Room Echo? REALLY?
https://voicebunny.com/samples/156521
I can't hear it.
I am interested in legitimate feedback, because I'm happy to learn if I am truly missing something.
But I hear nothing...and, frankly, I'm quite amazed that this sample was rejected for something so inaudible, if it's even there.
I look forward to your thoughts.
thanks,
- Chuck
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Hi Chuck,
Thank you so much for your willingness to learn and improve!
In this case, is not so much room echo as it is boxiness, which makes it sound as if it was recorded in a very small space. You'll find tips on the subject here https://bit.ly/2MrNsSV.
I'm confident you can fix it really fast.
One thing that comes to mind is, are you using compression on your audio? If so, maybe that could be the reason. That boxiness could be so small that is no problem at all, but when you compress your audio, it makes it more noticeable, and also will end up in boominess, an undesired boost in the low frequencies - that makes your voice sound muddy and inarticulate.
Please make sure you're not processing your audio, that way you'll avoid this kind of issues.
Hope this helps.
Hi Johnatan,
Thanks for taking time to reply.
No compression was used. I had a previous attempt of this script rejected for compression, so I re-recorded and didn't use it.
As to your comment on "boxiness", you seem to be sending mixed messages here:
you said: "boxiness, which makes it sound as if it was recorded in a very small space."
and you referred me to a document which reads: "Record in small spaces. The smaller the space, the better as there will be less reverb and reflections if you record in a space that is more confined. Also, small spaces are easier to fill with absorbent materials making if you have ambiance noise. Small spaces can vary from rooms and attics to closets and laundry rooms."
Do you see the contradiction here?
I record in a WhisperRoom, with thick acoustic foam on all the walls. And the environment is very quiet. I'm using a $1000 Sennheiser mic.
I have almost no submissions rejected anymore from VoiceBunny QC...which means I am clearly doing something right most of the time.
So, I say again... I'm quite amazed that this sample was rejected for something so inaudible. And I still have no clue what the complaint with it actually is...
C-
Hey Charles!
I understand where you're coming from, I work with the same microphone in a similar acoustic environment. As Johnny points out: there's boominess and boxiness (audible in the sub120 Hz frequencies) and something that would've triggered a rejection if it came from me: sibilance.
When you combine all of these issues and a spectral analysis of the file, the first logical conclusion is that compression is present. Especially because you can also hear the noise floor in between words, which indicates that a) gain was too hot in the preamp/interface and that b) some sort of processing (most likely compression) was applied to the file, because of the nature of the process itself.
Now, even whisper rooms can have problems with lingering frequencies, especially because of the size. This is true of every recording space where parallel walls are found and while it's not the type of "echo" one can easily define from hearing sound bouncing off of a hard surface, that boomy/boxy sound is very likely the result of the size of your space. Are small spaces easier to manage than big ones and that's why we recommend them? Absolutely! Are they completely devoid of undesirable acoustic qualities? Never.
Hey Charles!
I understand where you're coming from, I work with the same microphone in a similar acoustic environment. As Johnny points out: there's boominess and boxiness (audible in the sub120 Hz frequencies) and something else that would've triggered a rejection if it came from me: sibilance. Sibilance plus boominess though usually indicates excessive proximity effect, which could also be a characteristic in the offending sample.
When you combine all of these issues and a spectral analysis of the file, the first logical conclusion is that compression is present. Especially because you can also hear the noise floor in between words, which indicates that: a) gain was too hot in the preamp/interface and; b) some sort of processing (most likely compression) was applied to the file, because of the nature of the process itself would explain for those anomalies.
Now, even whisper rooms can have problems with lingering frequencies, especially because of the size. This is true of every recording space where parallel walls are found and while it's not the type of "echo" one can easily define from hearing sound bouncing off of a hard surface, that boomy/boxy sound is very likely the result of the size of your space. Are small spaces easier to manage than big ones and that's why we recommend them? Absolutely! Are they completely devoid of undesirable acoustic qualities? Never. This is where our job as self-recorded and self-produced VO artists gets complicated: we need feedback such as the rejection you had, to make us realize whether there's room for improvement. And there's always room for improvement.
Thanks a lot for reaching out, C. I'm keen on listening to that wonderful voice in other examples we could even use to teach the rest of the community!
-Héctor Adolfo Ituarte (VoiceBunny QC Agent)
Thanks for the response, Hector.
I'm not sure you addressed my point in regard to the contradiction inherent in his comment, which boiled down to:
"this boxiness makes it sound like it was recorded in a small space"
vs.
a document saying address the problem by making it sound like a smaller space.
But I do appreciate you getting back with me. I will take another look at the recording situation and try it again. Though, I still contend that there was nothing inherent in this recording that would ever cause a client to reject it, nor that it even audible to standard human hearing. I can't counter-argue against spectral analysis...but this seems very excessive to me.
best,
C-
Thanks, C.!
I'll make sure that the necessary adjustments to that document, to reflect yours and our observations. That's what makes the community great and we thank you for showing us an opportunity to improve.
I know getting the perfect spot, position, setting, etc. to achieve that golden sound is quite a drag sometimes, but gotta 'fess up and let you know: I used to be very annoyed with VoiceBunny's rejections. Now I understand and incorporate them into my workflow, which has made me a better pro, even after spending the longest time in Radio and TV Production.
By the way, we're also taking note of the reason for rejection, as it doesn't seem the most accurate one. We'll improve on that too!
Cheers!
- Héctor
Thanks, Hector. I appreciate the followup and clarification.
I, too, have been very wearied and even vexxed by what appear to have been the inconsistencies coming out of QC over the past couple years...especially after investing a couple hours on a job making it virtually perfect for the client...only to have it cast aside for what often have appeared to be spurious reasons (resulting in a need to go back and do the entire job again...on jobs that don't pay all that well in the first place). However, my goal is always to learn and improve where I can. So I sincerely want to grow and avoid future problems. I would much rather have a sample like this rejected than a real job, and fortunately, I haven't had too many rejections of jobs of late.
Thanks again!
C-