A Distressor For Voiceovers...Benefits? Thoughts?

[mike e]

Longtime Voiceover talent with an opportunity to get a nice deal
on a Distressor (Empirical Labs). I routinely deliver voice tracks
for commercials and narrations.. via web-delivery... (mp3,
..wav/.aiff). I supply dry voice tracks in most cases with a
chain consisting of a TLM103 or Senn.416>Fearn or Gt.River
Pre....>TC Finalizer into a Lynx L22 card to Bias Peak for
editing on a G4 - and finally hi-sample rate mp3 conversion
and distribution..(or .wav/.aif CD delivery).

Question. I do some promo voice work for television stations.

How might a Distressor benefit my voiceover chain...? Is
there something in this box that can be replicated within the
Finalizer, or can i get some unique benefits from a Distressor
to make a VO track "translate" with bigger presence when my
stuff meets with typical on-air processing? I have run the gamut
of outboard gear and have at one time or another worked with
an Expressor and Dominator combo (before going with a
Finalizer as my main "optimization" tool for the mic chain).

I'd be interested in thoughts about whether a Distressor would
be worth buying and trying for my purposes.. I know it's a well
respected box, but am not sure I can't accomplish comparable
results with the Finalizer alone...

Any thoughts much appreciated,

Thanks in advance,

Mike in Mich

[EganMedia]

<< Longtime Voiceover talent with an opportunity to get a nice deal
on a Distressor (Empirical Labs). >><BR><BR>


Buy it. Try it. They hold their value so well that if you get a "good deal"
on one and decide its not for you, you can probably sell it at a profit. I
like what they do for vocals. Whether or not you like it, and whether or not
the cost is justified, is up to you.


Joe Egan
EMP
Colchester, VT
www.eganmedia.com

[EganMedia]

<< Longtime Voiceover talent with an opportunity to get a nice deal
on a Distressor (Empirical Labs). >><BR><BR>


Buy it. Try it. They hold their value so well that if you get a "good deal"
on one and decide its not for you, you can probably sell it at a profit. I
like what they do for vocals. Whether or not you like it, and whether or not
the cost is justified, is up to you.


Joe Egan
EMP
Colchester, VT
www.eganmedia.com

[Mike Cleaver]

Depends!
Does your stuff go mainly to producers who want to add his/her own
processing to the voicetrack or do they just mix it as sent with
music, effects or background?
I find it best to send dry tracks with just a little compression and
send them as .wav files.
That way, the producer can add the effects he/she wants to the
voicetrack to thicken, eq, echo, reverb etc.
If they'e leaving your voice processing up to you, do what you need to
make you sound your best.
I have a variety of voice/over mics and pres available and a couple of
compressors..
If I know they aren't going to be processing the vocal track, I use my
own settings, otherwise, if they are going to process, i just use a
very little bit of compression.
Several just want raw tracks with no processing and specify which of
my mikes and pres they like.
And yes, I do send MP3's if requested (most radio promo and imaging
stuff goes this way) but most narrations and commercial spots go out
..wav

On 18 Nov 2004 14:28:10 GMT, (EganMedia) wrote:

><< Longtime Voiceover talent with an opportunity to get a nice deal
>on a Distressor (Empirical Labs). >><BR><BR>
>
>
>Buy it. Try it. They hold their value so well that if you get a "good deal"
>on one and decide its not for you, you can probably sell it at a profit. I
>like what they do for vocals. Whether or not you like it, and whether or not
>the cost is justified, is up to you.
>
>
>Joe Egan
>EMP
>Colchester, VT
>www.eganmedia.com

Mike Cleaver Broadcast Services
Voice-overs, Newscaster, Engineering and Consulting
Vancouver, BC, Canada

[Mike Cleaver]

Depends!
Does your stuff go mainly to producers who want to add his/her own
processing to the voicetrack or do they just mix it as sent with
music, effects or background?
I find it best to send dry tracks with just a little compression and
send them as .wav files.
That way, the producer can add the effects he/she wants to the
voicetrack to thicken, eq, echo, reverb etc.
If they'e leaving your voice processing up to you, do what you need to
make you sound your best.
I have a variety of voice/over mics and pres available and a couple of
compressors..
If I know they aren't going to be processing the vocal track, I use my
own settings, otherwise, if they are going to process, i just use a
very little bit of compression.
Several just want raw tracks with no processing and specify which of
my mikes and pres they like.
And yes, I do send MP3's if requested (most radio promo and imaging
stuff goes this way) but most narrations and commercial spots go out
..wav

On 18 Nov 2004 14:28:10 GMT, (EganMedia) wrote:

><< Longtime Voiceover talent with an opportunity to get a nice deal
>on a Distressor (Empirical Labs). >><BR><BR>
>
>
>Buy it. Try it. They hold their value so well that if you get a "good deal"
>on one and decide its not for you, you can probably sell it at a profit. I
>like what they do for vocals. Whether or not you like it, and whether or not
>the cost is justified, is up to you.
>
>
>Joe Egan
>EMP
>Colchester, VT
>www.eganmedia.com

Mike Cleaver Broadcast Services
Voice-overs, Newscaster, Engineering and Consulting
Vancouver, BC, Canada

[WillStG]

<< (EganMedia) >>
<< Buy it. Try it. They hold their value so well that if you get a "good
deal"
on one and decide its not for you, you can probably sell it at a profit. I
like what they do for vocals. Whether or not you like it, and whether or not
the cost is justified, is up to you. >>

You know, I had a voice over guy who I thought sounded a bit raspy so we
endeavored to optimize his recording chain. We tried all kinds of different
things, swapping out compressors and limiters, moving things around, different
mics, tried different micpres than his Neve 1272, and no matter what we did he
sounded exactly the same. It was uncanny.

That's just how he sounded.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Audioist / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[WillStG]

<< (EganMedia) >>
<< Buy it. Try it. They hold their value so well that if you get a "good
deal"
on one and decide its not for you, you can probably sell it at a profit. I
like what they do for vocals. Whether or not you like it, and whether or not
the cost is justified, is up to you. >>

You know, I had a voice over guy who I thought sounded a bit raspy so we
endeavored to optimize his recording chain. We tried all kinds of different
things, swapping out compressors and limiters, moving things around, different
mics, tried different micpres than his Neve 1272, and no matter what we did he
sounded exactly the same. It was uncanny.

That's just how he sounded.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Audioist / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[mike e]

(WillStG) wrote in message n>>
You know, I had a voice over guy who I thought sounded a bit raspy so
we
> endeavored to optimize his recording chain. We tried all kinds of different things, swapping out compressors and limiters, moving things around, different mics, tried different micpres than his Neve 1272, and no matter what we did he sounded exactly the same. It was uncanny. That's just how he sounded.
> Will Miho

Yknow Will, I get the point of the post, but think about it. If you
yourself
were a fulltime voice artist ...maybe that raspy-voiced guy - and had
your
own studio.. i bet you might be inclined to at least experiment with
ways
to "try" any gear options you'd heard were interesting - to make your
"product" in this case- voicetracks - the best they could be. I'm not
sure
if the implication I'm supposed to come away with is the moral message
that 'no amount of equipment will alter someone's raw talent' or
whatever-
but overall the message comes off kinda ****y to me.

[mike e]

(WillStG) wrote in message n>>
You know, I had a voice over guy who I thought sounded a bit raspy so
we
> endeavored to optimize his recording chain. We tried all kinds of different things, swapping out compressors and limiters, moving things around, different mics, tried different micpres than his Neve 1272, and no matter what we did he sounded exactly the same. It was uncanny. That's just how he sounded.
> Will Miho

Yknow Will, I get the point of the post, but think about it. If you
yourself
were a fulltime voice artist ...maybe that raspy-voiced guy - and had
your
own studio.. i bet you might be inclined to at least experiment with
ways
to "try" any gear options you'd heard were interesting - to make your
"product" in this case- voicetracks - the best they could be. I'm not
sure
if the implication I'm supposed to come away with is the moral message
that 'no amount of equipment will alter someone's raw talent' or
whatever-
but overall the message comes off kinda ****y to me.

[Shepherd Media]

(WillStG) wrote in message
>I had a voice over guy who I thought sounded a bit raspy so we
> endeavored to optimize his recording chain. We tried all kinds of different
> things, swapping out compressors and limiters, moving things around, different
> mics, tried different micpres than his Neve 1272, and no matter what we did he
> sounded exactly the same. It was uncanny.
>
> That's just how he sounded.
>
>
> Will Miho
> N Fox News
Will you seem to be off-target on the O.P's general question. I don't
think he was suggesting that his voice quality itself was faulty and
in need of
some sort of processing "magic" to improve upon any sort of deficiency
in talent per se... more a question about whether a Distressor is a
good
tool for optimizing presence in terms of translation of audio that's
often
delivered via mp3 or other web-based file formats - when it hits
typical
broadcast station processing. I can understand anyone wanting to
do the best with their own signal-path or 'chain' before distributing
it into
the post-production world --even if the guy has the greatest of
'pipes.'

M

[Shepherd Media]

(WillStG) wrote in message
>I had a voice over guy who I thought sounded a bit raspy so we
> endeavored to optimize his recording chain. We tried all kinds of different
> things, swapping out compressors and limiters, moving things around, different
> mics, tried different micpres than his Neve 1272, and no matter what we did he
> sounded exactly the same. It was uncanny.
>
> That's just how he sounded.
>
>
> Will Miho
> N Fox News
Will you seem to be off-target on the O.P's general question. I don't
think he was suggesting that his voice quality itself was faulty and
in need of
some sort of processing "magic" to improve upon any sort of deficiency
in talent per se... more a question about whether a Distressor is a
good
tool for optimizing presence in terms of translation of audio that's
often
delivered via mp3 or other web-based file formats - when it hits
typical
broadcast station processing. I can understand anyone wanting to
do the best with their own signal-path or 'chain' before distributing
it into
the post-production world --even if the guy has the greatest of
'pipes.'

M

[dt king]

"WillStG" > wrote in message
...

> You know, I had a voice over guy who I thought sounded a bit raspy so
> we
> endeavored to optimize his recording chain. We tried all kinds of
> different
> things, swapping out compressors and limiters, moving things around,
> different
> mics, tried different micpres than his Neve 1272, and no matter what we
> did he
> sounded exactly the same. It was uncanny.
>
> That's just how he sounded.

Casey Kasem? Colin Quinn?

dtk

[dt king]

"WillStG" > wrote in message
...

> You know, I had a voice over guy who I thought sounded a bit raspy so
> we
> endeavored to optimize his recording chain. We tried all kinds of
> different
> things, swapping out compressors and limiters, moving things around,
> different
> mics, tried different micpres than his Neve 1272, and no matter what we
> did he
> sounded exactly the same. It was uncanny.
>
> That's just how he sounded.

Casey Kasem? Colin Quinn?

dtk

[WillStG]

<< (mike e) >>
<< Yknow Will, I get the point of the post, but think about it. If you
yourself
were a fulltime voice artist ...maybe that raspy-voiced guy - and had
your
own studio.. i bet you might be inclined to at least experiment with
ways
to "try" any gear options you'd heard were interesting - to make your
"product" in this case- voicetracks - the best they could be. >>

Well of course! In my post wasn't I talking about trying to do just that
myself? It's what we all do, no?

<< I'm not sure if the implication I'm supposed to come away with is the
moral message
that 'no amount of equipment will alter someone's raw talent' or whatever- but
overall the message comes off kinda ****y to me.
>>

****y Mike? ;)

How about "imagine my chagrin at being unable to make a great talent
sound even greater than he already was no matter what the gear was!" How about
that, feel better now? I mean I don't really claim that there was any "moral
to the story" of my comments at all really, but maybe "don't be surprised if
you sound equally fabulous no matter what pro gear you use, if there is no
Golden Bullet" might be kinda more what I was getting at. But if you find a
piece of pro audio gear that is just head an shoulders above everything else in
class for your Voice Mike, please, let us know! BTW, the Boulder micpres are
a very milky sounding micpre we didn't have avaliable, they are discontinued
but I think they do they live on as the John Hardy "Twin Servo 990's"...

"****y" - lol... "artistes"....



Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Audioist / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[WillStG]

<< (mike e) >>
<< Yknow Will, I get the point of the post, but think about it. If you
yourself
were a fulltime voice artist ...maybe that raspy-voiced guy - and had
your
own studio.. i bet you might be inclined to at least experiment with
ways
to "try" any gear options you'd heard were interesting - to make your
"product" in this case- voicetracks - the best they could be. >>

Well of course! In my post wasn't I talking about trying to do just that
myself? It's what we all do, no?

<< I'm not sure if the implication I'm supposed to come away with is the
moral message
that 'no amount of equipment will alter someone's raw talent' or whatever- but
overall the message comes off kinda ****y to me.
>>

****y Mike? ;)

How about "imagine my chagrin at being unable to make a great talent
sound even greater than he already was no matter what the gear was!" How about
that, feel better now? I mean I don't really claim that there was any "moral
to the story" of my comments at all really, but maybe "don't be surprised if
you sound equally fabulous no matter what pro gear you use, if there is no
Golden Bullet" might be kinda more what I was getting at. But if you find a
piece of pro audio gear that is just head an shoulders above everything else in
class for your Voice Mike, please, let us know! BTW, the Boulder micpres are
a very milky sounding micpre we didn't have avaliable, they are discontinued
but I think they do they live on as the John Hardy "Twin Servo 990's"...

"****y" - lol... "artistes"....



Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Audioist / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[Kurt Albershardt]

WillStG wrote:
>
> if you find a piece
> of pro audio gear that is just head an shoulders above everything else in
> class for your Voice Mike, please, let us know! BTW, the Boulder micpres
> are a very milky sounding micpre we didn't have avaliable, they are
> discontinued but I think they do they live on as the John Hardy
> "Twin Servo 990's"...

Did I miss something? How did Boulder get into this?

I rather like the one I have...

[Kurt Albershardt]

WillStG wrote:
>
> if you find a piece
> of pro audio gear that is just head an shoulders above everything else in
> class for your Voice Mike, please, let us know! BTW, the Boulder micpres
> are a very milky sounding micpre we didn't have avaliable, they are
> discontinued but I think they do they live on as the John Hardy
> "Twin Servo 990's"...

Did I miss something? How did Boulder get into this?

I rather like the one I have...

[Jeff Jasper]

QUESTION: Mike E. asked whether a Distressor would beat a Finalizer for
voiceover compression.

CAVEAT: I do not own, nor have I ever used either.

ANSWER:

Friends of mine who do own it, like the Distressor because for them it does
a good job of clean to grungy compression, and can be set to emulate a
classic DBX, LA-2A, -3, -4, 1176LN, or do it's own thing. So does the
CraneSong compressor. Whether the Distressor does a better job than a
Finalizer for you personally is strictly a matter of your own taste. But
I've never seen a post from anyone stating that they didn't love their
Distressor.

One thing to consider is that the sound of multiband compression is not
appropriate to every application. It's great for a vocal effect on
bigger-than-life radio station promos, but not something you would really
like to hear on a long narration or some types of spots. Sometimes a vocal
effect that initially may sound awesome, does so at the expense of
communicating the message. That's a creative decision for you or the
producer to make. Ideally, you should have both wideband and multiband
compression available to use what's appropriate to the task at hand. The
advantages of the Distressor are that for a wideband compressor, it has a
wide palette of sounds, a couple of tasty distortion options, and available
sidechain filters that can solve some problems that most other units don't
address.

Happy Editing.

Jeff Jasper, voiceover guy
Jeff Jasper Productions, West Funroe, La.





"Kurt Albershardt" > wrote in message
...
> WillStG wrote:
> >
> > if you find a piece
> > of pro audio gear that is just head an shoulders above everything else
in
> > class for your Voice Mike, please, let us know! BTW, the Boulder
micpres
> > are a very milky sounding micpre we didn't have avaliable, they are
> > discontinued but I think they do they live on as the John Hardy
> > "Twin Servo 990's"...
>
> Did I miss something? How did Boulder get into this?
>
> I rather like the one I have...
>
>

[Jeff Jasper]

QUESTION: Mike E. asked whether a Distressor would beat a Finalizer for
voiceover compression.

CAVEAT: I do not own, nor have I ever used either.

ANSWER:

Friends of mine who do own it, like the Distressor because for them it does
a good job of clean to grungy compression, and can be set to emulate a
classic DBX, LA-2A, -3, -4, 1176LN, or do it's own thing. So does the
CraneSong compressor. Whether the Distressor does a better job than a
Finalizer for you personally is strictly a matter of your own taste. But
I've never seen a post from anyone stating that they didn't love their
Distressor.

One thing to consider is that the sound of multiband compression is not
appropriate to every application. It's great for a vocal effect on
bigger-than-life radio station promos, but not something you would really
like to hear on a long narration or some types of spots. Sometimes a vocal
effect that initially may sound awesome, does so at the expense of
communicating the message. That's a creative decision for you or the
producer to make. Ideally, you should have both wideband and multiband
compression available to use what's appropriate to the task at hand. The
advantages of the Distressor are that for a wideband compressor, it has a
wide palette of sounds, a couple of tasty distortion options, and available
sidechain filters that can solve some problems that most other units don't
address.

Happy Editing.

Jeff Jasper, voiceover guy
Jeff Jasper Productions, West Funroe, La.





"Kurt Albershardt" > wrote in message
...
> WillStG wrote:
> >
> > if you find a piece
> > of pro audio gear that is just head an shoulders above everything else
in
> > class for your Voice Mike, please, let us know! BTW, the Boulder
micpres
> > are a very milky sounding micpre we didn't have avaliable, they are
> > discontinued but I think they do they live on as the John Hardy
> > "Twin Servo 990's"...
>
> Did I miss something? How did Boulder get into this?
>
> I rather like the one I have...
>
>

[mike e]

> How about that, feel better now? <
>
> "****y" - lol... "artistes".... <
>
"Feel Better Now...?"

Just kind of a condescending and arrogant tone to your replies.

Guess that's all I was "getting at" Will.... "lol"

M

[mike e]

> How about that, feel better now? <
>
> "****y" - lol... "artistes".... <
>
"Feel Better Now...?"

Just kind of a condescending and arrogant tone to your replies.

Guess that's all I was "getting at" Will.... "lol"

M

[mike e]

A pre-emptive postscript to you WIll, actually based on your first
reply I guess i actually thought you were being facetious in your
response, as I can't imagine expecting to change a naturally raspy
voice quality through
any kind of processing.. so there.

(Of course, since i don't like Fox News..perhaps just a little bit of
personal venom get injected so don't take it personally... in the
words
of your brethren... let's just "Get Over It..." (LOL;)


(WillStG) wrote in message >...
> << (mike e) >>
> << Yknow Will, I get the point of the post, but think about it. If you
> yourself
> were a fulltime voice artist ...maybe that raspy-voiced guy - and had
> your
> own studio.. i bet you might be inclined to at least experiment with
> ways
> to "try" any gear options you'd heard were interesting - to make your
> "product" in this case- voicetracks - the best they could be. >>
>
> Well of course! In my post wasn't I talking about trying to do just that
> myself? It's what we all do, no?
>
> << I'm not sure if the implication I'm supposed to come away with is the
> moral message
> that 'no amount of equipment will alter someone's raw talent' or whatever- but
> overall the message comes off kinda ****y to me.
> >>
>
> ****y Mike? ;)
>
> How about "imagine my chagrin at being unable to make a great talent
> sound even greater than he already was no matter what the gear was!" How about
> that, feel better now? I mean I don't really claim that there was any "moral
> to the story" of my comments at all really, but maybe "don't be surprised if
> you sound equally fabulous no matter what pro gear you use, if there is no
> Golden Bullet" might be kinda more what I was getting at. But if you find a
> piece of pro audio gear that is just head an shoulders above everything else in
> class for your Voice Mike, please, let us know! BTW, the Boulder micpres are
> a very milky sounding micpre we didn't have avaliable, they are discontinued
> but I think they do they live on as the John Hardy "Twin Servo 990's"...
>
> "****y" - lol... "artistes"....
>
>
>
> Will Miho
> NY Music & TV Audio Guy
> Audioist / Fox News
> "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[mike e]

A pre-emptive postscript to you WIll, actually based on your first
reply I guess i actually thought you were being facetious in your
response, as I can't imagine expecting to change a naturally raspy
voice quality through
any kind of processing.. so there.

(Of course, since i don't like Fox News..perhaps just a little bit of
personal venom get injected so don't take it personally... in the
words
of your brethren... let's just "Get Over It..." (LOL;)


(WillStG) wrote in message >...
> << (mike e) >>
> << Yknow Will, I get the point of the post, but think about it. If you
> yourself
> were a fulltime voice artist ...maybe that raspy-voiced guy - and had
> your
> own studio.. i bet you might be inclined to at least experiment with
> ways
> to "try" any gear options you'd heard were interesting - to make your
> "product" in this case- voicetracks - the best they could be. >>
>
> Well of course! In my post wasn't I talking about trying to do just that
> myself? It's what we all do, no?
>
> << I'm not sure if the implication I'm supposed to come away with is the
> moral message
> that 'no amount of equipment will alter someone's raw talent' or whatever- but
> overall the message comes off kinda ****y to me.
> >>
>
> ****y Mike? ;)
>
> How about "imagine my chagrin at being unable to make a great talent
> sound even greater than he already was no matter what the gear was!" How about
> that, feel better now? I mean I don't really claim that there was any "moral
> to the story" of my comments at all really, but maybe "don't be surprised if
> you sound equally fabulous no matter what pro gear you use, if there is no
> Golden Bullet" might be kinda more what I was getting at. But if you find a
> piece of pro audio gear that is just head an shoulders above everything else in
> class for your Voice Mike, please, let us know! BTW, the Boulder micpres are
> a very milky sounding micpre we didn't have avaliable, they are discontinued
> but I think they do they live on as the John Hardy "Twin Servo 990's"...
>
> "****y" - lol... "artistes"....
>
>
>
> Will Miho
> NY Music & TV Audio Guy
> Audioist / Fox News
> "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[mike e]

(Corrected for spelling)
A pre-emptive postscript to you WIll,

Based on your first reply, I guess i actually thought you were being
facetious in your response, as I can't imagine expecting to change a
naturally raspy voice quality through any kind of processing.. so
there.

(Of course, since i don't like Fox News..perhaps just a little bit of
personal venom got injected, so don't take it personally... in the
words
of your brethren... let's just "Get Over It..." (LOL;)


(WillStG) wrote in message >...
> << (mike e) >>
> << Yknow Will, I get the point of the post, but think about it. If you
> yourself
> were a fulltime voice artist ...maybe that raspy-voiced guy - and had
> your
> own studio.. i bet you might be inclined to at least experiment with
> ways
> to "try" any gear options you'd heard were interesting - to make your
> "product" in this case- voicetracks - the best they could be. >>
>
> Well of course! In my post wasn't I talking about trying to do just that
> myself? It's what we all do, no?
>
> << I'm not sure if the implication I'm supposed to come away with is the
> moral message
> that 'no amount of equipment will alter someone's raw talent' or whatever- but
> overall the message comes off kinda ****y to me.
> >>
>
> ****y Mike? ;)
>
> How about "imagine my chagrin at being unable to make a great talent
> sound even greater than he already was no matter what the gear was!" How about
> that, feel better now? I mean I don't really claim that there was any "moral
> to the story" of my comments at all really, but maybe "don't be surprised if
> you sound equally fabulous no matter what pro gear you use, if there is no
> Golden Bullet" might be kinda more what I was getting at. But if you find a
> piece of pro audio gear that is just head an shoulders above everything else in
> class for your Voice Mike, please, let us know! BTW, the Boulder micpres are
> a very milky sounding micpre we didn't have avaliable, they are discontinued
> but I think they do they live on as the John Hardy "Twin Servo 990's"...
>
> "****y" - lol... "artistes"....
>
>
>
> Will Miho
> NY Music & TV Audio Guy
> Audioist / Fox News
> "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[mike e]

(Corrected for spelling)
A pre-emptive postscript to you WIll,

Based on your first reply, I guess i actually thought you were being
facetious in your response, as I can't imagine expecting to change a
naturally raspy voice quality through any kind of processing.. so
there.

(Of course, since i don't like Fox News..perhaps just a little bit of
personal venom got injected, so don't take it personally... in the
words
of your brethren... let's just "Get Over It..." (LOL;)


(WillStG) wrote in message >...
> << (mike e) >>
> << Yknow Will, I get the point of the post, but think about it. If you
> yourself
> were a fulltime voice artist ...maybe that raspy-voiced guy - and had
> your
> own studio.. i bet you might be inclined to at least experiment with
> ways
> to "try" any gear options you'd heard were interesting - to make your
> "product" in this case- voicetracks - the best they could be. >>
>
> Well of course! In my post wasn't I talking about trying to do just that
> myself? It's what we all do, no?
>
> << I'm not sure if the implication I'm supposed to come away with is the
> moral message
> that 'no amount of equipment will alter someone's raw talent' or whatever- but
> overall the message comes off kinda ****y to me.
> >>
>
> ****y Mike? ;)
>
> How about "imagine my chagrin at being unable to make a great talent
> sound even greater than he already was no matter what the gear was!" How about
> that, feel better now? I mean I don't really claim that there was any "moral
> to the story" of my comments at all really, but maybe "don't be surprised if
> you sound equally fabulous no matter what pro gear you use, if there is no
> Golden Bullet" might be kinda more what I was getting at. But if you find a
> piece of pro audio gear that is just head an shoulders above everything else in
> class for your Voice Mike, please, let us know! BTW, the Boulder micpres are
> a very milky sounding micpre we didn't have avaliable, they are discontinued
> but I think they do they live on as the John Hardy "Twin Servo 990's"...
>
> "****y" - lol... "artistes"....
>
>
>
> Will Miho
> NY Music & TV Audio Guy
> Audioist / Fox News
> "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[Jon J. Yeager]

Has the Distressor replaced the RNC as the RAC compressor of choice?

"Jeff Jasper" > wrote in message
...
> QUESTION: Mike E. asked whether a Distressor would beat a Finalizer for
> voiceover compression.
>
> CAVEAT: I do not own, nor have I ever used either.
>
> ANSWER:
>
> Friends of mine who do own it, like the Distressor because for them it
> does
> a good job of clean to grungy compression, and can be set to emulate a
> classic DBX, LA-2A, -3, -4, 1176LN, or do it's own thing. So does the
> CraneSong compressor. Whether the Distressor does a better job than a
> Finalizer for you personally is strictly a matter of your own taste. But
> I've never seen a post from anyone stating that they didn't love their
> Distressor.
>
> One thing to consider is that the sound of multiband compression is not
> appropriate to every application. It's great for a vocal effect on
> bigger-than-life radio station promos, but not something you would really
> like to hear on a long narration or some types of spots. Sometimes a
> vocal
> effect that initially may sound awesome, does so at the expense of
> communicating the message. That's a creative decision for you or the
> producer to make. Ideally, you should have both wideband and multiband
> compression available to use what's appropriate to the task at hand. The
> advantages of the Distressor are that for a wideband compressor, it has a
> wide palette of sounds, a couple of tasty distortion options, and
> available
> sidechain filters that can solve some problems that most other units don't
> address.
>
> Happy Editing.
>
> Jeff Jasper, voiceover guy
> Jeff Jasper Productions, West Funroe, La.

[Jon J. Yeager]

Has the Distressor replaced the RNC as the RAC compressor of choice?

"Jeff Jasper" > wrote in message
...
> QUESTION: Mike E. asked whether a Distressor would beat a Finalizer for
> voiceover compression.
>
> CAVEAT: I do not own, nor have I ever used either.
>
> ANSWER:
>
> Friends of mine who do own it, like the Distressor because for them it
> does
> a good job of clean to grungy compression, and can be set to emulate a
> classic DBX, LA-2A, -3, -4, 1176LN, or do it's own thing. So does the
> CraneSong compressor. Whether the Distressor does a better job than a
> Finalizer for you personally is strictly a matter of your own taste. But
> I've never seen a post from anyone stating that they didn't love their
> Distressor.
>
> One thing to consider is that the sound of multiband compression is not
> appropriate to every application. It's great for a vocal effect on
> bigger-than-life radio station promos, but not something you would really
> like to hear on a long narration or some types of spots. Sometimes a
> vocal
> effect that initially may sound awesome, does so at the expense of
> communicating the message. That's a creative decision for you or the
> producer to make. Ideally, you should have both wideband and multiband
> compression available to use what's appropriate to the task at hand. The
> advantages of the Distressor are that for a wideband compressor, it has a
> wide palette of sounds, a couple of tasty distortion options, and
> available
> sidechain filters that can solve some problems that most other units don't
> address.
>
> Happy Editing.
>
> Jeff Jasper, voiceover guy
> Jeff Jasper Productions, West Funroe, La.

[Scott Dorsey]

Jon J. Yeager > wrote:
>Has the Distressor replaced the RNC as the RAC compressor of choice?

The distressor is the most versatile ugly compressor around. If you want to
add coloration, the distressor is amazing because you can add a huge variety
of different colorations. You can do a respectable job of emulating most of
the vintage compressors on the cheap. Never perfectly, but usually good enough
to get away with.

The RNC won't do ugly sounds. But then again, the distressor isn't very
good at doing clean sounds. The RNC is really hard to beat for clean
compression but if you want heavy coloration it's not the way to go.

The RNC and the Distressor are two very different tools, and they are both
good things to have in the rack. If I could have only one compressor, it
would probably be the RNC. If I could have only two, it would probably
be the RNC and the Distressor. If I could have a couple dozen, I probably
wouldn't bother with the Distressor because I would have plenty of good
choices for coloration, but I'd keep the RNC.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Jon J. Yeager > wrote:
>Has the Distressor replaced the RNC as the RAC compressor of choice?

The distressor is the most versatile ugly compressor around. If you want to
add coloration, the distressor is amazing because you can add a huge variety
of different colorations. You can do a respectable job of emulating most of
the vintage compressors on the cheap. Never perfectly, but usually good enough
to get away with.

The RNC won't do ugly sounds. But then again, the distressor isn't very
good at doing clean sounds. The RNC is really hard to beat for clean
compression but if you want heavy coloration it's not the way to go.

The RNC and the Distressor are two very different tools, and they are both
good things to have in the rack. If I could have only one compressor, it
would probably be the RNC. If I could have only two, it would probably
be the RNC and the Distressor. If I could have a couple dozen, I probably
wouldn't bother with the Distressor because I would have plenty of good
choices for coloration, but I'd keep the RNC.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Has the Distressor replaced the RNC as the RAC compressor of choice?

Gosh, I hope not. I can't afford a Distressor.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Has the Distressor replaced the RNC as the RAC compressor of choice?

Gosh, I hope not. I can't afford a Distressor.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[WillStG]

>"Jon J. Yeager"

>Has the Distressor replaced the RNC as the RAC compressor of choice?

For *versatility* and covering all the bases I would think the "Compressor
of choice" would be more like a Cranesong STC-8. Does clean or dirty and
sounds like a lot of compressors as well.

But I'm still partial to my Manley Varimu, it's not as versatile maybe but
I can afford more than one compressor,and I love what she does. <g>

Anybody want a really nice Drawmer DL241 XLR?


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Audioist / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[WillStG]

>"Jon J. Yeager"

>Has the Distressor replaced the RNC as the RAC compressor of choice?

For *versatility* and covering all the bases I would think the "Compressor
of choice" would be more like a Cranesong STC-8. Does clean or dirty and
sounds like a lot of compressors as well.

But I'm still partial to my Manley Varimu, it's not as versatile maybe but
I can afford more than one compressor,and I love what she does. <g>

Anybody want a really nice Drawmer DL241 XLR?


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Audioist / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[Wayne]

>>"Jon J. Yeager"
>
>>Has the Distressor replaced the RNC as the RAC compressor of choice?
>
> For *versatility* and covering all the bases I would think the
>"Compressor
>of choice" would be more like a Cranesong STC-8. Does clean or dirty and
>sounds like a lot of compressors as well.
>
>
>Will Miho
>

Is the Cranesong STC-8 sound anyways close to two Trakkers? Do they sound
similiar? Do they do similiar compressor modeling?

I've got two Trakkers. I was just asking how close they are to the STC-8


--Wayne

-"sounded good to me"-

[Neil Henderson]

"WillStG" > wrote in message
...

> Anybody want a really nice Drawmer DL241 XLR?

Possibly... how cheap are you willing to let it go?

Neil Henderson

[Paul Stamler]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...

> The RNC won't do ugly sounds. But then again, the distressor isn't very
> good at doing clean sounds. The RNC is really hard to beat for clean
> compression but if you want heavy coloration it's not the way to go.

I dunno -- I've used the Distressor for some clean sound on live gigs with
John Renbourn and the late Dave Van Ronk, both of whom needed a *lot* of
clean compression, and it did a great job. No artifacts, no extra stuff;
just sounded like they were singing with sensible dynamics, which (judging
by the flashing lights) they weren't.

Peace,
Paul

[WillStG]

<< (Wayne >>
<< Is the Cranesong STC-8 sound anyways close to two Trakkers? Do they sound
similiar? Do they do similiar compressor modeling? >>

Haven't used the Trakkers. Do they link well as a pair?



Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Audioist / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

[EganMedia]

<< Haven't used the Trakkers. Do they link well as a pair?
>><BR><BR>


They link amazingly well, and not just as a pair. You can link up to eight for
7.1 work.


Joe Egan
EMP
Colchester, VT
www.eganmedia.com

[Wayne]

><< (Wayne >>
><< Is the Cranesong STC-8 sound anyways close to two Trakkers? Do they sound
>similiar? Do they do similiar compressor modeling? >>
>
> Haven't used the Trakkers. Do they link well as a pair?
>
>
>
>Will Miho
>
>
Yes they do. They link as in a stereo compressor with cross-feeds and respond
as one.

--Wayne

-"sounded good to me"-