Keira WitherKay wrote:
i'll beg to differ .....NOTHING can make an average voice sound better than it does ....it may make the artist feel better ? but an average voice is still an average voice .. no matter how it's treated ......and the audience hears it as such ...thats like saying a dodgy lead guitarist will sound better on a better amp......... we all know thats not true .....
BUT too much reverb/delay can destroy a naturally good voice if the sound guy is too heavy handed
I beg to differ straight back: there are plenty of singers (esp. pop artists) who have very average voices / vocal technique and who benefit from various bits of technology, including stuff like pitch correction. I didn't say dodgy singer, I said average singer (someone who can hold a tune but isn't going to bring the house down).
Obviously there's no substitute for pure talent and a great singer will always sound better than a good one (and they'll be able to wow audiences with no effects at all), but the reason that people employ effects like reverb and delay on both vocals and instruments is largely because, well, it just
sounds better. My post was largely for the benefit of people who've not had much experience singing through a mic, whether solo or in a band context, and who might not be aware of the difference it makes.
Just like playing through a decent tube amp, there's something about singing through a decent mic with a decent pre-amp with well-layered effects in place: it lifts your confidence, and thus your vocal performance overall once you begin to hook into the power of your own voice. My ex band-mate had a great TC Electronic vocal unit and on the odd occasion that I used her mic there was a helluva difference in both the quality of the sound and the quality of my delivery.
Too much of anything can destroy anything: drench a great, satchurated tube tone in reverb and all note definition is lost.
