confused on recording vocals....

1

187

Guest
Kay this has been bothering me alot lately.When recording vocals are you supposed to track it "in the beat" or "over the beat"...

aka Over the mixed down beat vs recording in the mix amongst drums,samples,instruments etc?
 
well if you making your own beats the best way to do it is recording "recording in the mix" that way you can mix down all the instruments among with the vocals.

Now me i dont make beats i just rap, so i always rap over the mixed down beat and then i mix my vocals and beat very good and the song ends up sounding great,

skills baby skills....lol
 
You should really record vocals with the beat sperated. Thing is you have to have enouhg trakcs to do this and you also have o have the beat sperated.

Back in the day Everyting would be seperated, vocals, instruments ect ubtil the mixdown process.
.

Undergournd and Indie artists are recording to mostly 2 track ( A mixed version ) of the beat and mixing the vocals down on top of that. This is whay most mixtapes sound like ****.

Best way is to have it all spread apart on as many tracks as you need :)
 
don't think of vocals as simply vocals. to me, vocals are just a much of an instrument as anything else in the track. vocals, at times, need to be tweaked, eq'd, and mixed just like anything else in the track.

if you have no choice then you'll have to two-track the vocals the best you can. if you have the choice of mixing the vocals in amongst the rest of your tracks, then do it.

side project - try it both ways on the same or similar track and see what you come up with.
 
187 said:
Kay this has been bothering me alot lately.When recording vocals are you supposed to track it "in the beat" or "over the beat"...

aka Over the mixed down beat vs recording in the mix amongst drums,samples,instruments etc?
Click to expand...

When recording, it doesn't really matter if the beat is seperated or not. It's at the mixing stage that this is important. It might actually be easir to record to a two track mix as this eases the pressure on the cpu, especially if you have a lot of effects and vsti's in your track.
 
187 said:
Kay this has been bothering me alot lately.When recording vocals are you supposed to track it "in the beat" or "over the beat"...

aka Over the mixed down beat vs recording in the mix amongst drums,samples,instruments etc?
Click to expand...

Ummm, Here is my input on it!

I personally record everything onto separate tracks and then mix down the whole thing after the fact. I am not too keen on tracking vocals over an already mixed down beat. Here is why:

Sometimes you would have to adjust certain frequencies within certian tracks in the music as well to get everything to sit correctly.

If you have the beat already mixed how would you go about adjusting lets say a flute that seems to be slightly clashing with your female vocalist?

If that flute is already in 2 track format then to EQ the flute will result in EQing the whole instrumental and might make things slightly un-balanced.

Does this help?
 
CubaseRox said:


Sometimes you would have to adjust certain frequencies within certian tracks in the music as well to get everything to sit correctly.

If you have the beat already mixed how would you go about adjusting lets say a flute that seems to be slightly clashing with your female vocalist?

If that flute is already in 2 track format then to EQ the flute will result in EQing the whole instrumental and might make things slightly un-balanced.

Does this help?
Click to expand...

All that comes under mixing the song and not recording the vocal. You can always record the vocal to the two track and import the vocal to your multi-track project. You can then eq the flute to you liking.

If I have a project with 15 tracks and have reverbs, delays, compressors etc inserted on several tracks, my cpu will be pushing 80% and recording like that will cause dropouts in my system. I simply mix down the music to two track, freeze the 15 individual tracks to free up cpu and then record the vocal. After that, I unfreeze the tracks, delete the two track mix and proceed to mix the song with all the tracks seperated.
 
^^ if your system bogs down then that is understandable and neccessary.

Fortunately I dont have that problem, even with 20-30 tracks running with effects. I rearely use the freeze function (no need to). I am anal-retentiuve also when it comes to disk space backing-up reasons). when you use the freeze fucntions it creates a file which will take up disk space. I dont know if you un-freeze it deletes the file but I do know that it creates it. I like to keep my projects relatively small and clutter free (meaning no parts or files or images that arent being used in the song shouldnt reside on the disk anymore). I know you can use the clean-up function in Cubase but you really do have to be careful with that feature for as you can erase an important file and then your project is useless. :D


I also record my audio onto a fast SCSI drive and I have Cubase make audio high priority. Once in a while if the computer is on for too long I would get some system bogs but for the most part I am ok a good 90% of the time.
 
CubaseRox said:
^^ if your system bogs down then that is understandable and neccessary.

Fortunately I dont have that problem, even with 20-30 tracks running with effects.
Click to expand...

Damn! If I have 17 tracks with a reverb on one send, delay on another, eq and some other FX on a few of the tracks, compressor on a bus and automation running, I'd be lucky if I can get the audio to play for more than a few seconds without dropping out. I'm hoping to upgrade my processor soon and maybe my motherboard.
 
^^ what are you using now?

I have:

MSI 850 pro motherboard w/intel chipset
Intel 1.3Ghz P4
256MB Rambus PC800 memory
1 - 40GB Maxtor 7,200RPM IDE drive (data)
1 - 18GB Seagate 10,000RPM SCSI drive (audio)
ATI 9200se Radeon graphics card
AC '97 soundcard (windows sounds only)
Echo Gina/24 (For recording apps only)
Adaptec Ultra160 SCSI controller card
Belkin 10/100Mbps Ethernet card
16X Pioneer DVD-ROM
52x Sony CD-RW

all enclosed in a 4U Rackmount case, with quiet PSU and CPU fans. No case fan though but the internal temp is fine.

Running Windows XP pro!
And I do have it plugged into a surge protector. And I also have a UPS this way if the power fails the battery would keep the computer on. And it is linked to the COM 1 port to initiate auto-shut down incase the power failure goes beyond 2 minutes. The UPS can power my PC for 15 minutes. I think it was worth the $70 investment, I had a power surge once and it damn near fried my motherboard!

My computer is starting to get a bit slower from the demands of the newer software hogging up resources, but I suspect if I upgrade my memory to 512MB and up I could possibly squeeze a few more years out of this one.
 
Last edited:
Windows 2000 Professional
1.33 megahertz AMD Athlon

60 Gigabytes 7200 RPM Hard Drive (WDC)

LITE-ON LTR-40125S [CD-ROM drive]

512MB SD RAM
Edirol UR-80 audio/midi interface
MPU-401 Compatible MIDI Device

I'm not sure about the motherboard but I think it has an SiS chipset. I've been doing research and I've come to the conclusion that I need a new motherboard that supports DDR RAM and maybe an Athlon 64 processor.

Am I correct with that conclusion?
 
^^ Yeah I might go as far as saying that your SD ram is probably giving you the trouble.

DDR (double density) is better than SDRam (single density) sticks.

As for the chipset on the motherboard I am not that quite sure, I only really have experience with Intel CPU's and I do know that if you use a P4 you shoudl get a motherboard with an intel chipset. I am not sure what chipset to get with an Athalon CPU though.
 
Mr.Curlz said:
Windows 2000 Professional
1.33 megahertz AMD Athlon

60 Gigabytes 7200 RPM Hard Drive (WDC)

LITE-ON LTR-40125S [CD-ROM drive]

512MB SD RAM
Edirol UR-80 audio/midi interface
MPU-401 Compatible MIDI Device

I'm not sure about the motherboard but I think it has an SiS chipset. I've been doing research and I've come to the conclusion that I need a new motherboard that supports DDR RAM and maybe an Athlon 64 processor.

Am I correct with that conclusion?
Click to expand...

Well,
#1 you need a second hard drive. Keep all your music files and programs on the second drive and keep windows on the first drive. If you have them on the same drive, it'll freeze and crash alot.
#2 you need atleast a gig of memory for your system to run decently.

#3 check out www.musictweaks.com
It has alot of good tips on how to get your windows os running good for music.
 
C-Lovely said:
Well,
#1 you need a second hard drive. Keep all your music files and programs on the second drive and keep windows on the first drive.
Click to expand...

I would keep the OS and programs on one drive and the second drive would be strictly for audio. Its not neccessary to keep your audio software on the same drive as your audio. Secondly I recommend a fast drive such as a 10,000RPM SATA or a fast SCSI drive for audio, your OS and programs can reside on a 7200RPM IDE.

If you have them on the same drive, it'll freeze and crash alot.
Click to expand...

Having everything on the same drive wont make it crash (if your system has crashed because of that then most likely you have other issues). There are several sound reasons for using multiple drives, the main reason for me is that I know my audio is safe incase my primary OS disk decides to crash, or if I accidently screw up a system setting, at least my audio projects would be safe. Secondly, my audio disk is a fast SCSI drive and I have that for speed and reliability, using DAW software and running a bunch of audio tracks simultaneously will bog down a slow 7200RPM IDE drive so I use a fast drive strictly for audio.

#2 you need atleast a gig of memory for your system to run decently.
Click to expand...

The more RAM the better but you dont need 1GB for a computer to run decently, I would say 512MB is the minimum and 256MB is the absolute minimum. Windows XP has a minimum of 128MB but like I said I wouldnt push it that low, thats why I said 256MB should be the absolute minumum. I myself have 256MB Rambus and my system runs ok, not great but OK, If I had 512MB I am sure it would run very decent.
 
Last edited:
Well, my RAM meter hardly ever goes over 10%. DOes that indicate that RAM is not the problem??? I don't know. I've been doing some research and I found out that my mobo is from PC-Chips and that it's very low end. I might try getting a new motherboard, DDR RAM and a faster processor.

How much for those SCSI drives anyway?
 
Mr.Curlz said:
Well, my RAM meter hardly ever goes over 10%. Does that indicate that RAM is not the problem???
Click to expand...

10% is pretty low considering if your running a multitude of tracks/plugins.


I've been doing some research and I found out that my mobo is from PC-Chips and that it's very low end. I might try getting a new motherboard, DDR RAM and a faster processor.
Click to expand...

PC-Chips I hear is kinda low-end, but I never actually used one to comment on its performance. Here is a list of some motherboards that fall into the top brands:

-Asus
-Intel
-Abit
-MSI

Any of those MB's are sufficient to use, there might be others but I dont know of any. Note: If you are going to use an Intel CPU be sure to get a MB with the Intel chipset to assure full compatability.


How much for those SCSI drives anyway?
Click to expand...

I bouhgt my SCSI set-up for $500 about 4 years ago. NOw you can probably have the same set-up for $100 - $200 pending where you buy it from.

I have the Adaptec 29160N ultra160 SCSI controller card, and I use ta Seagate ST318406LW 18GB HD.

I know 18GB isnt much, but honestly I rarely use over 4GB's at a time. Once a project is complete it gets backed up to a CD-R and erased from the drive to make room.

good luck!
 
wouldn't it be better if you run 1gig RAM, 40g external hardrive. So that you leave all the recording,mixing software alone, while your samples, sounds and audio stuff is in the external hard drive. Easy to carry around as you travel....
 
booyachic said:
wouldn't it be better if you run 1gig RAM,
Click to expand...

Yes the more RAM the better.

.....40g external hardrive. So that you leave all the recording,mixing software alone, while your samples, sounds and audio stuff is in the external hard drive. Easy to carry around as you travel....
Click to expand...

I wouldn't recommend that.... It would be easier to carry around a few $0.30 CD-R's with whatever you need to take on the road instead of a $200 external HD which could be lost, stolen, damaged etc. If that happens (and it can especially when transporting) then you would lose everything.

It would be better to have a DVD burner, and DVD-R's fit up to 4.3GB's of data on them. You can even use the DVD-RW's so you can re-use the discs several times.
 
Definitely go for the AMD Athlon 64s. From my experience, they are very fast and stable processors, though usually not as pricey as Intel processors. I would also reccomend 1 gig of ram, clocked at at least 3200.

As far as motherboards, Asus, Abit, and MSI are all great brands, though I would also recommend Gigabyte, whos motherboard I'm using (preferably the K8NS series).

You could always go big and get yourself an Athlon 64 X2, which is a dual core processor. Though expect a hefty $1,000 price tag. ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top