JOHN HARDY, GRACE, AKG 414 BULS – VOICEOVER ADVICE NEEDED

[grexter]

I'm new to this forum; have been reading posts for some time and found it very educational. I have a question, especially to those who have some experience recording voiceovers.

Within the next few months, I'll be setting up a home project studio for recording voiceovers, most likely for FM radio audio skits with cartoon-like wacky voices (some of which pitchshifted) on sfx/musical background. I'll be recording from home (will have a well designed vocal room) but will be “coached” by a guy who owns a small commercial studio (he'll help me with mixing, etc).

He feels very strongly about me using AKG 414 BULS (says U87ai too agressive) and since chances are I'll be working with him for the next couple of years, that's the mic I'll probably will be getting, at least for starters. Now assuming that's the mic I'll use, what are my options in terms of a preamp? (Budget for pre is around $1000 – just need one channel, maybe another $1000 for compressor during tracking)I would like to have a detailed sound that is not too agressive but that stands out easily from the mix. I heard great things about John Hardy M-1, Grace 101 or HV-3. However when i went to a local music store, the guy told me that something as transparent as those pres in combination with AKG 414 BULS will sound flat, dull and boring in the mix. (and then suggested Universal Audio LA-610 or Blue Robbie saying it would add some life to AKG 414 BULS. Is it true that JH or Grace wouldn't compliment well this specific mic for VO? Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Thanx, Greg.

[Brent Hahn]

The guys at the music store don't realize that VO is different from making records. What they call "life" and "color" is what VO and post-production people would call "distortion." The 3 pres you mentioned would all work fine for you, as would an Avalon M5 (you might find one used for a grand). I'm not sure what your "coach" means, however, about the 87 being more "aggressive" than a 414. The 414 will be cheaper, but the 87 is a more solid investment, and one of the 2 mics that are sort of VO industry standards, the other being the Sennheiser 416. Good luck!

[dbbubba]

First off... any guy that works at a "music store" most likely has done very little if any VO recording. I also doubt that he has done much "real" music recording either.
BIG HINT... he works at a music store!

The John Hardy is a very accurate mic pre amp.
I have recorded hundreds of national radio spots through them.
I was at an ex-employers VO studio today and they still use John Hardy M1s.
They have recorded many THOUSANDS of radio and TV spots since 1977... however, they have never worked in a music store.

The prefered mic in broadcast production studios is a U87.
The second choice is a 414.
A few people use the Sennheiser mentioned, but it is fairly rare.
The studio I worked at had four or five rooms running 9 to 5, Monday through Friday for the nine years I worked there. I saw the Sennheiser used for one set of sessions and that was because the client was based out of L.A. and used a studio there to record the body of the spot. We had to match the VO recorded with new product slugs on a weekly or monthly basis using the original voice talent. To match the body we had to buy a Sennheiser. It was used for those spots (I can't recall who they were for) and the other thousands were recorded on U87s with the 414s used only occasionally.

You could chalk it up to familiarity or folowing a tried and true method, but most voice talent that work a lot prefer a U87. They won't complain about a 414, but they would rather see the U87.

In your case the 414 will be fine because YOU are the talent.

BTW, a lot of people don't realize this, but making the voice talent feel comfortable is as important as pleasing the client. The voice talent suggests the studio to use in many cases. An established voice talent has probebly worked for many more years than the average agency producer. The agency producers hire the voice talent for their expertise and experience and the agency people DO listen to their opinions. The agency people might write the campaign and copy, but the voice talent make it come to life on the studio floor. I have been privelidged to work with some of the biggest pros in VO and I learned to have a deep respect for their knowledge.

After I left the studio that five rooms running five days per week doing nothing but broadcast production I went to a "battleship" studio that had two of everything. Neve 8168 mkII, SSL, HUGE rooms, every mic imaginable plus ALL of the toys needed to record almost anything. Many famous records were recorded there.
However, the place was staffed by guys that operated in a rock and roll mode. The whole place was operated in a rock and roll mode. While they had EVERY piece of gear needed to record broadcast VO, they did very little of that type of work. As much as the owner desired that business he wasn't going to get it. The VO talent didn't like the place. It wasn't comfortable to them, so they didn't like to work there. They didn't suggest the place. Even when the prefered studio was booked they'd wait! The "battleship" place was infinitely more appealing on the surface.
They had all kinds of vinatge mics, vintage Neve mic pres and esoteric gear, but it didn't help. The place was beautiful compared to the places that do lot's of VO work. Wrong vibe for the VO talent though.

Also, we never made any special considerations for the intended broadcast medium.
You record VO in a way that will work on AM, FM and TV or any other medium.
You never know how a recording wil be used during it's lifetime.
You make it sound like a good VO recording and if it needs to be tailored to a mediumj you do it during post production.

I have suggested the chain we used in all of our rooms to many who have asked.
That would be: U87 / John Hardy M1 / 1176
We would work with the EQ very lightly on mixdown and it usually was to match the material to previous takes.
Remember that a spot can live for quite a while and most big campaigns have many, many versions.
There is a "shell" recorded with most of the copy, but there will be a space (:10 seconds is common) for product inserts. Periodically, they will want the same spot, but with a new (seasonal or special) product. Many spots are co-op where the big store (say The Home Depot) will share the cost with the company who makes the product (Ryobi, Black and Decker, Glidden, etc...)
In short, you will record new product inserts, haul out the original spot, edit in/insert the new :10 second product info and send it on for broadcast for quite a long time on succesful campaigns.
We mostly used EQ to match takes from different rooms or studios.

Personally, I'd say that the U87 is LESS "aggressive" sounding than a 414, but if you trust this guy, then forge ahead and buy a 414. They are a hell of a lot cheaper!

If you want the most common rig then buy a U87, M1 and 1176.
Record it to digital.

Also, the "american" VO sound is largely based on the sound of FET based condensers, discreet component mic pres and the UREI 1176. The use of digital recording and editing has obviously become the norm as well.
I can safely say that almost no one uses tube based equipment.
The UA2610 is a great mic pre (I once had a console that had 16 channels of 610 style pres/EQs)
You DO NOT want to use it for serious VO work.
The same would apply to tube based compressors.

There it is.... take it or leave it.
I have never worked in a music store either, but I have recorded a LOT of broadcast VO and a LOT of music vocals. Slightly over thirty years worth. In fact, the first professional VO I ever recorded was for a "Bicentinial" themed spot. The Bicentinial was 1976, so that'd be just over thrirty years ago.

Danny Brown

[Acoustic Cloud]

Dang, I wouldnt argue with you Danny......would agree on the M-1 though!

[Sounds Great]

You can never go wrong with an M1.

[grexter]

I really appreciate the fact you took the time to respond to my question, especially given the fact that I'm new on this forum. Thanx a million. I will most likely be following the advice several people gave me and will get a John Hardy preamp.

I have another question though: quiet often I am suggested to get a U87 mic for my voiceover applications - u87 being the "industry standard". Does the recomendation to use a u87 in my voiceover chain (instead of 414 buls?...) still stand if we're talking about a u87ai model rather than the "original" version? (Up here in Montreal, Canada its much more difficult and costly to get hold of a good unit of the original u87)

Also, Danny Brown suggests the following: u87 - John Hardy - 1176. Are we talking about the new 1176LN or it kind of should be the "original"?

Greg

[Renaud Charlier]

Invest your money in a U87...this mic is THE standart for VO (and your voice talent & client will be more confident).

Regarding the preamp, here in Europe, we often use Focusrites (Red 7/6 or ISA 430) or Avalon 737's.

Have fun

[dbbubba]

The reissue 1176s are probebly "better' than some of the 1176s we had in our rooms.
We had eleven 1176s and they ranged from E series all the way to H or whatever the last versions UREI made before they went away were.
The new ones are close to what? Rev E models?

You could get a Purple Audio version and be OK.

I think you'd be OK with a U87ai.
They aren't THAT different than the older models.
We had about seven or eight and they were all at least ten years old.
They weren't hammered, but they weren't new either.
A few had been even rock-n-roll mics.

Focusrites (Red 7/6 or ISA 430) or Avalon 737's

Like I said... discreet designs.
Aren't those discreet design mic pres?

Danny Brown

[RadioMoo]

Originally Posted by dbbubba

the "american" VO sound is largely based on the sound of FET based condensers, discreet component mic pres and the UREI 1176.

...and some "engineers" who would do well to consider a career working in a music store.

Originally Posted by grexter

I am suggested to get a U87 mic for my voiceover applications - u87 being the "industry standard". Does the recomendation to use a u87 in my voiceover chain (instead of 414 buls?...) still stand if we're talking about a u87ai model rather than the "original" version?

Splurge and get an original, if you absolutely have to have an 87 - the ai's are hyped in the high end and sibilence is a real problem with them. But if the 414 is going to get you work, well...

[dbbubba]

[quote=RadioMoo;1038128]...and some "engineers" who would do well to consider a career working in a music store.

Is that a dig at my statement?

The newer U87ai are not hyped in the high end as much as they probebly have newer and cleaner diaphragms.

Danny Brown

[danno812]

I work with VO talent, across the country, everyday. The preamps you mention are all good. The bottom line is you want something clean sounding.

As for mics...I do not recommend the AKG414. I generally have not liked the sound of it for VO work. I do recommend the U87 and I'll also suggest the TLM 103 (although the music folks generally do not like them). Truth be told, the TLM 103 is probably top 5 in popularity for VO these days. I'd say 80% of the talent I work with use one in their home studios.

When it comes to choosing you microphone...the biggest factors to consider are your room and vocal quality. Try out a few (in your space) and determine what sounds best for your situation. I've done lots of mic shootouts with talent in their studio spaces and every situation is as different as the person talking.

[clusterchord]

if i may jump in as i have a similar question like the original poster.. about the VO mic and compressor.


i already have great river ME-1NV pre. i recorded some VO, with RNC on insert and crappy NT1, and was pretty satisfied with GR/RNC combo, as i ran low input, high output, i.e. "clean" mode to avoid too much character coming out of the transformers. now, i was thinking of about two mics as possible upgrade: Sondelux U195 or Geffel 930 as both get recommended often for (affordable) VO on the GSlutz (or perhaps wait and spring for an vintage BRD U87 when i have the juice). reviews tell both of these mics have slight tilt on high end of spectrum so u dont have to use high shelving eq that much (as i usually had to do with NT but with some other more expensive mics too, to make them stick over the background). on top of this, i do record ocassional vocals, bk vox n git amps too, so its not 100% VO work..

in your opinion, what would work best, paired with GR of these two mic? other ideas?



for compressing duties i've considered Purple Audio MC77 but often i've been hearing that MC77 and all urei 1176 types usually impart even more character of their own, i was wondering if this comp, paired with GR NV would perhaps be too much colour for VO ?!?

should i be looking at something more transparent, like buzz essence, trakker etc ?


thanks

[RadioMoo]

Originally Posted by dbbubba

Is that a dig at my statement?

No, just at the fact that so many spots - national spots - tend to stick out like cold sores on the air, as if mangling them and not making them sound more like records (well, before the loudness war, anyway) is a desirable thing.

[danno812]

Originally Posted by clusterchord

if i may jump in as i have a similar question like the original poster.. about the VO mic and compressor.


i already have great river ME-1NV pre. i recorded some VO, with RNC on insert and crappy NT1, and was pretty satisfied with GR/RNC combo, as i ran low input, high output, i.e. "clean" mode to avoid too much character coming out of the transformers. now, i was thinking of about two mics as possible upgrade: Sondelux U195 or Geffel 930 as both get recommended often for (affordable) VO on the GSlutz (or perhaps wait and spring for an vintage BRD U87 when i have the juice). reviews tell both of these mics have slight tilt on high end of spectrum so u dont have to use high shelving eq that much (as i usually had to do with NT but with some other more expensive mics too, to make them stick over the background). on top of this, i do record ocassional vocals, bk vox n git amps too, so its not 100% VO work..

in your opinion, what would work best, paired with GR of these two mic? other ideas?



for compressing duties i've considered Purple Audio MC77 but often i've been hearing that MC77 and all urei 1176 types usually impart even more character of their own, i was wondering if this comp, paired with GR NV would perhaps be too much colour for VO ?!?

should i be looking at something more transparent, like buzz essence, trakker etc ?


thanks

I don't have first hand experience with those two comps, but transparency as well as versatility is key. Depending on how versatile your voice is, you would want to be able to cover a range of deliveries. I prefer the VO talent not add compression themselves.

[RadioMoo]

Originally Posted by clusterchord

i was thinking of about two mics as possible upgrade: Sondelux U195 or Geffel 930 as both get recommended often for (affordable) VO on the GSlutz (or perhaps wait and spring for an vintage BRD U87 when i have the juice). reviews tell both of these mics have slight tilt on high end of spectrum so u dont have to use high shelving eq that much (as i usually had to do with NT but with some other more expensive mics too, to make them stick over the background).

You had to boost the highs on the NT?!? BTW, it's fairly common to boost highs on the VO if the music bed is masking it too much (well, or turn down the music bed!).

for compressing duties i've considered Purple Audio MC77 but often i've been hearing that MC77 and all urei 1176 types usually impart even more character of their own, i was wondering if this comp, paired with GR NV would perhaps be too much colour for VO ?!?

Um, a slight rant, not aimed at anyone in particular, but at the industry in general, and feedback is welcome: Why the fear of "color" or "balls" or whatever? These are recordings - records. Most of them are played between actual records on the radio - records that use mics and pres and compressors that are colored. Why should a spot sound so radically different and inferior? Why should an industrial not WOW you with warmth and balance?

Get that 76-type compressor. One of my favorites that I wish I had now was the LA-4 - color, balls, mojo...and loud.

[danno812]

Originally Posted by RadioMoo

Um, a slight rant, not aimed at anyone in particular, but at the industry in general, and feedback is welcome: Why the fear of "color" or "balls" or whatever? These are recordings - records. Most of them are played between actual records on the radio - records that use mics and pres and compressors that are colored. Why should a spot sound so radically different and inferior? Why should an industrial not WOW you with warmth and balance?

Get that 76-type compressor. One of my favorites that I wish I had now was the LA-4 - color, balls, mojo...and loud.

You need to have a clear, clean and present VO recording because much of the time, what it will end up with is anybody's guess. You just don't always know in advance what music or SFX the VO will be placed with. Also, in a dialog situation you may need to place people in a similar setting. Which is a good reason why there are "standards" because matching is theoretically easier.

Let me tell ya' clients never cease to amaze me with the choices they make.

[dbbubba]

He has obviously never done VO work in a big time production house.

Danny Brown

[jowillie]

Thanks for incredible, priceless advice here. Taking off on Greg's original question, if he were to get the John Hardy preamp, and his primary jobs are the local work he mentioned, is there a less expensive mic that most closely matches the sound and utility of the U87? At least until he gets a better idea of direction his work takes.

[Sounds Great]

Originally Posted by jowillie

Thanks for incredible, priceless advice here. Taking off on Greg's original question, if he were to get the John Hardy preamp, and his primary jobs are the local work he mentioned, is there a less expensive mic that most closely matches the sound and utility of the U87? At least until he gets a better idea of direction his work takes.

RE20's always seem popular for that sort of thing.

[Astrain]

I record Voice Over for a living, and I have to disagre that tube equipment isnt good for recording VO,in fact in the voiceover forums it seems that the holy grail is the DW fearn pre, yes very clean preams like the millennia , grace, hardy, are used a lot but now I see a lot of people using tube equipment to record VO.

Don Lafontaine uses a manley tube mic into a Tube Tech MEC 1A.

I owned a millennia HV3 for a couple of years and now own a Tube Tech MEC 1A and they both sound great, to me it depends in the type of VO you are going to do. For caracterization yes it would be something like the millennia, but for other kind of VO maybe a tube pre would be the best.


A couple of links that may be helpfull

http://www.coreyburton.com he does caracterizations for disney , very interesting forum

http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_recording_voiceover/

http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_voice_god_high/


About the Mic, Ive read that the gefell UMT70S sound better than the U87 and its around 1K less


My 2 cents

Sorry for my english

[jowillie]

Good points, Astrain. Cory Burton's tip-top, old-school, each job should have its own "flavor" attitude is perfect if you are in his top position of demand.
But if you are selling on the open market, you better be using the "flavor" of the moment....and like Dan says... It's U87, M-1 and 1176 or as close to the last successful campaign's sound as possible. Agencies like to go with what worked last. That may be why everything sounds the same--it's safe and it sells.

By the way, I've noticed that most production on Mexican networks in the US, like Univision and most FM radio, has a full, rich quality. I like it. Any insights?
I also would like to hear direct experiences on users of U87 and the Gefell UT70/71s.
Thanks

[warhead]

Originally Posted by dbbubba

The newer U87ai are not hyped in the high end as much as they probebly have newer and cleaner diaphragms.

Danny Brown

Agreed. I was present at a little shootout between an old (probably could stand a little cleaning) U87 and a new AI. The older U87 was a bit crunchy by comparison on this singer, the newer AI had a smoother top end in fact.

The old U87 beat it on richness though overall. The new one didn't quite have that mojo in many other areas. Both decent mics of course.

War

[RadioMoo]

Originally Posted by jowillie

By the way, I've noticed that most production on Mexican networks in the US, like Univision and most FM radio, has a full, rich quality. I like it. Any insights?

I think Astrain revealed a lot about that in his post.

[danno812]

Originally Posted by jowillie

is there a less expensive mic that most closely matches the sound and utility of the U87?

The TLM 103 is a single diaphragm, transformerless version of the U87. Not identical sounding with a slight high end bump, but pretty close.

Originally Posted by Sounds Great

RE20's always seem popular for that sort of thing.

Yes, RE20's are popular for on-air talent, but not necessarily the best for VO work. They can be too muddy especially on certain voices and in less then perfect rooms.

Originally Posted by Astrain

in fact in the voiceover forums it seems that the holy grail is the DW fearn pre, yes very clean preams like the millennia , grace, hardy, are used a lot but now I see a lot of people using tube equipment to record VO.

This is true. My favorite signal chain is a Brauner VMA into a DWFearn. BEAUTIFUL!

Also some talent are using the MXL V69me tube mic. Amazing sound for the price and similar sound to a U87 but I'd characterize it as a little darker then the U87.

[grexter]

Thanks to everyone who has posted a reply to my original message. I'll probably have some more questions in near future, but for now this thread has really clarified certain things for me, at least with the intitial stages of my gear-chosing process. Greg.

ps: special thanx go to Danny Brown who, even though he doesnt know me, took the time to write such a detailed and extensive reply.

[RadioMoo]

Originally Posted by grexter

special thanx go to Danny Brown who, even though he doesnt know me, took the time to write such a detailed and extensive reply.

You still need to take everything you read here with a grain of salt, weigh all opinions and draw your own conclusions.