 |
VO-BB - 20 YEARS OLD!
Established November 10, 2004
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dan4VO
Contributor
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 42
Location: Asheville, NC
|
 Posted: Thu May 26, 2011 8:00 am Post subject: So... |
 |
|
Here is my $.02
I've read that you have a mic pre that is clean, accurate and that you are happy with. I'm not familiar with the pre you have but if it does have those characteristics then there is little point to getting another pre that has those same qualities.
The discussion is progressing in such a way that is starting to encourage you to add processing while recording  . Aural exciters and EQ are great, but not for VO on the recording side. This should be done in post.
You have to take a look at your mic collection and your room. Perhaps you have too much acoustic treatment absorbing the high frequencies? I know you mentioned not wanting to get another mic, but this honestly is the next thing to look at. If you want to go more inexpensive a Studio Projects C1 may be a good option. If you are open to spending more, an AKG414 will definitely add sibilance and brighten your sound (but I personally think they are too harsh on VO).
Consider these things and keep us posted on your decision.
Dan Friedman
_________________
www.sound4vo.com
www.procommvoices.com
http://www.authorhouse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000377548 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mike Sommer
A Hundred Dozen
Joined: 05 May 2008
Posts: 1222
Location: Boss Angeles
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2011 9:49 am Post subject: Re: So... |
|
|
| danno812 wrote: |
The discussion is progressing in such a way that is starting to encourage you to add processing while recording. Aural exciters and EQ are great, but not for VO on the recording side. This should be done in post. |
I don't believe anyone has suggested using such things while recording, As I have mentioned these are post productions tricks.
| Quote: | | Perhaps you have too much acoustic treatment absorbing the high frequencies? |
Though it was acceptable to record in a active and live room at one time, these days with such small rooms there really is no such thing of a too dead of a room. The only downside is that it is uncomfortable to work in for the performer.
If you are a single sounds source in a room, that means: no echo, no room resonance, simply your voice coming out of your mouth and being captured by the mic, your voice is being received and recorded exactly as it is being produced.
The trend of bright shimmery audio is a post production trick. These are artifacts that add nothing to the clarity to the voice. --I'm glad to hear much of this trend is starting to fade away.
The C1 is a brighter mic, especially the early REV1 version. The newest release has addressed much of it's hyperactive sibilant punch problem, with a new capsule and tighter controls at the factory.
_________________
The Blog:
http://voiceoveraudio.blogspot.com/
Acoustics are counter-intuitive. If one thing is certain about acoustics, it is that if anything seems obvious it is probably wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kgenus
Seriously Devoted
Joined: 01 Dec 2004
Posts: 889
Location: Greater NYC Area
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2011 10:47 am Post subject: Re: So... |
|
|
| danno812 wrote: | | This should be done in post. |
Dan, you know that statement should be the BANNER for the gear section... answers 98% of the questions.
Hope you guys are well.
_________________
Genus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan4VO
Contributor
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 42
Location: Asheville, NC
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2011 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Though it was acceptable to record in a active and live room at one time, these days with such small rooms there really is no such thing of a too dead of a room. The only downside is that it is uncomfortable to work in for the performer. |
Although they often work hand in hand... absorption is different from diffusion. It is possible to reduce absorption of high frequency energy and still have a dead room. It is a matter of balancing the amount and placement of materials used. In a small room this is reasonably easy to do.
| Quote: | | If you are a single sounds source in a room, that means: no echo, no room resonance, simply your voice coming out of your mouth and being captured by the mic, your voice is being received and recorded exactly as it is being produced. |
Exactly.
_________________
www.sound4vo.com
www.procommvoices.com
http://www.authorhouse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000377548 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan4VO
Contributor
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 42
Location: Asheville, NC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Sommer
A Hundred Dozen
Joined: 05 May 2008
Posts: 1222
Location: Boss Angeles
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2011 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| danno812 wrote: | | Although they often work hand in hand... absorption is different from diffusion. It is possible to reduce absorption of high frequency energy and still have a dead room. |
Yes Adsorption and Diffusion do work hand in hand.
I believe what you're trying to express with your second sentence it that one can reduce the over absorption of High frequencies while maximizing the absorption of low frequencies. "Absorption frequency Control," or a well Tuned room.
It might be best to for the causal reader to understand that a room is either dead - free of echo, or it is not. Dead vs. Active. There is of course a well balanced room that controls modal build up and modal resonance that still allows room ambience (character or atmosphere) to enter the microphone, which in turn allows the voice to bloom. In Disney Studio's original Stage B, the atmosphere was quite delightful in that respect, but it was also huge and well treated - with thick fiberglass and a canvas like covering.
If you ever watched and old Disney film you heard this room, because almost every voice was dubbed. Below is a sample of that old room with Uncle Walt at the mic. For this set up, the mic was about 2 feet above Walt, this allowed the room to enter into the recording, and allowed Walt's voice to bloom. The mic could be raised or lowered to sharpen the focus of the voice, or blur it with the color of the room. The mic was an RCA KU-3A and an all tube RCA mix desk.
http://soundcloud.com/mike-sommer/session-1
FOR VOICE OVER- In small rooms contouring and tuning a rooms is most impractical. It is also expensive to do properly, and in the hands of a novice it is simply disastrous. In small rooms, it is best to simply kill it flat to allow the voice to be captured uncolored. Then add atmosphere in post. That's how most like it, because it offers the most control.
| Quote: | It is a matter of balancing the amount and placement of materials used. In a small room this is reasonably easy to do.
|
In a small room Diffusion is not always the best option, especially in rooms under 1500 cubic feet. It is also good to understand that the full and proper effect of diffusion is not realized until 5 feet away from diffusor. This is why most diffusion is placed at the back of most mix positions. In this configuration it adds a sense of space. When speaking into a primitive root quarter diffuser at the above distance, it is almost like speaking into nothing.
In this booth design, because it was over 1500 cubic feet, I was able to placed a simple primitive root diffusion at the rear of the room to add action and sense of depth to the room. Also most of the walls are not completely treated, but a good 85% of the walls are. It is best to understand that corner bass traps need to be supported by wideband trapping on walls because the walls themselves resonate and support low frequency resonance, as well as reflect high frequencies.
The only other diffuser that is worth using in a small room is a PBA diffuser, because they maximize and extend bass absorption while allowing the high frequencies to remain. BUT even this requires some distance to prevent slap back, and that's the problem with diffusion in small rooms, you well get early reflections before your get diffusion. Hence way I suggest not to record VO at a desk. Besides that's playing radio anyway. 
_________________
The Blog:
http://voiceoveraudio.blogspot.com/
Acoustics are counter-intuitive. If one thing is certain about acoustics, it is that if anything seems obvious it is probably wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Living Culture
Contributore Level V
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Posts: 189
Location: Taipei
|
| Posted: Fri May 27, 2011 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
My apologies for digressing from the digression.
What Kgenus said makes the most sense to me. You said your microphone changed character dramatically after you changed tubes, so why not find a tube that will give you the sound you looking for?
It will cost you less than $500 to try and if you not happy you can sell the tube at no substantial loss.
There is one online store that is very helpful with selecting tubes to achieve specific sounds; I can't find the URL at mo, but I'll have a look later.
_________________
Mandarin Chinese Voiceovers & Localization
http://lcmsmedia.com
http://imagesbykenny.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
