[SOLVED] Voice sounds distant in recording

I

Indialien

New member
Hi everyone! This is my first post on the forum. I apologize if this is in the wrong place.

I do voice commentary over gaming videos that I create. I record using Shadowplay, edit video in Vegas, and then I edit audio in Audacity. The final result sounds like my voice is slightly distant/thin, for lack of a better description. The chain of effects in Audacity is as follows: Noise Reduction, Compressor, Hard Limiter, EQ, Normalize. I've attached a picture of the EQ settings I'm using.

I've done some internet scouring and found vocal EQ cheat sheets, as well as general opinions from others.
Boosting in the 3K - 6K range as suggested by a vocal EQ cheat sheet, results in more sibilance and an overall thin sound. It also doesn't seem to address the issue of the recording sounding a bit distant, or not right up front. I'm assuming there is a sweet spot I'm not quite hitting?

I attached a short segment of the audio so you all can listen for yourselves. I should also mention that the track that the final vocal recording is on in Vegas is set to -3.6db. Could a simple volume reduction cause the vocal to sound distant? I wanted to make sure I mentioned this because the audio clip I have attached here is before the 3.6db volume reduction.

Any advice or tips would be hugely appreciated. Thank you for your time.
 

Attachments

  • Realms Episode 14 clip.mp3
    289.9 KB · Views: 55
  • EQ pic.jpg
    EQ pic.jpg
    227.4 KB · Views: 43
The wrong compression and eq settings are probably the culprits, although the noise reduction could be causing issues also depending on the algo. Have you tried just the limiter with out any other plugs? The best way i can think of getting the sound you want is to start with no processing. The idea of adding processing should be only to fix problems, if there are no problems then just limit and go with it. The 3-6 k range will take your head off if you push it up indiscriminately, that area is where intelligibility is found, IOW if you have an unclear/hard to understand part small wide boosts somewhere in that area can make it more easily understood since our hearing is designed to hear best in that(human voice)area. But boosting in that area wont always make it sound "good" or "closer". Compressing a signal can make it sound forward OR rearward depending on the settings , i suggest Youtube videos on compressing vocals, and compression in general, it will all apply.
 
I'm not hearing any "distant" anything. Sounds a bit thin (if you're sucking out all that mid 100's area, maybe don't?). Adding a bunch of 3.5kHz when you're not competing with other things in that area tend to make it sound thin in the top end also.

And the "-3.6dB" means nothing without some sort of reference. But whatever reference that might be, it probably isn't the issue.
 
If it isn't broken don't fix it, leave the eq flat and what does it sound like? How can people suggest an EQ setting? The mics could be different, the voice could be different, the room may sound different.

Alan.
 
I'm not hearing 'distant either. However, 'distant to me typically means 'thinner and/or the effect of ambiance (as in room, or reverb..) Perhaps you are thinking about the thinning in the lower range? As in the loss of heft' not being up closer on a directional mic. (..mics like the RE-20 being an exception to that rule for 'typical directional mics.
 
I done;t hear distant either - I just hear processed. You say the order is:
Noise Reduction, Compressor, Hard Limiter, EQ, Normalize

Can I ask why you think all this is remotely necessary? Your voice is fine, your diction decent (for an American - he he) and the mic itself seems to lack pops and bangs and wind noise. Me - I';d have EQ'd it first, then applied some compression - if it needed it, then normalised it to whatever level you decided on.

What's the point of a hard limiter AND normalisation". The limiter is a dead stop at XdB, so normalisation seems a bit irrelevant if you use a limiter.

All those stages - did you listen after each one and see if it was a positive? My guess would be that some would be inaudible.
 
rob aylestone said:
I done;t hear distant either - I just hear processed. You say the order is:
Noise Reduction, Compressor, Hard Limiter, EQ, Normalize

Can I ask why you think all this is remotely necessary? Your voice is fine, your diction decent (for an American - he he) and the mic itself seems to lack pops and bangs and wind noise. Me - I';d have EQ'd it first, then applied some compression - if it needed it, then normalised it to whatever level you decided on.

What's the point of a hard limiter AND normalisation". The limiter is a dead stop at XdB, so normalisation seems a bit irrelevant if you use a limiter.

All those stages - did you listen after each one and see if it was a positive? My guess would be that some would be inaudible.
Click to expand...

I watched a video on YouTube about how to make your voice sound better in Audacity. Those were the effects they used in the tutorial, so that's what I used as well.
I can try it your way, EQing first and then compressing.

The hard limiter seems to level out the wave form from what I can see visually. But I'm no expert, not even close, at this sort of thing. I'm learning a bit but I'm not at the level you all are. That's why I'm here asking for help.

I'm glad it doesn't sound distant to most of you. I may have just needed to walk away for a bit and come back to the recording. I personally don't hear the processed quality you are speaking of. Maybe it's because I cut out frequencies that were "boomy" sounding. I could try adding a bit back in at a time, but I found this to be my personal sweet spot. I'm also not a fan of the super bass sound that radio personalities tend to use.

This has eased my concerns a lot. I think the overall sound is fine and I intend to continue in this way. Thanks to all of you for your input and suggestions!
 
No.

With audio - you look at the tools available and then try them out. Please don't use my system, it might work badly for you. Don't fall into the trap of relying on what you see - it's what you hear that matters. For what it's worth, for twenty years I never used a compressor - because for what I was doing there was no need. Youtube tutorial are multi-level. Excellent ones to be followed. Well intentioned ones that confuse, and ones by idiots with no idea whatsoever.
 
Back to regarding distant/thinner vs closer/bigger heftier still curious, what mic and distance? (I see apparently you where also doing quite a lot of low filtering on the sample..
 
We don't tend to close threads on this forum - pretty common for people to pop up in a few weeks time to add things. People are still trying to offer help and advice. Always a danger when you join a forum and ask for advice and tips and then don't get quite the response you expect. We're not being negative - just trying to stop you wasting time on things not really either necessary.

Interestingly, the real question is why you felt it was 'distant' - not, you've discovered, what we hear? Maybe you are wanting some kind of similarity or 'signature' to your sound? In reality, when you record speech or music a few common themes pop up. Does yours sound like everyone else's in the same genre? Is there anything in yours that runs contrary to what people usually hear? If your's is normal sounding, whatever normal actually is - then the recording is fine. Some folk religiously normalise things to 0dB but that just makes you loud, and people probably just turn you down. In commercial recordings - the absolute levels seem to be within ranges. People complain at the extremes. Too loud or too quiet. Hit the middle zone and all are happy. I've been recording and mastering some quite specialist music, and I gave up trying to work by numbers. The music is either fast and loud or slow and quiet - so the average level of the loud ones hovers around -4dB fs. The quieter ones might never get above -7dB fs. You can play a loud one after a quiet one without having to turn the volume knob up or down. I'm calling this a win.

Check back ion a few days and see if somebody has had any brainwaves = happens quite often. It also will be picked up by the next person with the same questions, so can be a handy resource. We'd also love you to let us have the link when it's all finished if it's a public video - we understand if you can't do this, but it's nice sometimes to hear how things went.
 
rob aylestone said:
We don't tend to close threads on this forum - pretty common for people to pop up in a few weeks time to add things. People are still trying to offer help and advice. Always a danger when you join a forum and ask for advice and tips and then don't get quite the response you expect. We're not being negative - just trying to stop you wasting time on things not really either necessary.

Interestingly, the real question is why you felt it was 'distant' - not, you've discovered, what we hear? Maybe you are wanting some kind of similarity or 'signature' to your sound? In reality, when you record speech or music a few common themes pop up. Does yours sound like everyone else's in the same genre? Is there anything in yours that runs contrary to what people usually hear? If your's is normal sounding, whatever normal actually is - then the recording is fine. Some folk religiously normalise things to 0dB but that just makes you loud, and people probably just turn you down. In commercial recordings - the absolute levels seem to be within ranges. People complain at the extremes. Too loud or too quiet. Hit the middle zone and all are happy. I've been recording and mastering some quite specialist music, and I gave up trying to work by numbers. The music is either fast and loud or slow and quiet - so the average level of the loud ones hovers around -4dB fs. The quieter ones might never get above -7dB fs. You can play a loud one after a quiet one without having to turn the volume knob up or down. I'm calling this a win.

Check back ion a few days and see if somebody has had any brainwaves = happens quite often. It also will be picked up by the next person with the same questions, so can be a handy resource. We'd also love you to let us have the link when it's all finished if it's a public video - we understand if you can't do this, but it's nice sometimes to hear how things went.
Click to expand...

That's fine that you leave the thread open. Most forums tend not to keep topics open when the person inquiring has come to a conclusion and the issue has been resolved. If people want to continue chiming in on a solved topic, more power to them. There's no danger in joining a forum and asking questions. I got what I needed out of it. I have it sorted. That's why I thanked you all for your input.

I felt it was distant because it sounded distant to me originally. Please go back and read my prior posts. "what we hear"? Who is we? Only one of you mentioned anything about it sounding thin, and one other member mentioned it sounded processed. Neither of which resonate with me. So, I'm not too sure what it is "we" are hearing that you're referring to. The recording will sound "thin" to someone that prefers the low end bass boom that radio djs tend to use. I said multiple times that I don't like or want that sound. Again, please read what I've written in my posts. I'm not angry or trying to talk down to you, so please don't misconstrue what I'm saying. It would simply save us both the time if you would read what I said before commenting.

I've compared my audio to others that do similar creative work and mine is on par, or at the very least, close to it. Mine is "normal sounding" in comparison, and so I agree that the recording is fine.
Again, thank you all for your input, it is much appreciated.

I have this issue worked out. I thought I was hearing a "distance" that wasn't actually there. I'm happy with the recording. It doesn't sound too thin or processed to me. It's on par with others in the same genre. Problem solved!
 
The first thing i did back when i had this problem is trying to boost the high end to make it brighter. "Distant" sounds usually have less high end. happy there was an adequate answer
regards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top