Voice over technique

S

Saxon175

Member
I have recently done a training video for my dad. I was happy with the results but struggled with the voice over.

I had a Rode NT2 fed into a field recorder in a relatively sound dead environment. A friend kindly offered to read the script while I did the technical side. The result was less than impressive. The audio, to my ears, sounded clean with OK levels but thin and without presence. I concluded it was not only my technique but my friend didn't have the 'right' voice for what I was trying to achieve so I paid a pro to do it and got the results I wanted. Everybody happy.

I still want to learn where I went wrong and how I can improve for next time. I kindly ask for advice from the experts on this forum for help. Below are two 10 second clips, one from the original take and the other from the pro. I am guessing that EQ, Compression and reverb are the big differences but I have no idea how to approach it. My questions are 1. can my clip be made to sound anything like the pro version, if so what are the steps to achieving this and what software do I need and 2. Could I have done more at the capture stage and if so what, maybe a different mic?. Many thanks to any that can help.

Andrew

http://www.mediafire.com/file/m5t3zumjtyi/a_clip.wav
http://www.mediafire.com/file/fnzwdng3gdo/b_clip.wav
 
I would say performance is 70% and the voice is 25%. EQ and the rest is 5%.

The Pro has a nice deep clear voice and he enunciates much better and has a delivery that says he knows what he's talking about. You friend sounds OK but he doesn't enunciate very clearly and his delivery is a bit tentative, like he's reading it but doesn't "believe" it. I'm sure they used some EQ and compression but that was just icing on the cake.
 
Technical:
You need a pop filter. That way you can get up close to the mic without popping your P and B sounds. Also getting up close to the mic causes what is called "proximity effect" which brings up the bass in a voice. Many DJs use this to great effect. You need to have a nice full recording level too. Then in post you add some EQ to adjust any sonic issues like too much high or too much mid or bass. Usually pulling out the bad frequency works more naturally than pushing up a frequency. But sometimes a little presence boost around 2 to 5 k can add clarity. Use compression to even out the levels and phatten up that sound to make it more broadcast sounding.

Performance:
And of course your talent needs to treat the performance like a singer would. Sit up straight, or stand. Use your diaphragm to project. Intentionally use a lower voice, but not so much it sounds fake. Put your hand on your belly and push out against your hand. That's how you should have your diaphragm as you do the VO - it will sound more full. Like you are pushing down a little as if you're taking a crap. Don't push too hard!

Follow those steps and you should see great improvement. And have fun with it! Start out imitating voice-over guys you've heard, then adapt that to your own natural style. Enunciate your words! Speak as non-regionally as you can too.
 
Last edited:
Noiz2 said:
I would say performance is 70% and the voice is 25%. EQ and the rest is 5%.

The Pro has a nice deep clear voice and he enunciates much better and has a delivery that says he knows what he's talking about. You friend sounds OK but he doesn't enunciate very clearly and his delivery is a bit tentative, like he's reading it but doesn't "believe" it. I'm sure they used some EQ and compression but that was just icing on the cake.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, but but think the voice and performance are 50/50. Too many people think they can be a VO artist...and too many people tell those people they think they would make a great VO artist!:shocked:

There's a reason you can hear the difference...that's why it's an art.

Like you direct a film, you also have to direct a VO. Having hits & beats in the proper places will give you the correct cadence, flow smoothly and be a believable read.
 
ZazaCast said:
I agree with this, but but think the voice and performance are 50/50. Too many people think they can be a VO artist...and too many people tell those people they think they would make a great VO artist!:shocked:
Click to expand...

One thing is that you can train your voice to be better just like a singer. Some have a naturally good voice, but even if you don't have a deep voice, you can learn how to be a good announcer. So without training it may appear that one doesn't have "the voice", and they may not even try. I tend to think the performance is more of the equation than 50%. It's not a prerequisite that an announcer's voice is a baritone or bass.
 
Many thanks for the responses, it’s greatly appreciated. Like I mentioned, luckily this was not a commercial venture as such and my dad was happy to pay the pro because it really polished the whole thing. It's good to know also that I was doing my bit, despite lack of experience, reasonably well. My friend isn't a VO artist, doesn't claim to be any good and was happy to have a go for a pint of ale. The pointers kindly submitted above will give me a starting point for having a go myself to try to understand the whole process better although I think my voice is even worse than my freinds! I’ll be buying a pop filter tomorrow. If I have a similar need again, I would almost certainly go straight to the pro. Thanks again, Andrew.

Chadfish: If I understand you correctly, what I’m hearing as reverb is actually the proximity effect of projecting the voice when close the mic?
 
Saxon175 said:
Chadfish: If I understand you correctly, what I’m hearing as reverb is actually the proximity effect of projecting the voice when close the mic?[/SIZE]
Click to expand...

Reverb sounds like you are in a big church, or Hall. Proximity effect is just getting right up on the mic, and it sounds like the bass has been turned up. The two are totally unrelated.

However, the further away you are from the mic, the more of the room you will hear. Stand 10 feet from the mic and talk or yell, it sounds like you put some reverb on the vocals. Get up close, it sounds more dry and professional. That's why it's not so great to put a mic on the camera, but rather to put a mic on a boom pole, so the voices sound more dry.
 
Chadfish said:
One thing is that you can train your voice to be better just like a singer. Some have a naturally good voice, but even if you don't have a deep voice, you can learn how to be a good announcer. So without training it may appear that one doesn't have "the voice", and they may not even try. I tend to think the performance is more of the equation than 50%. It's not a prerequisite that an announcer's voice is a baritone or bass.
Click to expand...

Sorry Chad, can't agree with that. Having owned and operated a commercial recording facility for over 30 years and recorded and mixed countless VO's for radio,
television, industrials and the like...a true professional VO artist either 'has it', or he/she doesn't. You can't train a voice to produce tones that it's not capable of
producing naturally...period.

That's like saying ANYONE can be a virtuoso guitarist if they just practice...sadly, it doesn't work that way.

Thankfully, in todays variety of productions, there is room for speciality voices, so yes, work on cadence, enunciation, pronunciation, mic technique, etc.
and be the best you can be, but please don't fool youself.... be real.

This is a real sticking point for me because I have a few close friends that are true professional VO artists that I've worked with for years.
In my area alone, there's been a rash of 'voice over' schools that will take anyone's money and tell them after a 2 week course they can be making a living as a VO artist.
It's robbery, plain and simple...people are getting hurt when they find out it just not true.:nads:
I get a ton of demos each week and 9 out of 10 aren't even worth listening to. I hate to see people getting ripped-off!

Again, sorry for the rant....
 
Chadfish said:
Reverb sounds like you are in a big church, or Hall. Proximity effect is just getting right up on the mic, and it sounds like the bass has been turned up. The two are totally unrelated.
I now think what I'm hearing as reverb is actually the quality of the VO artists voice and possibly vibration of the vocal chords that gives the full sound. To be absolutely honest, I don't know. I'm just trying to learn and understand what I'm hearing. At least I now know it isn't something that can be added in post.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Zaza I hear you. And feel free to rant! That's what forums are for.

I know there are VO guys and there are VO GUYS. I have a favorite VO guy who has the voice and the training, and who even gives lessons. I would love to have his voice. My point is that not all VOs need to be done with "the voice". I use actors when I need something more sincere sounding. I recently saw a PBS thing on the Buddha with the VO by Richard Gere. He didn't have that VO voice, and you didn't even really notice that it was Richard Gere, but the VO was appropriate and effective to the project.

I agree with you about someone wanting to work as a professional VO guy. They need the voice. But not every project needs that voice. For my work producing whatever kind of video / radio project that comes along, I find that I need different kinds of voices. Not to discount your experience and knowledge in the field. I'm sure you've got some awesome voices in your stable.
 
I am sorry to say but I learned my lesson the hard way and after years for dealing with voice overs and voice over talents I will say that the voice is 75% and gear and performance account for the other 25%

if you listen to the professionals do it, or if you ever hire voice over talent, they will tell you the same thing, if the voice was not there to start with, all the gear and filters in the world will not make a difference, now on the other hand if you have a great voice over talent, the gear and filter will enhance something great into super great

my biggest lesson was when I needed to do a voice over for a project and had to get voice overs done locally, I went ahead and bought the best gear, the best mics and put them in front of so so talent, it was ok for a while and then I hired someone with a professional voice that makes a living from it, the difference was night in day, just my two cents :)
 
Saxon175 said:
Chadfish said:
Reverb sounds like you are in a big church, or Hall. Proximity effect is just getting right up on the mic, and it sounds like the bass has been turned up. The two are totally unrelated.
I now think what I'm hearing as reverb is actually the quality of the VO artists voice and possibly vibration of the vocal chords that gives the full sound.
Click to expand...

You are confusing me with your use to the word "reverb". Maybe look up the definition. Reverb is in no way a quality of a voice. It's the sound of anything bouncing off of walls.

Here's a video about a reverb effect. It is for guitar, but it can be applied to a voice:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaAI9qAbolg

A reverb effect emulates the sound of a room, in many cases a LARGE room. But even a small room has reverb. When your voice is closer to the mic the voice is much louder than the room reverb, so you don't hear it.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Chadfish said:
Zaza I hear you. And feel free to rant! That's what forums are for.

I know there are VO guys and there are VO GUYS. I have a favorite VO guy who has the voice and the training, and who even gives lessons. I would love to have his voice. My point is that not all VOs need to be done with "the voice". I use actors when I need something more sincere sounding. I recently saw a PBS thing on the Buddha with the VO by Richard Gere. He didn't have that VO voice, and you didn't even really notice that it was Richard Gere, but the VO was appropriate and effective to the project.

I agree with you about someone wanting to work as a professional VO guy. They need the voice. But not every project needs that voice. For my work producing whatever kind of video / radio project that comes along, I find that I need different kinds of voices. Not to discount your experience and knowledge in the field. I'm sure you've got some awesome voices in your stable.
Click to expand...

I guess you didn't read this part of my post?
Thankfully, in todays variety of productions, there is room for speciality voices, so yes, work on cadence, enunciation, pronunciation, mic technique, etc.
and be the best you can be, but please don't fool youself.... be real.
Click to expand...

We're in agreement.:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

But Richard Gere, Pete Coyote, Gene Hackmen, Keifer Sutherland, Donald Sutherland ... they all have "the" voice...as well as many other actors.
I don't think we'll be hearing too much of Fran Drescher (I hope).:shocked:
Although I'm sure she's done some VO work before.

:happy:
 
There is NO shortage of charlatans who are running VO schools these days. It's like a plague, and the worst part (to me) is that they try teaching things that (in many cases) can't be taught, but fail to teach some basics that could. It's a cottage industry, and all of the teachers "just happen" to also have studio services they can sell you.

One thing that hasn't been touched on here is the current popularity of the "anti-announcer" voice... the everyman type of thing. (Think Tom Hanks instead of Charlton Heston.) However, even within that subsegment, there are vocal qualities that someone simply has to have, and skills that are important (dropping g's, reading contractions even if they aren't there, and so on), and require a level of effort (and practice) that most people aren't willing to put forth. - Tim
 
And I who have been doing sound in theatre and film and radio for about 35 years would disagree, well partially. If you swapped "Great VO artist" for "true VO artist" I would agree. You CAN train the voice and you CAN learn to act. You CAn be good at it if you work hard enough. I do agree that the great ones also have a gift that isn't learnable. But we were listening to samples and talking about them. I didn't get any aha this is a "great" VO artist. What I got was someone who knew there craft. A BIG part of that is delivery. He could have a completely different voice and if he had the same delivery it would still sound good. THe voice can be trained and if that isn't enough if you really want to go there you can have it physically altered. A number of big name radio announcers from the golden age had surgery to help them get that BIG "announcer voice" that was the style. But I'll slide your way a bit and go to 60/40 performance/ voice because we have become accustomed to a certain "sound of authority" and with out that there will always be something lacking for this kind of VO. And I would also agree that the first guy is not going to be improved with technical wizardry. You could pitch his voice down and coach him till the cows come home but he would need a LOT of voice training and quite a bit of acting training to get much better.

Oh and I'm 100% in agreement with the scam nature of all these "voice schools". I know a number of people who make a living in voice acting and it is a HARD road. All these schools blab about big bucks and easy work, "just sign up for more classes". It's all BS. They don't have programs anywhere near rigorous enough, even if they knew what they were doing, to get results and NO they are not going to get you jobs.

ZazaCast said:
Sorry Chad, can't agree with that. Having owned and operated a commercial recording facility for over 30 years and recorded and mixed countless VO's for radio,
television, industrials and the like...a true professional VO artist either 'has it', or he/she doesn't. You can't train a voice to produce tones that it's not capable of
producing naturally...period.

That's like saying ANYONE can be a virtuoso guitarist if they just practice...sadly, it doesn't work that way.

Thankfully, in todays variety of productions, there is room for speciality voices, so yes, work on cadence, enunciation, pronunciation, mic technique, etc.
and be the best you can be, but please don't fool youself.... be real.

This is a real sticking point for me because I have a few close friends that are true professional VO artists that I've worked with for years.
In my area alone, there's been a rash of 'voice over' schools that will take anyone's money and tell them after a 2 week course they can be making a living as a VO artist.
It's robbery, plain and simple...people are getting hurt when they find out it just not true.:nads:
I get a ton of demos each week and 9 out of 10 aren't even worth listening to. I hate to see people getting ripped-off!

Again, sorry for the rant....
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top