That Manley Reference C is a terrific mic for vocals. Everything Manley designs and manufactures is top notch. EveAnna certainly knows what she is doing.
As you said, Manley is coveted but there is more used Manleys than DMs and Manley products have been more affected by depreciation rate than DM offerings.Take the Manley MP EQ, there are 14 used units on Reverb. Prices start at $3300 which is less than half of a new one. Now try to finf a used DM Comp.They have 2 used units that cost just $150 lesss than a brand new one. In other words, you are not going to find in the open market a used DM Comp for $1300 which is half the price for a brand new unit. Indeed, one of the few DM pieces that you can find for half the brand new price is the D-Box Monitor Controller and Summing Box. It has to do with DM gear not been around long enough. Look at the years that DM units became available:

2010 Dangerous BAX EQ
2011 Dangerous LIAISON
2012 Dangerous SOURCE
2013 Dangerous COMPRESSOR
2015 Dangerous CONVERT-2
2015 Dangerous CONVERT-8
2015 Dangerous 2-BUS+
2017 Dangerous CONVERT-AD+

As you can see some of these coveted units are just 2-4 years old. Now, compare it to some of Manley's:

1994 Manley Stereo Variable Mu® Limiter-Compressor
1997 Manley VOXBOX® Reference Channel Strip
1997 Manley Stingray® Stereo Integrated Amplifier
1998 Manley Massive Passive® Stereo EQ

Am I off-topic here? Do not blame me. Blame @Cav Emp

 

VOX BOX

 

TDR Nova??!! Wow...not many people use that. I've got it but haven't tried it. Perhaps I should give it a go.

 

Mic technique in my opinion is something that needs to be mastered by a vocalist to elevate a performance from pedestrian craft to expansive art. Much more than just the thing that an engineer or oneself connects to some preamp, in my opinion of years performing, keen observation, wearing the hat of both engineer and producer as well as reading anything and everything about audio engineering that I could get my eyes on, a microphone should be treated as an instrument in its own right.

I'll have much more to say about it another time, but I have a high fever while on the road to Miami, and frankly have not the energy to extrapolate. It is food for thought though, eh!

 

The vocal chain starts with a good singer and a good mic. The mic is even more important than the pre amp. Miami? I was there a couple of days ago looking at some mixing consoles. Lots of nice used gear at great prices in that city. It seems like everyone has a recording studio down there.

 

1. Gain Stage Input Level (around -18db)
2. Decapitator (for saturation)
3. EQ (remove unwanted frequencies)
4. L1 (use lightly to control consistent vocal level)
5. SSL Mix Hub (to shape vocal )
6. RVox
7. DeEsser (if required)
8. L1 (use lightly to control consistent vocal level)
9. Send to Parallel Comp
10. Send FXs - VERB / DELAY / SLAP

General workflow for CLA / Scheps & Darlington

 

Geeze, and here I am with fab q2 and c2 for 99% of songs. Ds when it needs it.

 

Do they really add saturation before, EQs, Comps, etc?

 

If you think about it, it's basically the same as running a fancy preamp. Add some harmonics on the way in, tame it itb.

I recently saw a vid about a tape plugin that suggested you use it as the first insert on the track too. I guess that makes sense... Idk I've always used it basically last lol. Something to try on my next project

 

to much .... money

EDIT many studios are used for money laundry , and i would say they had a lot to wash down there ,isnt it

i mean also over here enough ppl pay genre mixing and producing semi/pro or pro studios from .... money
http://highway-magazin.de/news/deut...deutscher-rapper-sprengt-sich-beide-haende-ab

---
sry for offtopicx

 

Last edited: Aug 8, 2019

I know that there is not a strict rule about anything. Indeed, the source should dictate the chain. Yet my comment was about what the OP stated about CLA and Scheps & Darlington. I was surprised because I had seen videos of them and read about their mixing techniques and don't recall them using saturation as number one on their respective vocal chains.
https://www.puremix.net/blog/chris-lord-alge-mixing-vocals-in-the-box.html
https://www.waves.com/demo-to-master-2-2-q-a-vocals (@11:00)

 

CLA talks about using saturation in the first Audio Legends course, he puts Slate VCC (SSL console) and Slate VTM (tape) on every track to simulate an analog signal path like he's used to.

I sometime use the VTM as saturator first in the chain for vocal recordings that are harsh or hard to compress, it evens and 'softens' them enough so the compressor works better.

 

Thanks for pointing that out bro. I recalled CLA being a fan of the VCC always thought he was using it more to mimmick his SSL 4000E coloration without actually "saturating." In other words, if you are trying to imitate an analog tape tracking session you go mic>console>tape. Translating it to Slate it would be VCC>VTM. However, if putting the tape first in certain instances sounds good ... then it is good.

 

Would you also add the console for the mix session?
Something like mic>pre(console pre or other)>tape>console channel? Maybe overkill, but I'd think that would be similar to the old school analogue chain where they're mixing down the tape tracks.

 

I'm starting to think we went to the same school but I don't remember seeing any dragons back in the old USSR. What you proposed is exactly what Slate had in mind. Remember he does have the VCC Channel and VCC Mixbuss. Nothing is overkill or too little. I'm a firm believer that there is more than one way to skin a cat. Likewise, there is more than one way to get a great vocal track. I have seen engineers in major recording studios use almost nothing. The same engineers in their home recording studio going crazy with their vocal chains. And vice-versa. The only constant here is a good vocalist and a good mic. Those you can't replace nor emulate. Anything else can be overcome with technology.

 

Maybe Florida? Haha.
I started using the Slate VCC and Mixbuss at one point. I've since migrated to Acustica for the bus/channel emulation. Also ended up using R2R presets for tape stuff (Nebula 3). The Slate stuff is good (I'll begrudgingly admit), but Acustica Gold was THE sound I'd been chasing all wrapped up into one strip. Likely because I'm a big Soundgarden fan (Neve board in their recordings). I never could get my vocal anywhere close to the clarity and tone as easily.

I'm really wanting to try out the Slate VMS. The ML-1 is supposed to be a very neutral LDC. As for a good vocalist... I guess I'll just have to make do.

 

You forgot brain surgery on you. If she is ugly and cant sing you need a lobotomy for employing her on a song...unless she is paying you some good money. In which case, I will tell her that she sounds like a mix of Streisand, Houston and Choplin.

 

Last edited: Aug 20, 2019

I'm looking for a STANDALONE vocal enhancement software. I'm not talking pitch correction, but rather compression, reverb, saturation; the kind of thing you'd want for live radio broadcast for example. Lots of software available, but most stuff I've seen are in plugin format. Looking for a STANDALONE to pair with something like ZOOM meetings software. Any suggestions?

 

Last edited: Jun 7, 2020

You may be going about things the wrong way... why not use a (free) VST plugin host like VST Host, then load a multi-faceted vox/performance plugin - IZotope's Nectar 3 for example - inside that.

I believe some VST hosts allow multiple VST plugins (like a rack) but i can't recall specific software names - a search engine search on "vst hosts" is bound to turn something up.

EDIT: Actually, it very much looks like VST host CAN chain multiple VSTs simultaneously... i'd play around with that for a bit before trying anything else if i were you.

 

Last edited: Jun 7, 2020

Hey Paul,

I have a host (Mixcraft), and I can get the microphone to be used by Mixcraft and Zoom. I used Core audio (WaveRT) for testing because I did not have any speakers attached to the interface at the time for ASIO. I don't know if ASIO would make a difference. I loaded an effects plugin on an audio track (in this case a reverb for testing purposes) and heard the reverb as I spoke through my microphone. However, when I put the focus on Zoom and tried the audio test in the Zoom audio settings, it played back a dry signal, sans the effect (reverb). I assumed using a standalone effect might be different, but maybe not.

It's all the routing options possibilities that I don't fully grasp. Are the host options you mentioned capable of passing wet audio to Zoom? If not, what else? FYI, I'm running Windows 10 2004 with a Behringer U404HD interface.