OT: Live singing?

[JonathanD]

How do you guys go about setting up effects for live vocals. I am in a genera where I like to ahve different vocal effects of different parts. I have a midi cable running from my BNX3(which I am using less and less, but for those 2 or 3 songs and a midi controler for the Lexicon MX200). After this is an DBX EQ/compressor/limiter. TO run these how I would like to I carry a board and have it all in a rack. Is this too much to take around?

Any other suggestions?

Jonathan

[Thomas Wilburn]

I put a mike in front of my face and run the cable into the PA system.

 

Live music should be less about worrying "can we use cool effects here" and more "can the audience hear me in the first place, and am I in tune?"

[rumpelstiltskin.]

nothing else needs to be said.

 

however, i will open my mouth and ruin the sanguine perfection of TW's post. if you want to use effects on your vocals, you will need to do at least one, if not all, of three things. [1] you will have to find a vocal processor to run in-line between the mic and the mixer/house input. [2] you will have to find a multi-effects unit to use in the insert of your mic channel on the board. [3] you will have to use one or more multi-effects units in the aux loops of the house board.

 

fourth, you must spell genre correctly.

 

if you don't have control of the house sound, you really only get to do [1]. but then the sound person will hate you passionately. unless you arrange it with him beforehand and probably pay him. then he'll just think you're a douche. (i don't mean that to be insulting, it's just how sound people think.)

 

robb.

[JonathanD]

Being in tune and being heard should be easy and very important. I have that down in most situations(only played 1 outdoor gig and I didn't run sound).

 

Thomas, I am looking for a highly produced sound like Tool or Maralin Manson. Sometimes I would like to be able to laugh into a mic with a couple octive detune and a gut churning chorus/phaser. Thats just me, and some of you might not like this type of thing. I could care less....

I am asking if anyone else does this and if so... how?

Jonathan

[Tom Capasso]

I had the pleasure of singing through some kind of vocalizer effect (I don't remember the manufacturer or model). It was a rack-style unit and it was a small room with the PA right in front. We put the unit on the table next to the PA and went from mic to vocalizer to PA. Most of the gig it was on bypass (no effect). But there was a song that I sang harmony on, and 3 voices came out. It was cool, but I haven't done anything like that since.

 

To dovetail with robb, you need the right equipment with the right connections. And you need to have the gear protected (if it's rack gear, it needs to be in a case or the stage has to have a safe place for it). And going from mic to effect to PA is best.

 

While many PA rigs have an effects loop, I think that just adds to the complexity of your setup (having to run lots of cables back and forth). You want it simple. The sound person won't like it if you double the cables to the stage. And if you play a place that has the booth in the back, you're screwed with an effects loop setup.

 

Since my band's music doesn't require vocal effects, and since our setup is "busy" enough now, and since it takes lots of concentration for me to sing decently, I don't see me using something like this (like TW).

 

And Jonathan - how about just reading through your post before you hit "submit"? A few typing fixes would make it easier for the rest of us.

 

Tom

[jeremy c]

As Robb said, you've got two ways to do it. Run the mike into the processor and than out to the PA, or run the processor through the effects loop of the PA.

 

It depends on how far you are away from the PA, and who's running the PA. If someone else (outside of a band member) is running the PA I would definitely not recommend asking to plug something into an effects loop. You will not make a lot of friends doing that.

 

I understand what you're trying to do. It's not like you're wanting to plug an Antares auto-tune unit between your mike and the PA. (Not that there is anything wrong with that. :grin:)

 

There have a bunch of records with the singer singing through a vocoder (which could give you a nice Darth Vader sound: you probably could find a good use for that.)

 

Cher had a hit with a vocoder on the vocals. (Of course I hated it, but what do I know? )

 

I used to work with a singer/guitarist who ran his vocals through an Eventide Ultra-Harmonizer so that our two piece group could have three part harmony. It sounded very good, IMHO. Of course it was his PA system and we ran the sound from the "stage" (whatever corner of the room the two of us were jammed into ).

 

Since he seemed to play the songs in different keys every night (unfortunately like so many acoustic guitarists with capos), my job was to press the appropriate button on the midi pedal to change the key of the smart harmonizer on the Eventide.

 

I had about two seconds to figure what song he was playing, what key it was in, start playing bass and press the appropriate midi button. Sometimes for a song that changed key on the bridge, I had to hit the buttons a few times per song. (Fortunately, he didn't know too many songs like that. )

http://www.jeremycohenbass.com/stinkin.gif

 

By the way, while we are busting your chops about spelling, Maralin is a pretty name, but the guy you are talking about is named Marilyn.

http://www.marilynmanson.com.ar/pictures/marilyn-manson.jpg

[The Bear Jew]

As a fella who has played shows alongside many bands who used those vocal effects units onstage, I can tell you one thing:

Sound guys HATE them.

 

I think it's because the folks who program them often have the various patches at different levels, so they'll go from having a generally acceptable mic level to a BLARINGLY LOUD one to a ridiculously quiet one... sometimes all in the same song.

 

And, of course, if they don't know the material, the soundguy will be stuck riding your mic levels for your whole set in order to dodge feedback and make sure you are audible, which tends to make them a little ornery.

 

The singer from my old band LOVED putting effects on his vocals in the studio, and we actually bought him a nice vocal effects processor. Then we found out from one of the sound guys at one of our usual venues that those units are a serious pain in the butt for sound people.

 

As Robb says, in order to do this kind of stuff, you need to be in control of your sound... or at least have your own sound guy who knows your tunes and can handle these duties.

 

Otherwise, as Robb also says, the sound guys at venues will, indeed, think you are a douche.

 

My advice?

Forget the vocal effects unless you're paying someone to help you make it go or run the sound yourself. Singing into a microphone is an art unto itself, and you'd be suprised how many effects you can achieve without the help of digital jiggery. Hell, the human voice is capable of SO many things all by itself. Hone that down, and see if you really, really need the effects.

 

[JonathanD]

Thanks guys.

Right now I have the FX sends (effects loop) in use. I have all the Effects levels already set, plus I run a compressor/limiter just in case something funky happens. All the sound guy has to do is mix the vocals in and leave it. (I and the main vocalist can back off of a mic) Its a dual processor so I can have seperate effect/or bypassed either channel. It seems to be working well.

 

I agree with you CMDN but there often times when I like a different sound.

Ok OK oK Maryellin. I mean marilyn.

 

I guess I will just have to get out there and try it.

Jonathan

[_Sweet Willie_]

And Jonathan - how about just reading through your post before you hit "submit"? A few typing fixes would make it easier for the rest of us.

 

Or re-read the post after you've posted and use the edit function to clean up the typos a bit.

 

I realize that it may not seem like a big deal, but it does affect the way what you have to say is read and interpreted.

 

Peace.

--sweetness

 

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

I was thinking about this thread and well, yes... the soundman is probably going to object to weird processors going into his PA. Unless, of course, he's your mixer and it's your PA.

 

But what about getting a small amp just for the treated vocals? You could run the treated (or "wet") vocals into the amp and the sound guy could simply mike up that amp. And if the amp will be used only for vocals and will definitely get miked up, it doesn't have to be a BIG or a powerful amp.

 

You could probably get an A/B box or a Y cable (or something) to make sure your mike's output is still going out to the desk when you don't want to cough into an octaver or whatever.

 

That'd be one way of keeping the sound guys happy.

[rumpelstiltskin.]

Sound guys HATE them.

 

I think it's because the folks who program them often have the various patches at different levels, so they'll go from having a generally acceptable mic level to a BLARINGLY LOUD one to a ridiculously quiet one... sometimes all in the same song.

 

that is essentially what i was saying. most guitar players also don't know how to set their distortion and effect levels, and they also annoy sound people.

 

Singing into a microphone is an art unto itself, and you'd be suprised how many effects you can achieve without the help of digital jiggery. Hell, the human voice is capable of SO many things all by itself. Hone that down, and see if you really, really need the effects.

 

i was watching a thing about kenny rogers on PBS the other day. they showed him singing a ballad on a stage where the band was in a pit in the center, so it was just him working the crowd in 360 degrees. man, that guy played with the mic more than anyone i've ever seen. and it sounded studio good. he knew what he was doing.

 

work the mic.

 

robb.

[The Bear Jew]

Singers who really know how to work a microphone are amazing to see... and hear... especially when they can incorporate those dynamics into their body language enough to sort of hide the fact that they're "working" the mic.

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

i was watching a thing about kenny rogers on PBS the other day. they showed him singing a ballad on a stage where the band was in a pit in the center, so it was just him working the crowd in 360 degrees. man, that guy played with the mic more than anyone i've ever seen. and it sounded studio good. he knew what he was doing.

 

work the mic.

 

robb.

 

 

Hell, if Kenny Rogers can do THIS:

 

Thomas, I am looking for a highly produced sound like Tool or Maralin Manson. Sometimes I would like to be able to laugh into a mic with a couple octive detune and a gut churning chorus/phaser.

 

 

then he's goooood!

[TimR]

Jon,

 

The amount of gear and how you carry it is going to come down to experience. If you gig regularly, you will soon get fed up with multiple journeys back to the car/van to bring your gear in. This wasnt an issue with me until recently when we did a gig where couldnt get parked close, all gear had to be transported by elevator and all cases had to be put back into the cars while we played.

Needless to say this week I bought a padded gig bag with space for my music and cables.

 

Dont listen to the others, they are philistines, as far as Im concerned music is in the ear of the beholder, the more different colours and tones the better as long as they have a place in the whole.

 

As far as the soundman is concerned his problem is not riding the faders, it is frequency mixing. If you are singing along without effects then all of a sudden kick in the Octaver, your voice will muddy the mix. What can he do? Either cut the bass/middle on your voice or cut the bass/middle on the rest of the band. This is going to take some special skills to do this on the fly. I recently ran the sound for a band with 2 keyboards, 2 guitars and a bass. One of the guitars hit a complex chorus type effect that completely threw the mix into confusion. Not least because of the frequency masking as was causing to all the other instruments. At the very least you need to sound check all the effects you will use, and not leave it up to the sound guy to try to dial you in while the audience is thinking wtf. If you dont have a sound guy and are relying on a basic mix, you should still do a basic sound check, and maybe pay attention in rehearsals to what fx everyone else is using at the same time.

 

Why do soundmen complain. Its their job! Its like truck drivers complaining when they have to change gear going up a hill. Surely something like this should present some excitement in their mundane lives.

 

[jeremy c]

If I ever have my own touring band, the auditions for soundman will be much tougher than the auditions for any of the band members.

 

The soundman has more control over the sound of the band than any player in the band.

[Phil W]

It was my great pleasure to tour and gig over a few years with a band with their own soundman once. It was well worth the expense - made a tremendous difference.

[jeremy c]

Yeah, I've done that too. And everyone in the band had their own monitor mix.

 

Mine had a tiny bit of lead vocals and piano in it and nothing else. (I had a small bass amp behind me.)

[Kramer Ferrington III.]

It was my great pleasure to tour and gig over a few years with a band with their own soundman once. It was well worth the expense - made a tremendous difference.

 

Oh, definitely. Knowing that the guy out front is really trying his best to give you The Greatest Sound Ever is fantastic. It's amazingly better than having to deal with a different guy each night.