VO-BB - 20 YEARS OLD!

Frank F

Most who follow the links here know my opinion of using shotgun microphones for voice over; now here is an article which might put the reasons into a light which expresses what I cannot verbalize appropriately: http://digitalcontentproducer.com/soundforpic/revfeat/shotgun_microphones_0610/

You will need to read between the lines about what these microphones are designed to do, but you will understand.

Of course you can now have a mono, stereo, or surround shotgun mic for use in your VO world. Rolls Eyes

Toodles

F2
_________________
Be thankful for the bad things in life. They opened your eyes to the good things you weren't paying attention to before. email: thevoice@usa.com

Rob Ellis · M&M Joined: 01 Aug 2006 Posts: 2385 Location: Detroit

I have always had (and still do have) mixed feelings about shotgun mics for VO...

I often don't really like how I sound on them, and part of me wants to be a member of that club that does, somehow, sound pretty good on them. With me, a somewhat nasally voice is part of the equation, as shotguns seem to exaggerate that somewhat.

From reading the article, the only thing I could glean that seems to apply to what Frank is referring to was the part about how they are directional at higher frequencies but not so much as lower frequencies. (?)

Frank F · Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 12:40 pm Post subject:

Yes.

A shotgun will never have the full body or be as solid sounding as a good 1" diaphragm condenser - period. They were not designed that way.

F2
_________________
Be thankful for the bad things in life. They opened your eyes to the good things you weren't paying attention to before. email: thevoice@usa.com

Rob Ellis · M&M Joined: 01 Aug 2006 Posts: 2385 Location: Detroit

Yeah, I know that is true for me, but of course some folks (Bruce Miles, Dan-O, Nelson Jewell, Ben Wilson, Bob Souer, Eddie Eagle, Karen Clark etc.) do quite well with a shotgun.....

......I just don't appear to be one of them.

georgethetech · Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 7:26 pm Post subject:

Never in my life did I even see a shotgun mic before I moved to LA.
It's thanks to Hollywood that it's in use in studios here today. Some engineer stuck one in front of a prolific VO talent because they figured if it works for dialogue on set, why not in the studio.
If there is one industry that hates new tricks, it's Hollywood. They stick with what they know, and are VERY stubborn to change. One of the very few places ISDN is still in use, as well (besides radio).
Due to their design, they do have some unique characteristics, for sure. It's one of the few mics that seems to have a tad of acoustic compression built right in, and has EQ bumps and dips in the right places for many voices, creating a 'pre-produced' sound that makes the mixer's job easier.
_________________
If it sounds good, it is good.
George Whittam
GeorgeThe.Tech
424-226-8528
VOBS.TV Co-host
TheProAudioSuite.com Co-host
TriBooth.com Co-founder

Nelson Jewell · Guest

Well stated, George.

Honestly, it took me a very long time to get used to the MKH416. I have a tendency to move a bit too much, and mouth noises are a bit more prevalent with me. Yes, it has made me money, but now I'm ready to move on to another money making mic that's easier to work with---and of course sounds good with my voice.

PJHawke · Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 12:58 pm Post subject:

I'm on a radio show-type podcast, and I'm getting ready to start training with a VO coach, so I'm going to buy my first professional quality mic. I'm trying to choose between the Rode NT1-A and the NTG-1.

For the podcast I've just been using my newbie-ubiquitous MXL-990, and it does make me sound pretty good except for the sibilance. I'm told that the MXL is a very bright mic, and it makes my esses so burning hot it's painful for me to listen to after the mix is done. I was told the Rode NTG mics are great at reducing sibilance, and I thought maybe a shotgun would be better for my recording situation (needing less room treatment for sound absorption), but that's just theory on my part.

You guys are the pros who actually use these things... what do you think? Do you think the shotgun would be of benefit for the above stated reasons, or should I go for the warmth of the NT1? I'm going to A-B them at guitar center soon, but I thought I'd ask your opinions first.

Bill Campbell · DC Joined: 09 Mar 2007 Posts: 621

I have the Rode NTG-1 and NT1A. The NTG-1 is muddy and boxy,
the NT1A is not your friend if you have an essssy voice. It's very
detailed and sharp.

I'd suggest for an esssy voice(in order)

E/V RE-20
Shure SM7B
Neumann TLM-193
KEL HM2D
Studio Projects B1
Sennheiser 416 (if you must have a shotgun)
Speech Therapy
_________________
www.asapaudio.com

ricevoice · Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 1:42 pm Post subject:

Bill Campbell · DC Joined: 09 Mar 2007 Posts: 621

Well, I think Frank would agree. A TUBE preamp will always warm up Speech Therapy.
_________________
www.asapaudio.com

Frank F · Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:47 pm Post subject:

Rob Ellis · M&M Joined: 01 Aug 2006 Posts: 2385 Location: Detroit

I've been on-again, off-again with my Sennheiser shotgun, but have continued to experiment with different approaches, etc.

Latest----it seems that I am finding that if I run the gain hotter (around 45db) than I normally do, and use if for low-volume reads, I get a nice result and a presence that definitely cuts through.

Increasing the gain (and the output on the pre-amp) seems to improve my results with this mic., but again only with certain applications.

jrkaiser · Guest

Rob, what you are saying makes sense to me... we've all heard it before. The shotguns aren't built for screamers, or even a higher energy/volume read. They work best in a more intimate environment.

I've got the 415 in my road kit. It works fabby...

I'm also having to relearn a new approach to VO work. I've gotten some great help from others on this board, but am currently doing some coaching with one of the more well respected members of this board and have realized that after 17 years on-air, I need to start taking some time to focus on VO work and technique more than ever. Specifically working that mic and not eating it... and not wanting to squish the crap out of it with compression.

Rob Ellis · M&M Joined: 01 Aug 2006 Posts: 2385 Location: Detroit

[/quote]squish the crap out of it with compression.

Dayo · Cinquecento Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 544 Location: UK

Recently revived my 416 and been very pleasantly surprised how well it sounds next to my Lawson. Certainly a different flavour.

The theory I'd heard was that a 416 was pretty forgiving of less than perfect room acoustics, and that may be true. But since I recently did a lot of remedial work on my booth I was keen to hear it afresh - I must say it sounds pretty spectacular in the new booth with a better balance to the acoustics.

I know this has been covered before, but I'd be keen to hear from fellow 416 users as to your favorite placement and what kind of pop filter works best for you?