Skip to main content

Reduced processing - is this better for more likely acceptance?

share share
  • Shaun Streeter #702680246
      0

    Hi - I just wanted to update this with another clip. I identified a further issue with the pop filter I was using - and have switched to a different filter which I believe allows for a more clear sound. This is a selection of the newer audio. Thank you!

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y2rcckhO5_8BqHiKa5UJJl0kCsoNFFTK/view?usp=sharing

    share share
  • Hiroshi #371709074639
      0

    Hello Shaun,

    Thanks for sending in these samples!

    I gave them a listen and what I noticed is that there was a noticeable change in quality and tone at 0:19 in the processed file. This may be the reason for the rejection reason that you received. 

    For the unprocessed files, the second version sounded much better and clearer. There's still a little bit of plosives but I believe it is passable. I'll go ahead and send these to the rest of the QC team for a more detailed answer. :)


    Oh, and I know you probably know this already but just a friendly reminder that the quality, processing, and overall mix of all deliverables should always be consistent. If ever there are any special effects requested by the client, they will be fulfilled by our post-production team.

    However, if there are tonal or performance-related requests regarding the voiceover delivery, it should be done by the voiceover artist while making sure that the mix and overall quality are consistent.

    Best,
    Hiroshi

     

    share share
  • Hiroshi #371709074639
      0

    Hello Shaun,

    I just received the teams' feedback and they all agreed that the unprocessed files sound better. One of our post-producers mentioned that he's hearing some mouth clicks and a little bit of boominess and it would be a lot better and easier to mix for post-producers if these issues are addressed. 

    They also recommend the us of a good professional condenser microphone instead of a dynamic one if possible.

    I hope this helps! 

    Best,
    Hiroshi

     

    share share
  • Shaun Streeter #702680246
      0

    Hi Hiroshi,

    Thank you for the feedback. So, I am and have always been using a professional condenser microphone. All of the above samples are recorded on a Warm Audio WA-87R2. Between the first recordings and the very last recording, in addition to reducing some of the processing, I did change out the pop filter from a foam style to a higher quality solid mesh screen. I believe that has helped with some of the muffled sound I was getting before. If you could elaborate on where the QC team member was hearing the boominess (which sample and approximate time?) so I can listen for it? Thank you!

    share share
  • Hiroshi #371709074639
      0

    Hello Shaun

    Thank you for clarifying! 

    Our post-producer did not specify the instances where they hear the boominess. I honestly cannot hear the boominess myself. I also believe that the quality of your latest sample sounds good and it shouldn't have any issues passing QC standards. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y2rcckhO5_8BqHiKa5UJJl0kCsoNFFTK/view?usp=sharing

    Best, 

    Hiroshi

    share share

Please sign in to leave a comment.