| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Which file do you prefer? |
| File 1 |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| File 2 |
|
10% |
[ 1 ] |
| File 3 |
|
90% |
[ 9 ] |
| None of the above! Get used to saying "Would you like fries with that?" |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 10 |
|
| Author |
Message |
brianforrester
Backstage Pass
Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 492
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
|
 Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 2:15 pm Post subject: Your Opinion ... |
 |
|
Hello all of my beloved VO-bb'ers...
Now that I'm finally kinda settled into life in Vancouver, I'm back to messing around with my studio setup and am trying 3 different gear configurations... At the end of the day it all comes down to what sounds best (performance aside for now as these were all quick reads), so I'd appreciate your opinions on the files below...
Each file is recorded with the same microphone, with the same mic positions etc.... the only differences are the gear configurations between the mic and the mbox.
There is no processing or eq on any file, from either hardware or software.
The question is, which one would you choose as being the best. My end goal is to send the best possible file (sonically) to the producer (duh!!!), without too much coloration or influence from the gear. I prefer to let producers sweaten things!
I'll let you know which configuration is associated with each file a bit later on, but for now I'm looking for uncolored opions, therefore no personal biases due to names like Neumann, Avalon, Neve, focusrite etc...
Disclaimer... the reads kinda suck, so thanks for your patience.
Here are the links... they're all wav files
File 1 - http://www.brianforrester.com/audio/bf_audio1.wav
File 2 - http://www.brianforrester.com/audio/bf_audio2.wav
File 3 - http://www.brianforrester.com/audio/bf_audio3.wav
Thanks again for your input!
Brian
_________________
Brian Forrester Voice Overs
www.brianforrester.com
brian@brianforrester.com
778.668.5715 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
richgates
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| To be honest they all sound really close to me. I liked the third one best if I had to choose, but they all so close it really was hard for me to hear differences. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronphi
Been Here Awhile
Joined: 11 Sep 2006
Posts: 221
Location: Arlington, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I tend to agree with Rich. To my, admittedly untrained, ears there isn't a lot of difference among the three. However Number 3 seems to have a little more low end. To my ears it is a little more pleasing but I would be happy with any of them.
_________________
Ron Phillips
"The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
David Sarnoff's associates in response to his urging for investment in the radio in the 1920s. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don G.
King's Row
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 1071
Location: MA
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks. All you did was confirm that I'm losing my hearing! 
Actually, while I thought they all sounded very similar, I liked #1 least. No processing at all? It sounded a bit compressed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vowannabe
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I have a very untrained ear but liked #2 the least but it was hard to tell. My vote was for #3 but I agree with the others, all were good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vowannabe
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Something you might want to take into consideration. I did not read comments prior to listening. The fact that all 4 of the choices right now are the same, may mean something.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave
Lucky 700
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 727
Location: Houston, Texas
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Three works for me... but of course I have this hearing loss thing from too many radio years wearing cans 
_________________
. If at first you don't succeed, then bomb disposal probably isn't for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brianforrester
Backstage Pass
Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 492
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dave wrote: | | but of course I have this hearing loss thing from too many radio years wearing cans |
uh, pardon... sorry I couldn't hear you, can you turn up the pot on my cans!  
Seriously though, what is that you like about number 3... I know that there are only subltle differences between the 3 files, and I know what I think about each one independently, but would love to know your reasons for you choosing number 3.
Thanks all!
Brian
_________________
Brian Forrester Voice Overs
www.brianforrester.com
brian@brianforrester.com
778.668.5715 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yoda117
M&M
Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 2362
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vowannabe wrote: | | The fact that all 4 of the choices right now are the same, may mean something.. |
means that you need to pass whatever you're drinking 
Only three files. Or maybe I've had too much to drink. 
Of the three, I disliked #1 the most. Too sibilant and "brittle" to me in spots. I liked #2, as it was less sibilant than all the others, but #3 edged it out with the additional whatever was going on with the LF (it may not have been EQ'ed, but it definitely had a boost there). So you got another vote for #3, but with the caviat that I'd like to see a boost to the upper mids with that chain if you go with it.
_________________
Voiceovers by Gregory Houser
Philadelphia based Voice Actor
Blog - A man, a martini, and a lot of microphones |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
donrandall
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| To my ear, there is not enough difference to make a fair assessment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brianforrester
Backstage Pass
Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 492
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| donrandall wrote: | | To my ear, there is not enough difference to make a fair assessment. |
Now that's a fair comment for sure... and one that may make the desion on which route to go, that much easier.
Thanks Don.
Brian
_________________
Brian Forrester Voice Overs
www.brianforrester.com
brian@brianforrester.com
778.668.5715 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gregory Best
The Gates of Troy
Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 1853
Location: San Diego area (east of Connie and south and east of Bailey)
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2007 11:30 pm Post subject: 3 |
|
|
I like 3 best. It seemed clearer and fuller. 1 and 2 were more sibilant that was hard of the "s" sound.
Greg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave
Lucky 700
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 727
Location: Houston, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| brianforrester wrote: | | Dave wrote: | | but of course I have this hearing loss thing from too many radio years wearing cans |
........what is that you like about number 3... I know that there are only subltle differences between the 3 files, and I know what I think about each one independently, but would love to know your reasons for you choosing number 3. |
Yep, the difference is very subtle, and I wouldn't be worried about using any of the three set-ups. But, be that as it may, #3 seemed to have a much more complete range of sound. We're really splitting hairs (mostly the few remaining ones in my ears) here but 1 and 2 were somewhat thinner.
...we now return to our regularly scheduled critique of sonic characteristics secure in the knowledge I have successfully muddied the water beyond any degree of usefulness.
_________________
. If at first you don't succeed, then bomb disposal probably isn't for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
COURVO
Even Taller Than He Seems On TV
Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: Vegas, Baby!
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
#3 was best for me, too, Brian.
#1 and #2 were almost undiscernably the same, but #3 jumped out immediately as having better "presence" and fullness.
DC
_________________
Dave Courvoisier - Las Vegas, NV
http://www.CourVO.com
CourVO@CourVO.com
Courvo's "Voice Acting in Vegas" Blog: http://www.CourVO.biz
on your phone at courvo.mobi
702.610.6288
"I'm not a news anchor, but I play one on TV." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
