Has Anyone Noticed???

[Shonsteez]

Out of curiosity: How many of you notice that when you record and mix your vocals in ACID 4.0 they turn out sort of quite and thin sounding??...Tha reason i ask is cuz i bounce from various sequencing programs to see what sounds best, and in comparison Acid always tends to sound tha worse and really cant figure out WHY?? Right now i use Sonar 3, or even Samplitude 7 to compare tha sound quality of vocals recorded in ALL 3 programs, and when recording in Sonar 3 - tha vocals tend to be much more full and true...Tell me that isnt wierd!?? The reason i ask also is because i really prefer how much quicker and easier it is to work in Acid versus Sonar, even tho Sonar tends to be tha shit.If any of you have encountered tha same problem, then please relpy, especially if you may kno why tha hell tha vocals come out like that in Acid???

Anybody even kno what tha hell im talking about here? - Or for that matter; does anybody ever even use various softwares to compare tha best sound between Acid and any others?? (please keep in mind this is regarding VOCALS ONLY)

In case my first statement was confusing to a few people as well: I simply wanted to address that i noticed laying VOCALS in ACID compared to VOCALS in SONAR tend to sound "thinner"! THA QUESTION IS WHY IS THAT?

PLEASE ONLY REPLY IF YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION - THANKS.

STEEZ

 

[Fade]

*Note: This thread has been cleaned up. Only reply if you're actually helping!

Thanks.

 

[eka]

I never noticed it before, but what I do is double the vocals and pan 1 all the way to the right and the other all the way to the left. it works for me, but I usually don't record vocals in other programs so I can not compare.
it is an interesting problem and I will ask around to see why this is.

 

[Shonsteez]

Thanks Eka...Tha panning idea is helpful for maybe seeing how it might improve the over all sound quality...I figured this may be a hard question to answer if no one else has tried this with more than a few softwares....Im jus asking cuz its definitly a noticable amount of quality lost in comparison between tha 2.

And Fade: My bad for dirtying up tha board.

STEEZ

 

[bigdmakintrax]

Well I haven't Messed with acid since I had version 3.0.......I know that a lot of the output you get in acid when recording has to do with the properties of the input.....I believe that the channels will allow you to use EQ, and other FX......so the basic recording you have needs to have fx applied either on the input recording or afterwards.....and also layer with a differently equ'd clone track....and work with both of them until you get the desired vocal sound thru your monitors....

 

[Shonsteez]

Thanks D!...I think thats basically tha solution then. I jus want tha vocals to sound as if they really werent captured on tha computer at all, but more like a live recording. I jus noticed that Sonar helped preserve that feel for some mysterious reason?..., But Acid tended to sound strangly thinner than tha vocals i did in Sonar - Strange huh!?...I really like working in Acid much more tho, so i think ill jus have to adapt like You and Eka have basically described.

Thanks for tha help fellas.

 

[Kevin A]

DueceMade, Acid is great for recording, but there can be major draw backs. Acid is good for hearing your effects realtime, that's fine and dandy, but when you get into the habit of doing it soley that way, you lose the habit of cleaning your audio. The audio needs to be processed before you add effects to it. Unless you have a top of the line mic and sound proof booth, you will want to do this. Noise reduction, Normalized, silencing out unwanted sounds etc. Then take your waves to acid for realtime effects. Sound foundry Noise Gate sucks, expecially if your trying to use it real time, so it's best to do it in cool edit if you have it. Wings had posted a like about Caphene's audio editing process using cool edit, it's best to read and take from that, then move to acid. It is important to process your audio, and it's alot easier on your cpu. Don't try to audio process and add effects both in realtime if you get what I mean, I might not be using the correct terminology, or spelling for that matter LOL , but you sure you catch my drift.
Acid records dry vocals, but it is too tempting to play with effects, cooledit is easier at recording and processing dry vocals. Clean em up, and ship em out. Also take a look at vegas 4 or 5, although it is for Video, the darn thing has a great multitrack with will actually let you hear effects before you record them. It's worth a play with, but don't defeat the purpose of my post by jumping over to vegas. Later Duece

 

[Obsidian Blue]

also, you might want to check your preferances and make sure that you are using your sound card, not Micrsoft's bit mapper. And if that doesn't work, there's always the wave editor. You could always sequence your vocals in Acid after recording.....

 

[Shonsteez]

Thanks for tha info guys. Ive actually done both in tha past. Ive recorded straight into Acid like described and I have also recorded into other programs and then mixed them down in Acid later....Kevin You said a good deal of helpful info too. and I kno what you mean by NOT processing yer effects in real time too much cuz of tha quality and cpu taxing. I was actaully posting this question after listening back to STRICTLY DRY VOCALS In BOTH ACID and SONAR, and SONAR had a more full presence for some reason?...I hadent applied any effects what so ever before I noticed that tha vocals in Acid were weaker. And, YES, I do have my soundcard selected and tha Mic i had recorded with was a bran new 57 so it sounded great processed through a friends Tascam US-428 mixing board....Jus tha signal dry was very impressive, but in Acid it sounded as if there was quality lost for one reason or another.

thanks again for tha tips and info.


Steez