#5
Okay... you want feedback on the effects. I'm a fan of TC stuff. I have the M300 processor and it appears on virtually every recording I make, as it beats the pants off any of the software plugs I have for time-based effects.

I think the effect sounds good. I'm hearing a doubling effect. When done as an algorithm, it usually involves some delay, pitch-shifting (very slight.... only a few cents), and panning. It worked great. I wouldn't use it on every song, but I have used those tricks together to fatten up a vocal. (Unsaid and Like This in my profile), and used sparingly can really help bring a vocal to life.

As far as the preamp goes... can't tell. I mean, if it's TC, it's gotta be at least decent, but in order to judge it, you really have to hear it without effects.

What mic are you using?

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#6
Quote by axemanchris
Okay... you want feedback on the effects. I'm a fan of TC stuff. I have the M300 processor and it appears on virtually every recording I make, as it beats the pants off any of the software plugs I have for time-based effects.

I think the effect sounds good. I'm hearing a doubling effect. When done as an algorithm, it usually involves some delay, pitch-shifting (very slight.... only a few cents), and panning. It worked great. I wouldn't use it on every song, but I have used those tricks together to fatten up a vocal. (Unsaid and Like This in my profile), and used sparingly can really help bring a vocal to life.

As far as the preamp goes... can't tell. I mean, if it's TC, it's gotta be at least decent, but in order to judge it, you really have to hear it without effects.

What mic are you using?

CT


The mic is a Blue Blubird condenser. About the pre-amp, it's hard to notice a difference by just listening to that sample. But without the TC, my Pro Tools interface got a pretty weak signal that turned muddy the more you boosted the input. With the TC Helicon, I can boost the input a heck of a lot and it sounds crystal clear and warm. My Bluebird condenser sounds pretty good either way, but my Sennheiser dynamic mic sounds really shitty and lo-fi going straight into Pro Tools.

As for the effect, there's a Mix knob to balance the Dry/Wet signal. I turned up the Wet signal quite a bit so it was noticeable, but I'll probably turn it back down to 50/50 in practice. Also, I'm running it in Mono since I only have one balanced XLR input. The detuning seems to sound just as good in mono. I think in stereo, the vocals might take over the mix.
#7
Bluebird makes good stuff. Which protools rig do you have? The Digi002's and up have Presonus pres, which are quite solid. Sure, they're not Avalon's or anything, but they leave nothing to complain about. I can't remember what is in the MBox, etc.

I have a Sennheiser e835 that I use for live vocals. I LOVE it. It kicks the crap out of my SM58. It makes the Shure sound like singing through wet moving blankets.

.... but that's live. My first choice for recording is almost always a condensor. Different tools for different jobs, though. I recorded one singer who, no matter what I put in front of her, sounded strident - my NT-1, an AKG med diaphragm condensor, even my Senn e602, which is a large diaphragm dynamic (similar to an RE-20) used to give radio announcers that big radio voice. Wanna know what sounded like gold on her? The SM58.

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#8
Quote by axemanchris
Bluebird makes good stuff. Which protools rig do you have? The Digi002's and up have Presonus pres, which are quite solid. Sure, they're not Avalon's or anything, but they leave nothing to complain about. I can't remember what is in the MBox, etc.

I have a Sennheiser e835 that I use for live vocals. I LOVE it. It kicks the crap out of my SM58. It makes the Shure sound like singing through wet moving blankets.

.... but that's live. My first choice for recording is almost always a condensor. Different tools for different jobs, though. I recorded one singer who, no matter what I put in front of her, sounded strident - my NT-1, an AKG med diaphragm condensor, even my Senn e602, which is a large diaphragm dynamic (similar to an RE-20) used to give radio announcers that big radio voice. Wanna know what sounded like gold on her? The SM58.

CT


Yeah, I have the Sennheiser e835 dynamic too. I was considering a Digi 003, but there's too many sound engineers here, so I wouldn't get any work to make it worth while. And I'm not fussy about plugging stuff in and out for my own songs.

I use an Mbox2 Mini, which was nice for traveling to and from college with. I used to have a full size Mbox 2, which I regret selling since now I could use more than one XLR input. The inputs are generally good quality, so long as you don't need to boost the gain much past unity 0dB. With the Sennheiser, I have to boost the input quite a lot, which made it almost unusable.
#9
Quote by BrickIsRed
With the Sennheiser, I have to boost the input quite a lot, which made it almost unusable.


Weird! Compared to a 57/58, my Senn puts out relatively hot.

???

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#10
Quote by axemanchris
Weird! Compared to a 57/58, my Senn puts out relatively hot.

???

CT


I think it's the Mbox's fault. It just generally isn't good with dynamic mics without some kind of pre-amp infront of it.