5 ms·

Hell, I can deal with shitty microphones, I just wish people would figure out that you need to record all speakers' audio independently and not rely on Skype or

by fivre 7y ago

Hell, I can deal with shitty microphones, I just wish people would figure out that you need to record all speakers' audio independently and not rely on Skype or Discord or whatever relaying it to a single location. Robovoice is the worst.

viridian 7y ago
You don't need to necessarily have independent audio streams to have good audio, just independent sources. I did a podcast up until January, and as the person doing the editing, I found zero benefit to having one input stream per microphone, and ultimately I eventually just started outputting the multiple inputs as a single dual channel stream. Podcasts that aren't in person are rough to listen to though, for sure. The ability to read body language and respond without weird little timing idiosyncrasies just isn't there with Skype.
- ghaff 7y ago
  When I was doing a podcast, getting guests in the same room was always the limiting factor. Between lack of body language/other physical cues and technical glitches, I just never liked doing interviews remotely--although people obviously make it work.
- floren 7y ago
  Independent streams really helps me when editing. If I'm talking and one of the other guys' dog barks at the mailman, I know I can just keep talking and silence the dog later. You're right, though, that the hardest part of recording remotely is avoiding collisions / incremental back-off problems. Then you have to cut out the "No, you go ahead" and people have a real bad habit of then following up with "I was just going to say, ..."
- ghostly_s 7y ago
  I think you missed the parent's point. Remote participants should be recorded locally. It's not about having multiple streams for flexibility in editing, it's about having high-quality sound instead of the compressed garbage that comes through a Skype feed. I recently learned one of my favorite podcasts hires a local audio engineer to mic and record all their remote interviewees, which seems like insane overkill but obviously is one way to do it. Is there really not a product that's a dead-simple USB audio recorder you can ship out to your guests, have them plug it into their laptop, and lets them Skype/whatever you while simultaneously recording their audio locally and sending it out to your editor after the fact?
sureaboutthis 7y ago
Having worked in broadcast and film, I sometimes laugh when I see these people using high end microphones as if they knew what they were doing by buying them.
- ghaff 7y ago
  The snark isn't really necessary but it's probably fair that there are a lot of people who obsess about pro-level gear and studio setups when that last 1-2% of hardware is pretty much indistinguishable in the final product unless everything else is REALLY nailed down.
  - eropple 7y ago
    Yup. I have a small studio (for podcasting, among other things) and my go-to microphones are $99 sE L7 dynamics because to my ear they're cleaner than SM58s. I have a few others available, like the AT2035 that sits at my desk, but the difference is so, so marginal for any spoken-word stuff that I don't know why someone would bother. (The above is with one major caveat: I'd kick a puppy for a half-dozen RE20s. I love the sound of them.)
    - TimTheTinker 7y ago
      Have you tried Monoprice's dynamic performance mic[0]? It's an SM58 clone with (if reviews are correct) great detail and a bit more high-mids/highs. It might be another alternative besides the sEL7. [0] https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=600058 https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=600058
      - eropple 7y ago
        I haven't, no. It looks like a competitor (if it isn't a rebrand) of a Behringer XM8500. Which are fine cheapo mics, and really good for stuff like on-stage performance or karaoke or whatever. But I, for my purposes, am using those sE L7s as something of a knockoff of a broadcast mic, with decent-to-good plosive handling and very strong off-axis rejection (they're supercardioid microphones). So, while they're more expensive, they exactly fit my needs. Lots more interesting options exist in condensers, IMO, than in dynamics. The sE V7 is a standout in the space. Honestly, from my experience, the only real upgrade in the "quiet room, sitting down" dynamic microphone realm is an Electro-Voice RE20 (if I want "newsy" or a Shure SM7b (if I want "aggressively neutral"); both are amazing microphones but neither are as notably bright as a V7. There's one interesting option in the Beyerdynamic TG V70d for some stuff, because it has a dangerous amount of proximity effect, but it's more "interesting" than "good".
beat 7y ago
I just listened to an interview podcast that was clearly done on Skype. Interviewer on the left stereo channel, interviewee on the right. Despite the sucky sound quality of Skype and mics, the stereo separation made it relatively easy to follow. Of course, this one is all about kitchen remodeling. I don't expect kitchen remodeling experts to also be audio engineers.

by fivre 7y ago

viridian 7y ago

You don't need to necessarily have independent audio streams to have good audio, just independent sources. I did a podcast up until January, and as the person doing the editing, I found zero benefit to having one input stream per microphone, and ultimately I eventually just started outputting the multiple inputs as a single dual channel stream. Podcasts that aren't in person are rough to listen to though, for sure. The ability to read body language and respond without weird little timing idiosyncrasies just isn't there with Skype.

ghaff 7y ago
When I was doing a podcast, getting guests in the same room was always the limiting factor. Between lack of body language/other physical cues and technical glitches, I just never liked doing interviews remotely--although people obviously make it work.
floren 7y ago
Independent streams really helps me when editing. If I'm talking and one of the other guys' dog barks at the mailman, I know I can just keep talking and silence the dog later. You're right, though, that the hardest part of recording remotely is avoiding collisions / incremental back-off problems. Then you have to cut out the "No, you go ahead" and people have a real bad habit of then following up with "I was just going to say, ..."
ghostly_s 7y ago
I think you missed the parent's point. Remote participants should be recorded locally. It's not about having multiple streams for flexibility in editing, it's about having high-quality sound instead of the compressed garbage that comes through a Skype feed. I recently learned one of my favorite podcasts hires a local audio engineer to mic and record all their remote interviewees, which seems like insane overkill but obviously is one way to do it. Is there really not a product that's a dead-simple USB audio recorder you can ship out to your guests, have them plug it into their laptop, and lets them Skype/whatever you while simultaneously recording their audio locally and sending it out to your editor after the fact?

sureaboutthis 7y ago

Having worked in broadcast and film, I sometimes laugh when I see these people using high end microphones as if they knew what they were doing by buying them.

ghaff 7y ago
The snark isn't really necessary but it's probably fair that there are a lot of people who obsess about pro-level gear and studio setups when that last 1-2% of hardware is pretty much indistinguishable in the final product unless everything else is REALLY nailed down.
- eropple 7y ago
  Yup. I have a small studio (for podcasting, among other things) and my go-to microphones are $99 sE L7 dynamics because to my ear they're cleaner than SM58s. I have a few others available, like the AT2035 that sits at my desk, but the difference is so, so marginal for any spoken-word stuff that I don't know why someone would bother. (The above is with one major caveat: I'd kick a puppy for a half-dozen RE20s. I love the sound of them.)
  - TimTheTinker 7y ago
    Have you tried Monoprice's dynamic performance mic[0]? It's an SM58 clone with (if reviews are correct) great detail and a bit more high-mids/highs. It might be another alternative besides the sEL7. [0] https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=600058 https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=600058
    - eropple 7y ago
      I haven't, no. It looks like a competitor (if it isn't a rebrand) of a Behringer XM8500. Which are fine cheapo mics, and really good for stuff like on-stage performance or karaoke or whatever. But I, for my purposes, am using those sE L7s as something of a knockoff of a broadcast mic, with decent-to-good plosive handling and very strong off-axis rejection (they're supercardioid microphones). So, while they're more expensive, they exactly fit my needs. Lots more interesting options exist in condensers, IMO, than in dynamics. The sE V7 is a standout in the space. Honestly, from my experience, the only real upgrade in the "quiet room, sitting down" dynamic microphone realm is an Electro-Voice RE20 (if I want "newsy" or a Shure SM7b (if I want "aggressively neutral"); both are amazing microphones but neither are as notably bright as a V7. There's one interesting option in the Beyerdynamic TG V70d for some stuff, because it has a dangerous amount of proximity effect, but it's more "interesting" than "good".

beat 7y ago

I just listened to an interview podcast that was clearly done on Skype. Interviewer on the left stereo channel, interviewee on the right. Despite the sucky sound quality of Skype and mics, the stereo separation made it relatively easy to follow. Of course, this one is all about kitchen remodeling. I don't expect kitchen remodeling experts to also be audio engineers.