question abt. VO levels for Post

[mikeshep]

I am a longtime VO talent with studio and routinely send out dry voice tracks to various post houses for broadcast mix. Recently I've been hearing stuff on-air for a local client and the VO is notably muddy and compressed-sounding vs adjacent material.

We do not heavily compress anything here. Typically for TV I do normalize for peaks at around -3db, using Bias Peak. Signal path is pretty straightforward. Neumann 49>Great River Pre to Finalizer>Lynx L22/Mac.
(Sometimes use a Peluso mic too). Occasionally will add a touch of mid-range and upper-mid EQ boost to brighten around 3 and 5k...
Many clients do insist on submissions as mp3 email attachments - in which case I at least send at highest sample rate FWIW.

Could something about the normalization level that might be at fault on my end? Any rules of thumb to live by about best average digital peaks for sending out dry tracks for Post?

Thanks for any new advice and/or refreshing my memory about some fundamentals,

MikeMich

[soundguydave]

Yea, I wouldn't normalize a VO before I send it to a post house. Looks like you have a pretty good signal chain, just record it at a healthy level and let the engineer deal with it.

[Neps]

+1 to soundguydave!! I prefer working with the original VO recording. It just makes my life easier. But if you've only noticed the VO sounding muddy recently I'd say that it must have happened at the Post house. If all the other work has been fine, then your method is fine. But from preference I'd rather keep it clean.

As to preferred level.. I prefer a peak at -6dB. But then again, I've recieved material that was way softer than that, that worked brilliantly. Dunno what the other guys think but this is just my preffered way of working.

[mikeshep]

Thanks for your suggestions!

Just a follow-up question- and this may be rather subjective but, as far as stuff being sent out to be used "as-is" - direct-to-air (radio spots oft-times) - would you be inclined to follow the same guidelines i.e., digital peaks at -6, or would that audio perhaps benefit from some degree of normalization? Here again, a great many clients also prefer mp3 delivery and many times that mp3 will constitute the final spot that is distributed to stations for air.

Thanks again for your time

Mike

[Neps]

If you're sending out material that wont go through a posthouse, then your way of normalizing to -3dB will work fine. ( Q: Just straight VO spot, no FX?). -3dB will also make it a bit of a better mp3 conversion (thats from my experience), but you should have a long chat with your clients on 'why to Post!'

Pleasure to help out.

[philper]

I'm a little uncomfortable with the amount of compression you are doing, and normalizing is, for me, irrelevant: I can't use your VO that hot anyhow and pass TV network dialnorm standards. The gear is all good, but please be careful of over processing (I see that Finalizer in there), and keep in mind that you probably don't really know what else will be going on in the track around your voice. While you are "out in front" when you are talking, your VO has to play well with the other elements. This is especially true in handoffs between VO and location interviews and verite dialog.

Philip Perkins

[Brent Hahn]

If I'm receiving VO files, I want them with with no EQ/comp/limiting. And especially no gating to remove the sound of the computer in the booth. I'm amazed by the number of people who do that (not that you're one of them).

[mikeshep]

Thanks for this input - very helpful reminders... Re: the Finalizer, Sound Wiz Jay Rose helped me create a preset a few years ago that he felt "prepared" the audio signal for mp3 conversions...

Otherwise I am using it mainly for downward expander/ambient noise management and..there is a modest amt. of multiband EQ tailored to my voice/mic... and rather nominal amt of compression overall.

Again, thanks for your time one and all!

Mike

[Dallas Taylor]

Yes... I agree with most of the others.

If you were to send anything to me, I would want absolutely nothing done to the signal. ...no level adjustments & positively NO EQ or Compression. I receive hundreds of raw VO Records a year from countless Recordists, and I can always tell when there's been processing added. I know the Recordist is just trying to help, but it actually has the exact opposite affect.

You (as the Recordist) are not responsible for the final mix... even if the Post House doesn't use a Mixer.

[bizzle]

I don't mind a little processing, but many times it is excessive, and in some cases completely ruined by it. I hate when there is a gate on the VO , let us deal with that. But my biggest issue is poor mic technique (even from top guys and gals). Keep your mouth in the sweet spot and don't expect the signal chain processing to compensate when you fall off mic. The kinds of mics that are typically used for voiceover tend to have terrible off axis frequency response so it becomes difficult and/or impractical to repair an inconsistent recording. I can hear when you tilt your head down to read the page, and it not only hurts the recording but now I know when you are reading and it blows the whole facade. I know it is super convenient for a person to record themselves at home, but it is often at the detriment to the quality. Engineering a recording is much less about having things preset and more about reacting to changing conditions.

+1 on all the other great responses here.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

If I'm receiving VO files, I want them with with no EQ/comp/limiting. And especially no gating to remove the sound of the computer in the booth. I'm amazed by the number of people who do that (not that you're one of them).

[smurfyou]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

If I'm receiving VO files, I want them with with no EQ/comp/limiting. And especially no gating to remove the sound of the computer in the booth. I'm amazed by the number of people who do that (not that you're one of them).

Another !

I'm sure you'll hear that from most every mixer if you ask. It makes our job harder and usually to the detriment of the final product.

And I'll reiterate that normalizing is entirely unneccessary and the first thing I'd do is attenuate the clips.

[philper]

Jay Rose rocks, but as you say his "preset" is for MP3 files. If you are making hifi uncompressed files for use in a mix, I'd want you to turn all that stuff off. I am always suspicious of "one-size-fits-all" audio processing loops, and you don't know how your recording is going to sit in the eventual mix that you haven't heard. I have had this discussion a number of times with VO talent who record themselves, and often the real issue is that they want their tracks to sound big and full to their clients on their own, and I want them to play nice with the rest of the mix. In the past I have had to go to great lengths to back off the "in your faceness" of over-processed VO tracks that were causing me trouble in the mix. The reply from the VO talent was similar to what was stated here: "Famous engineer X set this up for me and famous mixer/network/studio etc. never complains." My point is that what works well for VO on its own to MP3 is not the same as what works well in uncompressed in a complex mix of music, sfx, other interviews and location dialog of varying quality. In the former case--do what works, in the latter, I'd appreciate it if you didn't make more work for me undoing (sort of) the signal processing you did for a different media.

Philip Perkins

[Rick Sanchez]

Originally Posted by Dallas Taylor

Yes... I agree with most of the others.

If you were to send anything to me, I would want absolutely nothing done to the signal. ...no level adjustments & positively NO EQ or Compression. I receive hundreds of raw VO Records a year from countless Recordists, and I can always tell when there's been processing added. I know the Recordist is just trying to help, but it actually has the exact opposite affect.

You (as the Recordist) are not responsible for the final mix... even if the Post House doesn't use a Mixer.

Agreed...ISDN and MP3 sound bad enough as it is without additional processing to screw it up.

[Henchman]

FINALIZER!!!!!!
Lose that f-ing thing.

[Yoda117]

Originally Posted by bizzle

I don't mind a little processing, but many times it is excessive, and in some cases completely ruined by it.

+1 to this comment, and to the many other good pieces of advice given. Even when I've been asked to add the EQ and other dynamic processing, I'm sending the dry track alongside it. Unless asked for, I don't add anything to it in most cases.

But my biggest issue is poor mic technique (even from top guys and gals). Keep your mouth in the sweet spot and don't expect the signal chain processing to compensate when you fall off mic.

I wish that more talent would realize that. I'm a fan of actually listening to yourself while recording (some home talent will monitor their stuff while tracking, but many don't). At the very least, monitor your stuff before sending it out!!! If it doesn't sound good to you, odds are it doesn't sound good.

Engineering a recording is much less about having things preset and more about reacting to changing conditions.

Someone buy this man a beer

In most cases, VO talent are not engineers... don't try to be one if you don't know how.