Heh, I just tried using the recorder in my phone to check what my voice sounds like and found some drunken recordings of myself and my mates doing some great discussions. I really don't remember why and how those happened... My own voice was different than I thought but I'd guess most people don't know how their voice really sounds like... naturally the sound quality is quite low but I recognized my mate's voice so I have a vague picture of my voice at least

Thanks guys,
One more question, is there anyway to make the microphone more "sensitive." What I mean is that I need to have my lips almost on the microphone to get a good loud sound. And even then I must sometimes increase the volume in Audacity (Thats what I use for recording.)

Quote from Hankstar :

Once you listen to a few recordings of yourself, you can learn what your voice does when you sing.

That's what I meant with 'listen!'

Take, for instance, this:

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=41237

It's a recording of Demetrio Stratos explaining the significance of the voice and trying to imitate an organ with his voice. In the video he uses a mirror to see (listen to?) his face and have a better control when attempting something extremely difficult, such as recreating the attack transients of an organ.

The performance starts at about 2.25, after a brief discussion in Italian about the importance of breathing and other vocal related issues.

Depends what equipment you're using.
My radio mic has it's own gain setting. Obviously too much means feedback and too little means silence. It also has a "squelch" control, which doesn't relate to volume at all, but is worth mentioning because I love being able to "turn up the squelch"

Standard wired mics don't have any controls and the best way to increase volume is by going through a mixing desk. You could also try plugging in via a volume boosting guitar pedal, or a compression box, but those will need the relevant cables as well, and too much compression will make you sound weird.

The obvious solution is trying to get the rest of the band to turn down, but I know how hard that can be!

Also think about the position of your mouth relating to the mic. I have the tendency to place it too low, meaning I'm singing over the top of it rather than into it. I need to consciously hold it so the top is just under my nose.

If it's for a live performance or a rehearsal, the best thing you can do if you can't hear yourself is stick a finger in your ear

Quote from Kajojek(PL) :

Thanks guys,
One more question, is there anyway to make the microphone more "sensitive."

Several issues here...

- adjust the mic input in order to maximise it without "clipping". Some soundcards feauture a mic boost of +10 or +20Db, see if your has it and if it gives a better sound (not simply louder volume). See if your using line input values instead of mic input values, but judging from the quality of the recording you're already using mic input.

- The "presence" effect: if the mic is very close to the sound source it saturates the sound, giving it more richness in overtones and a better overall frequency response. Also, frequency response curves for mics vary with the distance from the sound sorce.

- Mic positioning is also important for the kind of sound you pick up: closer to the mouth, less nasal tones.

Here's a little background on microphones.

Most singers have to go through this, so no worries. You'll get used to it. And after a while (more recordings) you'll be able to work on it and make it sound more like you think it should (the way you hear yourself).

Hmm I dont think my sound card has those options, but thanks for explanation. I'll use it some day when I have better computer. I can boost the sound to 12db in audacity though. Sorry for those noob questions but when I plug in the mic I get this thing http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/4016/errorot9.jpg I searched the error but everyone receives it when doing something else. What may be the cause at this situation? (The microphone is still working so maybe it doesn't even affect it?)

I suppose the error is due to the ability of some soundcards to recognise that a device has been plugged in. This happens with cards which can use their connections alternatively as outputs (for a 5.1 setup) or inputs. As long as the result is unaffected you can consider it only an aesthetical error, or - if applicable - you could manually adjust the input level to mic input if it's recognised as a line input, but I think that the input level is already more or less correct.

Different soundcards have completely different preamp stages, so there's no general rule. For instance my WaveTerminal 192X has only balanced line level inputs, I can't plug in a microphone and expect it to work as it does on my M-Audio Fasttrack Pro. And since you're using a dynamic microphone (in no way a condenser mic could cost about 5$) that's normal since dynamic mics aren't preamplified on their own, so the input level, unless you scream or sing at an appropriately loud volume, is normally low.
There's however some difference in preamplifying something and boosting the level in postproduction or editing, and that difference mainly affects dynamic range of the sound.

At your level of practice and knowledge there are, in my personal opinion, a lot of things you should read and decide before committing any money to a better system/microphone.

Some time ago a magazine did a practical test, giving low quality mixing equipment to professionals and high quality gear to to hobbysts like me. The pros had much better results at mixing conventional stuff than the hobbysts. So, in your case, it would be probably best to know and understand the limits and abilities of your equipment before investing any money in something that may not give the better results you're expecting.

Gear is important, but it's not everything. For example, for the stuff I'm doing right now, a $4000 Neumann U87 would work much worse than the $2 piezo capsules I'm using as contact mics, but a quieter external preamp would work much better than the preamps of my FastTrack Pro since I'm recording nearly at the limit of silence, and I pick up a little too much unwanted hiss generated by preamps. Not that I would dislike owning an U87, anyway

A little bump. First of all, I got Fruity Loops Studio for beat making... Ahh such a great program. Did anyone ever use it? I just have a one question, how do you make the beats longer? Because once I set up the whole rythm and press save as, its usually only 3-4 seconds long (The beat doesnt repeat) How can I change this?

I love Fruity Loops (www.ekranoplan.org - click "tunes", fear the robots)

Check this screen shot. Click in the little panel with the dashes (circled) and drag until the number increases. That'll increase the bar length of the loop.

Now, to get it to repeat as a song, put a series of loops in the Playlist screen (it's right underneath the loop screen). Then you need to select the "song" box (next to the "pause" key up top), hit play and it'll play as many loops as you've got in the Playlist screen, then repeat. When you get the hang of it you'll be able to make a bunch of loops and mix and match them and mess about for hours, getting no sleep and hearing repeated demands to come to bed

Hope that makes sense If you're after anything more complicated, check the help menu or online help because I'm at work where they don't let me play with Fruity Loops. Bastards.

If your doing vocal recording then DON"T use a computer, they really aren't good enought.

4/8 track reel to reel is good, so is a minidisk with a GOOD mic.

It also really depends on WHERE your recording, acustics are a field of learning that you can study for years.

Pro-tools is popular here in NZ with home recordists, I know several bands who use it and it's free for a 4 track studio.

Read as much as you can, http://homerecording.com/, good luck and have fun !!!

Quote from Hankstar :

I love Fruity Loops (www.ekranoplan.org - click "tunes", fear the robots)

I like it!
Specially x-lo-fi, nice work!

Quote from Racer X NZ :

If your doing vocal recording then DON"T use a computer, they really aren't good enought.

Well that's wrong for a start. All studios these days use hard disk recording, the only difference in sound is that it's digital and crisp. So obviously if you prefer the warm sound that you get from analogue then by all means go for it. But CoolEdit has a filter that can add emulated noise like you'd get on analogue, and it works pretty well.

In terms of recording a vocal, environment is only a variable if it's an extreme. Like a small room with hard walls or a massive space like a hall or something. Recording from a single vocal mic a few centimeters from the source won't pick up much of the ambience of the room. That's why a lot of studios use ambient mics spaced around the room.

Anyway, back on-topic.
I recently started trying to change the way my voice sounds. I think I've gotten lazy over the last few years. The comparison to Chris Cornell really spurred me into action, because while I don't mind him I don't want to sound like him.

I figured out that I can change the overall tone of my vocal by closing off the back of my nose and throat, rather than just singing with everything relaxed. It removes a lot of the resonance that comes from the throat and nose, giving the sound a less bass-y tone. You can do the same by concentrating on closing off the same muscles you use when you're about to spit. If you sound nasal you've closed the throat too much.

It has upset my breathing though, so I can't do it for long notes. I'm going to have to relearn how to breathe if I want to keep doing it. Thankfully I only really need to do it on certain words though

Quote from Kajojek(PL) :

I can't watch videos where there is my voice because it sounds so awful.

You are 15 years old - it's perfectly normal.

Quote from Hankstar :

I love Fruity Loops (www.ekranoplan.org - click "tunes", fear the robots)

Check this screen shot. Click in the little panel with the dashes (circled) and drag until the number increases. That'll increase the bar length of the loop.

Now, to get it to repeat as a song, put a series of loops in the Playlist screen (it's right underneath the loop screen). Then you need to select the "song" box (next to the "pause" key up top), hit play and it'll play as many loops as you've got in the Playlist screen, then repeat. When you get the hang of it you'll be able to make a bunch of loops and mix and match them and mess about for hours, getting no sleep and hearing repeated demands to come to bed

Hope that makes sense If you're after anything more complicated, check the help menu or online help because I'm at work where they don't let me play with Fruity Loops. Bastards.

Wow thanks mate, I already went to sleep at 3 am yesterday making those 4 seconds beat (I wont show any cause they are so bad) hahah. Awesome program!

One more question to Fruity Loops masters I found out how to fade out songs but how can a fade out one pattern in the playlist without fading out the second one under it? I want to do this in order to make a smooth transition between two sounds.

Have you seen the mixer window? Just fade the sliders you want to fade.

Been ages since I used Fruity but as I remember it has a mixer with a channel for each track.

It's also got them fancy envelopes in the piano roll view if I'm not mistaken.

Quote from Dajmin :

Well that's wrong for a start. All studios these days use hard disk recording, the only difference in sound is that it's digital and crisp. So obviously if you prefer the warm sound that you get from analogue then by all means go for it. But CoolEdit has a filter that can add emulated noise like you'd get on analogue, and it works pretty well.

In terms of recording a vocal, environment is only a variable if it's an extreme. Like a small room with hard walls or a massive space like a hall or something. Recording from a single vocal mic a few centimeters from the source won't pick up much of the ambience of the room. That's why a lot of studios use ambient mics spaced around the room.

Yes, but have you checked a studio system compared to the average home computer ?

If a machine is specificly setup for recording then ok, but to be honest it still doesn't match a decent anologe recording. Digital sound is nearly always clipped to reduce the file size.

It is a personal matter but try listening to the same album on both CD and vinyl, use a decent turntable and reference CD player. To me anyway, the vinyl sounds better and easier to listen to for extended periods.

When recording audio into a PC, the most obvious shortfall is the microphone. These logitech desk mics are useless. Get a decent studio mic, stick it through a little line mixer and into the PC, and the quality is phenomenal. Environment is important, of course.. no use recording voice near an open window, near your PC's fans, or with the telly on.

I remember the first digitally mastered album I heard was Queen, It's A Kind Of Magic. I'd just splashed out on lots of expensive separates, including my first CD player, and I sat down in silence to listen to the piano version, "Forever". I was utterly blown away by what I could hear. It was like I was sitting with my head in the piano. I could hear the hammers rising and falling, and May's foot shifting on the damper. It was one of those moments in my life.. I'll never forget it.

I remember when Neil Young went off on one about vinyl being better than digital. I personally don't subscribe to the idea.. and apparently, neither does he when the chips are down, because he still recorded his album digitally.

Oh, and don't get me started on about audio cables with titanium jacks and ceramic-shielded platinum-wound cords. If you fall for all that crap, you're a sucker. That was an industry that made a fortune on a fantasy. I'm sure someone shoulda gone to jail for it!

Quote from Racer X NZ :

Yes, but have you checked a studio system compared to the average home computer ?

If a machine is specificly setup for recording then ok, but to be honest it still doesn't match a decent anologe recording. Digital sound is nearly always clipped to reduce the file size.

I'm sorry but have you ever done any recording on a PC? Nobody optimises tracks on the way to disk, that would be insane. I've got a consumer audio recording box sitting right next to me that will do a 96Khz sample rate across 16 inputs (actually up to 192Khz via the first stereo pair of ins). Frankly neither you nor anybody else would be able to fault a recording at 96Khz. Given the same signal source, a neutral tape recording would sound exactly the same.

MP3 examples of what can be achieved with a PC recording setup: ProTools (expensive version), various pre-amps & related hard/software, Rode NT2 and Rode Classic microphones. Recorded, engineered, produced by our guitarist Doug in 2001. Mastered digitally off-site.

Band: Mothdust
From Afar
Eat Me
Funky Lepinja

So, yes, a purpose-built PC with the right software, soundcard(s), studio mics (Rode or Neumann are industry standard) can be as good as any indie studio. Your average home PC probably could cut it processor-wise, but you can't expect a decent, pro sound without splashing on some dedicated hardware & software, and especially a good mic for vocals. Rodes are expensive but a decent live mic can do a pretty good job. Shure SM58s are fine sturdy things. I use a Sennheiser on stage though - better dynamic range and compression.

Since this recording, Doug's replaced his enormous fluid-cooled PC with a souped-up Dell laptop, one line-mixer/preamp and a Rode Classic (with condenser unit). Fits all into a backpack and achieves results far superior to the above recordings - all we need do is make a mattress & quilt soundbooth, sit him in the hallway of my house and we can do noiseless, crispy vocal takes all day. This Guerilla Studio(tm) setup can be ready to go in 20 minutes. Great for coming to visit me from London and getting hassled by the men at customs, who have numerous questions about his little electronic boxes and miles of cables. I'll post examples of our results when they're ready

Contrast: latest from my current band From The Ashes. Debut album in progress. Pro studio, up & coming producer, pro everything (professional pricing too, oh boy - hope we sell some bloody records :zombie.

Quote from RocksGt :

I like it! Specially x-lo-fi, nice work!

Thanks mate, many wasted hours

Personally I think the main reason Vinyl often sounds better than CD is that they usually don't get raped by modern mastering processes. There's actual dynamic range on Vinyl, letting sounds that need a bit of headroom (drums for instance) pop out much more easily. I don't think there's an album released on a major label in the last 10 years that hasn't made my head throb after about 10 minutes of listening. I just can't stand it.

A properly mastered CD would kick any piece of vinyl's butt.

I just bought a preamp for my record player - I tell you, there's a rennaissance in my house After so many years of iTunes and my PC speakers, it's a revelation! Pink Floyd, Radiohead & The Mars Volta never sounded so good. Time I bought Soundgarden's Superunknown on LP...

Ok, seeing all you sissy girls are sound experts. What's a good way to take a mic input and put it to line input. my iMac (and MBP) only have Line inputs, but I want to have Mic in for them. What's a good (but affordable) amp/explosion that will do that job?