Vocal enhancement??

[dj chaze]

im trying to make a remix and add some vocal but when I play back the track with the vocal i chosen, it sound kind of amature. The vocals do go with the track & it sounds nice.

 

But i feel like i need to do something else so they can mix well together. it kind of hard to example.

 

 

Need some help. Thanks...

[Eriksimon]

im trying to make a remix and add some vocal but when I play back the track with the vocal i chosen, it sound kind of amature.

 

That's a pretty useless description, honestly. Just bounce out a couple of phrases that best show what you mean by "amature". Do it in MP3 or M4a, zip it and attach it to your post here, so we can have a listen. Or put it on soundcloud, and post a link here.

[dj chaze]

http://soundcloud.com/chaze/fedde-le-grand-vs-booka-shade

 

thanks.

[slamthecrank]

http://soundcloud.com/chaze/fedde-le-grand-vs-booka-shade

 

thanks.

 

Well, that track is 10 minutes long.

 

Care to tell us exactly WHERE you are referring to? There are lots of vocal parts I heard within the first minute or so. Have any examples of what you're going for?

[bcfromfl]

Nine minutes and seventeen seconds...omg...

 

First of all, your subject heading talks about "vocals", yet all I heard (in the minute or so I listened) were vocal effects. They are percussive, maybe, enhancing a sense of rhythm, etc., synthetic, robotic, but are not vocals, per se. The fact that they are effects makes the standard "mold" they might fit into open to a much broader interpretation. When you say they are "amateurish", we are unable to determine what's in your head that would qualify them as "good" or "bad" -- i.e., what are you trying to achieve. If, on the other hand, you were recording someone like Barbra Streisand using an SM58 instead of a Neumann u87, then we could easily say that the vocals are amateurish. The performance certainly wouldn't be, but the recording would be.

 

In order to perhaps offer more help, we need to know more information, like, what sort of mic are you using, and/or what's in your signal chain? I would venture to guess that not many folks in this messageboard do the sort of thing you've presented, but maybe giving us a starting point might end up with a response you might find helpful.

 

And, finally, allow me a bit of editorializing. Loops are the worst thing to ever happen to music composition...

[Alan Shields]

First of all, your subject heading talks about "vocals", yet all I heard (in the minute or so I listened) were vocal effects. They are percussive, maybe, enhancing a sense of rhythm, etc., synthetic, robotic, but are not vocals, per se. The fact that they are effects makes the standard "mold" they might fit into open to a much broader interpretation. When you say they are "amateurish", we are unable to determine what's in your head that would qualify them as "good" or "bad" -- i.e., what are you trying to achieve. If, on the other hand, you were recording someone like Barbra Streisand using an SM58 instead of a Neumann u87, then we could easily say that the vocals are amateurish. The performance certainly wouldn't be, but the recording would be.

 

+1 Context is important but Barbara Streisand, come on!

 

And, finally, allow me a bit of editorializing. Loops are the worst thing to ever happen to music composition...

 

You forgot to add IMO to your editorial. FWIW I don't usually use loops and I don't like the vast majority of loop based music but that's just my view and doesn't make this type of music any less valid or 'musical'.

 

I have auditioned the supplied apple loops a few times and although I don't use them I usually find myself thinking "wow, who played this", many of them are truly excellent, IMHO of course.

 

Alan.

[slamthecrank]

 

+1 Context is important but Barbara Streisand, come on!

 

Hahaa, I totally read that "come on" in Gob Bluth's voice....

 

 

You forgot to add IMO to your editorial.

 

Hmm. I don't think you understand the definition of "editorialize" - so, here ya go:

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/editorialize ::

"–verb (used without object), -ized, -iz·ing.

1. to set forth one's position or opinion on some subject in, or as if in, an editorial.

 

2. to inject personal interpretations or opinions into an otherwise factual account."

 

[bcfromfl]

I could've chosen any number of great singers, but I chose Barbra as an example. Luciano Pavarotti, Brian Stokes Mitchell, Renee Fleming, Celine Dion, David Pittsinger, Kristin Chenoweth, Robert Goulet, Nathan Gunn, to name a few, are all great singers who need and use very little vocal processing, but depend (or depended, RIP) upon the best mics to capture every nuance they evoke into their singing. To use a lesser mic with their voices would be a crime. Despite my choice of singling out one singer in my description, was my point still clear?

 

For those of you who doubt the greatness of Streisand, watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIxV-yDDRE8 Her attention to dynamics, emphasis, enunciation, timing, vowels, etc., are unparalleled, and she is even admired by the likes of Placido Domingo. Even on this house mic, her voice is still silky.

 

My intent was not to hijack this thread into another discussion, and for that, I apologize to the OP.

 

-Bruce