Revision vs Rejection? Have a listen!
Hello
I'm fairly new to VB and am just starting to get more contests but wanted to get some perspective on these two recent submissions I had done. I realize my levels have been a little inconsistent and I am constantly adjusting and perhaps there may be a little more gain on one but I am honestly a little puzzled as to why one got accepted and the other rejected.
Another question I have is what constitutes VB asking for a revision vs getting a rejection? In this particular case it seems as if this specific piece was rejected because of hiss and mouth noise? Yes I do hear very slight noise from the mouth but it doesn't seem bad. If it had been just hiss and no mouth noise would that have been something that could have been fixed in a revision? I guess my question is how do you justify a revision vs a rejection?
I'd be curious to get everyones take on each of these samples.
Accepted: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hmz4wTecW3RTxNZ2oMnyLTxNXMNcvuWD/view?usp=sharing
Rejected: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iy7TIsVMSyZzWx8wTnXM5b5WZ-eijoca/view?usp=sharing
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Hi Ted!
Good questions. First, whether it's a revision or a rejection depends on the type of issues found in the audio and depending on the type of project. If the project is a Contest or a Speedy the QC can ask for a revision or reject, depending on the type of issues found and their complexity. For Bookings we can only ask for revisions unless we reach a point were the audio is not approvable.
Looking at your profile, I see the QC has asked you multiple times (both through revisions and rejections) to fix issues related to over-compression, room echo, hiss, mouth clicks and poor editing (clicks and audible cuts). Furthermore, your success rate is quite low. This can be related also to how closely you are interpreting the clients's remarks.
For these two reasons, we've decided to put your account on hold, and you will not receive anymore projects until you are able to solve the issues mentioned above. We expect the Pros to follow the feedback provided by QC, but if the same problems keep showing up, we are forced to take action in order to give the opportunity to other Pros.
I hope this answer your questions.
Best,
Juan.
Hi Juan
Thanks for your reply. Apologies about my back and forth via email and the community board. Just trying to get the hang of everything here and have tried a new audio sample. Wanted to get an idea if this meets the QC standards at VB.
I've got zero compression and have EQ'd my master to -3.5db along with a -3db Normalization. I'm using a Rode NT2a microphone into a avid mbox via pro tools. I've also sound proofed my room a little better with foam proofing.
It doesn't seem like too many Pro's get involved with the community board on here on specific samples so I'm hoping you might be able send me some suggestions on different levels I can adjust if need be.
Thanks
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ai_AC4Q7-IvPigFvPPX98UnnyytJuMgF/view?usp=sharing
Hi Ted!
I checked the last file and it does sound completely different from the ones before! It's really much better. The volume is still a bit too high for me, though. I would lower the gain down a notch. I always recommend recording at a lower level (my go to is to have the levels barely surpassing the green part to the yellow area of my DAW's meters) so you can be 100% sure you're not going overboard your preamp's capacity. Then, you can normalize the recording to -3dB.
I'd also never recommend you to EQ your master. If you're planning to use EQ (which I don't recommend unless there is a very high and clear boost on a frequency) do it on your vocal channel. Masters can be tricky as they don't work in the same way as normal channels do.
Hope this helped!
Hi Angela
Hi Ted!
I think your voice sounds great. There's a bit of noise in the background that would be nice to decrease in order to achieve a cleaner take that allows your voice to stand out with clarity.
Besides that, I suggest you try a more natural and conversational tone. Some ideas feel disconnected, due to the intonation and the editing. This makes the voice sound monotone and computer generated, one of the main reasons why our clients reject the work.
I hope this helps!
Best,
Juan
Thanks Juan
Appreciate your feedback. Will try to correct these issues and send another audio file over shortly.
Please do, Ted!
We'll be here to check it out. You're definitely on the right track here!
Hi Angela,
Attaching two samples of some audio I've done at different bit rates. I realize VB likes 44.1khz / 16bit but also wanted to attach a higher bit rate as well to see if that made any difference and if you have suggestions on bouncing files.
This one is at 192khz / 24bit
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1llOUcOB_iMo4sjg2hygVgZs1mVKCQNLI/view?usp=sharing
This one is at 44.1khz / 16bit
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GVegD5l0aY3mdeLUy4z1472PkWZwtAVi/view?usp=sharing
Hi Ted!
When you're recording voice overs, higher sample rates and bit depth don't make a big difference. Higher sample rates are more for recordings where you're using a lot of microphones and the signals are piling up. This do need a higher space to avoid losses in quality but for voice overs, the differences are almost non-audible.
I do feel these files are much better! There are a lot of plosives so I would recommend you record a bit farther away from the mic and a bit off-axis to avoid some sibilance. The rest does sound really great!
I'm going to reactivate your profile as of now. Just make these changes and we'll be good to go. You should be able to see your profile up and running starting now at this very moment.
Thank you for working with us to achieve a better recording quality!
Thanks for the latest update and appreciate all your feedback. And its great to be back up and running on the site. Can't wait to get back to work here!
Hi Ted!
What processing are you adding to the chain? I feel the compressor is too aggressive and it's causing distortion at some points.
Please share with us a description of the processing you are applying as well as a processed and a raw take.
That will help us listen to your system and help you improve the quality of your audio.
Welcome back! :)
Best,
Juan.
Hi Juan
Apologies on the late reply. Holidays and just catching up with everything. Wanted to send you two samples of what I've been submitting recently to VB. These two samples were accepted speedies so its seems I'm doing something right.
I know there's still a lot to learn and I am taking the utmost care and concern for monitoring all the different variables at play including mouth noise, and my hardware chain. I've backed off the mic big time and am usually standing about 7 to 8 inches away using the pop screen.
These two samples are pretty bare bones. I have the Rode NT2 going directly into MBox and into Pro Tools. I am recording using one mono track set at -4 db and apply no filters or plug ins. The gain is up quite a bit but that seems to have been working well at the 3pm position on the MBox. I don't seem to hear any hissing noise and most often it has a flat line when I'm not talking.
After I'm done recording and editing I simply normalize the tracks at -3db and then bounce to wav at the 16 / 44.1 rate.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QATKcZXmUsCjKZdw8Eq9vr19uQp7uzjI/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1naK39T1jc0OLoQDqT9vmA8mExChNO2DK/view?usp=sharing
Hi Ted!
Thanks for sharing!
To me this sounds really much better than before! It's approvable but I do think you could make some small tweaks to make it even cleaner! I think it sounds as if the gain could be too high which could be making the file to sound as if there was some kind of compression added. Maybe your mic or the MBox have their pads activated. I would suggest you ensure these are not on or maybe turn them on and then off again to ensure they're not active in any way. The Mbox has a digital panel you can open in your computer to ensure it's off in case you're not sure by pressing the button on the channel.
Also, the sound is a bit nasal. Could you try recording a bit farther away from the mic? You can also try to point the mic's capsule to your mouth at the center and locating your mouth at the top outside of the main cone. It could help!
Try this and let us know how it works :)
Hi Angela
Thanks for the feedback and timely response. I've tried a few of those suggestions and I'm not sure I'm getting better results. I've gained down my levels from about 3pm to 2pm on my actual physical gain knob on the ProTools mbox3 and while it sounds pretty good at the 2pm mark that's almost at least one notch below where I was on the previous takes it seems the actual quality of sound lessened immensely.
Also of note are the normalization levels. When the final recording is done I notice doing the -3 normalization actually boosts the final level even higher then when my gain was actually at 3pm mark. Sorry this is so confusing with my terminology of audio production but hoping you understand. I also did try to pull back even more from the mic and yes I know I already have a pretty nasally voice as is. I'm very midwestern and already have a pretty announcer style voice with my radio background but have tried to pull it back as much as possible.
I almost want to go back to my original settings from the previous two samples but I'd be curious to hear your feedback. I'm not sure either of these are very good but this is what happened when I did gain down and move away from the mic.
Hoping to find a good level here soon!
With Normalization
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hr-BoXsnwyHrYObXn7FtbrBHe8zEr6wT/view?usp=sharing
Without Normalization
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1c9gydX9gPlGUQtLHfGuvc65KQ9CrXS7c/view?usp=sharing
Also I wasn't totally sure about the pads. I looked on the internal digital panel for the mbox and didn't see any "pads" on the channels. I noticed on the mbox2 (looking online) there are physical pad buttons I believe on the box itself. But perhaps I'm not seeing it on mbox3 version.
Also my mic switches or pads are all at the zero level.
Got another sample to share.
I'm feeling better about this one. Each take is a little different energy wise. First one being a bit straight forward, second softer, and third one with a little more off the cuff.
Each one is completely uncompressed w no plug in. I record and then normalize and then edit accordingly for any breathing or small mouth noise. I realize after normalizing the whole level gets boosted including any white noise which sometimes comes out but I try my best to delete that in the final takes.
Let me know what you think and I keep about two fists apart from my mouth and the mic fyi.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MsInB_Z77EPzU6Hb1GP1xY4nRARI54O2/view?usp=sharing
Hi Ted!
I think it sounds much better! Some parts still sound a bit compressed, like the last take; where there's more energy in your voice. For that reason, I'm guessing that it could come from the mic's capsule. There's also a boost in the low frequencies, and this may also give your voice a more nasal sound. I see the mic has a low cut filter, using the 80Hz filter might help you clean a bit the lower end.
Another trick we could try is recording at 24 bit. That should give us more headroom to play with. For vocals I like to record at around -6dB peak. That gives me plenty of space before clipping, while keeping the preamp's noise floor well below.
Just wondering if you have other mic? It'd be interesting to see the sound you can get with a different mic. That could give us more answers.
Let me know what you think!
Best,
Juan
Hey Juan
Sorry for late reply. Crazy past week. Trying to catch up here.
Thanks for the suggestions. I switched the setting to 80HZ on the Rode. Also at 24 bit for recording and still pulled back quite a bit about 2 fists or 7-8 inches away from the mic.
I do have a Shure SM7 and Heil PR40 but those require extra gain and or a cloud lifter of which I don't have at the moment. I don't want to attempt to use those mics right now.
Let me know what you think of this sample:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VoPnwnWxm8Vya3Pa8YXQGssTC8L79rL8/view?usp=sharing
Hi Ted!
Good to hear back from you.
I think the audio sounds better, although there's still some noise in the background. I would like to hear your voice on other mic, I think you have a terrific voice and at the moment it sounds a bit thin and nasal. There's an editing click at 0:21.
Best,
Juan.
Good to hear. Once I get this cloud booster I will be able to send you proper audio from the Shure and or Heil, but for the time being perhaps you have other suggestions on how to boost the "Thin" and or "Nasal" sound that your hearing. Or perhaps you have suggestions on boosting mic signal on a dynamic mic into MBox. I've been told that MBox might not be the best processor and it may have a weaker preamp than some of the other options out there. Wanted to get an idea if you knew that was true or if its something I may be able to adjust manually or within the software?
Also do you think adding a compressor EQ and or Bombfactory plug in would help just a touch?
Noted on the audio click as well.
Hi Ted!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. As you've come a long way with Juan San, I'll let him handle this case himself, however, I'd like to recommend you to get the SS-1 from Simply Sound instead of the CL-1. It does the exact same thing, sounds really well and has a super low noise floor but its like half the price! It's only $40 right now as they're on sale! You can get it here if you're interested: https://simplysound.co/product/ss-1-microphone-preamp/
Also, I would definitely not use any compressor on the recording! If you'd like to use a mild EQ, I'd recommend using any Waves or UAD plugins. They're expensive, I know, but I love them. They're high quality and very, very reliable.
Hi Ted!
Well, having a 'thin' sound may be a combination of multiple factors. Every stage of the process adds up to the final result. You may have a good mic, but a poor preamp, so the signal will suffer some quality loss at the amplification stage. The Mbox is a great product, I really like it. It was my first interface and I still love it, although it's not part of my main setup anymore. What I like about the Mbox is that it's portable and resistant, and at least my mBox 2 has fairly decent preamps. However, I don't use it in the studio anymore. As it's usb, it operates on 12V. This limits the dynamic range of the system compared to an interface running on 60V. That's another example of why a recording would sound 'thiner'.
Best,
Juan.
Hey Juan and Angela!
It's been a few weeks. I've been preoccupied on some other projects but still trying to work on all the suggestions and tips you and Angela have given. I've been uploading as many new samples to my profile as well and I just put up a few new ones last night. Haven't been getting as many invites though.
Hi Ted!
Thank you very much for sharing these. We will definitely look into them.
Keep in mind that we have around 6,000 Pros at the moment. Some of them are marked as auto-approved so some of the recordings are not screened. We're doing our best to clean the database and find the ones that don't align as much a we'd want with our current standards, but it's a tough process that takes some time.
We are proud to say, though, that these are not the rule but rather the exception. Your reports actually help a lot because it helps us find borderline and/or bad cases that we could've missed.
In the meantime, let's focus on seeing where the thinness of your recording is coming from. You're really good and I know we can help you grow a lot! I've personally also learned a lot helping you so I'm sure we can help you with your setup :)
Hey!
Thanks for the feedback glad I've been able to help. Just been more or less curious about the QC process on all ends of the VB platform. Which actually makes me think of another question. Are the screenings being listened to on a certain kind of headphone or monitor each time?
Can you also tell me about auto-approved?
Got some new recordings here from the Heil PR40 dynamic mic going into my new simply sound SS1 and then into the mbox3. Each one has been compressed to -3db as well. Master level is set at -6db and I have no eq's or plugins going through.
I didn't edit any of the breath noises out just hoping you might have some good feedback on the general overall sound.
Thanks!
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1r9o3WJE0dgbWF-sF1YTZg-IscRIc2bOF/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XrQqe3y-G19akfTdfKhdZesvrFgiRrU_/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-YgkSuwXsOrzbu2chLkB_MbeMVZ4nGTD/view?usp=sharing
Hey Ted! Let me answer your questions one by one.
1. We use the Sony MDR7506. I also have a pair of AudioTechnica ATH-M50x which I use to monitor when I want some extra confirmation of what my 7506s give me.
2. Some of our Pros are marked as reliable and/or trusted. These users get only some of their submissions screened but we trust them so much that we allow some of them to pass directly to our users. This happens usually with only a couple of users who have been working with us for a long time and don't usually receive rejections and/or revisions on their screened audios. As our platform has been up for such a long time, we have some users that were reliable before but are not that reliable now. For this, we're doing the Pro screening process I mentioned before in which we make sure that only the best of the best are marked as such.
3. About the recordings, I prefer the gain at 12 the best. There's no noise at all and the voice sounds the most balanced and at a healthy level! However, as I mentioned before, I still believe you should toss the compressor away. I'd just record and normalize. Also, I suggest you add an high-pass filter at around 80 Hz as your recording sounds very boomy. This is more likely being triggered by the nature of dynamic microphones which are usually more robust and designed to boost low frequencies.
Hope this helps :)
Awesome was just curious about the headphones.
Sounds good about the Pro Screening as well. I hope to soon make it into that category!
The 12 setting I marked works great for me.
I mis spoke on that last note. Sorry I meant to say I normalized not compressed to -3db
Here's the same recording you liked with a high pass filter I think I do hear what you're talking about in regards to the boomyness. It seems that High Pass definitely reduced it here.
Let me know what you think of this one. Thanks!
https://drive.google.com/file/d/18mlNdhr4aMEE_t4HyK0Hmpq1bqyDLsn4/view?usp=sharing