|
HOME STUDIO Choosing The Right Audio Equipment: Confessions Of A Hopeless Gearhead  By Paul StrikwerdaVoice Actor Guilty as charged: In the past few years I've become more and more of a gearhead. I like to look at new audio equipment; I like to read about it and I like listening to sound samples. On any given day, I have to spend at least a few minutes studying reviews, gazing at pictures and drooling over obscure objects with buttons, switches, cables and meters. Dear Abby: Is this weird and should I be worried? I mean, my equipment is fine. There's nothing wrong with my microphone and I don't need another preamp. For a voice actor like myself, a simple studio setup will suffice, so why am I staring at all this stuff?WE'RE NOT ALONE ... I know I'm not alone. My photographer friends are always looking for the latest cameras, the best lenses or software that will revolutionize the industry. Musicians wonder what they would sound like on a new instrument. Professional chefs can't wait to get their hands on a new set of sharp-looking knives. Even quilters go gaga over new gadgets. Why is that? WANTS AND NEEDS There's a constant battle in our brain between our wants and our needs. It's scary how good most of us have become at justifying purchases that make no logical sense whatsoever. All of this to answer the basic question:
What If? What if I bought this new guitar?
What would it do for my sound, my creative abilities - my career? What
would this new high-tech camera allow me to do? Would I finally be able
to take those impossible shots? And what about this new editing
software? Could it save me time? Would it make my colleagues green with
envy? CAUSE OF A BAD HEADACHE All these questions and unfulfilled
desires can create massive tension inside an otherwise rational mind. No
longer happy with what we already have, we start looking for the next
best thing. And trust me. As long as we're alive, there will always be a
next best thing. The industry feeds on our
never-ending desire for new and improved products, and brands big and
small are masterful at pushing all the right buttons at the wrong time. SELECTING THE RIGHT GEAR When it comes to selecting the perfect audio equipment, I have a hard time answering the following question:
Let's say I'm in the market for a new microphone.
Is staring at pictures, reading reviews and listening to audio samples
helpful? DON'T JUDGE BOOK BY ITS COVER Ultimately, it shouldn't really matter what a microphone looks
like. Clients are paying us for our sound, not
because our JZ BH3 microphone has a hole in it. So, if we forget about looks for a moment, are descriptions - whether from critics or manufacturers - actually helpful? Take a JZ Black Hole mic as an example. The maker writes: Fantastic vocal mic, is great on every application it is used. Unbelievable clarity and definition, smoothness and full transparency. Does that help you make a $1599
investment? THEY'RE ALL ABOVE AVERAGE Once you start reading up on microphones, you'll be amazed
at how many makers call their mic "great on every application." It might be a true statement, but it doesn't say much, does it? Let's pick a quote from the Sound On Sound review of the JZ Black Hole. Perhaps that can clarify things a bit:
USELESS LINGO The problem with words is that they
are inadequate. They attempt to describe an experience, but they are not
the experience itself. Words are always open to interpretation. What I
describe as a "smooth" or "warm" sound is colored by my personal
biases. If anything, it probably tells you more about me. This so-called
"warm" sound might be perceived by someone else as "muddy" or "dark." So, if words can't properly describe
a specific sound and looks don't matter, wouldn't it be helpful to
listen to some recorded audio? Surely, that must be the best way to
select a microphone online. Not necessarily. In my review of the Microtech Gefell M 930 Ts, I wrote: It is easy to forget that any microphone is part of a recording chain, and when you change one link in that chain, everything changes. Of course, the source of the sound is very much part of that chain. IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS Let's examine the variables in more detail: The person recording the track. Does he/she have a decent mic technique?
Some mics are known for their proximity effect (bass boost) if you get
too close. At the right distance, a mic might sound clear and open, but
when you're almost eating the thing up, listeners could get the wrong
impression. Was a pop filter used? A pop filter keeps a mic nice and dry and it softens plosives, but some filters can muffle the sound. If a microphone has multiple settings,
which setting was used during the test recording? Omni, cardioid,
figure-8, or another setting? Some mics have a low-cut switch which activates a high-pass filter that reduces the amount of low frequencies in the output signal from the microphone. This obviously alters the sound. Some mics even come with multiple capsules. Where was the track recorded? In
Carnegie Hall, at 3 Abbey Road, or on the factory floor? The sound of a
microphone can differ depending on the acoustic environment.
Microphone tests recorded in a lab don't necessarily reflect how that
same mic will sound in your walk-in closet slash home studio. Two of a kind don't necessarily
sound the same, either. Especially, classic microphones go through some
remodeling over time. The famous Neumann U87 has a vintage model, the U87i, and the current production version, the U87Ai. Some engineers will even tell you that the two U87Ai's they own do not sound the same. There's a reason most manufacturers will sell you "matched pairs" of microphones for stereo recording. True audiophiles claim that the quality of the cables
used to connect various pieces of equipment can make a difference in
the quality of the signal and ultimately the sound. Others believe we
might as well send a signal through a coat hanger wire and save
ourselves a lot of money. Preamplifiers
that are used to bring the low-level microphone signal up to line-level,
may add a signature sound to the signal, too. You'll often read that tube preamps are supposed to add "warmth" to the sound. Of course, we know that audio engineers also use compression, equalization and all kinds of fancy filters to manipulate what comes out of the loudspeakers. FROM RECORDING TO LISTENING All
those things happen in the recording studio. Now let's look at how we
receive the sound of that microphone we're evaluating. What variables are we dealing with on that end? Are we listening on cheap computer speakers,
high-end studio monitors or are we using headphones? The quality of
these devices is in part responsible for the character of the sound.
Compare listening to a track on your iPhone through earplug headphones, to hearing it in a soundproof recording studio equipped with Genelec 8260A 390W Active Tri-amped studio monitors. Even the position of the speakers, as well as the position of the listener in relation to those speakers, needs to be factored in. In which acoustic environment
are you listening? Sounds bounce off the walls and resonate differently
depending on the shape, size and treatment of the room. Are you focused
or distracted as you're listening? That, too, can play a role in how you
evaluate the sound. Hearing in and of itself is a subjective experience.
It's an attempt to understand the world around us. Mechanical sound
waves are converted into electrical impulses and sent to the brain for
processing. Once in our brain, the hearing centers go to the memory
banks to localize and identify the sound. Think about someone's tone of voice. Whether a sound is labeled as "pleasant" or "warm" is a matter of personal interpretation. Then there's the issue of hearing loss. In a world that seems to get noisier and noisier, hearing loss is on the rise among young and old. It's hard to make a precise measurement with faulty equipment. The last factor that's influencing how we perceive the quality of, in this case, a microphone, is one of my favorites. It's our perception. It's deeply personal, and it can also be guided by culture.
We all suffer from selective thinking (and hearing), which allows us to notice and look for information confirming our personal beliefs. It's called confirmation bias. One such belief could be that all microphones under $300, especially
those made in China, are rubbish. Another belief could be that Neumann
is the best brand in the world.
Imagine listening to a mic test, knowing in advance which mic you're going to hear. Do you honestly think it's even remotely possible to be completely objective? COMPARING MICROPHONES The other day I was watching a video comparing the Prodipe Lamp Studio Pro ($299), the M-Audio Sputnik ($679) and the Neumann U47 ($1,599.95). As I watched the video, it told me when the audio switched from one mic to the other. I don't know about you, but I found
the differences between these mics to be very subtle. I listened on my
AKG K240 Studio headphones, and when I closed my eyes, I often didn't
even hear when they made the switch from mic to mic. Perhaps this
unmasks me as a complete audio ignoramus. Perhaps it demonstrates that
you don't need a sixteen-hundred-dollar microphone to produce a decent
sound. You be the judge.
The question that remains is this: How on earth do you find out which microphone is right for you? Do you really need a big name brand to play the game? Is expensive always better? TOUGH CHOICES This I can tell you:
Making a wise choice based on online info only is almost impossible.
When you change just one of the variables mentioned above, you change
everything. Factory specs tell you a lot about
pickup patterns, output impedance, frequency response, and the
self-noise of a mic. However, no one can define what you find
aesthetically pleasing. When researching your next mic, it
might be tempting to listen to the snobs and self-proclaimed experts on
the gearhead message boards. That can be a frustrating and intimidating
experience. Can you always trust the various dot-com critics that give a
mic four out of five stars? Some online reviews are actually written by people who are paid to say nice things about a product. MAKE UP YOUR MIND At the end of the day, you have to rely on your own judgment in your own environment. Ideally, try to get hold of a couple
of microphones in your price range and take them for a spin. Maybe a
colleague in the area is willing to lend you some of his or her gear.
Perhaps you can find a maker or a pro audio store willing to send you
something on a trial basis. Kam Instruments, for instance, gives you seven-day inspection period. If you decide to send
the mic back, you'll pay for shipping, insurance and a 15 percent restocking
fee. It's better than wasting a whole lot of money on something that
doesn't meet your expectations. Harlan Hogan's VO: 1-A mic is sold with a no-questions-asked money-back guarantee. LET EXPERTS HEAR YOU Once you've recorded a few audio samples with your small collection, send them to an objective expert such as Dan Lenard, George Whittam or Dan Friedman for evaluation. Take their feedback into account and then make your choice. I have to warn you, though. Playing around with gear can be a lot of fun. Eventually, you might end up like me - a hopeless gearhead for life. ----------------
ABOUT PAUL Paul Strikwerda is a 25-year veteran of the voice over industry whose Nethervoice service features German and Dutch voice overs, translation and evaluation services. Born in Holland, he has worked for Dutch national and international radio, the BBC and American Public Radio. Although 90% of his work is in English, Strikwerda also records in Dutch, German and French. Clients include Novartis, Johnson & Johnson, and the Discovery Channel. He also publishes an informative and entertaining blog, Double Dutch. Email: paul@nethervoice.com Web: www.nethervoice.comDouble Dutch Blog: www.nethervoice.com/nethervoice |
|
|
.png)
I know you well enough to declare you've got decent ears, so an ignoramus you're not....and a certifiable gearhead you're becoming, it seems!
Some things to keep in mind....
Don't forget when watching mike comparisons on video sites like YouTube that the audio usually gets compromised when converted to a web-friendly format, even if it's in "HD." Subtleties that might make for those "delicate highs," "bold, clear mids," and "solid low end" that make the difference in higher-end mikes are usually the first to get mangled. Few things irritate me more than pulling up a great-looking "high-def" video for something I'm really interested in, then hearing the telltale swishy/swirly sounds of audio compression artifacts in the soundtrack turning everything to dreck.
That's why I and other gearheads like you instead turn to sites like RecordingHacks.com, where audio pros who (usually) know what they're doing submit high resolution uncompressed samples when having a gear shootout.
Having done one recently for their sister site Microphone-Parts.com comparing 5 different mike capsule upgrades they sell to improve the quality of cheapie import mikes (and actually having a real-world background in this kind of thing), I can attest that doing this with some credible notion of controls, references, and testing factors isn't the easiest trick for most folks to pull off, or even fully appreciate (even I didn't, until I figured out how many audio files would be needed, and how badly they needed to be recorded simultaneously in a controlled environment, something I surprisingly rarely see even with tests of really high-end toys).
It doesn't help when manufacturers all seemingly reach for the same brass ring instead of boldly forging ahead with new designs, because "everyone wants that classic sound."
That said, people will still listen with laptop speakers, iPod earphones, etc., and declare "I don't hear the difference." And I might even agree using my own gearhead gear. Some stuff just works for some folks and is a complete failure for others, "voices of God" be damned (prime example: before Harlan Hogan came out with his signature mike, I bought the MXL 909 on his recommendation because it sounded Sennheiser 416-ish - and it sounded NOTHING like the real 416 I invested in later because it was so terrible). Some gear may be the best product in the world, but never properly had a light shone on it due to the manufacturer having zero advertising budget and/or guerilla marketing skills, or the ability to efficiently mass produce said genius product.
The good news is, you're right: most folks don't need an expensive Neumann or other marquee mike name to do decent VO, and many lower-priced alternatives out today can work fine. What's equally - and even more - important is spending the time to find the right mike for YOU, pairing it with an above-average audio interface/preamp, recording in a properly-treated recording space, and most of all, having a notion of what the heck you're doing both when recording and delivering the audio goods to a client.
Sadly, this all takes time, and in some cases, some cash outlay, and many in VO fall down on the latter, even in this day and age of abundant knowledge....but if they at least try to make an effort to become even a somewhat educated gearhead newbie, they're miles ahead of the rest.
Plus, being a geeky gearhead is fun. After all, it's not necessarily the destination, but the journey getting there....
It wears me out just thinking of all the other choices out there. So I'll just stay with what I have.
Good post though. I'm quite sure folks are confused as to what to purchase. I say, whatever makes you sound natural, and you don't have to spend a small fortune either. $1700 for a mic? Not for me.