What would you guys say the best way to master over a vocal track to make them kind of have the same sound and depth as those guys with the over dramatic sounds.
Here's an example of what I'm hoping I can get it pretty close to.
[youtube:eb7dCDc790]http://www.youtube…]
Topic Tags
Comments
Just curious. What's the answer you want to hear? I think you go
Just curious. What's the answer you want to hear? I think you got the right answer already but if you go ahead and post the answer you want to hear maybe someone will oblige you.
The mic in the clip looks like it might be a U47 which can run upwards of $6000 used. That would be a good place to start.
As Mr. Scrip pointed out, this has little to do with mastering.
As Mr. Scrip pointed out, this has little to do with mastering. You need to get it to sound good to begin with. That means choice of mic, mic placement, the preamp, the medium, but mostly the talent. If It's already on disc/tape then you have no choice but to resort to either hardware or plugins. Maybe eq. Likely some compression. I think it comes down to your voice talent though. You can't squeeze blood from a stone as they say.
I don't want to post the "beating a dead horse" animation just y
I don't want to post the "beating a dead horse" animation just yet, but I'd really like to know what he's looking for too.
If I had Don LaFontaine (or Al Chalk, Nick Tate, John Leader, or in the case of this video, Hal Douglas, etc.) in here, threw a SM7b in front of him going into a Crane Song Flamingo, that's pretty much all that it's going to take. Sure, maybe add a little compression (maybe) or a dB or two of high shelf (again, maybe).
If I did the same with *my* "announcer voice" it wouldn't be anything close to that -- I wasn't blessed with Mr. LaFontaine's voice.
The "next steps" are whatever the mix is asking for --
I've been around the bush a few times...
Then why are we talking about this in the mastering forum? I still have no idea what any of this has to do with mastering... It barely has anything to do with mixing for that matter.
But in any case, you get it at the source - If you don't have the source, you barking up the wrong tree.
The video is an example of a bad-sounding recording of a guy with a great voice. Again, it's all the source - and then messing it up as little as possible. Not taking the wrong source and trying to make it sound like something it does not.
Man, it's so weird to actually see the face of that guy. His voi
Man, it's so weird to actually see the face of that guy. His voice sounds almost inhuman.
The face of the guy beating the horse, or Newman?
Maybe it's the beer, but I'm having a hard time seeing the horse beating dude's face...
And Newman is a little inhuman...
:lol:
Massive Mastering wrote: I've been around the bush a few times.
Massive Mastering wrote:
I've been around the bush a few times...Then why are we talking about this in the mastering forum? I still have no idea what any of this has to do with mastering... It barely has anything to do with mixing for that matter.
But in any case, you get it at the source - If you don't have the source, you barking up the wrong tree.
I have gone through both mixing and mastering, just never trying to achieve a certain sound other than from suggestion to suggestion. It just hasn't been the worlds largest bush...
You answered it dead on; for the most part...
Worst comes to worst I can throw up a clip to see if I can get some suggestions.
Sorry for all of the haggle.
Come on guys? I know what he's asking for. When I cut commerci
Come on guys? I know what he's asking for.
When I cut commercials with those spokesman oriented voiceovers with guys like this, I frequently used a U87 or KM86, in cardioid to take advantage of the proximity effect. I'd then also crank in some extra presence around 5kHz, maybe a 100 hertz boost for a couple of extra DB, depending on how close he was to the microphone. And yeah, maybe a couple extra DB around 12kHz. Then I squish him good through a 1176 followed by an old KEPEX I, downward expander. By adjusting the compressor's attack and release times, I can make him huge sounding. Faster release times on the compressor will create greater apparent loudness, until it sounds like crap. Adjust attack times to taste. Downward expander adjusted for 6 to 10 DB that only closes down when he takes a breath. That's a tricky adjustment but really pays off.
Mastering? For commercials? I think not.
Ms. Remy Ann David
f I had Don LaFontaine (or Al Chalk, Nick Tate, John Leader, or
f I had Don LaFontaine (or Al Chalk, Nick Tate, John Leader, or in the case of this video, Hal Douglas, etc.)
I have had the pleasure of recording all these guys, and quite a few more.
Back then (the 90s) they all shared the same thing, besides their voice, it was a Sennheiser MKH416 into a Neve VRP, or SSL 8000, 80 Hz HPF, to 2" tape, a DBX 165 was used to protect the tape.
As Remy Stated, proximity effect pushed to low end, and the 416 had enough on the top not to need eq..
No esoteric pre, no fancy compressor, no $3000 mics!!!
Mastering??? Naw, we mix into the program.
LOL! I think more like Times Square? Actually they were neon b
LOL! I think more like Times Square? Actually they were neon bulbs that required high-voltage. Those were my first four with aluminum colored knobs. The later version utilized those newfangled LED gizmos and didn't require the additional 100 volt power supply to excite the neon. The mod is time-consuming but relatively easy to convert a neon version to LED. The later units had yellow and blue plastic colored knobs. And little the original units little plastic busts of Allison on each unit, since the company was named after her, Allison Research. Those early units also utilized peak detectors as opposed to the more modern RMS detectors in use today. Those old units had a tendency to chatter if you didn't get your thresholds set just right. And you generally have to replace all electrolytic capacitors in these units every 10 years or less if you want them to keep working well. It can actually get pretty amazing sounding if you have all the drums slamming through those things as well as tightening up vocals. The ones in software just ain't the same. I keep trying. I'm close. I miss Allison. I don't think she looks like that anymore?
Pump me up to pull me down.
Ms. Remy Ann David
No way man. Can't do it. It has to be the guys voice. 90% anyw
No way man.
Can't do it.
It has to be the guys voice.
90% anyway.
I have tried tooooo many times over many years.
If the guy has the voice, you can get it with an SM57.
If they don't have the voice - no amount of EQ or pitch shifting or any of that will give you results that really sound like those guys.
Chances are you already know somebody who can do it, but they only do it as a joke - never realizing that "funny deep voice" they do as a gag might be needed somewhere.
You're both right. What REmy's describing is S.O.P. for making
You're both right. What REmy's describing is S.O.P. for making that golden voice "fit" into the parameters of a good movie trailer or TV spot, it does indeed help it "pop" out of nowhere and into your ears.
But I agree: There's no way in the WORLD alll that processing is going to let Don Knotts sound like Hal Douglas, etc. (A very dated reference, but you get my point, eh? :twisted: )
I've been fortunate enough to know and work with a handful of incredibly talented VO's and announcer people. One is still working and on the air as I type this. It's fun to watch him work: I've sat (literally) next to him as the engineer at live remotes and things like in-store promos, and he speaks in a normal, albiet very nice and pleasant voice to folks around him, and people saying hello, etc.
But the moment he has to go on the air, he politely withdraws from whomever he's been chatting with, and takes a little mental break (and slight physical change comes over him) before putting "The Voice" on. (As I like to call it.) It's amazing to watch, and it's easy to miss it if your'e not paying attention. As soon as he's on the air, he's "ON", if you know what I mean. His shoulders come up, so does his chin and overall posture, and he's speaking like he means business. (And so he does!) I've used SM58's on him, Sennheiser 421's, and he's on the air with Neuman 103's. Doesn't matter what, it's HIS VOICE that's got the magic. The rest is just details.
A long time ago, there was a trick that some pro's used to use to practice; they'd sit with a mic fed to a VU meter, and try to keep it steady while speaking their parts. Of course, it would always move to SOME Extent, but the main goal was even, modulated tones coming out of their mouths. Assumimg the ballistics of the meter were set properly, this wasn't a bad way at all to learn to speak. (I wish more folks would try it!)
Just recently, I had the honor of recording actor Henry Gibson doing a monologue at a memorial concert for an old friend of his. We used a generic wireles lav, and it STILL sounded wonderful, because Henry Gibson is wonderful, and has a great voice. I did nothing but keep the levels balanced, and avoided feedback when he moved around in the theater. The rest was all Mr. Gibson and his voice. (He didn't do any flower poems, though.... ;-)
You can warm up, squeeze, level out, and add sparkle to anything you want to, but if it ain't happning in FRONT of the mic in the first place, you're wasting your time.
That has as much to do with mastering as the paint on a car has
That has as much to do with mastering as the paint on a car has to do with its 1/4 mile time.
90% of it is the voice -- And of course, capturing it with the right gear in the right space with the right engineer.