics.

if she came to Olympic, they would have used their Helios.

and know what?
good engineers would have made her sound great (better than she ever DOES sound on her records) in all of those cases.

the choice of preamp has NOTHING to do with the source.

[Acoustic Cloud]

Originally Posted by wwittman

If Christina came to Abbey Road in the 1960's they'd record her on their EMI desk.

if she came to the Record Plant they would have recorded her on their API or Spectra Sonics.

if she came to Olympic, they would have used their Helios.

and know what?
good engineers would have made her sound great (better than she ever DOES sound on her records) in all of those cases.

the choice of preamp has NOTHING to do with the source.

Probably very painfully true... I was reading and waiting for someone to say at least something like this....

[tenereefa]

Originally Posted by wwittman

If Christina came to Abbey Road in the 1960's they'd record her on their EMI desk.

if she came to the Record Plant they would have recorded her on their API or Spectra Sonics.

if she came to Olympic, they would have used their Helios.

and know what?
good engineers would have made her sound great (better than she ever DOES sound on her records) in all of those cases.

the choice of preamp has NOTHING to do with the source.

Ok ... even better , dont have to waste more money....

[TonyBelmont]

Originally Posted by tenereefa

Ok ... even better , dont have to waste more money....

Assuming you owned one of those amazing consoles...

[Acoustic Cloud]

Why were they amazing??

[tenereefa]

Just one more question about the ELAM 251...
are u talking about the new ones?
http://www.telefunkenusa.com/product...tem=3&cat=mics


What is the street price and where can u get it in Europe?

[TonyBelmont]

Originally Posted by Acoustic Cloud

Why were they amazing??

EMI, API & Helios?... Those boards of that era had great mic pre's, which most modern large format analog consoles don't have....

[robmix]

Originally Posted by absrec

A local tech here in town has a line of pres that were apparently used on her voice on the first record. Who knows? Maybe they used a variety of chains for different things.

Could've been. On the first record every producer used their own chain, which made mixing and mastering more of a challenge. Ron and Christina took steps to find a more definitive sound for her, and that chain pretty much follows her around.

[robmix]

Originally Posted by wwittman

and know what?
good engineers would have made her sound great (better than she ever DOES sound on her records) in all of those cases.

the choice of preamp has NOTHING to do with the source.

Thanks . . . . . appreciate it

[Dave Derr]

Its so true that equipment has little to do with things these days. Everyone has 49 tracks, a four band parametric and compressor on every channel in their DAW, editing capabilities never seen before...

I saw a very famous engineer take some pretty mediocre sounding tracks, and move things around, fix pitch, eq wildly etc etc and voila! A hit record. A great engineer could take one SM57, a Mackie Mixer, and a couple compressors and do magic. Forget what he could do in Protools.

One of my best friends, John Patterson came into my old 16 track studio around 1990 and in about 10 min had a sound coming out of my speakers the likes I had never heard! I was sitting there thinking "Wow, its really not my equipment". He passed on so much knowlege just thru hanging and watching him.

I always kind of smile when people obsess over the latest converter or 39 bit resolution like this is going to change their lives. Just use your tools a lot, and compare what you do to your favorite records. Try to work with famous engineers too... its unbelievable what you will pick up. There are tons of tricks that dont have anything to do with equipment or what bit resolution you are using etc etc. Its about music, and learning how to fit things together to complement that music. Its developing your skills thru thousands of hours of practice and learning from others skilled in the art.

[RoundBadge]

Originally Posted by wwittman

and know what?
good engineers would have made her sound great (better than she ever DOES sound on her records) in all of those cases.

the choice of preamp has NOTHING to do with the source.

Wow.. Thats a pretty damn snobby dis on Rob Hoffman's work[who was also kind enough to share some technical info on how he did it above].. i think he's done a great job recording her

[neilio]

the right u-67 or try a manley gold or ref card, kinda scooped mids on the manleys but have great top end