vocal effects on Lady Madonna

[LNovik]

While I realize Paul sings somewhat differently on the song, Lady Madonna, does anyone know what vocal effects were involved to impart that lead voice sound? I did read the following from a Beatles website: "Paul recorded lead vocals onto track four of the tape, this deliberately being overloaded to create an edgy quality not unlike that of Fats Domino."
I guess that means they overloaded the signal, though I would think that would have caused clipping. I would also think there was a specific vocal effect that helped produce the finished lead voice sound, though I have no idea what it was. Any ideas?
Thanks.
LNovik

[vurt]

tape could be pushed in to the red a bit more forgiving than digital.
you'd get a soft saturation rather than clipping, overloading the mic by shouting too close would likely cause clipping, but before it reached the tape.

there the beatles studio diary, that contains notes on every session, could be helpful?

[LNovik]

Thanks for that 1st paragraph. I guess that means if I don't record to tape, I can't really reproduce that aspect---unless I'm missing something regarding what you said.
As for the 2nd paragraph, did you mean, "try" the beatles studio diary? if not, please respond.
Thanks.
LNovik

[vurt]

yes, recording digitally, you would need to add a tape saturation effect (there are many available, not sure which is best)

2nd paragraph.
the beatles studio diary, is a book, written from notes taken in the recording sessions.
it's a great resource to find little tips on how each track was recorded.

[heyheycnv]

Start with a Neumann U 47.

https://reverb.com/item/55212600-neuman ... microphone

[soulata]

Start with a Neumann U 47.

https://reverb.com/item/55212600-neuman ... microphone

Start with McCartney's voice. That man is underrated as a singer, capable of insanely different voice characters.

k

P.s.: I'll check the books but to me it sounds like there's some slap echo on the vocal.

[LNovik]

Hi,
I appreciate and look forward to hearing about the effect. It almost sounded like a "radio" type effect, if that's even a thing, since it sounded so bright. I'll also look into the saturation, since, I believe that can give a certain brightness, or exciter aspect to a recording. I did look up a Neumann U47, and found the first one I saw to be listed for $37,000. That might have been one of the original ones, but I think I'll pass on that. I realize one can buy those now for about a tenth of that, but still up there for my purposes.
Thanks.
LNovik

[muki]

trying to be kind of constructive:

i don't hear any special effects on paul's voice imho

yes,
recording it hot (or even superhot) results in distortion
in the preamp, in the mixing desk and on the tape formula
overload/distortion results in added harmonics
that's probably what you are hearing

and yes,
his voice kond of has some sort of subtle "boxy" character
the neuman do colour afaik
so maybe thats coming from the neuman
maybe a cheaper tlm103 will fit the bill
maybe some special eq'ing, eq-matching will be fine...

afaik there are microphone simulation plugins,
that try to mimic the tonal characters of microphones
slate digital would come to mind
probably there are others

as for saturation:
waves has a bunch of "abbey road" plugins simulating the old beatles gear
among them the j35 tape recorder

there are tons of other saturation plugins which might be cool to try

for example also audiothing valves
which also has a cab simulator - maybe useful for simulating the subtle "boxyness"

[LNovik]

Thanks for that comprehensive reply. I'll look into these. I also learned a new abbreviation--imho. Took me a few moments to get it.
LN

[Giova942]

Paul sang loud and very close to the mic, that's the only trick.

The most impressive thing is that the first vocal take was the best. Paul tried a new vocal take later, but it was clear that the first one was the best.

Source: The amazing book "Recording The Beatles".

[vurt]

Paul sang loud and very close to the mic, that's the only trick.

The most impressive thing is that the first vocal take was the best. Paul tried a new vocal take later, but it was clear that the first one was the best.

Source: The amazing book "Recording The Beatles".

that's the book i meant. totally messed the title up.
great book though for recording in general even for non beatles fans. although can be expensive, so library!

[zerocrossing]

Start with a Neumann U 47.

https://reverb.com/item/55212600-neuman ... microphone

Start with McCartney's voice. That man is underrated as a singer, capable of insanely different voice characters.

k

P.s.: I'll check the books but to me it sounds like there's some slap echo on the vocal.

Underrated? Isn’t he known as one of the best pop singers of all time? Didn’t his songs land him 70% ownership of London?

[vurt]

Start with a Neumann U 47.

https://reverb.com/item/55212600-neuman ... microphone

Start with McCartney's voice. That man is underrated as a singer, capable of insanely different voice characters.

k

P.s.: I'll check the books but to me it sounds like there's some slap echo on the vocal.

Underrated? Isn’t he known as one of the best pop singers of all time? Didn’t his songs land him 70% ownership of London?

i know london is a shithole, but i don't think he's that rich

[Giova942]

Start with McCartney's voice. That man is underrated as a singer, capable of insanely different voice characters.

Underrated? He is literally the most succesful singer, songwriter and musician of all time. People have been crazy about him for the last 60 years.

[MogwaiBoy]

To emulate this I'd start with recording through a tube condenser microphone into a saturation plugin like the industry standard Decapitator or whatever. Bandpass the crap out of it too.