• New!

    Try our new Social Feeds, look out for the navigation icon: . You can now set default social feed view in your account preferences.

Beginner recording Hello (Lionel Richie)

Have you gotten your toes wet with chord changes/beginning improv or the like ? Or are you at the stage where all you are trying to do is play the melody of songs correctly, timing and note and phrase wise... and make it sound good ? (no judgment here, the latter is perfectly fine).
I've tried to improvise in some of the SOTMs with more jazz-focused songs... but they're not very good. Mostly running my fingers around a certain scale hoping to sound good. I do understand the "call and response" format though, and try to fit my finger runnings around that idea.

I've also played around with making up short lines for intros, endings, and the bridge/instrumental for pop songs, again just mainly running my fingers around a scale (usually pentatonic). Sometimes sounds like it could work, sometimes not so right.

As far as pop songs vs jazz goes, though, I feel like pop is so much easier. Just go up or down, occasionally change direction, and as long as I stick to the main scale of the song, start and end on the root or 5th, and it'll somehow work out. But, that mainly works for improvising new lines for intro/bridge/ending... not sure how to work that into modifying an actual melody.

After practicing a song once or twice, I can start to throw in simple embellishments though. Usually simple turns because that's so intuitive, just quickly go up one note and then back down (or the other direction, whichever I feel sounds better). Grace notes I can sometimes do on the fly, sometimes I need to think ahead and prepare. Filling in notes in between intervals, kind of like a slow gliss, is something I'm also working on. Another technique I've been working on, is adding a bit of fill at the end of a phrase, usually like 3-4 notes that continue and descend after a phrase. But overall, all those changes still only work within the melody of the song, not really "straying away" from it, if you get my meaning.

That's why I almost prefer improvising on songs that I don't know, preferably originals that I hear for the first time.
Without thinking
Just playing "the essence" of the song how I perceive it.
That actually makes kind of sense. I already know how Lionel Richie sings Hello, so maybe my mind is kind of fixed to how it should go and limits how I try to interpret the melody.

p.s. There is a free download of Open Compressor (I lost the link but you can google it)
I found a link to 4download -- but that looks kind of fishy, considering that the plugin normally isn't free.
 
I've tried to improvise in some of the SOTMs with more jazz-focused songs... but they're not very good. Mostly running my fingers around a certain scale hoping to sound good. I do understand the "call and response" format though, and try to fit my finger runnings around that idea.

I've also played around with making up short lines for intros, endings, and the bridge/instrumental for pop songs, again just mainly running my fingers around a scale (usually pentatonic). Sometimes sounds like it could work, sometimes not so right.

As far as pop songs vs jazz goes, though, I feel like pop is so much easier. Just go up or down, occasionally change direction, and as long as I stick to the main scale of the song, start and end on the root or 5th, and it'll somehow work out. But, that mainly works for improvising new lines for intro/bridge/ending... not sure how to work that into modifying an actual melody.

After practicing a song once or twice, I can start to throw in simple embellishments though. Usually simple turns because that's so intuitive, just quickly go up one note and then back down (or the other direction, whichever I feel sounds better). Grace notes I can sometimes do on the fly, sometimes I need to think ahead and prepare. Filling in notes in between intervals, kind of like a slow gliss, is something I'm also working on. Another technique I've been working on, is adding a bit of fill at the end of a phrase, usually like 3-4 notes that continue and descend after a phrase. But overall, all those changes still only work within the melody of the song, not really "straying away" from it, if you get my meaning.


That actually makes kind of sense. I already know how Lionel Richie sings Hello, so maybe my mind is kind of fixed to how it should go and limits how I try to interpret the melody.


I found a link to 4download -- but that looks kind of fishy, considering that the plugin normally isn't free.
It's some kind of promotion and I downloaded it and plugged it into my Cubase and I think it is awesome. Especially the visual representation of what the compressor actually does. Once you wrap your head around the concept and play with it a little, the visuals make it much easier to dial in the effect you actually want to accomplish.
 
BTW... to go off on a very minor tangent... since I mentioned my wife's earlier recording of me several times already, I suppose I should let you hear it to get to know the kind of sound I'm talking about:

VID-20250420-WA0002.mp3
Please do note that this was on alto, and it was taken at the end of my practise where my embouchure was already very tired and I was just wrapping up and trying to have fun, so my airstream does get kind of flaky as the song goes on.

Now contrast this with... say... another alto SOTM recorded around the same time of year:

Notice how different they are, how the phone recording seems to have more... uh... "body" (I'm not sure what the proper term is), and I don't think it's just the room reverb. The sound is simply very different.

BTW... to go off on a very minor tangent... since I mentioned my wife's earlier recording of me several times already, I suppose I should let you hear it to get to know the kind of sound I'm talking about:

VID-20250420-WA0002.mp3
Please do note that this was on alto, and it was taken at the end of my practise where my embouchure was already very tired and I was just wrapping up and trying to have fun, so my airstream does get kind of flaky as the song goes on.

Now contrast this with... say... another alto SOTM recorded around the same time of year:

Notice how different they are, how the phone recording seems to have more... uh... "body" (I'm not sure what the proper term is), and I don't think it's just the room reverb. The sound is simply very different.
The latest posts are about 'playing' rather than processing raw sax input. And playing better is more important than 'processing' better!

Still, I've compared the 2 recordings and - like you - are trying to understand the differences.
I have little or no experience in recording or mixing sax. And there are much more qualified members to comment than me! But a couple of thoughts occurred to me:

1. Possible differences in playing locations and/or recording positions and distances.
Leaving aside any difference in the sensitivity mics for the moment, any differences between playing locations and 'recording distances or positions' will probably affect the sound of the recordings. Your wife's recording places you in more 'space' than your recording of "You sound wonderful". Maybe in a different location with more 'natural space' (echo, reverb). Maybe in exactly the same location but in a different recording position and/or distance to you playing directly into 2 mics. If it's the same location, then depending on your wife's recording position and distance, she may be picking up more 'reflected sound' (from the walls) than you own mics do. This may have 2 effects. Firstly 'reflected sound' travels more distances from different walls and these can combine to give a recording with 'more space' than your recording directly into your mics. Secondly the 'fundamental frequencies' of the sax are (depending on volume) often stronger in volume than the (higher) 'harmonic frequencies' which all instruments produce. So with a different recording position, more 'reflected sound' and - as a consequence - more effective 'distance' to your raw sax input maybe your wife's recording is picking up relatively less (higher and weaker) 'harmonic frequencies' and more 'fundamental frequencies'. All contribute towards a less 'dry' and more 'focused' sound.

2. Differences in mics
In principle, the 'top model' mobile phones from Apple, Samsung, etc. all cover the entire frequency range (including harmonics) of saxes. I've not yet been able to find out 'the recording distance' to which this sensitivity extends. My guess is that phone mics are primarily designed to work at short distances (speech). A 'Zoom recorder' certainly picks up much more in a rehearsal than a mobile phone. So it's possible (IMHO probable) that a mobile phone mic becomes less sensitive as the recording 'distance' increases.

By contrast, you're playing directly into a bell-mounted mic and a condenser mic (which is generally highly sensitive). Neither of these mics give you any 'presence' in any 'space'. So this is something you'll need to learn how to do in 'mixing'.

FWIW, there's a 'frequency spectrum' view of tracks in
Audacity. This might allow you to compare the 'frequency spectra' of your wife's recording and yours ("Wonderful Tonight"). Yes, I'm Nerd 🙂. I've downloaded your wife's recording but I've been unable to download your recording of "Wonderful Tonight".

If you send me your audio file for "Wonderful Tonight" as an attachment to a PM, I'll compare the two and let you know (via a PM) anything I might be able to discover.

Best wishes,

Mike
 
The latest posts are about 'playing' rather than processing raw sax input. And playing better is more important than 'processing' better!
@atwl77, That's really the bottom line.

Aside from that, microphone type as well as positioning are super important so there is really no way to compare two different recordings and analyze them for differences or commonalities.
In addition smart phones do automatic bias adjustment based on background noise and, the newer ones, using AI to find what they think is most important. But they may not understand what you are trying to record. Keep in mind, they are mostly looking for human voices and background noise elimination.

You can take two identical recordings outside and the wind picks up during the second one and it'll drastically change every dynamic and (most likely) spectrum of your recording.

Practice, practice, practice, get a copy of Bob Mintzer's etudes for playing along and listen to his articulation. And once you have a good grip on that, you can start applying mixing knowledge to the tracks.
 
I was recording myself practicing today with a phone on the desk. Here's an excerpt from that session, where I'm experimenting with some different lines to the song.

20260617_112412.mp3

It's funny how sometimes the line seems ok-ish when you play it, but then later when you listen back, you think, "yeah, that just doesn't work." But I guess the point is, this is where I'm at in terms of improvising the melody.

Also, I switched to a different mouthpiece, a Vandoren T55. I think I can get a more "moody" feel with this mouthpiece, perhaps more suitable for this song when mic'd and mixed properly?

I should probably subtone some of the lower notes though... as soon as I can figure out how to do it properly on a tenor.
 
Or you play by ear...

That's why I almost prefer improvising on songs that I don't know, preferably originals that I hear for the first time.
Without thinking
Just playing "the essence" of the song how I perceive it.
Yup, but this assumes one has a somewhat developed or even 'natural' musical ear 😉 YT and forums are littered with 'musicians' who prove otherwise....
 
I've tried to improvise in some of the SOTMs with more jazz-focused songs... but they're not very good. Mostly running my fingers around a certain scale hoping to sound good. I do understand the "call and response" format though, and try to fit my finger runnings around that idea.

I've also played around with making up short lines for intros, endings, and the bridge/instrumental for pop songs, again just mainly running my fingers around a scale (usually pentatonic). Sometimes sounds like it could work, sometimes not so right.

As far as pop songs vs jazz goes, though, I feel like pop is so much easier. Just go up or down, occasionally change direction, and as long as I stick to the main scale of the song, start and end on the root or 5th, and it'll somehow work out. But, that mainly works for improvising new lines for intro/bridge/ending... not sure how to work that into modifying an actual melody.

After practicing a song once or twice, I can start to throw in simple embellishments though. Usually simple turns because that's so intuitive, just quickly go up one note and then back down (or the other direction, whichever I feel sounds better). Grace notes I can sometimes do on the fly, sometimes I need to think ahead and prepare. Filling in notes in between intervals, kind of like a slow gliss, is something I'm also working on. Another technique I've been working on, is adding a bit of fill at the end of a phrase, usually like 3-4 notes that continue and descend after a phrase. But overall, all those changes still only work within the melody of the song, not really "straying away" from it, if you get my meaning.


That actually makes kind of sense. I already know how Lionel Richie sings Hello, so maybe my mind is kind of fixed to how it should go and limits how I try to interpret the melody.


I found a link to 4download -- but that looks kind of fishy, considering that the plugin normally isn't free.
Ok, good, keep doing that but I think you also gotta start identifying chord changes, because at some places in a song in a given key, you need more than just playng the scale notes of the key.

Yes stick with pop that is fine, chord progressions tend to be simpler and more archetype-al.

You wanna make yourself happy ? Find some Blues songs, 12 bar preferably. You can play over blues changes using only the notes of a blues scale and it will always sound pretty good, long as your time is decent...

If you aren't into the classic blues artists or simple jazz blues songs, some pop tunes are blues progressions....Kiss by Prince....Gimme One Reason by Tracy Chapman...for example....
 
Hi @atwl77, I have no absolutely no knowledge or expertise in this kind of stuff at all. But FWIW, I did compare your wife's and your own recordings using Audacity 'spectrogram view'. See below.

Frequencies.webp


I have little or no idea how to interpret this. But it seems to me that your wifes recording (top two) more strongly record your lower (fundamental) sax frequencies. And her recording of your 'higher frequencies' are weaker and more 'diffuus' (blurred) than in your recording (bottom two) which is generally much sharper, especially w.r.t. the sharper and stronger 'peaks' at the higher frequencies.

TBH, I have no idea whether this comparison is of any practical use (given all the differences in recording). But maybe it can get you a bit closer to the 'sound' on your wife's recording. For example by 'dampening' down the higher frequencies.Ands maybe (subtlety) using some kind of delay/reverb to 'smear' your raw sax sound a bit based on your wife's recording.

Hope this helps,

Mike
 
Thanks @MikeMorrell , additionally I'm wondering if the phone has any additional enhancements to the audio which make it sound better... after all, current modern phones are all known to be a little "extra spicy" with their photography, I wouldn't be surprised if they did the same to video (and the accompanying audio).
 
Thanks @MikeMorrell , additionally I'm wondering if the phone has any additional enhancements to the audio which make it sound better... after all, current modern phones are all known to be a little "extra spicy" with their photography, I wouldn't be surprised if they did the same to video (and the accompanying audio).
Almost all phones do gain setting to keep the level more or less reasonable. In other words, compression followed by makeup gain…

Mic position and proper gain staging are the key to successful saxophone recording. Also, position of you and your saxophone in the room, especially if there are lots of hard surfaces (walls, floors, mirrors, etc.). Spend time getting that stuff right before adding a lot of plugins.

I have found that harware compression is also useful. My current audio interface (UA Apollo Twin) has built in preamp and compressor plugins. Prior to that I used an analog preamp and compressor in front of the audio interface. These things make a big difference in the quality of my sax sound. UA makes a fairly inexpensive interface (the Volt series) that has a built-in compressor and it also sounds excellent.

That said, applying brain-powered compression really helps more. By this I mean really concentrating on keeping my sound even 🙂

Working on your musical concept and really trying for a musical performance will do more than any hardware or software processing.
 

Trending

Latest Song of the Month

Forum statistics

Topics
32,253
Messages
575,728
Members
8,080
Latest member
DataPath
Back
Top Bottom