Comments

• 

  Alexis Serrano May 23, 2012 at 5:51pm

  My dad did a side by side with our Rode NT1A and our TLM103 and they were very close.  There was a difference but one was not better than the other.  

  The NT1A costs about $250 with a pop filter.  

  Another choice may be the Harland Hogan mic, we have never used it but I have heard good things about it.  If we needed another mic I bet my dad would get that one. It costs about $250 I think. 

  A small Mackie mixer might be a good investment if you don't have one to tweek the EQ on whatever mic you choose.  I say Mackie because they are known for being very quite and having good preamps (esp. the Onix series).
• 

  Gillian Martin May 23, 2012 at 3:47pm

  Hi everyone, 

  I am considering upgrading my mic from a Rode NT 1000 to something else.  I think the TLM 103 is more than I want to pay, but has anyone heard anything about the Shure KSM32 for VO use?  (My Rode has quite a bit of inherent noise or self noise as they say and it's also quite sensitive to my English accent - plosives, esses etc.  Any suggestions anyone?
• 

  Howard Ellison May 14, 2012 at 4:19am

  Thankyou, Joe. Yes, that backup is really important. And if, like me, you worry about over-filling your hard-drive, there are web services that will store stuff for you economically.
• 

  Joe Van Riper May 13, 2012 at 11:05pm

  I may be a month late with this addendum to Howard's excellent points, but it's worth mentioning anyway.  To any talent that is going to do any editing or processing of their recording before sending it out, a very strong suggestion: ALWAYS keep a copy of the "un-fooled-with" version of your track! You never know when someone else's ears are going to disagree with yours about EQ, compression, levels, etc. If you don't have the original to go back to when this happens, you're wearing a lot of egg on your face.
• 

  Victoria Phelps April 15, 2012 at 11:05pm

  Thanks Howard :)
• 

  Howard Ellison April 9, 2012 at 7:24pm

  'Finished' has to reflect what your producers want, and they vary.  If they work with a proper engineer, they might expect or specify 'unprocessed' from you - just a nice straight track that sounds like you and has no intrusive noises.

  Even so, your tracks should at the very least be recorded to consistent levels:  not too many decibels below the maximum possible, and certainly never 'into the red'.

  If it's a book, chapters should match in their general level and loudness - those are not quite the same thing, but a studio can resolve such nuances.

  If someone asks you for 'finished' - ask about the end-use. That's a reasonable question because if they are planning loud music throughout, you'll need to process accordingly to be heard.    They could be saying please deal with the dynamics for us - i.e. reduce the contrast between your soft and loud, by using volume compression and limiting, and deliver a track accurately regulated throughout to (for example) no higher than 3 decibels below maximum.  Possibly they'd expect you to use noise-gating as well, if needed, though everyone prefers the result you get from a silent studio, and any gating has to be done with extreme care as it can eat syllables and can't be undone. Best avoided. 

  Another thing you'll often see mentioned here is 'de-essing' - reducing the strength of esses.  Not all performers/microphones need this, but again simple software can fix it. 

  All this is perfectly feasible with home studio software, can be enjoyable, and is not strictly 'technical' - but it does need practice and careful listening to get it right, plus more information than we usually get about the end-use. For example, something processed to be audible in a noisy vehicle (by raising all the quiet parts of words) might sound over-blown as a bedtime story.  

  'Finishing' a track as above means it can be glued straight into a production without much expert intervention, so it can be another string to your bow, best appreciated by lower-budget projects.  On the other hand, it takes up time that might be better applied developing other aspects of what you do.   Some successful performers never lay hands on their tracks, not even to edit out the fluffs that vex most of us.

  If the producers you've found like your tracks just as they are - lucky you!
• 

  Victoria Phelps April 9, 2012 at 6:14pm

  I am not sure where to ask this question, and if it is already been asked and answered please direct me in the right direction. I use wave pad as my recording software, I record and I can edit, but the question is, what is the difference in just editing the recording and it being a “finished product” I have not had to do a “ finished “ product at home yet and I am a little confused. Thank you for your help.
• 

  Ed Mace March 8, 2012 at 4:10pm

  Thanks Alexis-TW is sounding better and better!
• 

  Alexis Serrano March 8, 2012 at 4:00pm

  We record and do most of the editing on Twisted Wave but use Sound Booth (Now Adobe Cs 5 I think) mostly for the click and pop removal, and as a back up. We love Twisted Wave though. 
• 

  Ed Mace March 8, 2012 at 3:23pm

  Thanks Howard for that great recommendation! I love simplicity. It's funny that in addition to being voice talents,it doesn't hurt to be quasi recording and editing engineers! I am not super tech savvy but have done well with audacity over the years and look forward to twisted Wave. Cheers! Ed