Tips for Controlling Vocal Sibilance - theproaudiofiles.com

Tips for Controlling Vocal Sibilance Posted on March 7th, 2012. Written by Rob Schlette.

Tips for Controlling Vocal Sibilance

Posted on March 7th, 2012. Written by Rob Schlette.

Vocal sibilance is an unpleasant tonal harshness that can happen during consonant syllables (like S, T, and Z), caused by disproportionate audio dynamics in upper midrange frequencies. Sibilance is often centered between 5kHz to 8kHz, but can occur well above that frequency range.
This problem is usually caused by the actual vocal formant, but can also be exaggerated by microphone placement and technique. This article will discuss some ways to control vocal sibilance, and keep the problem from becoming a musical distraction.

Sibilance at the Source (best read with sibilant whistle)

In phonetic terms, sibilance comes from a type of vocal formant called a fricative consonant. During these sorts of utterances, the airway (usually the mouth) is drastically constricted by two anatomical features, like the teeth, tongue, or palette.
This pressurization causes some amount of noise that forms the consonant sounds we would recognize from a phase like, “Sally sits sideways on the tennis trolley.” Sibilance is a very necessary feature of human speech, but when there’s (subjectively) too much noise created during these consonants, we get a very distracting harshness.
It isn’t really practical or productive to address micro-muscular vocal technique during a session, so your best bet to mitigate sibilance at the source is microphone selection and placement. Here are a few suggestions:

• Every vocalist is remarkably different, so don’t pre-suppose that anything you’ve tried before will or will not work again.
• Be sure to leave some space between your vocalist and the microphone. Twelve to eighteen inches would be a nice starting point.
• A pop filter won’t do anything to help with sibilance.
• Once you find a microphone and distance combination that helps, try angling the microphone downward 10 to 15 degrees to place the 0-degree axis toward the throat instead of the sibilant source. 

Audio Dynamics Processing

Vocal sibilance is a phenomenon of disproportionate dynamics within an isolated frequency range. In other words, it is a problem of too much loudness contrast within a small frequency range of a waveform that has a dynamic profile of its own.
‘De-essing’ is the classic compressor technique used to address vocal sibilance through processing. In fact, de-essing is just one example of many uses for compression that is conditioned on a limited frequency band, or a modified harmonic profile.

De-esser Signal Flow

Audio dynamics processors like compressors and expanders contain two signal paths:

1. The audio path, which is subject to conditional gain reduction and;
2. The sidechain or ‘key’ path, which the gain reduction is conditioned on.

In short, gain reduction happens (or not) in the audio path based on the interaction between the sidechain signal and the detector settings (i.e. threshold and time constants). By placing an EQ in the sidechain path, we can further condition gain reduction on user definable frequency conditions.
The de-esser technique typically uses a narrow peak EQ in the sidechain path to boost the most offensive sibilant frequencies. This EQ exaggerates the dynamic difference between the sibilant band and the rest of the vocal waveform, making it much easier to achieve gain reduction during those consonants (and only then).
A pre-configured de-esser may provide an interface as simple as a compressor threshold and the peak EQ center frequency. These often work just fine. For more detailed control, one could patch an EQ into the sidechain of a relatively fast compressor, or use any number of compressor plug-ins that provide detailed EQ in the sidechain path.
There are lots of great techniques based on this signal flow, so spend some time with it. Frankly, de-essing is the least of what you can do by adding frequency conditions to your gain reduction.

Other Precautions

When you’re recording a vocal performance that may have a sibilance problem, resist the urge to compress the signal in the channel path. Over-compression can exaggerate sibilance. Instead, try using a fader to level the vocal performance, or just record with an adequate amount of headroom.
The same applies to the mixing process. Once you’ve done your best to control vocal sibilance, try using a fader and automation to maintain a consistent vocal volume in the mix. If you simply must instantiate a compressor on every vocal track, keep the attack time slow (> 30ms), and the ratio low.
Finally, don’t listen too loudly when you mix. That’s good general advice, but quality control issues like sibilance highlight its importance. Try a control room volume of 78-83dB(C) SPL. You might be surprised how much detail you’re suddenly able to hear.

Source Post:
http://theproaudiofiles.com/vocal-sibilance/

Tips for Controlling Vocal Sibilance - theproaudiofiles.com

The Expensive Vocal Sound And Other Unicorns

The Expensive Vocal Sound And Other Unicorns

The Expensive Vocal Sound And Other Unicorns

Getting Proper Vocal Sounds-Live Sound Touring Engineers Give Mix Magazine Tips on Getting a Proper Vocal Sound Onstage

When you're working with a vocal-oriented artist or group, time is a major factor. A fix for placing a vocal in a group is to assign all instrumentation to two groups so that the stereo image remains the same as it was in the stereo bus. Bring those up to two group-out masters panned hard-left/right. Leave all of your vocals, lead and backgrounds on the stereo bus. Insert a digital delay on the left and right of that stereo group and increase the delay setting between 2 and 6 ms for left and right. (Remember to turn off any feedback gain settings.) You can then tune the distance between the band and your vocals. Then, time-delay your entire P.A. back to the drums using the delay inside the house crossover or EQ.
—Howard Lindeman

With the SiDD software for the XTA DP324, I can pull up each channel individually in my laptop and fine-tune it to each vocalist's specific needs. For instance, when I identify very particular frequency points in a singer's voice, such as 2.5 kHz or 3 kHz that are accentuated when they hit certain levels, using the dynamic EQ feature, I can attenuate exactly those frequency points without deleting that frequency content when the level falls below threshold. The memory presets are also valuable for the bass vocal artist, allowing settings for each bass vocal application, as well as the artist switching to lead vocal on certain songs. I route the extra output from that particular channel on the SiDD to a separate channel on the mix console, which assists in the cue/listen function.
—Dave Farber

We have all faced the problem at some point in our career where your vocal mics are grabbing a lot of the backline and cymbals from the kit. A cool little problem-solver for this is to use a product called Mic-Mute (www.micmute.com). These are infrared-activated gates that plug in between the microphone and the cable right at the mic stand. They are easily adjustable with trim pots for threshold and decay, and they also run off of phantom power. These are great for cleaning up your mix. I've had great success with these with a number of bands — especially when a singer or guitar player stands in the center of the stage in front of the drum kit.
—Fabrizio Del Monte


Getting Proper Vocal Sounds-Live Sound Touring Engineers Give Mix Magazine Tips on Getting a Proper Vocal Sound Onstage

Getting Proper Vocal Sounds-Live Sound Touring Engineers Give Mix Magazine Tips on Getting a Proper Vocal Sound Onstage

Anatomy of a Tear-Jerker - WSJ.com

Why Adele's 'Someone Like You' Makes Everyone Cry - WSJ.com

Anatomy of a Tear-Jerker - WSJ.com

Diss the Hiss_EM Magazine

Diss the Hiss

Diss the Hiss
10/13/2011

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, “sibilant” (the adjective form of sibilance) is defined as “having, containing or producing the sound of or a sound resembling that of the s or the sh in sash.” More telling, perhaps, is the contextual example the dictionary provides: “a sibilant snake.” This emphasizes the strength and importance of the ssss sound. Sibilance, as it is referred to in recording circles, is a collective of consonant and combination sounds that tend to show up harshly in vocal recordings, including s, sh, c and ch sounds. On the other hand, de-essing is, as the name applies, the act of removing or lowering those sibilant sounds from a recording. Knowing what causes sibilance and how to de-ess will shine some light on how to take your basement and bedroom vocal recordings to a more polished level.
WHAT'SSS THE PROBLEM?

Sibilance is a natural phenomenon of spoken language. The particular collective of sibilant sounds are crucial to many words and phrases in just about any language (though they show up more in some than others). The problem is, when it comes to musical vocal recordings (or even simple spoken-word), the sibilant sounds often show up many decibels louder than most of the other sounds and can be quite harsh to the ears if they aren't corrected. The problem rears its ugly head to a greater or lesser degree depending upon the specific singer on hand, and it can be enhanced (or reduced) in a number of ways related to the recording process, including mic placement and proximity, the sound of the recording room or space, applied compression and the engineer's choice of microphones. Because each recording situation — not to mention each singer's voice and studio experience — is different, there are no hard and fast rules to speak of. But for starters, follow these basic tenets: If you have choices, be very selective with your mics when recording. Or when purchasing a mic for a specific singer and project, find one that does not overly emphasize the sibilant sounds, and use your own ears as the judge. Then apply that same care to how you place the mic for the recording sessions — if you are in a highly reflective space, avoid placement too close to walls or right in the middle of the room, and experiment with the distance from the vocalist's mouth — close enough for clarity and strong overall presence, far enough to avoid the snake syndrome. If you wish to use compression, try using it for the express purpose of de-essing, which is covered below.
SQUASH THOSE SOUNDS

The value in de-essing is in yielding a more even-toned, professional-sounding recording, with much less (or ultimately none) of the harshness of overly emphasized sss, sh and ch sounds. De-essing can be achieved in a number of similar, yet different ways. The most common is sidechained, frequency-dependent compression, whereby an equalizer is inserted into a compressor's sidechain, and a chosen band of frequencies that spans the sibilant sounds is boosted by several decibels. Because the boosted “esses” will trigger the compressor more strongly, the compressor will reduce the overall signal at precisely those harsh points. However, because the entire signal will be compressed, an increased emphasis is placed on the compressor's attack and release times if you want this to succeed without “pumping” artifacts. Start with a very fast attack time and fairly fast release time, and slow them down only as necessary. Again, use your ears as the judge. (For more on sidechaining, read the Phantom Power article “Do the Dip” in the August 2007 issue of Remix or on remixmag.com.)

A cruder but still useful way to de-ess is to process the vocal with just an EQ, using very selective notching-out of the troublesome sibilant frequency bands. That will color the resulting recording more, since the notch will affect more than just the sibilant portions, but if you don't have access to a compressor with a sidechain, this may be a viable alternative. If you are fortunate enough to own a dynamic parametric EQ, your problem may be more simply solved as you zero in on the sibilant frequencies. When the vocalist belts those out, the EQ responds in kind by reducing those frequencies.

For another technique, use multiband compression; thankfully, more and more DAWs today, such as Cakewalk Sonar 7 Producer Edition ($619; www.cakewalk.com) and the new MOTU Digital Performer 6 ($795; www.motu.com), include these highly useful tools in the standard bundle. Just as with the EQ in the sidechain description earlier, the idea here is to determine the frequency range of the sibilance and more heavily compress just that range, while leaving the other bands either unprocessed or much more lightly compressed. Even a simple 2-band compressor could do the trick, but it may prove even better if you can pass through frequencies both above and below the sibilant range with a 3-band (or more) compressor.

As a third option, apply some good old-fashioned elbow grease in your DAW. Use your automation curves and draw in explicit drops in volume wherever troublesome sibilance occurs. The downside of course is the time required to do that very effectively, yet the upside is the opposite: that surgeon's level of control that you have to sculpt the perfect vocal track. For some engineers these days, this level of micro-tweaking has become standard fare, just like tape splicing became in the pre-Pro Tools, Cro-Magnon recording days.

The above techniques are not necessarily just for minding your “esses” and “cees.” You can use them to tame long, drawn-out screams; Ps, Bs, and Ts; and other strong-attack consonants and even sounds unrelated to vocals, such as overly boomy bass, saxophone squelches, VU-pinning trumpet blasts and many other unruly hot volume troublemakers. Try out these tips, but as always, practice makes perfect.

Diss the Hiss_EM Magazine

How to Get the Best Performance From Your Vocalist | Audio Issues

This is a guest post by Kyle M. Bagley. If you want to submit a guest post, please see the guidelines in the author box below.

Getting a great recording from musicians often takes more than just choosing the right microphone or preamp. In the end, it is a great performance that will define the song and its impact.

Engineers use a series of simple techniques to get a great recording, making the singer most comfortable and using psychology on top of their engineering knowledge to craft the sound they’re looking for.
Who’s In The Room?

The first and most important consideration is who will be present for the recording. In general, singers are more comfortable with fewer people in the room, which can be a departure from their bandmates who may like to record in large groups.

Other factors, including what the singer hears in their headphones and the vibe of the room will greatly affect the performance’s energy level. It is your job to shape this energy to fit the mood of the song for the perfect take.
Lights

Lowering the lights in the room or booth will generally quiet a vocalist and bring the energy level down. Some musicians prefer this lighting, as it is easier on the eyes. However, be aware that for long sessions, a dark room might also make your singer tired.

Lamps give the singer ultimate control, especially if they can be pointed and/or moved to enable music and lyric reading without making anyone uncomfortable. They are also a solution for buzzing overhead fluorescent light fixtures. Singers do not usually know what is best, or how the light is affecting them, so have it set when they come in.

Headphone Mix

Creating a good mix for the singer to listen to while they track is crucial. Chordal rhythm instruments are the most important thing to hear. They should be panned center and be heard clearly of the rest of the rhythm. This keeps singers in tune and on pitch throughout a take.

Other rhythm instruments are only necessary to give your singer a sense of what they are used to hearing, for the balance of the band and to help them keep the form. Other melody instruments can either act as a crutch for your singer or be a source of confusion. Add them in selectively.

The overall headphone volume can have a similar effect on your singer to the lighting. Loud headphones will make them sing louder over the music, which can add a boost, but sometimes at the cost of a straining voice or reduced stamina. Always check to see if your headphones are bleeding too much into the microphone.

If the volume is not loud enough, many vocalists will end up singing flat, “under” what they hear. Again, these are not conscious changes to the singer, and it is your job to make the headphones just right for your singer.
First Timers

Singers going into the studio for the first time often have a hard time adjusting from how they sing at live performances. The stage and the studio have a completely different approach, and your singer may need time to adjust when he arrives.

Microphone technique should be discussed before you begin. Give tips on how close they should be to the mic and where to aim their voice.

I have engineered few sessions where a singer complained of a “delay effect” in the headphones. This is often not a software issue, but a discomfort that the singer has with hearing himself live in the headphones. If he still has trouble after a few takes, try having him sing with only one earpiece. That way he’ll hear himself in the room with the open ear alongside his headphone mix.
Tips For A Smooth Session

Just like every musician, singers usually need time to warm up before they are recording their strongest performances in the studio. Arranging a “set list” is usually a good idea. Start with the easiest tune, and once you know the singer is warm, go after the hardest ones. Songs with a wide range or complicated arrangement won’t get their full attention at the end of a long session.

Even if the singer knows all the words to a song, printing the lyrics for both the performer and the engineer can be beneficial. It helps them keep their place while tracking, and makes finding overdub spots go faster.

When starting on a new song, always always always track the first take! You can scrap it later if nothing comes out, but singers often exhibit raw energy and emotion that is lost as they go over the song multiple times.

Lastly, the most important thing you must do while engineering a session is to respond to the singer. Listen for problems and strengths, make changes if things aren’t working, and make sure they are comfortable throughout the session.

Kyle M. Bagley attended Berklee College of Music, and currently works as a musician and studio owner. See more of his work at http://www.kylembagley.com

Source Article:
How to Get the Best Performance From Your Vocalist | Audio Issues

How to Get the Best Performance From Your Vocalist | Audio Issues

- Eq-ing Vox : Recording Magazine -

Eq-ing Vox
Approaches to eq-ing vocals...
By Geno Porfido

By definition, the vocals are the focal point of a ‘vocal’ song. But getting a good vocal mix and a good vocal sound that cuts through isn’t always easy—especially when a lot of electronic sounds are being used. So here are a few quick eq tips and techniques to help achieve a better vocal mix

As a preface, remember the garbage in/garbage out rule: it all starts with a good recording of good vocals. But we’re not here to coach your singer or nag him or her to cut down on the cigarettes, booze, and so on. Nor are we discussing mic and mic preamp selection, compression, reverb, or delay. This is just about eq.

Beyond the performance

Unless you’re after an extreme vocal effect such as a supremely squashed vocal, rough edge/low tech sound, or that long-distance telephone sound, judicious use of eq can enhance your tracks tremendously. As a starting point, my preference is to start with a slight rolloff around 125 to 240 Hz, a few dB removed at 2.5 to 3.5 kHz to cut piercing frequencies, and a boost at 10 to 15 or 16 kHz to bring out the air.

All of the usual variables (singer, mic, etc.) will ultimately guide exactly what eq you use, but here’s the rationale for that starting point. Today’s trend is toward a very crisp lead vocal, crystal clear on top with nice unobtrusive bottom.

When trying to keep lead vocals proportionate to the band mix, for starters I roll off some bottom with a highpass filter. Some mics and most consoles have this built in; common frequencies range from 60 Hz to 200 Hz, depending on design or manufacturer, with varying degrees of sloped attenuation (example: 6 dB per octave rolloff, from 100 cycles down).

This filtering keeps excessive bass out of the vocal track and helps it fit in its proper frequency spectrum to make room for accompanying instruments. It also helps keep plosives (popped Ps and other hard consonants) from being obvious; that and a pop filter should eliminate them altogether. Most human voices don’t usually have a lot to offer below around 160 cycles anyway, so you’re not losing much by cutting in that range.

Next, the reason for removing 4 to 6 dB at approximately 125 to 240 Hz is to keep the vocal out of the upper bass drum/bass guitar/fat drums area. You always want to be aware that cutting too much out can result in a thin vocal, so take it slowly and remove a little at a time.

Again, the exact frequencies and cut amount will vary from singer to singer, even throughout a song. On some mixes a totally flat vocal or one that’s only been eq-ed slightly on input has worked as the main track. But there may be a section that changes drastically and the singer drops down or jumps up an octave for a few lines, requiring additional eq to match the rest of the song.

There are several ways to make eq changes on the fly that way, depending mainly on the type of equipment you’re using. With an analog board, the usual method is to mult (“Y”) the vocal track to two console channels, each with the different eq (and often volume fader) setting. Then you simply mute the appropriate channel while unmuting the other, or crossfade them.

If you run out of channels, it’s also feasible to insert outboard equalizers with the alternate settings. Inserts can easily be switched in and out from either the channel insert switch or the eq unit’s bypass control.

All this is a lot easier if you’re using an automated digital console, because you can automate the eq changes—it’s not necessary to mult the signal to two channels. Same with digital audio workstation software, which is how most of you will be working these days.

Regardless of the equipment, you want to pick a clear place in the music (if there’s no rest, the spot where the singer takes a breath is the most likely candidate) to make the change so there’s no pop or click. This can be done numerous times throughout the song as needed.

Top shelf

Whether you’re eq-ing vox or instruments, the goal is to help the part find its space in the tonal spectrum and try not to step on it with too much other information. The top end poses its own series of challenges.

Some recordings just have this incredibly bright vocal that’s still smooth and warm without being harsh. Others have this great edge, almost like a cliff, that pokes the vocal through even the thickest mix, yet sounds totally natural.

There are many ways to eq a track, but I like to approach it from two directions. One is a smooth shaping curve using a wide bandwidth (a.k.a. “Q”—the lower the Q number, the wider the bandwidth), very evenly boosted across the top. The other is to boost one or more frequencies in a tight bandwidth so the edge is purposeful and creates a bite.

For the wide bandwidth boost I generally use a shelving eq to add a few dB very high, somewhere between 7 and 12 kHz. Shelving eq starts at the selected frequency and continues out to the end of the spectrum, so if you ad d 3 dB at 10 kHz, from 10 kHz out to 20 and beyond the eq will be even in gain. This creates a nice, smooth, almost ethereal top end that brings the vocals up into an area where there’s less competition from other instruments.

Hopefully the whole top end is very smooth with no frequencies sticking out. Note that we’re safely above the sibilance (“ess” sounds) frequencies, which are usually around 5–8 kHz. Sibilance is a separate problem for another article, but once in a while you can just cut specific frequencies on singers and tame slight sibilance without having to use a de-esser (or de-essing technique). Usually the eq approach to this will bring too many side-effects, but it’s worth mentioning while we’re discussing eq.

The second high-end eq approach is to zero in on a couple of key frequencies, boosting or dipping them a few dB with a peaking eq. Peak eq centers around the selected frequency and slopes off on either side depending on what bandwidth you select. You can create an edge that just sounds incredible if you find the right places to boost. Unfortunately there’s no magic number here—you just have to listen to the vocal in context and find the spots. Sometimes the mic has an inherent boost, so you may not even need to do this.

Life and larger

Male and female vocals present different problems. In most cases I’ll leave the bottom untouched for female vocals unless they really need a corrective boost or cut to deal with a tonal problem.

With male vocals, some engineers like to get a larger, fuller sound. That’s okay too, but I’d still recommend a rolloff at least from 80 or 100 and below. Keep in mind that the big fat vocal track can eat up almost everything in its path, from kick drum to cymbals, and it may be harder to pull into the mix than a vocal that’s been eq-ed to fit a narrower frequency spectrum.

If you like to mix vocals first and then balance the band in around the vocal, a big fat sound could be the one for you. My preference is to go for fairly natural instrument sounds, though, and a singer has nowhere near the bottom end of a bass guitar or chunky Marshall.

When you’re dealing with a superstar vocal or an act whose focus is the vocal and nothing else, then a much larger-than-life sound is appropriate. With this sound the lead vocal is huge and full-bodied with lots of warm bass and clean high end, so it really stands above everything.

Some of the better tube mics available today will help fatten your track naturally, as will classics like a Neumann U87 or old U47. But if a flat recording yields a thin vocal take, you can try adding a few dB around 160 up to 300 Hz to thicken it up. Rolling off some upper mids may also be a good course of action, depending on whether you hear the problem as being a lack of certain frequencies or too much in one area.

Cutting and boosting both work, but remember to adjust the gain accordingly. If you boost 6 dB at 1 kHz on the track, for example, you may need to pull the track down to compensate and avoid distortion.

The best way to develop these skills is simply to listen to a lot of recordings and try to emulate the sounds you like (and avoid the ones you don’t like). Just remember to go slowly with eq—a little bit goes a lot farther than one tends to think.

Geno Porfido (talkback@recordingmag.com) is currently living and recording in San Francisco. He’s looking for projects to produce in the Bay Area, as long as they pay ridiculous sums of money or are located near a decent pizzeria.



Full Article Source:
- Eq-ing Vox : Recording Magazine -

- Eq-ing Vox : Recording Magazine -

How to Eliminate Muddiness and Low-End From Vocals | Audio Issues

Welcome back to another segment of Question the Answer!

We all want clarity in our vocals. We want the vocal to shine through the mix without the low-end cluttering it up. It’s such an important part of the mix, and we don’t it to come off muddy and boomy.

But what can you do to fix muddy vocals?

I got a question from a reader who had this exact issue. He was having problems with too much low-end, causing the vocals to sound boomy.

Here’s his question:

I’m recording with a condenser mic and I’m using the Auralex Mudguard to eliminate reflections but the vocals sound muggy and low. I tried to put a tube amp effect on it but it makes no difference. Can you help me?

I’m answering this question without hearing the audio he has recorded so I’m somewhat limited in my advice. However, there are a few different things you can do to clear up your vocals in order to make them less boomy and muddy.

1. Scrap that tube amp effect

That probably won’t do anything to help you clear up your vocals. If anything it might add more lower mids, causing even more boominess.

2. Filter out the low-end

If you’re recording vocals with a microphone that has a low-frequency roll-off, use it. It might be enough to clear up the rumble and low-end that’s causing that extra boom in your vocals.

If that doesn’t work, use a high-pass filter to remove the frequencies below about 100 Hz.Vocals don’t really occupy the range below 100 Hz, so there’s no reason to have extra unneeded energy cluttering up your vocal recording.

Full Article:
How to Eliminate Muddiness and Low-End From Vocals | Audio Issues

How to Eliminate Muddiness and Low-End From Vocals | Audio Issues

Learn Mixing Lead Vocals | EM Tips and Techniques on Mixing Lead Vocals

Every producer worth his or her salt will tell you that the success or failure of a non-instrumental recording hinges primarily on producing a riveting lead vocal track. While recording a great performance is the critical first step in the process, the mix engineer must work his specialized techniques on the raw track afterward to take it to the next level and rock everyone’s world. Simply slapping a compressor and equalizer on an insert is rarely enough. Wowing your audience takes some wizardry.

In this multi-part series, I’ll show you how to sprinkle fairy dust on the singer’s track to create a magic moment. Before it can cast its spell, however, a bewitching vocal must first be made to sit properly in the mix so that it sounds powerful but doesn’t overwhelm the band. In this first installment, I’ll show you how to use dynamics processing to do just that.

MIND YOUR SIGNAL CHAIN
In most cases, you’ll want to place dynamics processing on the vocal track before any EQ so that the compressor doesn’t limit the effect of your tonal adjustments. (In an upcoming installment, I’ll reveal a cool trick that takes the opposite tack.) Post-EQ placement would arbitrarily condition the compressor to dip levels when the singer hits a part of his or her range that has EQ boost applied, which may not be what you want. Use dynamics processing first to rein in the track’s levels. Then apply EQ to shape its tone.

DE-ESS FIRST
Sibilance (a whistling sound that can occur when the vocalist sings lyrics containing an s, f, or t) can create very transient and large signal peaks (up to 20dB!) that leap out of a mix and distract. Most soft-knee compressors are too slow and non-discriminating to catch these ephemeral, high-frequency peaks. But even though they’re always late to the party, their gain reduction function can still be whipsawed by sibilance after-the-fact. That’s why it’s important to place a de-esser (dynamics processing tailored toward taming sibilance) on a sibilant vocal before any compressor you use to create density or control average levels.

To quash sibilance, you usually need to use a limiter or hard-knee compressor that employs peak-detection circuitry. The limiter must offer a sky-high ratio of 20:1 to 50:1, lightning-fast 50µsec (0.05ms) attack time and a release time of 40 to 60ms. It should also allow access to its sidechain.

To de-ess the vocal track, first copy it and insert an equalizer on the copy. Using a shelving filter, boost the equalizer to the max (even 24dB is okay) above 5kHz. Cut below 5kHz as much as possible. Bus the heavily-EQ’d track copy into the sidechain for a limiter placed on the original vocal track. Now the limiter will “hear” a screechy version of the vocal with highs cranked and lows removed, making it ultra-sensitive to any sibilance. Set the limiter’s threshold so that gain reduction occurs when whistling fricatives sound but not when sustained vowel sounds are voiced.


Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Learn Mixing Lead Vocals | EM Tips and Techniques on Mixing Lead Vocals

Recording: Studio Techniques To Get Great Sounding Vocals - Pro Sound Web

Recording: Studio Techniques To Get Great Sounding Vocals - Pro Sound Web

Recording: Studio Techniques To Get Great Sounding Vocals - Pro Sound Web

5 tips for better vocal recordings

Audio Geek Zine » Blog Archive » 5 tips for better vocal recordings

5 tips for better vocal recordings

Vocal EQ Settings | Behind The Mixer

Vocal EQ Settings | Behind The Mixer

Vocal EQ Settings | Behind The Mixer

Why an Instrument Frequency Chart is a Guide and not a Solution | Behind The Mixer

Why an Instrument Frequency Chart is a Guide and not a Solution | Behind The Mixer

Why an Instrument Frequency Chart is a Guide and not a Solution | Behind The Mixer

5 Need-To-Know Frequency Areas of the Vocal | Audio Issues

5 Need-To-Know Frequency Areas of the Vocal | Audio Issues

5 Need-To-Know Frequency Areas of the Vocal | Audio Issues

Perfecting The Art Of Vocal EQ - Pro Sound Web

Church Sound: Church Audio Basics: Perfecting The Art Of Vocal EQ - Pro Sound Web

Perfecting The Art Of Vocal EQ - Pro Sound Web

Vocal Tips For Keeping Your Voice Fresh - Audiofanzine

Vocal Tips For Keeping Your Voice Fresh - Audiofanzine

Vocal Tips For Keeping Your Voice Fresh - Audiofanzine