Reducing Harshness of Booming Vocals

[monkeywisdom]

OK. Thanks. That one sounds pretty good. Did you just do noise removal and a normalize at -1 and that's it? The volume on it seems almost as high as I would want it optimally. By the way, I screwed up when I said "styrofoam". The box is lined with cardboard on all sides and cushion foam (the stuff with the sparklies in it) on four sides. Yes, it's very much like mom's kitchen. I threw some clothing over the box and duct taped a coat on the wall in back of me and came up with the following track. At 10 seconds, it's normalized at -1. The amplitude is slightly lower than I'd like it to be, but some of the peaks from hard consonants are already hitting the top. I'm comparing the volume to Pandora (probably a pretty good volume standard) and another audio course I did. This is slightly lower than both in volume. After 10 seconds I did about four rounds of noise removal to get rid of all the cicadas, and at the end I kept in the car that is about 100 yards away. Anyway, now I'm a whole lot closer to resolving this and now know how to experiment to get it right. Thanks, y'all. New file: http://www.mediafire.com/?xrxzy73rxegyql4

[kozikowski]

That better?

http://www.kozco.com/tech/clips/harshne ... mpress.wav

I followed my procedure with the Compressor tool.

I did not Normalize. You need to pay attention to the order of operation because the tools can interact with each other.

From the original work.
Effect > Amplify > New Peak Amplitude > -1dB.

Effect > Noise Reduction
Get the Profile from a voiceless segment of the show.
(from the top):
12
0
180
0

Effect > Compressor
(from the top)
-19
-40
5:1
0.2msec
1.0 sec
[X] Make-up Gain

The Make Up Gain seems to stick at 0dB which I don't like. You can leave Make Up Gain unselected and re-apply Amplify to -1 after you compress.

Koz

[monkeywisdom]

That's great. I tried your approach with compression, etc and made four files: A .6 input volume both compressed and uncompressed plus the same for .7. Very hard to choose between the four, but I'll listen to them over and over again. Noncompression gives the voice a slightly more natural sound, and it's unclear which approach gives a softer edge. My ears aren't well trained, but listening to them all for an hour or two should narrow it down. Thanks a lot, everyone. I also do animation on the side, and these tips will certainly come in handy for that, too. Hope this thread helps some other schmuck who upgrades to a real microphone after a lifetime of cheap mics.

[kozikowski]

You can change the Compression ratio from 5:1 to a lesser number and get less dense and intense, more natural sound. Of course, with no compression, and the other tools just helping a little bit, that should give you the most natural sound of all, but may not be able to compete in volume with other people's voice submissions.

It's always a decision what's important to you -- or the client.

OK now after all that, you get to show us what an actual performance sounds like. Not the whole thing, just a 20 second or so segment of what you do -- for real. As a deliverable to the client.

Koz

[kozikowski]

None of them should change the edge. That grit came from the distortion and damage of the original work. Your voice appears to have a slight natural sibilance. If you're intent on changing that, then we need more processing. I personally would leave it just as it is. You are a product. The object is not to sound like everyone else.

Koz

[monkeywisdom]

Koz, I'll send a sample. I'll be recording this week. I studied up a bit on compressors and what each setting does. Anything that keeps the amplitude more constant without occasional extremes will probably be nice because I tend to have some high peaks followed by much lower amplitude. Playing around with the compressor might help me to up the volume a bit without occasionally smacking people in the face with sound. Other than that, I like natural and don't care for too much processing anyway. I made a much bigger audio course with a $40 AT dynamic mic and the voice sounded great. The problem with that one was that there was plenty of noticeable hiss. This will just be cleaner and more digital sounding. Looks like .7 input volume is a nice sweet spot. Sounds pretty good with or without extra processing other than noise removal. The compressor just might help to flatten it enough to increase the volume slightly without the sudden extremes. I played a clip over some Pandora music and the voice wasn't drowned out by the music. Every word was clear. I think it will be a good volume.

[Trebor]

http://www.kozco.com/tech/clips/harshne ... mpress.wav

It's good but I can hear a problem with plosive Ps and Bs ...

"so I'm sPeaking about the same I way I was Before on the other file"

it's fixable with the equaliser (attached) but better to prevent it in the first place with popshield .

[ IMO de-essing is required too, the popshield may help with that too ]

[kozikowski]

Maybe de-essing, but the pop shield won't do any good for the "s" sounds since they're not plosives. As long as they don't get gritty, I think that's just what the performer sounds like.

Noise Removal is required before compression (in this case) because the whole object of compression is to bring the the high, powerful sounds closer to the lower gentle ones. Low and gentle is where the noise lives.

Koz

[kozikowski]

But yes, pop shield is always good.

http://kozco.com/tech/audacity/wynonna2.jpg

I bought an AKG microphone and it came with a pop shield in the case. I was surprised to find that the thing had two layers of women's black stockings stretched over the hoop instead of only one. My other stand-alone shield only has one layer.

Koz

[kozikowski]

It's good but I can hear a problem with plosive Ps and Bs ...

How? How are you listening? Headphones? I admit I didn't do the Worst Case Listening Experience with Computer Speakers, but I guess that's warranted. The sibilant highs are where modern listening systems live.

http://www.kozco.com/mytv/caleigh2_982x600b.jpg

Those are two Boston Acoustics CR6s driven by a BGW 250 on the floor under the table. The preamp is a Hafler HD101 and the computer is a Mac Mini. The amplified bass cabinet (also under the table) is a KLH 10".

So it's a full-on wide band music system.

I have a set of Koss Pro4 AA headphones, although for a good test, I should probably use earbuds and a low-end speaker system.

Koz