VO-BB - 20 YEARS OLD!

[Ed Fisher]

I recently dug up my Project 1 DBX 286 Mic processing strip. The original one designed by Broadcast Engineering Genius Bob Orban. The major difference between the original 286 and the 286a (that I'm aware of) is the original had a "wall wart" power supply whereas the 286a had the power supply built into the unit...and the 286a has an extra knob to set more precisely the frequency for the DE-ESSER in the chain. Whereas the original had only a DE-ESSER threshold setting. I find the DE-ESSER useful, but it also takes a bit more out of the "crispness" than I would like when used. I suspect that having the ability to more narrowly find the SSSS frequency would be an improvement. Or...I could simply be fooling myself. Opinions on whether it's worth the trouble to upgrade to the A version? Anyone have experience with both? As for the new S version....I don't know very much about it. A different engineering team took over the project from Bob's original design..so I don't know how that affected the outcome.

I'm using it with a recently acquired Sennheiser 416 and it seems to work well. I've only now figured out how to use the thing. My main usage is to keep my voiceoveer room noise level nice and quiet. (it's pretty quite already...but you can never have too much "quiet.") Plus a little judicious compression can also be a nice thing. DE-ESSING is really last on my list. But, still....it is nice to have when you need it.

This is my first post here...so opinions or suggestions are obviously welcome.

[dwpthe3rd]

Over the past couple of years I’ve read with interest the comments about the usage and various versions of the DBX 286 – left me with a strong case of GAS; many here seem to prefer it over the more expensive Symetrix 528e, a unit I’ve used for a number of years. Just this week put the newest – the 286s – in my rack. Your comments seem to be pretty much right on based on my research. Although it seems I saw somewhere that the earliest version didn’t provide a full 48v phantom.

To me the DBX seems to be more aggressive in its settings, (including that of the de-esser), and it can really jump into that “radio DJ” sound quickly. I’m using considerable moderation to avoid that type of processed sound. It’s nice to have both the freq & threshhold controls on the de-esser. Also, the pre as a stand alone device seems a lot “warmer” than some – I’m still in ‘test it out’ mode and the sound of my FMR RNP sounds more honest in comparison so I’m inserting it as the front end pre and relying on the DBX more for the expander/noise reduction, which is very smooth.

I’d guess the 416/286 to be a good combo for promo/trailer VO.

Welcome to the forum – I lurk more than most as I enjoy the friendly dialog – I’m sure you’ll feel welcome. So far it's all my opinion – now a word of advice: seems you need to follow guidelines on all the llama and chocolate stuff.

Dave

[Jason Huggins]

I use a 286a, and I can attest to its ability to get into DJ sound quick. Set right, though, its manipulations can be rather tasteful. I've used the enhancer to add stuff where necessary, but I never crank it past 2. The expander and De-esser can also be very useful. The frequency knob is MEGA necessary (if you really need to use it) IMHO.

Honestly, though, I currently bypass everything but the Hipass filter. I keep it around for those spots that need a bit of compression or some enhancement...but that is rare. I've found that my raw audio is just better in the long run. I De-Ess in software now. If you screw it up on the recording, you can't fix that...but if you record mostly raw, you can always fix it in post.

If the De-Ess frequency is the only change....I'd skip it. Just do that in post if you really need it. I think mic technique and voice technique are better than a De-Esser any day.

And welcome to the forum! You might head over to Chat and introduce yourself. Be prepared with chocolate and llama maintenance tools.