Doubling vocals

[The Late Great Libido]

Hi everyone,

So, I have always disliked doubling my vocals. When my past bands would go into the studio, the engineer would usually ask me to double the vocals and it would always sound wrong to me. Sounded too much like I was going through a chorus effect. I would always ask them to knock it down to one vocal track. Maybe its just my voice...?

Anyway, yesterday I was listening to the Jane's Addiction album Ritual De Lo Habitual (an ESSENTIAL album IMHO) for the first time in a good-long while and realized that ALL of Perry Ferrell's vocals are doubled on that album. Some of them line up quite poorly too...but when I was younger and practically wearing holes in that CD, I never noticed. Now that I'm listening for that stuff I hear it on a lot of recordings.

So, now as I near the vocal tracking stage of my first home recording, I would like to ask for your opinions/methods on this. Do you always double vocals? Only with certain singers? Certain genres? Chorus/verse only? Whenever you feel like it?

Thanks for any advice

[String7th]

I've had bands say the same thing and the truth was that even though I thought the song needed a thicker vocal part by doubling, the singer just couldn't do it. The singer was sparatic with singing and couldn;t match the part exactly so, yes, it sounded thin. On the other side of that, listen to any Alice in Chains, the whole song verse/chor/bridge is all a 3 part harmony because it was his style and he could do it.

Not all songs need doubles. It depends on the singer's style, the song, and the band's style of music. A metal I worked with needed ZERO doubles because it was mostly rough/raspy vocal style. But another metal band had a singer who did clean chorus's I thought could separate the metal from what could be on the radio by doubling the chorus similar to Soilwork/Killswitch/Shadows Fall.

IMO, doubling vocals is an optional part of producing a song and not a requirment.

[Ruzz]

Originally Posted by String7th

IMO, doubling vocals is an optional part of producing a song and not a requirment.

Bang on, IMO. And one thing's for sure, if you're shooting for an initmate personal vocal, doubling (or even too much reverb/delay) can completely ruin a vocal.

And I have to say this to Libido, if you don't like it - in your heart, in your gut - you can't make yourself like it. But... (there's always a but )

What you could try is creating a double from an existing take and delaying it ever so slightly and pan it off to one side just a little (could even do this twice to make three voices). Watch out for phase/comb filtering issues though and be sure to mono test the output. And realise you could just bring in the double(s) on the busier parts (chorus, lifts, bridge, etc.).

Ruzz

[brandondrury]

So, now as I near the vocal tracking stage of my first home recording, I would like to ask for your opinions/methods on this. Do you always double vocals? Only with certain singers? Certain genres? Chorus/verse only? Whenever you feel like it?

All good questions. I bet I have a good 5 page section on doubling vocals in my upcoming home recording book.

1) It depends on voice. Some people double so tightly you can barely hear it. Other singers sound ROBO chorusy.

2) How you blend it in the mix and the blend between the two tracks makes a huge difference. A 50/50 blend will always be the most intense. Some guys sound good with one lead vocal and one down 6dB.

3) The compression used makes a huge difference.

4) The level and vibe of the vocal makes a huge difference as well.

The most important thing is not to get immediately turned off by the double if it's actually good. (Good luck knowing that!). I'd ran both vocal tracks to a bus. Before you play back the doubled vocal, SLOWLY raise the vocal bus fader from all the way down to wherever it should be.

Brandon

[The Late Great Libido]

Great feedback, thanks! I like the idea of having one vocal track a little more in the background. I'll definitely work with that.

Since my singing voice has - uh - character you could say, so I'm going to have to get creative with this. I'll post clips for bashing when I'm ready (still a ways away).

Thanks again - and if anyone else has methods to share, please do.

[sparqee]

For my voice I find that rolling off the lows up to the low mids on the double track is the key. That and compressing the hell out of it. I sometimes do two dbl tracks and pan them or if I'm having a tough time getting two good dbl takes I'll just pitch shift the dbl take by 9 cents and then pan it. I've also gotten some good effects by doing a harmony vocal part and mixing it in just a touch. I keep the level so low that you don't even perceive it as a harmony part, it just adds a certain "quality" to the lead vocal.

I've read a *lot* of posts on various forums about vocal doubling and I've worked with at least a half a dozen good singers (myself included) that have had varying experiences with doubling. I really think that it's more of a performance skill than a mixing skill. Some singers can just do it. Most singers need to learn how. They need to practice it. Unfortunately most singers don't. They only ever do it when a producer asks them to "give it a try" and then, regardless of their success (or not) they don't do it again until the next time a producer asks them to try. Guitarist tend to be really good at doubling their tracks. Drummers... NOT!

[brandondrury]

I don't look at doubling as a skill. I'd call it a "trait". Some people are more precise and more consistent. Others are more random and more chaoitic. I've recorded some great singers who sound terrible doubled. I've recorded terrible singers who double extremely well.

Brandon

[sparqee]

Originally Posted by brandondrury

I don't look at doubling as a skill. I'd call it a "trait".
Brandon

I think that's a common belief shared by many people. I also think that it's an unfortunately limiting belief. If a singer believes that "I don't have that trait" then they will never "practice the skill" and will therefore never learn to do doubles. Great harmony singers are often times better at doing doubles (than many lead singers) because they have practiced the skill of matching/complimenting the phrasing/tonality of a lead vocal track.

Now, if I'm producing a project and the singer isn't getting anywhere close to doing a good job doubling, then ok, I would go ahead and say "let's not do this". But... I would always try and reinforce the idea that learning the art of doubling is something the singer might find rewarding for future projects.

Vocal harmonies and doubling isn't right for many songs, but in the right place it can sure do wonders!

[brandondrury]

Maybe you are right. Then again, maybe trying to cage someone who is naturally not such a rigid singer into becoming rigid could have it's down sides too.

Brandon

[sparqee]

I don't know that I've ever considered the word "rigid" when I think about the good harmony singers and vocal doublers that I've worked with. The really good ones are actually extremely flexible. They are able to listen to the lead track and then match the energy/phrasing. I'm not suggesting that a lead vocal be made "rigid" in order to be easier to follow in a doubling session. I'm suggesting that any singer who wishes to have a "deeper bag of studio tricks" can improve their ability to match/compliment an existing vocal performance, whether it be there own or that of another another singer.

I think that improvement/exploration/polishing of an existing talent should always be promoted. Even if a singer never learns to become a great doubler the experience of trying will teach them a lot.