I am planning to record voice over for my own documentaries .One of my house room is not noisy.I have few shotgun mic but for vo i am looking for shure SM7B which is within my budget .Please some one tell me what are the results of this particular mic.I have heard good things about studio projects C1 also.

I used one when working in radio for many years. Decent mic, but I prefer my AKG 414 by miles.

Ha! Another vote for the 414...mine is the TLII variety.

On a budget, the AT2020 is what I have set many VO talents up with.
When the VOs have the budget, the Neumann TLM103 is becoming a standard in the industry.
others to look at:
AKG 214
AT4040
Shure KSM42

The 7 is ok but the modern condenser mics listed are much nicer. I had a 7 about 25 years ago and sold it. I dont miss it at all!

You should also look into some of the RODE studio mics. I have used a few of them and they are also very nice and around your budget.

I am planning to record voice over for my own documentaries .One of my house room is not noisy.I have few shotgun mic but for vo i am looking for shure SM7B which is within my budget .Please some one tell me what are the results of this particular mic.I have heard good things about studio projects C1 also.

Having done literally hundreds and hundreds of paid VOs over my career, I can say with some authority that the human voice isn't a particularly difficult sound profile to capture. Some of the mics you mention, like the SM-7 (and it's predecessor the SM-5b "fat boy" were very popular in radio since they were basically reasonably sensitive dynamic mics with lots of pop-filtering, so you could work them close for proximity effect and get some extra close-mic'd bass tones.

The AKG mics were "clearer" with more attack and more crispness, as one would expect with a phantom powered "active" approach compared to the dynamics.

All mics also take on the "color" of the preamp circuit that they drive, so a decent mic with an excellent pre-amp would often out-perform a great mic fed into a mediocre recording circuit. Today, most pre-amps except the cheapest are pretty clean, if a bit "sterile" for my tastes. You can often fix that with post-processing, but it's more efficient to just do it properly in the first place and not have to spend a lot of time futzing around in post.

At the end of the day, no matter which you use, all they can do is capture and record the voice that hits the diaphragm. So the key to a good sound is good talent. Always was and always will be. You can start with a sub-standard read and compress it for clarity, make it crisper or boost certain frequencies - but it's still going to be a recording of the performance that happened.

So starting with someone who knows how to perform VO work will get you farther faster than putting down more money for a better mic and sticking it in front of someone who has little experience and who hasn't conditioned their voice and their brain over time to do the work properly.

For what it's worth.

Hi Robert ! I was reading some literature about the mics mentioned by you.I think the requirement is of Neumann TLM103. But that is not affordable.In your opinion between the AKG 414 ,AKG 214 and AT4040 which one has some tight bass suitable for narration?

Bill , I absolutely agree with you as far as the role of VO artist is concern. But if I consider your view while choosing a microphone, I can record VO on my already available shotgun Sennheiser MKH416 .By the way I have SD302T which has got nice preamps.

If you can't swing the Neumann, my second choice would be the 214.
Reason is the 414 is meant to be an all purpose mic. It has dual capsules and multiple polar patterns which is useful when recording all sorts of stuff. The 214 has the same capsule (single) but is cardioid only which is the most common setting used on the 414. Essentially you're getting a 414 without the bells and whistles and for a great price. I own a 4040 and only occasionally pull it out. Had the 214 been around at the time I would have picked up the AKG.

Thank you Robert,I have purchased 214.Thank you all.

Just an FYI, now that you have spent money on a different mic, I can tell you that the Sennheiser MKH416 you already have can be used to good effect doing voice work. It was the mic of choice for a national session I did a couple of days ago.

Good Luck!

Dave

IIRC, the Senn MKH-416 was the mic or choice for the late, great Ernie Anderson - who did the lion's share of the ABC network daybook announcing and was well remembered for his signature sound on promos for TV programs like the Love Boat!

I can still hear his dulcet tones in my head drawing out that long "O" in "Tonight on the Looove Boat" in promos every night on TV throughout the late 1970s and early 1980s!

May he RIP.

The point being, Ramji is that you already had a mic that has been field proven to work wonderfully at the national broadcast level in recording VO work. That you elected to dismiss it and change direction is fine, but the larger point is that what you are searching for may not be "in the mic" at all.

FWIW.

IIRC, the Senn MKH-416 was the mic or choice for the late, great Ernie Anderson - who did the lion's share of the ABC network daybook announcing and was well remembered for his signature sound on promos for TV programs like the Love Boat!

I can still hear his dulcet tones in my head drawing out that long "O" in "Tonight on the Looove Boat" in promos every night on TV throughout the late 1970s and early 1980s!

May he RIP.

The point being, Ramji is that you already had a mic that has been field proven to work wonderfully at the national broadcast level in recording VO work. That you elected to dismiss it and change direction is fine, but the larger point is that what you are searching for may not be "in the mic" at all.

FWIW.


I couldn't agree more. I have done thousands of spots and been on air in Radio (WSB Atlanta and others) and TV for many years (I still do some freelance voice work, time permitting.) A good mic processor is just as important as a good voice and mic. I'm a big fan of DBX processors for the home studio these days.

In my 'old school' tenure, some pro VO artists have specified their preference for 416s. (some brought their own) But of course.. they had 'the voice' and delivery to go with it....which is most important.
But I guess in these days of low cost equipment...'good pipes', delivery skills and a talented engineer is no longer a requirement. Times they are a-changen.
But there is no 'one size fits all' solution... case in point ... years ago, I recorded a very famous actor / VO artist with a U47.. which I thought would work.... Big mistake.. it came back to haunt me all the time on CNN.

Dear Bill , Jerry and Rick ! I am a novice in the field of recording VO. Now that I have purchased AKG 214,the only option left is to compare the nature of the sound captured by the mics and then decide.
Basically I am going to record on AKG 214, Sony ECM-678 and MKH-416 and see which one is better suited for my voice over artist's voice.

I will have to see which one picks the less noise.Let me tell you that my room is not fully sound proof like a studio , though I have made it extremely noiseless.

As I understand every mic has a deferent flavor.One of my friend has a great mic called Sanken CS3E, I just wanted to know whether this can also be used for VO?Looking at the above posts I am wondering how come the shotguns are being used for VO.

it came back to haunt me all the time on CNN.

Personally, I like the way Mr. Jones sounded on CNN. ;)

As a side note, I traded my U47 after a rebuild by stephan paul years ago for all the gear needed for my first studio. It's amazing what some folks will pay for a microphone.

Yeah...some of us would sold a limb for a Paul modded U47!! :)
We had to "settle" for an M149! Ha ha!

Okay, I'm just looking at the past and current VO talent here, and . . .

Actually, we have need for VO work pretty regularly. Would it be best to post that in the "Helping Hands" section?

Yes...and if you contact your friend in PHX who happens to have a roster of talent and his own studio, he might be able to help you out! ;)
Talk to ya soon!

Okay, I'm just looking at the past and current VO talent here, and . . .

Actually, we have need for VO work pretty regularly. Would it be best to post that in the "Helping Hands" section?

Send me an Email would be the best way, at least for me.... : )

Call me simple but I just use my Zoom H2N for voice overs, mounted on a little table top tripod. It sounds simply wonderful.

But there is no 'one size fits all' solution... case in point ... years ago, I recorded a very famous actor / VO artist with a U47.. which I thought would work.... Big mistake.. it came back to haunt me all the time on CNN.

Rick, that was YOUR session?!?!

Whether you like the results after the fact, that voice and sound have defined a generation of news station IDs... A pretty cool milestone...

Any mic can be used for vice over work, but some suit one voice, some another, and a few most. I don't think any are guaranteed to work on everyone, so the OP now has two mics with different timbres - or colours, if you like - and they're different enough to give plenty of options. At the end - it's down to the sound coming out of the speakers.

I find it interesting that people focus on the tone of a mic. Yes, on first listen, it's the main thing that one notices. However, with EQ, it's one of the easiest things to adjust. If a mic is too dark, cut some bass. Too bright? Cut the highs. As long as the mic is reasonably good and doesn't have any holes in the response, EQ can be quite effective.

What's more important, IMO, is the pattern and the location/position of the mic. Sometimes, hanging blankets will be more effective in improving the sound than changing the mic.

There are practical concerns: weight is important if the mic will be on a boom; high dynamic range is important for loud sounds; low noise is critical for capturing distant sounds.

Where we get into microphone alchemy is the distortion that a mic presents. A small amount of pleasing distortion acts like an exciter - it creates harmonics that weren't really there. A great mic can use this to add a distinctive edge or presence to a voice while keeping the overall sound smooth. It's like heavy cream with a dash of nutmeg. This is the aspect that's tough to fake in post.

The Electro-Voice RE20 is a mic that has that magic sound that we've all heard on radio. I checked out the new RE320 at NAB and found it to have a similar character, but with extended bass and treble intended for musical instrument recording. The RE320 is a good bit cheaper too. Pinch the highs and lows a bit with shelf EQ and balance the bass and one should be able to get an RE20 sound on a budget. These mics are directional yet have a controlled proximity effect, so they're easy to use too. Record in a reasonably dead space, EQ, and apply some compression and all(!) you need to add is the talent. :)

One of the more interesting mic shootouts is on Transom.org and has some surprising mic values. Definitely worth listening to. Although it is from 2005 and several new models have been introduced since then. http://transom.org/?p=7517#

I like the sound of the 416 shotgun for VO, though some people hate it. After digging a bit more I found that it was because of the shotgun's tight pattern which kept the talent restricted to a rather small area of "perfection". If you watch behind the scenes of someone like Robin Williams in the VO booth you'll see how animated he becomes moving his head wildly about. That's when the looser pattern of a cardioid makes sense. For most folks though, we're pretty much staying in the same position and a shotgun that you may already own makes sense. Give it a shot, just watch for being too close and becoming overly bass heavy with proximity effect.

The experience that most informed me about VO mics was doing so much paid narration and spot work in professional studios over 20 years.

If I'd do eight sessions in a typical month, I'd expect to be standing in front of at least 4-6 different mics.

Studio 1 would have a Shure Sm5b. 2 would hang an AKG-414 BULS or TL2. 3 would be a "music shop" with maybe a Neumann or perhaps a Sony C-37. 4 would be a TV station where they stuck a plain old 58 or 57 or maybe an EV-635. And then I'd hit another studio where the engineer was convinced that a Sennheiser 421U or maybe an EV RE-20 was the ticket.

The point is that I'd do VOs in each of those spaces, and a month or so later, I'd hear ALL those spots on the air and they all sounded just fine. Not ONE of those mics, from the assembly line SM-57 up to the pristinely engineered German gizmo had a problem recording me and getting my voice out to do it's job of selling the stuff.

What made ALL the difference (and trust me when I say this, cuz I've been there and done it for more years than you can imagine) was how well the clients and producers had understood the ACTUAL nature of the problem the spot was designed to solve, and how well the writer(s) had turned that understanding into a quality SCRIPT - and how well I was able to bring the INTENT of their good writing to LIFE in an engaging performance. (The final step, of course was some unheralded media buyer doing THEIR job correctly so that all the above work could actually reach the intended audience, that's that the "inside baseball" stuff that nobody sees but that can wreck the entire effort in a flash!)

The ephemeral "tonality" of the VO signal? Barely marginal at best in terms of importance compared to EVERYTHING in the paragraph above. Period. End of story.

Believe it or not, but it's the absolute truth.

Simple as that.

Bill, so true about the quality of the script and the intent.

That said, you mentioned using all these mics in studio settings. A lot of budget shooters are recording in a home office with a few hanging blankets and are recording amateurs. In that situation, there could be a bigger difference between mics.

If a mic has too tight a pattern, you'll get a proximity effect and falloff when the talent moves from side to side. It might pick up the room poorly as well. Given that, a decent large diameter condenser mic with a cardioid pattern along with a good pop filter - or the RE20/RE320 could be the most forgiving. A 57 lacks a pop filter (and is dull to my ears). A 58 is designed to be used very close and could vary if the talent isn't consistent in their spacing. You don't have to be too close to a shotgun, but they are often poor in small spaces and can be picky about placement and aim. A picky mic is also problematic when you try to match some dialog a few days later.

Overall, I think the RE20/RE320 are the most forgiving of room and placement and tends to sound big right out of the box. And, yes, with a good room and technique, you can make most any decent mic work. But not everybody has a good room and technique. (Or a good script or intent, but that's independent of the mic.)

I think the only reason hollywood uses 416 shotguns for voiceover is because they match the 416 they use on a boom during on-set production sound. By using the same microphone there are less tonal issues in cutting between the two.

So if the vo mic is used for ADR work on a film then stick with the same mic that was used for the production. But if the vo is for narration or something that doesn't have to match, a large diaphragm mic is a good match for the human voice.

I don't know about VOs in Hollywood, but in my experience, I've had more than one VO artist state that they like the way the 416 sounds on their voice. One man even brought his own 416 to a session.