I've just listened to the last version.
Its perfectly intelligible so, if all that matters is whether an audience will understand what is being said, I'd say it is adequate.
However, as someone with a former career in broadcast speech, I'd say it leaves much to be desired and, personally, I found the quality of voice and/or processing artefacts quite distracting and irritating or grating.
Before I render a lot of video, advice on the audio settings (dialogue), please
Re: Before I render a lot of video, advice on the audio settings (dialogue), please
- Hugh Robjohns
Moderator -
Posts: 41720 Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Contact:
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound...
(But generally posting my own personal views and not necessarily those of SOS, the company or the magazine!)
In my world, things get less strange when I read the manual...
(But generally posting my own personal views and not necessarily those of SOS, the company or the magazine!)
In my world, things get less strange when I read the manual...
Re: Before I render a lot of video, advice on the audio settings (dialogue), please
As purely a listener as opposed to an expert in such matters, it is indeed intelligible but the 's' sounds come across more as filtered white noise to me and it sounds almost as if it was synthesized speech despite it obviously not being.
I listened to three versions posted thus far and the same could be said to greater or lesser extent for all three of them. This is one case where I would be greatly inclined to re-record it as opposed to trying to fix it.
I have no practical experience of recording the spoken word other than one occasion when I recorded a voice-over (with no prior notice) for a short company video at my desk using a $10 headset mic.
That recording went live on youtube and much as it's far short of the results Hugh or Mike would have undoubtedly got, I think it's better than the samples you've posted. I'm not knocking/judging you at all - we all do our best and goodness knows few of us are experts in the recorded word but in this case as I said, I think you'd get far better results by re-recording it.
I listened to three versions posted thus far and the same could be said to greater or lesser extent for all three of them. This is one case where I would be greatly inclined to re-record it as opposed to trying to fix it.
I have no practical experience of recording the spoken word other than one occasion when I recorded a voice-over (with no prior notice) for a short company video at my desk using a $10 headset mic.
That recording went live on youtube and much as it's far short of the results Hugh or Mike would have undoubtedly got, I think it's better than the samples you've posted. I'm not knocking/judging you at all - we all do our best and goodness knows few of us are experts in the recorded word but in this case as I said, I think you'd get far better results by re-recording it.
- Eddy Deegan
Moderator -
Posts: 9551 Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Brighton & Hove, UK
Contact: