 |
VO-BB - 20 YEARS OLD!
Established November 10, 2004
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
KaraEdwards
M&M
Joined: 21 Feb 2007
Posts: 2374
Location: Behind a mic or camera, USA
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 16, 2010 11:34 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
George, thank you so much for your helpful answer!! You know I will be calling you 
I certainly hope I didn't ruffle feathers with my question here. I have specific reasons for asking it, I'm not just throwing ideas against the wall and hoping something sticks. I wanted to hear honest opinions about the advantages/disadvantages of vocal booths.
Thank you to everyone that took the time to offer thoughtful and helpful advice!!
_________________
Threadjackers local 420
Kara Edwards
http://www.karaedwards.com
kara@karaedwards.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bobbinbeamo
M&M
Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 2468
Location: Wherever I happen to be
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
I love my 4'x4'x7' Dawbox booth built a few years back. It's my gal-cave and we jokingly call it the "profit center". I needed a quiet and cost-effective solution for ISDN work. My set up is simple and for better ambience and air, I'll crack the door a bit. Cost was about $1100.00, most of that was the Auralex. Some would feel it's tight quarters, but it's working for me.
_________________
Bobbin Beam
www.bobbinbeam.com
blog.bobbinbeam.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lance Blair
M&M
Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 2281
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| digdog1 wrote: | @Lance:
Good point. I have much less hassle with room noise when using my RE-27/Symetrix 528E combo, chosen because it duplicates the core hardware of our on-air setup.
Large diameter condensers being much more sensitive, they tend to pick up every shirt rustle, lip smack, and whistling booger in the immediate vicinity. But the right one can be magic when it's a good fit for your voice.
So, like most things in life, it's a bit of a tradeoff. |
Hey, is that a Blue Mouse in your pic? Nice...how do you like it?
What kills me some times is how VOs are processed to sound like dynamic mics a the end of the day. All the smoothness and 3-D imaging is usually crushed by the time it's done. Listen to broadcast VOs at home through your headphones. Yikes.
Might as well have that up-front shaved off end sound at the beginning.
Especially as everything goes more and more through the web...all that lovely detail is lost. If anything, what I record on dynamics sound way better through the net.
_________________
Skype: globalvoiceover
and now, http://lanceblairvo.com the blog is there now too! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Billy James
Contributor II
Joined: 29 Mar 2010
Posts: 72
Location: Dreamland, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@Lance
Yup -- got an amazing deal on the Mouse thru a guy on eBay. It's outfitted with the original custom pop filter Blue made for the Mouse and Kiwi, which straps onto the body of the mic like those custom pop filters Abbey Road made for their mics back in the 60s (similar to that custom filter Neumann bundles with their U87 anniversary edition).
The Mouse is a pretty balanced sound -- nice bottom, not overly bright up top. (And I'll resist the urge to make a Borscht Belt one-liner out of that...  ) It's used a lot on kick drums and drum overheads, but makes a decent VO mic for the right voice. And like most Blue products, it looks amazingly cool, too.
I hear what you're saying on the awful things done to audio for broadcast. Still, it seems a shame to settle for less in the recording phase just because the vocal is going to be stepped on repeatedly to make it "pop" on a crappy car radio speaker. (And I say that as a guy who's still looking for a decent vocal booth solution for a home studio.)
On the other hand...
Someone sent me a vid the other day about a female VO profiled on a TV show. She had nice delivery, and apparently works for clients all over the world. The most surprising part of the vid was watching her open her vocal booth -- a bedroom closet door -- and deliver the copy to her laptop via...a Rode Podcaster USB mic. She even held it in her hand like a singer using a Shure SM58 onstage.
So ya never know... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lance Blair
M&M
Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 2281
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting about that talent.
What I mean about "why not use dynamic mics" is not a question of settling for them (I would urge using good ones with great preamps) but that they bring out the good qualities that are left over after processing, so I say might as well use them.
It's remarkable how dynamics are the mic of choice for some great vocal recordings. Thriller was on a SM7, Springsteen uses one...and Depeche Mode used one for the first time on their new album...and used it hand held for the tracks! Radiohead is now using RE20s.
They all sound rather good...
_________________
Skype: globalvoiceover
and now, http://lanceblairvo.com the blog is there now too! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Sommer
A Hundred Dozen
Joined: 05 May 2008
Posts: 1222
Location: Boss Angeles
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bjork used a SM58 in her studio session, along with her NU47.
_________________
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 |
|
|
Claire Dodin
Club 300
Joined: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 392
Location: Sunny LA
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I used a small sound booth of the kind once (different brand, but similar) and I was so disappointed with the sound that I ended up re-recording the entire job at my friend's where I was staying, in the living room surrounded with blankets. It sounded 10 times better.
The reason why it was bad was because there were people talking not too far from the booth (in a room pretty close) and the booth didn't exactly isolate well, I could hear their entire conversation; and secondly it did not have any extra sound treatment inside and just sounded like a small box.
Before this experience I was thinking of buying one, now it's totally crossed off my list.
I imagine if the booth is a larger one and has extra sound treatment it would be much better; but as is sold is just not good sound and does not isolate as much as you'd think it would.
_________________
www.clairedodin.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lance Blair
M&M
Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 2281
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 7:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike Sommer wrote: | | Bjork used a SM58 in her studio session, along with her NU47. |
Again, interesting. Now, can you tell the difference from track to track? Dynamics are great for very loud or very soft delivery while condensers are usually better for even middle projection...or are they?
Another dynamic recording...The Killers' Sams Town was all with a Heil PR40...and I think it sounds thin and grainy much like that microphone, but it kinda works.
Anyhow, with any of the recordings mentioned, you'd never say "pshaw, that's a crummy $150-300 dynamic microphone.
I know a talent that used to do the Braves' promos from home with a RE20 and a dbx286, and they sounded awesome. They weren't announcery reads either.
_________________
Skype: globalvoiceover
and now, http://lanceblairvo.com the blog is there now too! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rob Ellis
M&M
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 2385
Location: Detroit
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
All good points taken here, but I'm still not ready to give my BOOTH the BOOT....(partly because those things are heavy and I'd prob break a toe in the process)  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Sommer
A Hundred Dozen
Joined: 05 May 2008
Posts: 1222
Location: Boss Angeles
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
The reason Bjok likes to use the SM58 is that she can move around the studio. And the reason she Loves her NU47 is because it captures those delicate sounds and nuances that her voice makes. Which is the reason we should use a condenser, it captures the details in the voice and we don't need to work as hard. Dynamic mics are great too, I have a locker full of them, each one capable of delivering specific built in "vintage" sounds, so that I don't have to apply cheesy effects in post.
Mics and preamps are just tools, it's understanding what's the best tool for the job.
_________________
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 |
|
|
scottreyns
Contributor
Joined: 29 Jan 2010
Posts: 35
Location: San Francisco, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 1:45 pm Post subject: Re: Vocal Booths...down and dirty |
|
|
| KaraEdwards wrote: | | Now, my current set up is perfect, no need to change...but I'm thinking of the future...so I'd love to hear from those that have Whisper rooms. What do you love/ hate- and would you buy them again? |
For many years I used a standard (single-thickness walls) 5' x 7' which I got second-hand at a good price. In retrospect it was really too large and boxy-sounding even with some foam put up. I never used the AC system, and my cat Mozart, rest his soul, took to frequenting an outside corner of it as a scratching post as well as sleeping and occasionally puking on top of it.
It worked well when my basement/garage was still in raw/semi-raw stages (cold, wet, grungy - very much down and dirty etc.) and I needed something temporary.
This same unit, I'd used previously in a rented office space which I used similarly mostly in evenings, with OK results for what it was... not great, not good, but OK. I think the key to sound isolation is mass which kind of flies in the face of having portability, so one has to have that in mind when setting expectations.
When I finally got a chance to make something permanent, I sold it at a fair price to a musician who wanted to use it for practicing and recording both vocals and instruments. Just like I was when it came into my hands, he was real excited and I'd like to think he's been getting solid use out of it like I did.
I think WhisperRooms can be OK contingent on one needing something portable. I won't say I'd never use one again, but in a situation where I'd be considering it I'd be looking at what could be done with a closet first. I've recorded some of my best vocal work to date in closets. Pets and available space aside, portable booths aren't cheap. They're also physically laborious to assemble (more so than they are to break down), especially if/as one is doing it without any help and trying to do it on a slightly uneven surface.
If you're in a place where you plan to not move from anytime soon, and you're working and/or otherwise invested enough in your career enough to feel ready for it, there's nothing like building a good permanent booth. I think that's probably the only way to get a decently dead space, and even then it's not like one will necessarily end up with a space that will rival what a booth in a dedicated recording facility will have... Again, a lot of it's about expectations in parsing out one's actual must-haves vs. nice-to-haves.
_________________
Scott Reyns, voice talent serving major metros (San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, New York) and beyond |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rob Ellis
M&M
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 2385
Location: Detroit
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Gotta share this----
Lately I have been noticing more and more that my mics, especially my Gefell UM70S, were sounding very dry and lifeless in the booth, and much better outside of it, though a little boomy in my semi-treated office.
Upon adding some ATS Acoustics Panels a few months back, which helped tremendously, I had also added Auralex bass traps from floor to ceiling in every corner. Turns out that too many bass traps was causing the dry, lifeless sound.
I removed most of the traps, leaving a few in the upper corners, and immediately noticed my mics sounded much more lush, 3-D and alive. I am now a happy booth owner and user once again (for now anyway ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Sommer
A Hundred Dozen
Joined: 05 May 2008
Posts: 1222
Location: Boss Angeles
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rob- that is the problem with bass traps. To become effective at the bass frequencies you're also going to become that much more effective at the at the mid and upper frequencies.
With the Auralex traps, there is nothing you can do, but with bass traps made from rigid insulation one can increase the bass efficiency of the trap without sucking out all the highs. One can do this by making the trap a membrane trap or a Helmholtz Resonator, or introducing reflection back into the room with diffusion.
It's all about understanding the space, listening, and contouring the sound to your liking.
_________________
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.
Last edited by Mike Sommer on Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:28 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rob Ellis
M&M
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 2385
Location: Detroit
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
At any rate it sounds much better now.
I still have room to add two more 24x24x4"ATS acoustic panels to the lower portion of the booth. I'm assuming this will probably only improve the sound, if only a little.
If not, I'll take them back out. But even without those 2 additional panels (which I just ordered) it sounds 200% better to my ear since greatly reducing the Auralex bass traps. I had no idea this was happening and was on the verge of selling my UM70 and 416, thinking the problem must be with the mics......ha! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Sommer
A Hundred Dozen
Joined: 05 May 2008
Posts: 1222
Location: Boss Angeles
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
They should help, because the panels are more "Broadband". You can increase the efficacy of the panels by putting an air gap behind the panel: a 2" panel will need a minimum or a 2" gap; a 4" thick panel will need a 2" to 4" gap.
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
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
