looking at new mics anyone used the EHR 1. any comments?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Microphone.
- Thread starter ron shannon
- Start date
This is also known as the Octava ML 52 rs
Not a bad deal, if you want a ribbon. It's rare that I would choose a ribbon for VO.
Thanks Emmett. I'm always curious as to why V.O. seems to shy away from ribbons especially in favor of condensers. what do you think of the SM7b for V.O.?
ron shannon said:
Some of today's product claims to be sturdy, but ribbons in the past (think RCA 44BX and the 77D) were considered a bit delicate. A lot of Radio Procution V-O folks would probably blow the ribbon apart!
They are normally bi-directional. I would think they would be a nightmare in the booths and closets that a lot of V-O people use. It would be a double-barreled proximity effect to deal with.
By working them close, milking the proximity effect, a lot of deep-voiced guys get a thrill out of a ribbon mic... but I think where ribbon mics really shine is in the upper frequencies. Great for a female singer.... great for classical music where well defined violin notes are part of the picture that needs detail. Not too many V-O guys have upper ranges that need added fidelity. ;D
A few modern ribbons, like Royer, are fairly sturdy. More traditional ribbons, like RCA require a lot more care. You don't want to leave them on their side, for instance, because the ribbon will stretch. One plosive will destroy a ribbon.
The sound of ribbons are dark, almost no high end. But very pure sound. Very true. You can EQ the high end back for a brighter sound. The only ribbon I've used that I liked for VO was the Rupert Neve RNR-1. I wouldn't buy it for VO, but it sounded good.
As for the SM7B, it's a dynamic, so it just isn't very detailed. Great for radio, but a weak choice for VO, when the subtleties and details are the difference between you booking a session or the next guy booking the session.
The sound of ribbons are dark, almost no high end. But very pure sound. Very true. You can EQ the high end back for a brighter sound. The only ribbon I've used that I liked for VO was the Rupert Neve RNR-1. I wouldn't buy it for VO, but it sounded good.
As for the SM7B, it's a dynamic, so it just isn't very detailed. Great for radio, but a weak choice for VO, when the subtleties and details are the difference between you booking a session or the next guy booking the session.
Hello Emmett... what microphone do you prefer for vo?
Well, I look forward to Emmett's response. I think he has the best opportunity of all of us to just try as many different mics as he would like... (or has time to mess with!!!).
I recently came to realize that my own little humble voice studio was operating in a very dangerous zone. The zone of background and studio noise. In some other discussion groups I recruited suggestions on how to get more distance between the "program content" and the pesky noise floor that is down there somewhere.... hopefully out of earshot.
And then it rose up to bite me. I'm doing some audio-book narration. On one audition, the "producer/curator" pushed back and said: there is audible noise under neath your words. Clear and quiety between words and paragraphs. I played back the audition on my system, cranked it up much louder than I usually listen, then stood up out of my chair and leaned over, stuck an ear right up in the monitor speaker. Oh My Word!!!! I have been using Noise Reduction in my software and fooling myself into thinking there was no problem.
Second Issue: When you send off your material, depending on your market, the purchaser may choose to compress what you produced to make sure that the "loudness" of the content meets THEIR chosen specks. If your recordings, like mine, have a lot of "noise floor" ingredient, the added compression by your client will make the noise much more noticeable.
So for about three weeks I have been on this whirlwind of picking people brains on best ways to squeeze noise out of a voice-over studio. And are there measureable standards we can use. What noises exist in my studio that can be wiped out? Which ones are afford-ably removable?
So back to the topic here. (I would NEVER thread-jack someone. :
I will share the ID later: there is a popular microphone that some people use in v-o work. I had some kind of prejudice against it. Someone shoved one into my hands and said: I want you to try this. The background studio noise went down 8 dB!!!! When you have your noise already down to 45 to 55 dB below content, to gain 8 dB is like "Manna from Heaven"! I'm trying to squeeze out another 8 to 10 cB by getting rid of computer fan sounds, turning off electrical equipment in other parts of the house that cause virbration within the frame of the house.
Advice? When selecting a mic, there is more than: Does this mic make ME sound good? Does this mic make ME sound the way I WANT to sound? Be sure and ceck to see if it keeps you out of the mud and sludge lurking underneath what you record.
I recently came to realize that my own little humble voice studio was operating in a very dangerous zone. The zone of background and studio noise. In some other discussion groups I recruited suggestions on how to get more distance between the "program content" and the pesky noise floor that is down there somewhere.... hopefully out of earshot.
And then it rose up to bite me. I'm doing some audio-book narration. On one audition, the "producer/curator" pushed back and said: there is audible noise under neath your words. Clear and quiety between words and paragraphs. I played back the audition on my system, cranked it up much louder than I usually listen, then stood up out of my chair and leaned over, stuck an ear right up in the monitor speaker. Oh My Word!!!! I have been using Noise Reduction in my software and fooling myself into thinking there was no problem.
Second Issue: When you send off your material, depending on your market, the purchaser may choose to compress what you produced to make sure that the "loudness" of the content meets THEIR chosen specks. If your recordings, like mine, have a lot of "noise floor" ingredient, the added compression by your client will make the noise much more noticeable.
So for about three weeks I have been on this whirlwind of picking people brains on best ways to squeeze noise out of a voice-over studio. And are there measureable standards we can use. What noises exist in my studio that can be wiped out? Which ones are afford-ably removable?
So back to the topic here. (I would NEVER thread-jack someone. :
I will share the ID later: there is a popular microphone that some people use in v-o work. I had some kind of prejudice against it. Someone shoved one into my hands and said: I want you to try this. The background studio noise went down 8 dB!!!! When you have your noise already down to 45 to 55 dB below content, to gain 8 dB is like "Manna from Heaven"! I'm trying to squeeze out another 8 to 10 cB by getting rid of computer fan sounds, turning off electrical equipment in other parts of the house that cause virbration within the frame of the house.
Advice? When selecting a mic, there is more than: Does this mic make ME sound good? Does this mic make ME sound the way I WANT to sound? Be sure and ceck to see if it keeps you out of the mud and sludge lurking underneath what you record.
Condenser mics are the most susceptible to picking up noise..they "hear" everything and that is part of what makes them great for VO. Also want makes them a bear to deal with. Yes, a very quiet room is best..preferably with no computers, fans, HVAC noise..people walking on floors above..etc.. But also condensers will amplify mouth noises..breaths, saliva clicks..false teeth rattling (for some I guess that is an issue). I had a problem with my jaw making a TMJ type clunk noise..the mic heard that a lot and I was all over the place trying to track down the source of the external noise..and it was coming out of my head! Got that fixed..
In essence noise will be there in most any recording. Ribbon mics have a fairly low output and require a usual cranking up of the input..well that injects more noise..so an additional in-line preamp can be inserted (Cloud electronics makes a great one) but Emmett is right ribbons are dark..so you goose the highs..back to more noise..just not worth it.
As far as ambient noise..a good processor with a downward expander is best..it adjusts as input increases..unlike a noise "gate" that is either ON or OFF..it's not subtle. Sometimes the compressor is in the circuit BEFORE the expander so that kind of negates the effect..I nearly never compress any VO stuff anymore. The producers know how they want it..and they compress as much as they like on the other end..BUT I will use an expander in the mic chain..with a good mic that's about all that's needed.
Goat..were you using a software based noise reduction plug-in or something? I'd be interested to know what it was that you used, and what mic was used that decreased backround noise by 8db. A shotgun? That would do it.
In essence noise will be there in most any recording. Ribbon mics have a fairly low output and require a usual cranking up of the input..well that injects more noise..so an additional in-line preamp can be inserted (Cloud electronics makes a great one) but Emmett is right ribbons are dark..so you goose the highs..back to more noise..just not worth it.
As far as ambient noise..a good processor with a downward expander is best..it adjusts as input increases..unlike a noise "gate" that is either ON or OFF..it's not subtle. Sometimes the compressor is in the circuit BEFORE the expander so that kind of negates the effect..I nearly never compress any VO stuff anymore. The producers know how they want it..and they compress as much as they like on the other end..BUT I will use an expander in the mic chain..with a good mic that's about all that's needed.
Goat..were you using a software based noise reduction plug-in or something? I'd be interested to know what it was that you used, and what mic was used that decreased backround noise by 8db. A shotgun? That would do it.
I'm not going to ID the mic yet... because it is yet-to-be-determined if it gets to live in my studio permanently. I think most of you will consider it "mainstream" once I am ready to talk about it.
Answers to Jeff's question about noise reduction: I use Adobe Audition for almost ALL of my audio work. For noise reduction I use the Noise Reduction built into Audition. Is there a better noise reduction product out there that I should take a look at?
I have older versions of AA on the machine, and I still have a copy of the old CoolEdit96 that I learned on back in the stone edge. My how the quality of the noise reduction process has improved through the years. But using noise reduction is like a woman and her make-up: Some times "less is more". Too much noise reduction can get pretty ugly... pretty quickly.
I shall not issue any great pronouncements on the over-use of make-up on the female of the species. ;D
Answers to Jeff's question about noise reduction: I use Adobe Audition for almost ALL of my audio work. For noise reduction I use the Noise Reduction built into Audition. Is there a better noise reduction product out there that I should take a look at?
I have older versions of AA on the machine, and I still have a copy of the old CoolEdit96 that I learned on back in the stone edge. My how the quality of the noise reduction process has improved through the years. But using noise reduction is like a woman and her make-up: Some times "less is more". Too much noise reduction can get pretty ugly... pretty quickly.
I shall not issue any great pronouncements on the over-use of make-up on the female of the species. ;D
With regard to using an expander, I agree with Jeff but mine is software-based in Audition (all of my processing is software-based). The Compander setting in Dynamics Processing is what I use on every single VO I do; in fact it's the only edit I'll make. It compresses and expands simultaneously.
I know a couple of people who are staunchly opposed to using Compander, saying it compresses too much. That hasn't been my experience, and I'd even go so far to say that it's one of the lighter compression options built into Audition. It is possible to defeat the compression in the settings on Compander if you just want to use the expander, though.
I know a couple of people who are staunchly opposed to using Compander, saying it compresses too much. That hasn't been my experience, and I'd even go so far to say that it's one of the lighter compression options built into Audition. It is possible to defeat the compression in the settings on Compander if you just want to use the expander, though.
whitfm said:
If you haven't declared it a "military secret".... what settings do you use in Adobe "Compander"? The defaults that Adobe offers, or do you season and sweeten it up to your own tastes?
I played with it a long time ago and wasn't happy, but haven't tried lately.
Typically for time's sake I use the defaults, but I do like disabling the compressor when I need a really clean sound, particularly for radio. I should note that I try to record with most voice peaks coming in between -12 dB and -6. I also normalize to -1 dB first; that seems to make Compander work a little more aggressively. Most of the stations in the market where I do the bulk of my work have their Optimods and Omnias set up to compress pretty hard, so that expander can be a lifesaver for cutting down on room tone. For non-radio VO I'll keep the compressor engaged, just to smooth out peaks.
Of course these are settings based on me recording directly into Audition with only a preamp in my chain. My ultimate goal is to get a processor with expanding capabilities.
Of course these are settings based on me recording directly into Audition with only a preamp in my chain. My ultimate goal is to get a processor with expanding capabilities.
I've been away, sorry for the late response. What mic I prefer depends on the voice, style and project. Budget is also a big factor. The Sennheiser 416 is often a good bet. The Mojave MA201 is really underrated for the price. If we lower the price to $300, the Rode NT-1000 is good. Even less expensive is the Blue Spark and Rode NT1A.
- Status