coreyburton.com ~ View topic - Male vs. Female.

Author

Message

< Welcome! ~ Male vs. Female.

Tom Wagner

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 5:10 pm

Joined: 14 Dec 2007 Posts: 597 Location: Long Island, NY

Are there any microphones that suit female voices rather than male voices and vice versa?

Thank you.

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:47 pm

Joined: 14 Dec 2007 Posts: 905 Location: HERE!

Sure - as well as some that flatter particular voices of either or both genders, while not necessarily a reliable general choice to cover all male or all female voices. As a rule, a warmer, "silkier" coloration is what you'd want for most female voices; whereas male voices usually do best with an aggressive, midrange-weighted tonal "signature" imparted by the microphone. But then - a "dulcet-toned" female voice will often sound muddy on a "warm" mic; and hard-edged male voices can take on an unpleasantly "crackly" trumpet-like quality when heard through a more "forward"-sounding mic.

All in all, though, most well-designed high-quality "professional grade" microphones can produce excellent results with any type of voice - when placed within a well-balanced acoustical space; and especially in the skilled hands of an experienced recording engineer, with just a couple of fine basic electronic pieces to properly extract their best potential.

Mike Sommer

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 2:46 am

Joined: 14 Dec 2007 Posts: 455 Location: Los Angeles

What about women on ribbon mics, are there any potential pitfalls with these mics?

~~~~
I had a situation with a females voice, when on a U87 it had a tendency to be sibilant and shrill at times. This was even after everyone had their attempt at trying to fix her voice in the digital domain. I deemed it unappealing and unusable, considering it was for her audition reel I felt I was doing her a favor. I suggested trying a different mic, or looking into the sound chain or their micing techniques.
I know it's impossible to determine anything without hearing the session, but what would you do in such a situation if you were the engineer with a voice that sounds shrill and sibilant?

Just for kicks I ended up knocking the mid range down (1.5kHz) about -3 dB's, and a few other EQ adjustments to kill some of the other funky bits. I then ran it through a sonic maximizer to bring the vocals back to the top, then adding a little Studio B reverb to the mix. The difference was immediately noticeable to everyone. Her voice really bloomed from this adjustment.

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:57 pm

Joined: 14 Dec 2007 Posts: 905 Location: HERE!

Quote:

What about women on ribbon mics, are there any potential pitfalls with these...?

You'll get gorgeous, full-rounded "synergy" on any ribbon mic with virtually all female voices - without a trace of ear-shattering sibilance. Unless the object is to filter out any tell-tale signs of "mature" velvety richness, and you actually want a shrill, squeaky "little kid" sound to emerge, a Ribbon is reliably a perfect choice for women. In fact, I know of no better way to capture warm feminine chest-tones, without the all-too-common muddiness, nasality or "honk", or that unnaturally "tubby" tonal balance inherent in other types of microphone.

Quote:

...a female voice, when on a U87...had a tendency to be sibilant and shrill at times...what would you do in such a situation if you were the engineer with a voice that sounds shrill and sibilant?

First of all, something must have gone terribly wrong in the acoustical space, electronics, or mechanical integrity of the capsule: A properly hung and maintained U87 simply can't manufacture "shrillness", by design. I'd suspect a nasty Yamaha preamp, bad power supply assembly, or damaged capsule at the root of it. Or an abundance of hard-surface reflection in a carelessly arranged recording space. ...Or something maybe nobody considered: If the initial recording was made digitally, without any form of outboard limiter to contain headroom-slamming peaks, the saturated bitstream will blur the transient content of high-volume tones into ear-piercing shrieks of glassy "ringing" - which can never be undone, and so must merely be "disguised" through heavy "curtains" of heroic post-processing procedures.

Quote:

...I ended up knocking the mid range down (1.5kHz) about -3 dB's, and a few other EQ adjustments...

I'd begin with applying gobs of "hard-knee" limiter compression, while rolling-off anything over 15kHz to tame the worst of the sibilant spikes. Then you wouldn't need any help from a "sonic maximizer" to bring the voice back to the front of the mix. From there, you could fiddle a bit with midrange EQ, dipping slightly at the offending frequency peak; and then moving up to the treble range between 5-12kHz to squelch upper-harmonic distortion screeches.

Quote:

...then adding a little *Studio B (*classic recording stage) reverb to the mix...Her voice really bloomed...

Which points to the fundamental reason behind why voices suffer from such shallow, limp reproduction so often nowadays. Airless, tight recording spaces don't allow voices to "bloom" at all; so they merely "sprout", like pointy little carpet tacks - out of cold, hard, digital nothingness. "Clean" does not have to equal "Stark"! (grumblegrumblegrumble...)

Mike Sommer

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:55 pm

Joined: 14 Dec 2007 Posts: 455 Location: Los Angeles

Quote:

Unfortunately I was not able work with the raw file, I was given the finished demo (complete with music and effects). Everyone and their mother had worked on it by the time it got to me, and there were all kinds of digital artifacts around her voice. I Just slapped on my band-aid just to demonstrate what it could sound like.
It put a nice feather in my hat.

But I agree there must have been something wrong in the recording session.

Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:13 pm

Joined: 14 Dec 2007 Posts: 905 Location: HERE!

Quote:

...not able work with the raw file, I was given the finished demo (complete with music and effects)...

That being the case, I'd say you took precisely the right steps to remedy an otherwise unlistenable poorly-done mix. I've had to resort to a very similar series of processes in that situation, many times lately - often to simply be able "to stand" listening to a study-track (for voice-matching) over and over again. (It's really annoying to try listening for subtle vocal details, through an obnoxiously distorted mix.)

All times are GMT - 7 Hours

View next topic View previous topic Page 1 of 1 coreyburton.com Forum Index ~ Welcome!

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum