You can spend $700+ on his high end audio recommendations but 90% of home office style recording environments (even with acoustic panels) are going to have a noticeable amount of background hiss (computer fans, etc.) get picked up and his set up doesn't account for that.
If you goto the OP's Youtube channel and listen to his recordings, for example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lh0sTxLs9VA, there is a HUGE amount of hiss / static in his audio, to the point where I would be uncomfortable listening to his voice for a long period of time at a medium volume. He's using the $400 Shure mic in that video too.
The $100 for the dedicated 2nd pre-amp with the Triton seems pretty wasteful. As an alternative, for $299 you can pick up the DBX 286s pre-amp[0] which also acts as a noise gate (helps filter hiss / static), de-esser, compressor and basic EQ together. It's an awesome piece of hardware and offers way more bang for your buck.
Also the AT2005[1] mic is a solid upgrade from the AT2100 that he recommends, and both are about the same price. IMO the AT2005 is worth using as an end-game microphone. The AT2005 is one of those crazy mics where it almost feels like it's mis-priced at $80 and the DBX 286 has enough knobs and buttons to make it sound good with a number of different types of voices.
Ultimately your real natural voice is going to play one of the biggest roles in how you sound in the end.
A noise gate does not remove hiss or static, it simply reduces the volume of the signal when it gets below a certain level.
As a professional audio engineer in a past life, I can say the SM7B + Triton Fethead is a great recommendation. The SM7B has very good off-axis rejection characteristics and will pick up _much_ less room noise than most alternatives.
> A noise gate does not remove hiss or static, it simply reduces the volume of the signal when it gets below a certain level.
But the end result is with a configured noise gate the audio coming out will not appear to have as much hiss or room noise.
Check out the Youtube video I linked of his. It's super noticeable. With Sony MDR-V6 headphones, I hear a huge amount of hiss in his audio. To the point where it's distracting and drowns out his voice.
I'm not trying to pick on you or him, but if I go to your most recent Youtube video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lf6dwipRYg, you can very much hear the same type of hiss within the first few seconds. I can't say for what what it is, but it sounds like your computer fan is spinning at 50% and it very much comes through. At about the 16:22 mark in the video, your fans appear to be spinning at 100% because it's much louder than before you started coding. It sounds like your computer is about to launch into space.
It looks like you have the same mic too.
I'm not saying the mic is bad, it's a really good mic. I just think the OP should have talked more about one of the biggest things that will kill a recording, especially when talking about "professional podcasting" and recommending high end gear.
There's no software processing here either and my room is not treated with acoustic panels. In fact, my office is almost a worst case scenario. It's a wide open empty room with hardwood floors, angled ceilings and almost no furniture or rugs. I have super loud computer fans too and I'm right next to a window.
Even at maximum volume (unrealistically loud) there's pretty much no hiss or room noise. At least nothing I can hear with the same Sony MDR-V6 headphones.
I'm sure I could get similar results with the Shure mic too (using the DBX), but I'm happy with the AT2005. If I ever upgrade mics in the future it would be to a shotgun mic so it's out of frame.
What you're hearing in that video is a space heater running in my office — I don't put a ton of effort into making everything perfect for ad hoc live streams.
A proper screencast is probably the better thing to judge:
> I'm sure you'll find something to nitpick over but I think it's pretty good for a programming tutorial recorded in my home office.
It's not nit picking.
The video you linked sounds much much better and really really good. Besides turning off your heater did you do any other processing with software afterwards? Such as using your video editor's noise cancellation filters or a proper DAW?
I'm just asking because taking a quick skim through your videos, your live stream videos all have some form of hiss but your shorter non-live screencasts do not which makes me think additional post-processing is being done on them.
But I think the OP's channel intro video and your live stream video is a good example of the importance of managing background noise, which isn't mentioned in the article at all but it's probably the most important thing to do and you can't just blindly throw money at the problem to fix it with no prior knowledge.
For a professional set up, it seems like a no brainer to want to filter out background and room noise before it even hits your computer. That's some of what the DBX does. This way the amount of effort it takes to do a live stream or screencast is the same when it comes to audio quality. You just turn it on and hit record, and you're done. It also works the same in OBS, your video recording tool of choice, zoom, hangouts, skype or any program that records your mic.
You mentioned being an audio engineer. Surely you know how important having a good audio source is, and how time consuming the editing process is when you need to fiddle with cleaning things up after the fact. Configuring all of this stuff to happen live is something I did after recording about 20 videos. Now 400+ videos later I couldn't imagine having to do post-processing on videos just to clean up audio.
I listened to the first clip expecting it to be much worse than it ended up being. I'm listening on HD280pros, the headphones I keep at work, although I use Sony MDR-7506s when I'm in front of my audio gear.
The noise floor sounded more to me like bad gain staging than it sounds like fans and room noise. And I honestly think that the majority of people who watch that video aren't going to notice. I think you're too close to the process. I would venture that almost no one else in this thread would watch that video and call that an all-caps HUGE amount of noise.
A long time ago, I was mixing down some rough recordings of my band, and as I was putting everything together, I kept hearing the squeak of my cheap kick pedal every time I hit the bass drum. It was incessant, and it didn't help that I typically played at upwards of 160bpm. I tried EQ, notch filtering, all kinds of things available to me back in 2002 to try and get rid of that squeak without destroying the other things coming through the room mic, and I just couldn't do it, so I had to leave it in. No one else in the band could hear what I was talking about.
On my way home, I put in a CD by the band Cake that I'd had for a couple of years at this point, and I had heard probably a hundred times before. And even though it had never stood out to me at all before, all of the sudden the only thing I could hear on this professionally recorded album was THE SQUEAK OF THE KICK PEDAL. It was absolutely maddening.
I went on an electronic music binge for a couple of months after that, just to cleanse my palette.
> I would venture that almost no one else in this thread would watch that video and call that an all-caps HUGE amount of noise.
I listened to the video and while I wouldn’t go all-caps, it’s way more noise that I like to listen to. So I downloaded the audio track and measured the RMS noise and signal levels, getting about a 30dB SNR. That’s a somewhat bad number, which matches my subjective experience.
A few years ago I converted some old audio cassettes with voice recordings of deceased family members to MP3. I heard all sorts of weird noises, but I spent a while getting rid of them with EQ and notch filters. I don’t know if anyone else in the family cared about the work I did cleaning up the audio, but I did.
Everyone has different standards, and it’s not quite fair to say that nobody in the audience cares about these things, just like it’s not quite fair to say that everyone in the audience cares.
Thanks for doing the work to get the RMS noise and signal levels.
Yeah just casually comparing it to other random videos and podcasts, IMO it's really noticeable.
I was going to post a screenshot comparison of that between all 3 videos but it's probably not worth the effort. It's tricky to compare just by hearing because headphone quality plays a massive difference. On some headphones you can't hear anything but on others you hear all sorts of stuff.
Here's a funny story... I recorded a video course once, and even with a dynamic mic, RDX, etc. a crow was going BERSERK outside of my window, like you would think it was having a fight to the death with a pterodactyl.
Since the video came out pretty nice, I decided to keep it in as a joke since it didn't last too long, and during a spot where it was super loud I decided to throw up a 1 second picture of a crow.
Since the course has come out, I've had about 20 people e-mail me asking me why I showed a crow picture while talking about Docker. Turns out, they couldn't hear it even after I mentioned why I did it and requested to them to play it back a few times in a loop at max volume. Some headphones are just mechanically limited to not emit certain frequencies. Sadly, these are common frequencies in voice, instruments and random background noises that humans can hear.
A pair of MDRV6s can go a long ways. It's no wonder they are used in almost every recording studio.
As I’m reading your comment I have the MDR-7506 (the V6 is discontinued, I think) right next to me.
They’re almost useless for mixing, but whenever I record something with a mic, I’ll put headphones on and crank up the mic gain. Does wonders for getting clean recordings.
A more directional and less sensitive mic like the NTG-2 may work better with some dampening on the walls or by adding a carpet. Additionally if you can't fix the room you can use a plugin to help reduce noise in dialog, something like Izotope RX7 will do a good job of doing this, but fixing the room should always be the first step.
I've used both the SM7B and the NTG-2 and I would record vocals all day with the SM7B if the room was in a good condition to do so or I was recording actual singing vocals. Otherwise I'd just use the NTG-2 which with it's highly directional nature is pretty good at removing a lot of other background noise.
Does the NTG-2 work well in a desk setup with minimizing typing? I’m looking to find a better quality mic (blue yeti now) that does better at minimizing keystroke sound.
The problem with the NTG-2 is it sounds reasonable enough when you have nothing being compared to it, but when you put it side by side with a decent dynamic microphone where you can listen to each one in an A / B test then it falls apart due to sounding super muddy and thin. It's something you can pick out in a blind test 100 out of 100 times if you have decent headphones and there's nothing you can do in post-processing to fix it.
Shotgun mics with a very good dynamic range and a pleasant tone tend to be pretty expensive. Usually in the $1,400+ range. Compared to something like the AT2005 which is a dynamic mic and is $80, but now it sits in front of your face.
This video has a pretty decent comparison of a high quality dynamic microphone to a $300 shotgun mic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiYEX-omlFk. It has both talking and typing tests. It's not the NTG-2 shotgun mic tho, it's the Deity-S. But it does serve as a decent base line comparison of how much worse a shotgun mic sounds unless you go up to the very high end.
> But the end result is with a configured noise gate the audio coming out will not appear to have as much hiss or room noise.
> Check out the Youtube video I linked of his. It's super noticeable. With Sony MDR-V6 headphones, I hear a huge amount of hiss in his audio. To the point where it's distracting and drowns out his voice.
If the noise floor is high enough that it interferes with the actual signal, a gate is just going to make it more annoying to listen to (as you hear the noise cut in and out).
I was a recording engineer at a TV studio before I got into programming. When we used gates it was very shallow, long compression so you couldn't notice abrupt changes.
I use a Scarlett 2i2. I prefer it over the Solo because the input jack supports XLR and TRS (the 2i2 has a combo port where the Solo is only XLR). For vocals or recording yourself with a mic this isn't a big deal because mics use XLR connections but if you ever wanted to screw around with a guitar or another instrument then you'd be using a TRS cable.
Also for podcasters, if you ever end up doing a live show with a guest, having the 2 inputs is nice because then each of you can plug in your own microphone. You can't do that with the Solo.
The Solo is $110 and the 2i2 is $135. Given the above I don't mind spending the extra $25 for the 2i2.
The only downside I've seen with Scarlett's interfaces so far is that the USB connection is very sensitive. Every 6 months or so I have to reconnect it otherwise nothing works. This is with the 2nd generation interface. They just came out with a 3rd generation not too long ago, so maybe that has a more robust USB connection (I haven't tried it). I've had my 2nd gen for a few years and it's still going strong, you just need to be aware of the USB connection.
Overall it's decent. I haven't had any real complaints, other than maybe its pre-amp tends to slightly boost high end frequencies but I don't think it's worth replacing it for that alone. A lot of this stuff comes down to combinations of gear too, not just 1 piece. For example if the pre-amp boots highs and your natural voice is deep, and your mic is pretty neutral then things will sound good in the end. If you have a high pitch voice with boosted highs on your pre-amp and mic then you might sound a little thin.
You could get a shotgun to work in an untreated room, but the problem with shotguns is everything in the $200-500 range sounds pretty bad when you directly compare it to a dynamic mic. I have not experimented first hand with a bunch of shotguns so I wouldn't feel comfortable recommending anything, especially not in the $1,000+ to $2,000+ range.
Curtis is a really knowledge dude when it comes to audio and his channel has a bunch of great comparisons and tips. He has some videos where he compares dynamic mics to shotguns too.
Thanks also for the link to Curtis’s video. I get the impression I’m better off with a good dynamic mic for now. (Using a Rode Podcaster at the moment, which has great rejection of room noise and echo but leaves little control over tonality/gain and really stands out on video since it’s white. My experience with audio software for streaming and other live audio has not been great on macOS – crashes and delay being the main issues – hence why rack-based hardware appeals.)
Around half way down that thread, someone posted a sound attachment with a bunch of noise.
Mine sounds exactly like that if I crank the gain too. I keep the Scarlett at about 35% and do notice a lot of noise as I go above that. It climbs up quickly.
What's interesting is the DBX has enough gain on its pre-amp to keep the Scarlett at 0% with the AT2005 mic but I don't do that because I found with the AT2005 + DBX + my personal voice combo things come out a little too boomy on the low end which is weird because my voice is pretty high. So in this case I like having a little bit of the Scarlett's presence come through and at this amount of gain there's no real noticeable noise.
The DBX's pre-amp gain is really quiet. I have it at 100%. There's extra gain you can add on the output side too. I keep that one at -8 DB because if I go any higher than that it clips, which is nice because it means the DBX has a lot more power to give for a more power hungry mic.
I'm still not 100% happy with my audio. I think from a line noise perspective it's close to as good as you can reasonably ask for but I feel like it's still too boomy and slightly muddled on the low end. I keep the low end completely off with the DBX too (it has an "Enhancer" which is sort of like a basic EQ for highs and lows). I'm not convinced it's a pure DBX issue tho, or a problem with the microphone.
For example, this guy has the same AT2005 microphone https://youtu.be/g95hJZlWFwU?t=111 and personally I found his sound to be very natural with a great tone. It doesn't feel boomy and it has an even spread across the spectrum. I don't know what pre-amp or interface he uses.
Audio is super complicated because your real voice plays such a huge role. That and it's a rabbit hole that never ends haha.
> I think from a line noise perspective it's close to as good as you can reasonably ask for but I feel like it's still too boomy and slightly muddled on the low end.
You sound better than most presenters to me, your sound is really clean, and I spent your video listening to what you were saying and not wondering why the noise floor was so high. The OP sounds excellent too and his post, videos, and work are great but I had the same reaction as you to the noise level, particular for the channel intro post which does not seem environmental to me. I agree with others that most won't notice, though, and I think I only did because — like you — I have spent some time obsessing over such things in the past. So I wouldn't worry about tweaking your sound too much. (He says, heading to Thomann to fill a basket with a DBX 286s, an Aston Stealth, and a bunch of other things to start tending my audio rabbit warren again.)
I imagine you've experimented with mic placement such as talking into the barrel of the mic more directly? I notice you use it off-axis in the video you posted, but a more extreme off-axis rather than just slightly angled, presumably to reduce pops/breathing and so it doesn't block line of sight. In the “pick of the week” video that you liked the tone of you'll notice the presenter is talking into the barrel of the mic and it's only slightly angled at times; his voice is still going into the mic rather than past it.
I used to own a bunch of dynamic XLR mics but came away disappointed because of the noise floor at the gain I needed to get a good signal, so I sold almost everything to buy the Rode Podcaster USB mic that just works out of the box. I didn't realise at the time how much hardware and software processing people use. I expected to be able to get great sound with an XLR mic and USB interface alone. Few people used to talk about what they did _after_ they bought the mic and interface; they just said “I use an SM7B and a Scarlett Solo” or whatever, neglecting to mention they also had a Cloudlifter/Fethead in the line to boost the signal, bring down that gain, and reduce the noise floor, as well as a whole rack of stuff or software to tune their sound. It's great that people talk more openly about their setups now.
But spending hundreds on mics at least taught me that some cardioid dynamic mics have a very consistent sound regardless of placement and gain, but others (mostly mics with larger diaphragms) have a little off-axis coloration. I wonder if it would alter the sound quality for you at all to talk directly into the mic, even at the risk of more plosives and breathing sounds.
Not saying this is true of you, but I think a lot of people go through phases of buying new mics when really they just need to learn how to place and adjust the one they have better. It's certainly been true for me at times, although there are other times when switching mic has made a huge difference (I would never go back to a condenser mic after using dynamics, for example, unless I had the luxury of a treated room).
I wish more audio pros would offer paid home setup advice; I would pay for someone to check out an audio/video clip, see photos and screenshots of my settings and say, “that's an end-address mic; you should be an inch closer to it, talking straight down the barrel, and then you can pull back on the gain by 10%” or whatever.
> I imagine you've experimented with mic placement such as talking into the barrel of the mic more directly?
Yes but I don't think I experimented enough. You are right tho, I mainly did that to minimize plosives and breaths. The AT2005 is really sensitive to that (as you can see in that "pick of the week" video).
I ended up playing with it last night and you know, putting it a little more direct like that other video does make a huge difference for the better. Almost in an unbelievable way. Things went from sounding a little muddy and boomy to pretty even and clear.
What I ended up doing was positioning the mic 100% vertical, putting it about 1 inch below my chin and then I pushed it out to be maybe 3 or so inches past my face (in between my monitor and face). Then I tilted the mic about 15 degrees towards me. At this point my boom arm is almost 100% extended and I can't tilt it anymore without the mic falling out of position due to gravity (I have a cheap $15 boom arm).
In any case, this is really promising. My next video will be like this. I may tinker with it a little more before recording but with this new set up, the mic is almost out of frame. About an inch of it sticks out from the bottom in the middle of the screen.
I can't pull it down any lower because then the mic gets too far from my mouth and it starts to pick up echos from the room and also starts to sound thin, but I think as is this is a pretty big improvement.
> I didn't realise at the time how much hardware and software processing people use.
Yeah. It's a lot of effort. Although if you go out of your way to buy near silent computer fans (cpu, case and power supply) that helps a ton for cutting room noise. My next build will have that for sure, since it's a pretty cheap investment (maybe $30 in fans) to make a noticeable noise floor reduction of the room.
For comparison I recorded this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeSD17YRijk almost 3 years ago with the AT2005 directly connected to my computer over USB using a $10 pop filter in the same office. Since there's no webcam video, I had the pop filter covering like half my face with the mic positioned more like that pick of the week video.
There's no Scarlett, DBX or any processing in software other than running Camtasia's noise filter. So the total all-in cost here was $80 for the mic, and zero time spent processing it afterwards in software. I just pressed 1 button and waited a few seconds for the filter to apply.
I haven't listened to this in a long time and it for sure sounds less boomy than my current videos. It almost sounds maybe a little too thin but that could also be due to being pulled back a little bit since I put about a fist's width of space between the mic and pop filter, and then I was a good inch or 2 from the pop filter.
But, long story short, I think if you could kill the room noise you could get away with a set up like that where you just plug in a USB mic and go.
> Not saying this is true of you, but I think a lot of people go through phases of buying new mics when really they just need to learn how to place and adjust the one they have better.
I haven't gone off the deep end yet with mics but I've spent a stupid amount of time generally researching audio components. Prior to this mic I was using a Blue Yeti but got rid of it because it was too sensitive. It picked up everything. Then I went on a Youtube review binge quest on audio gear / microphones and learned about dynamic mics.
Some of my really old videos from 2016 use the Yeti such as this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjKVyePLmFM, but I also used to run it through REAPER in real time and did a ton of processing on it so it's not a fair comparison. Back then I had no idea wtf I was doing, and looking back at these old videos make me cringe at how overcooked my compressor was (I almost sound wispy and robotic). But to be fair, back then I had crappy Sennheiser HD201 headphones so I couldn't even hear anything and over time about 100 people who took the course mentioned they really enjoyed the clear audio so who knows.
> that's an end-address mic; you should be an inch closer to it
The crazy thing is, for dynamic mics that 1 inch makes a massive difference haha.
I'm not an audio expert but if you want to post some of your videos, I wouldn't mind having a listen and we can talk about your set up. If you don't want to do it openly, feel free to email me too. I don't know when HN stops letting you reply to comments due to nesting, so we'll probably end up hitting that point soon anyways here.
I have alot of experience with live audio, and from my understanding I can't see what the point of the Triton Fethead is? Is that used in addition to the pre-amp in your interface? If so why? Does the SM7B have super low output? It's not used much live, but when we did, we never had trouble with level, and I'm pretty sure an inline pre-amp would have added more noise.
I know, the idea that somebody could link to something useful and then be compensated for the value of their recommendation is so awful. It should be illegal for people to make money for doing things online. It should all be free. If we could get farmers and ranchers in on it, then municipalities and auto makers- heck- lets get the whole government on it- everything will be free and everyone will work for the common good. What could possibly go wrong!
Had you actually read my comment, you'd know I'm not complaining about this recommendation. I'm complaining about Amazon's affiliate structure specifically. If I buy a hammer on Amazon 23 hours after absent-mindedly clicking the GP's link, they get a cut of that. A cut that they don't deserve.
I would prefer HN be one of the few places online where I can trust links because of the products behind them, not because of someone trying to drive affiliate revenue.
I did throw a disclaimer in there that I've used these products in a professional environment for years.
I didn't wake up that day hoping to make affiliate sales off a product. I happened to have the links handy because they are listed on my site in a "tools I use" blog post[0], and honestly getting the links from there was faster than getting the non-affiliate links.
The Triton fethead is just a "plug it in and go" solution in a lot of setups. That dbx preamp has a lot of knobs that, for the most part, need to be set right in order for it to work at all - let alone help the situation.
Also worth noting that the fethead is tiny - it sits inline with your cable, whereas that dbx requires you to mount 19" rack gear at your desk, which is a big ask for a lot of people.
> The Triton fethead is just a "plug it in and go" solution in a lot of setups. That dbx preamp has a lot of knobs that, for the most part, need to be set right in order for it to work at all - let alone help the situation.
But that's the thing. The Triton is just a pre-amp, the Scarlett also has its own pre-amp, but maybe it's not strong enough to drive the Shure mic (it's strong enough for most other mics).
The DBX also has a pre-amp but it does many other things to improve the quality of your audio where as the Triton does nothing except boost the signal. I would classify the DBX as very much helping the situation. Way more than just having a pre-amp.
> whereas that dbx requires you to mount 19" rack gear at your desk, which is a big ask for a lot of people.
I don't think having a piece of gear on your desk is a big ask for a personal recording studio. It's not like you're sometimes streaming or recording your podcast at Starbucks. You also don't need to mount it. It sits flush on a desk without straining any of the parts or sitting uneven.
It's been happily sitting on my desk for a long time now.
> But that's the thing. The Triton is just a pre-amp, the Scarlett also has its own pre-amp, but maybe it's not strong enough to drive the Shure mic (it's strong enough for most other mics).
An awkward reality is that while prosumer preamps like those in the Scarlett are very nice for what they are, you often find yourself needing more clean gain than they comfortably provide. The Scarlett Solo’s gain range is listed as 56dB, and while that seems like a lot, and it seems like it should be good enough, for voice applications at normal speaking volumes and with typical microphones, you want more gain. From what I understand, this is more or less the amount of gain you can get in a single gain stage without introducing tons of dirt.
I personally have a Scarlett and a small assortment of mics, including dynamics, small and large diaphragm condensers, and ribbon mics. It’s only for louder sources like drums and guitar amps that I feel comfortable plugging straight into the Scarlett. For everything else, I plug into an outboard preamp.
While the DBX is nice, everything but gain can be done in software later on. I’d go ahead and recommend the DBX to most people because it solves the problem “once and for all” rather than forcing you to configure every different piece of audio software you use, but for my own personal use I’m much happier doing all EQ, compression, gating, de-essing, etc. in software.
That stuff isn’t necessary in hardware, but you really do need the gain.
> While the DBX is nice, everything but gain can be done in software later on.
Totally, but...
Doing it in software can be a pain because ideally you just want to flip your recorder on, talk and be done with it. Especially when your day to day involves recording many videos.
I know OBS has VST support but if you ever record outside of OBS everything sounds different.
Or if you want system wide software processing, it gets really complex with audio redirects / patching where it becomes a ceremony just to begin recording, and you need to worry about xruns, pops and other weird abnormalities unless the software you use is 100% amazing.
The only software I ever found to work well for that was in Windows using ASIO Link Pro to patch the real-time output of REAPER as microphone input to any app, but the author literally died and his license key server went offline (I bought it like 4-5 years ago). That is what eventually lead me to use the DBX. Now I just turn it on and never think about it, because it works the same across all apps with no ceremony, and will work on Linux too (or any OS).
The title is "Remote Work, Podcast..." not focused on creating a personal recording studio. It's not really appropriate to have a rackmount pre-amp to just make you sound slightly better on a conference call.
> As an alternative, for $299 you can pick up the DBX 286s pre-amp[0] which also acts as a noise gate (helps filter hiss / static), de-esser, compressor and basic EQ together.
Do you know of any device with similar capabilities but in smaller form factor (even if more expensive)? Something of the size of Focusrite Scarlett 4i4 [0]. Or at least not meant to be mounted in a rack?
The 4i4 is just like the 2i2 (which is what I use). It basically acts as a way for you to plug in an XLR mic (or instrument) into your computer. It's classified as a USB audio interface.
It won't help you when it comes to background noise cancellation or any type of processing. For that you need something like the DBX or you can find other hardware that combos as a USB audio interface + pre-amp + processor (with comparable options to the DBX). I don't know of any offhand but maybe something exists.
Also, you can go the software route too to avoid needing any hardware (and just use a USB mic), but it gets a little more complicated. OBS supports VST plugins which is straight forward enough, but if you plan to record in other programs you won't have those effects applied.
Or you can delve into the wonderful world of software based audio redirecting where you can redirect the output of a DAW like REAPER into another app as input to capture and process audio in real time. I did this for years until the software I used stopped working due to the author dying and his license server went offline. Alternative software doesn't exist on Windows with the requirements I had so I decided to go with hardware.
The cool thing about the AT2005 mic I recommended from earlier is it has a USB and XLR connector, so you can try both out.
I know what both of those are, I was asking if there was anything with functionality of DBX but with a form-factor of Scarlett 4i4. It doesn't even have to have an integrated USB audio interface, although that would be cool.
Oh sorry, I missed the part about being "the size of the 4i4". I thought you were thinking about using the 4i4 as a replacement to the DBX.
The DBX doesn't need to be mounted to a rack btw. It sits clean on any flat surface like your desk. The only thing that's not optimal is it doesn't have a power switch on it and you should keep it off when not using it.
Personally I have mine hooked up to a surge protector with an on / off switch, so I don't put any stress on the plug. You could also use a remote control surge protector so you don't need to fiddle with manually turning it on / off like a barbarian.
Don’t know of any small units that also include a noise gate but otherwise something like a http://www.joemeek.com/threeq.html could do the job. A compact channel strip. Plenty of these units and their predecessors on the used market too.
Running your signal through analog EQ and compression is super useful, because they’re intuitive to use (just twist knobs) and once you’ve got your settings dialed in, it will survive any OS update or kernel panic :) And you’d need some dynamics processing digital or analog if you want to approximate the kind of voice people associate with radio or voice over.
I think a noise gate is tricky though, if set up wrong it can make the audio sound choppy. If at all feasible, reduce the noise at the source. Especially if you use a compressor, because as great as it can sound, it will also amplify the noise. You might notice this less if the compressor has a very fast release time (i.e. its amplification drops out immediately after the audio drops below the level where it’s supposed to kick in) but also that risks making the audio sound choppy and unnatural.
In that linked YouTube video, I didn't hear hiss or find anything objectionable in the sound. But I found it really distracting the way the microphone was so big in the picture. It even looked like it could be easily adjusted so the mic was in the same place but the stand was more out of the way. But if it was me, I'd go for a smaller / less obtrusive one even if the sound wasn't quite as good.
Funny how different people are sensitive to different things.
I had the same experience way back, dithering on old CRT with composite videos is smoother since you create new colors given how the signal is transfered and converted compared to a high resolution computer display (800x600). Now days I'm pretty sure there are GPU filters for that.
I'm somewhat guilty of it as well, but a lot of people geek out on the gear side and spend money to optimize a fairly small part of the overall audio experience.
Most of what I record for podcasts these days is on location anyway and I know I don't personally have a "radio voice." So I do what I can to get reasonable audio quality but don't sweat the details too much.
> I'm somewhat guilty of it as well, but a lot of people geek out on the gear side and spend money to optimize a fairly small part of the overall audio experience.
There's nothing wrong with buying gear.
It's just, he lists that set up as a "professional" podcast set up but forgot to mention the most important piece of hardware (or software) to get rid of continuous background noise.
If you're going to listen to someone talk for an hour, having a bunch of white noise hiss in the background is very tiring on your ears.
If you read that article without years of prior audio experience you might just blindly click those links and buy the top end set up, and then get upset that you just dropped $700 on a set up that sounds worse than what you could have gotten for $80 (+ free software) or half that in pure hardware but spending your budget on different hardware.
> home office style recording environments (even with acoustic panels) are going to have a noticeable amount of background hiss (computer fans, etc.) get picked up and his set up doesn't account for that.
You can definitely baffle a lot/all of that noise away, but you definitely need to be more mindful of your setup and not just have some wall-mounted panels and your tower right next to your mic.
I've been privy to some crafty home studio setups. It's workable—the first problem is paying attention/having an ear and the example you posted is so obvious I was surprised at it.
> the example you posted is so obvious I was surprised at it.
Yeah I was surprised too. Considering that clip is from the author of the post.
> you definitely need to be more mindful of your setup and not just have some wall-mounted panels and your tower right next to your mic.
Mine is on the floor, under my desk, which has a large thick piece of wood (the desktop) as a barrier and it still comes through without a noise gate. My mic is on a boom arm like 5 feet above my tower (I use a standing desk) and the mic is positioned opposite of my computer to further reduce it picking it up.
Also, a lot of people use laptops as their main computer which is even worse. Chances are you'll end up with your laptop on the top of your desk instead of below it.
That's why I was so taken back by him creating this article without mentioning noise cancellation.
Fortunately I do have the DBX and the noise floor is almost silent without clamping down too hard on natural frequencies. I've recorded about 400 videos, some with the DXB and some without and there's such a huge difference.
A single wooden panel won't do much to help you in that situation regardless. It's a great reflector and wouldn't absorb much of the noise, especially of the sides are wide open.
Most people, especially someone just recording dev screencasts or video conferencing don't at all need a $300-350 preamp. It just seems like so much overkill. You could get perfectly usable noise reduction baked into Audacity, or with $50 plugin if the noise is existing.
FWIW, I record (music) with a laptop on my desk, sometimes multi channel simultaneously and with the right mics[1] and sufficient ambient noise reduction I've never had an issue with fan hiss or hum.
> Most people, especially someone just recording dev screencasts or video conferencing don't at all need a $300-350 preamp. It just seems like so much overkill. You could get perfectly usable noise reduction baked into Audacity, or with $50 plugin if the noise is existing.
I do record dev screencasts. Using Audacity is ok but it's extremely tedious if you record a lot of videos.
That means for every video you create you need to split and export your audio, import it into Audacity, get a noise sample, filter it out, export the new audio, import it back into your video editor and then edit as planned.
That work flow will drain your soul if you're trying to record a 150 video course, or you put out new videos every day.
Some video editors like Camtasia, Screenflow and Resolve have decent enough noise cancellation filters where you can press 1 button and wait 10 seconds to avoid having to do that with Audacity, but it also means if you ever do live streaming you'll need to set up a different type of VST with OBS, otherwise your live streams will sound bad.
But you're right, for starting out I wouldn't bother with any of that. That's why I think the AT2005 is a great mic for $80 bucks. It works over USB on its own but it also has XLR support so you can "grow" into it if you decide to use hardware to save time later. The DBX is a lot more than a $300 pre-amp btw.
If you're serious about it, I'd look for a voice coach. It's likely easier to find someone who trains singers than who focuses only on speaking. That is fine. Vocal technique is largely the same.
Additionally, I'd look into something like Toastmasters. This will give you a great place to practice outside of formal lessons with a voice coach.
Being comfortable to listen to is about both your vocal technique - the mechanics of how you form sound - and about your content and delivery.
> Is there a way to train your voice to become more comfortable for others to listen to?
This is something I struggle with too honestly.
I've recorded 400+ videos and I still think my voice is -ultra- cringe and I feel like it gets worn out after talking for only maybe an hour straight.
So what I usually do is record for about 45 minutes, then edit for a few hours and then go back to recording when my voice is fresh. I drink plenty of water while editing too.
I don't have any professional advice since I'm just a dude who records screencasts. But I think my biggest problem related to getting worn out is I tend to talk slightly louder than normal when I'm recording because I still internally link loudness with tone variance and "energy". So maybe talking less loud, raising the gain on my mic and learning how to have more tone variance without talking louder would be something to look into. If I were to guess this is probably a common problem for many folks.
If you don’t have a really good quality preamp in your interface, the fethead makes making up the gain really well that the sm7b needs. Sooo much gain.
The value of a good mic for remote work cannot be understated.
One of the worst aspects of my job as a remote developer has been working with people with crappy microphones. I worked with one client whose conference mic was so low-fi that a lot of what they were saying in meetings was incomprehensible. (I told them about this, but they didn't seem to care, which is why I'm glad I'm not working with them anymore)
Going against what the author suggests, I purchased a Blue Yeti mic. The reason I went for it is that I want my coworkers to not have to strain to hear me. Ideally, it should sound as if I'm in the same room with them. With cardioid mode turned on, I can use the mic with my MacBook Pro speakers as the output channel and never have feedback issues. My home is quiet, so I never have issues with bad noises coming through. If I'm at a cafe, that's when I'll use my AirPods. However, I use my Yeti mic when possible. A few of my other coworkers have since bought a Blue Yeti or a Razer Seiren, and it makes a world of difference.
I used to use a Snowball, which worked great, but it obstructed my view of my 4 monitor setup. I currently use a Blue Snowflake, and it's been working very well. It's small and inobtrusive, and I haven't heard any complaints about the audio for calls. For a podcast, however, I would probably go back to the Snowball or higher end mic.
I've had a very different experience. I work remotely and sometimes others at my company do, the people who are remote are always so much easier to hear than the people in big echoey conference rooms, no matter what mics they are using.
I think the section on mics could be enhanced by explaining a little about the different pickup patterns available. A cardioid pickup is a lot more appropriate for these uses than an omni pickup would be. The author mentions the Yeti mic picking up a lot of background noise - I'd bet that that mic has an omni pick up pattern. Some mics even have a small switch which allows you to cycle between different pickup patterns.
EDIT: While I've always known them as pickup patterns, I've just noticed that Wikipedia refers to them as polar patterns. I assume this is a more universal term.
I use my Blue Yeti on cardioid mode without headphones and the noise picked up is relatively minimal. My apartment is pretty quiet to begin with, but cardioid limits some of the noise and also seems to prevent feedback. (which is taken care of to some degree by the software, but I never have issues when cardioid is on)
Do you remember what the factory default was? I expect most people who aren't au fait with pickup patterns will either leave it on the factory default or put it in stereo (which looks very similar to omni).
Most inexpensive mics ($100-$400) are cardioid only, but I’d say the most important information is how to do placement. Beginners think in terms of pointing the microphone at a sound source you want to pick up, but you should also think about what directions the microphone rejects and point the mic away from noise sources you don’t want to hear.
That, and stop putting the mic so damn close to your mouth.
One thing he didn't differentiate on was the microphone and its appearance in video casting.
While there are many good choices, the Shure SM7B is the quintessential desk or studio microphone for recording vocals. However, it is a bulky monster and will take up a _lot_ of real estate in a video frame. If you're audio-only, that's not an issue, your vocals will sound awesome.
For video, I really think an off-camera mic on a boom stand in sound treated room is the best option for seated, stationary casting. Many hypercardioid vocal microphones most people have actually work fairly well in this setup. Treating panels doesn't even need to be expensive; this youtuber made really nice looking ones from towels: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVEXp87TTrs
I don't like the sound or intrusive look of a lapel mic or the noise it picks up, for moving sequences, it's probably the best option unless you can hire a grip.
Surprisingly the monoprice 600700 pencil condenser with a hypercardiod capsule works really well for this, and it’s way cheaper than mid range shotguns.
I love me a good boom mic (as mentioned in my own post I have a Synco D2, which is a shockingly good Sennheiser MKH416 knockoff, sitting above my head right now) but they do have disadvantages. If you have a mechanical keyboard, it's really hard to position one 1) out of frame, and 2) so the pickup area isn't gonna be going rattle-rattle-rattle.
There's no great middle ground. I'd rather have it than a SM7B, though, that's for sure.
I hope that nobody reading this thinks you HAVE to have these things to work from home. I've been WFH for the better part of a decade. Audio: A $25 Logitech H390. Video: A MS 720p webcam. Cost: Maybe $60 USD tops? I'm not in meetings all day, but really it's not that big of a deal when I am.
One small point I'd like to make regarding USB mics (and USB headsets): the #1 rule of digital audio is to only have a single sample clock for the entire system (the sample clock is the thing that defines when a voltage value gets converted to/generated from a digital sample).
Although I understand the plug-n-play appeal of these devices, they uniformly violate this rule because they cannot share whatever sample clock is being used for the other "direction" (i.e. the USB mic has its own clock, which is independent from the one used for playback).
Using these sorts of devices implicitly requires the audio software stack to do resampling to keep both input and output in sync with each other. For podcasting the change in quality that this causes is probably not an issue, but users should at least be aware this is happening under the hood.
You're much better off getting a cheap USB audio interface, an XLR mic and doing both recording and playback via the same device (with a single sample clock).
I've recently made a present for myself on birthday - behringer umc22 + sm 58 mic. previous to that present were m40x headphones.
After using those headphones for couple years, I now see the difference between audio output of a laptop and simple interface like umc22 (which has own DAC + amp as I understand).
I have not found much use for mic yet (guess no one has called me since), besides recording birds outside, and generally having fun with it :D but I definitely love how headphones sound after getting audio interface (or DAC+amp part of it)
Are you claiming to be able to "hear" resampling, and I dont mean 20 year old naive implementations like Cretive SB Live. Sample clock, and its phase is irrelevant as long as you pass Nyquist threshold, reconstructed signal will be indistinguishable from original.
I cite xiph.org/monty's videos to people all the time, just to be clear (I write a DAW for a living).
If you check out infinitewave.ca you will see that actually there are still lots of resampling implementations with notable artifacts, certainly when subject to measurement.
Can you hear them? Depends on the nature of the artifacts. I'd agree that in general, the answer is no.
Nevertheless, it is still wrong in my opinion for these mics to be spreading (or even being made) without it being clear what they imply for the user. You might not hear the effect, and you might not care, but you should understand clearly what using these devices require from whatever software stack you're using.
To be honest, investing in a whole studio setup for remote work seems to go against one of the biggest perks of remote work itself: freedom.
Stock is usually good enough. That money is better invested on a pair of comfortable headphones, and also some good on-the-go light headphones with micro to hold remote calls outside of a quiet environment.
Freedom to arrange my workspace in whatever form makes me the most effective, productive, and comfortable sounds like freedom to me.
But most importantly, I'm 100% sure my expensive ($1500-ish?) audio setup has been a competitive advantage for me. I've had numerous people comment that they are relieved when they find out they can comfortably converse with me, and how outside the norm that is. From my own experience, I can attest that most people are oblivious to the discomfort they can cause by not putting reasonable effort into the quality of their team or client's experience.
Two things annoy me greatly enough to want to avoid having to work with someone.
1. Being late / unprepared / distracted in meetings
2. Having to tolerate a literal headache due to background noise, awful sound quality, or constant technical issues during a call.
It mostly seems unnecessary even if I'm doing calls from my office, as opposed to when I'm traveling or otherwise not at home. I have a dedicated office with decent lighting (and not backlit) and a good Logitech webcam. That's more than a lot of people I work with have. Anything more would really be overkill and probably not even noticeable on a typical video call.
Hell, I've been trying to get coworkers to just get webcams and it is an uphill battle. There is so much non-verbal communication that you lose working remote, it's harder still when you can't even see the person.
A number of teams I work with have fairly strict "Cameras on unless there's some reason you can't (e.g. you're driving)" rules. In general, I think it's a good idea. I know not everyone likes video but it's one of those things you should really do IMO if everyone isn't co-located.
It’s disappointing to see the Shure SM7B recommended so widely for use in residential environments. While Shure’s classic offering is popular among 2020 media creators (Joe Rogan, Bret Weinstein, and streamers like Tfue or SypherPK) it is still cruel and unforgiving of poor microphone technique, audio reflection, and background noise. Considering its high noise floor when driven by all but the nicest preamps, other options are just more attractive overall.
It’s not that the SM7B is bad. Like any high end tool it requires to skill (and other high end tools) to be effective. Even in amateur hands it can sound great. But for $350 the average podcaster, streamer, or remote worker can do much better.
I like the EV RE320; it's way easier to use (don't have to be a perfectionist for technique / distance, at least IMO as much as the SM7B), and it's usually discounted at least $100 less.
The Rode RE20 is a very similar mic used in broadcast radio scenarios almost as much as the SM7, mostly because it is so forgiving of poor technique, and when you have guests on radio shows, it's not nice (or often even possible) to force them to be a certain distance from the mic, and use a certain technique.
Shure's SM58 and SM57 have the same capsule as the SM7B for 1/3 the price and fuss.
Like the Rolex Submariner, the SM58 has been cloned at lower and lower prices since its introduction. The design is solid regardless of the price point. Imitations from Pyle and Audio Technica sound great and cost less, but aren't as rugged.
If you _want_ to spend money for more pleasing tone the Beta 87A from Shure is outstanding. As are similar cardioid microphones from Electro Voice and Neumann
I will 100% back up the SM57 (to a slightly lesser extend the SM58, but it's still an easy make). I've also had no problems with Samson C02s[0] (though they can be bright if you don't EQ them well, but have great isolation) and the MXL 2003A[1] (much warmer—great for vox all around). All are relatively affordable.
I've also driven a truck over an SM58, dropped it about a dozen times, and seen them smashed up beyond recognition—and they still sound as good as new. Those things are built like tanks.
That line of Shure's in general are amazing. I've got an old 565SD from the 60s or 70s that was given to me. It's beat to all hell and still sounds fantastic and is totally reliable. They've re-released them as well if anyone's into the shiny thing
The SM58’s best feature is it’s ubiquity (so you know exactly what you’re in for) and how rugged and dependable it is. That’s why they’re everywhere in stage sound IMHO. I don’t really like the sound though. For me it’s lacking in high end. A decent condenser mic (like the 87A for example) will do much better in this regard. Such mics need phantom power but most audio interfaces provide that.
- Sony makes great cameras but the lenses are expensive. You can get an old Panasonic GH3 and a camlink and the lenses will be cheaper, while the image quality won't (for this sort of use) be affected much at all.
- You don't need a freakin' SM7B for this stuff. I do audio engineering as one of my too-many side gigs and the most expensive microphone I own is the Synco D2, an interesting little MKH416 knockoff shotgun microphone. It was $225. It's above my head right now, I was on a call an hour ago. It's out of frame and it sounds great. While the PR40 (which personally I prefer to a SM7B) or the SM7B are great mics for what they are, the delta between them and much cheaper competitors is not that significant.
- You don't really need hardware to tune your audio stack, aside possibly from a preamp if you bought the wrong microphone (in this case, defined as "the SM7B"). Use your computer. It's fast enough, it can save multiple presets, and it will get out of your way.
- Software matters. I use vMix for everything: live streaming and recording. This is where I recommend spending money. vMix has a reasonably featured (for the purpose--videography and audio to go with it) audio system, able to use ASIO with Windows and to use VSTs. It can support half a dozen cameras (my road kit uses 4, my home setup uses 6) and as many voices as your interface can, while supporting multi-record for archival footage/alternate takes and a nice tablet-control interface that's topped only by Logic Remote in this space (and if you're only doing audio, Logic Pro on a Mac is a no-brainer).
Somewhat off topic, but I've thought this would be quite a useful thing to do just for helping my focus while working, kind of like having a permanant rubber duck.
Has anyone ever had experience of "live coding" at a company, and if so, how do you manage things like, not broadcasting a database secret, etc.
Are there any examples of companies letting people record their work? I remember a lot of videos floating around about "a day in the life at X" style things.
Actually, I just started doing this yesterday. I had streamed a handful of times on Twitch (channel the same name as my username here) for side projects before, but I just joined a startup as a co-founder and decided to try streaming during work hours.
A couple tips:
- Use multiple monitors - this is almost a hard requirement
- Separate secrets into their own files.
- Exclude secret files from your IDE/editor search
- Make the second monitor the main monitor so notifications and what not go there
- On that second (or third monitor), put everything that isn't your editor
Be prepared for few to no viewers. Remember the point is to help keep you focused, not get attention.
Re: secrets, I'd say never work on production while streaming. Don't keep production credentials on your local machine either. Keep a local .env.development file with local credentials ONLY.
If you work in the cloud, usually database secrets and the like will be obscured as well in password fields. Same as in password managers, e.g. 1password has a 'copy' button, and displaying it is an explicit button you have to press.
I recently got a green screen to use during my video conferencing. I thought it would be fun just to mess with my co-workers, make it look like I'm on the Mars or something. I've yet to figure out how to get it to work with gotomeeting/skype/hangouts video though. I've found apps that can do it for recorded video, but I suppose it's on the camera to have the chroma effect available. Which the one I have doesn't do. I don't want to spend too much just for a joke.
I've done it for shits and giggles. Every once in a while I set it up when the team needs a laugh. If you use Linux, it isn't too hard to set up a virtual camera source that OBS Studio writes to.
Thanks, I think this is what I need. I've done it with some streaming software out there. But it needs to come from a camera source to spoof it into a regular Hangouts meet I believe.
mkdir -p ~/src
cd ~/src
sudo add-apt-repository ppa:obsproject/obs-studio
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install obs-studio
sudo apt install qtbase5-dev
git clone --recursive https://github.com/obsproject/obs-studio.git
git clone https://github.com/CatxFish/obs-v4l2sink.git
cd obs-v4l2sink
mkdir build && cd build
cmake -DLIBOBS_INCLUDE_DIR="../../obs-studio/libobs" -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr ..
make -j4
sudo make install
cd ../..
git clone https://github.com/umlaeute/v4l2loopback.git
cd v4l2loopback/
sudo apt install libelf-dev
make
sudo make install
sudo depmod -a
ls /dev/video*
sudo modprobe v4l2loopback exclusive_caps=1 video_nr=9
ls /dev/video*
You should see a video9
Open OBS
Tools menu -> V4L2 Video Output
(It will look really squished, but you only have to do this once)
Path to V4L2 Device: enter /dev/video9
Hit Start button, close window
In Sources pane near lower left, hit the "+" button, then Video Capture Device (V4L2)
In new dialog, select your actual webcam (not the new device)
In resolution, select 1920 x 1080
Now you can test: hit the "Start Recording" button in lower right.
Spending money on decent lights and cameras to then block the view with a GIANT microphone doesn't make sense to me. I've been involved with professional audio for 23 years--if I were doing this, I would use a decent single ear, earset style mic. That would keep the mic out of view, provide excellent sound quality, and keep the audio consistent if you turn your head (away from a fixed mic).
It actually drives me nuts when podcasters use the SM7B mic and have their low-end cranked or don't apply a strong enough HPF to compensate for the mic's proximity effect. That's incredibly tiring to my ears--I usually end up reducing the low end via my playback device's EQ.
99% of the pre-amp options don't matter as long as you get a strong, clean signal into a decent ADC stage. Spend your efforts on learning how to properly process the signal chain instead (apply High-pass filter, proper gain, apply dynamic compression, possibly EQ/de-ess, etc.).
> 99% of the pre-amp options don't matter as long as you get a strong, clean signal into a decent ADC stage.
It turns out this is actually hard, when you use inexpensive preamps, typical microphones, and you’re recording voice at home. Getting a strong signal means more gain than onboard preamps in inexpensive interfaces typically provide, which is why you might want to get an outboard preamp or use an inline device like the fethead. Getting a clean signal means learning how to do mic placement, doing some room treatment, etc.
From what I understand, there’s a limit to how much clean gain you can get from a single amplifier stage, and it’s often just not enough. I was very skeptical about getting an outboard preamp but it ended up making a much larger difference than I thought it would.
> Mine is the C930e, but Wirecutter now recommends the c920s, which is cheaper and adds a privacy shield.
Ah, Wirecutter. The same guys who will one year absolutely recommend dual-hose portable ACs (and cite many sources, including the Department of Energy) and utterly demolish the efficiency of single hose models. Then, next year, say that this is not actually important at all. Because they are less practical or something. Which is an argument they themselves discarded just one year prior.
What changed? That's left as an exercise for the reader.
They may be fine if you use them to check products that you might otherwise have missed. But as far as recommendations go, I'm not sure they have no agenda.
I was a bit surprised to see the recommendation of another inline preamp in the chain with the Focusrite. He recommends a TRITON AUDIO FetHead Filter in-Line Microphone Preamp. Does anyone have further experience with this setup? I've been using my MXL Mics 770 Cardioid Condenser Microphone with a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 with nothing in-between. I know I've got the gain dialed up pretty high but it never occurred to me to put something else in between them. I'd love to hear your experiences and recommendations. Is an in-line preamp worth it?
I run a Shure SM57 - which is not exactly the same mic, but it's a very similar dynamic microphone that's also VERY quiet. I run it into a Scarlett 2i4 - and it was terrible before I bought the FetHead. The preamp in the Scarlett just can't bring that microphone up to reasonable levels without picking up a LOT of hiss and noise - it sounded like garbage. Adding the FetHead totally fixed that.
You're running a condenser mic that's going to be a lot "louder" on it's own. Running the gain pretty high is fine if it doesn't seem noisey to you. It was 100% obvious I needed to do something else when I first attached my mic directly to the Scarlett.
I don't see that recommendation in the article. Rather it's specific to the SM7B which is famously pretty quiet.
I use a Cloudlifter with my SM-58 just because the gain it provides is a lot cleaner than my interface (Audiobox iOne) seems to provide at the top end.
It also gives you a little more headroom for doing things like talking at a greater distance from the mic (e.g. talk at 6-10" from the mic and still get great signal).
Of course, if the room acoustics are horrible, that's not going to sound nearly as good as talking close to the mic, but if you have a decent sounding room it is freeing to not have to be close (and a good mic won't necessarily sound worse at slightly longer distances).
The preamps in your Focusrite are decent, and you have a condensor microphone which is probably louder than the dynamic microphone used for the video. You’re fine I’d say!
If you’d want more control over the sound before it goes into the computer, than a kind of channel strip unit with a preamp compressor and eq could make sense, although you can do all that in OBS as well.
It turns out the key for me was that my mic requires phantom power and that the Fethead blocks it from reaching the mic. There are apparently some versions of the Fethead that allow pass-through of phantom power, but not the one I tried. I guess I'm stuck with the gain from the mic & the 2i2 as-is.
I've been doing remote work and videos for a while. I sort of took my built-in camera for granted even though I've had better tools available.
Recently, started using the base logitech webcam and have gotten several mentions about how much better the video is from people on the other side of the calls. That sort of drove it home for me.
Don't know why it took me so long for it to "hit" - gonna probably pick up a couple things in this post - thanks.
Any suggestions for maintaining sound and video quality when you are interviewing/featuring someone remote, who does not have any special sound or video equipment beyond what they have on their laptop? Would you keep a modest kit with decent webcam and mic that you can mail them with a return label? I've heard of at least one podcaster doing this.
The comments here were as helpful as the original post - thanks all.
I just did a bunch of this over Christmas, and it was a ton of fun to set up.
The way I see it...people work in these offices that cost hundreds of thousands, so I will benefit from looking somewhat professional on my calls from home.
One frustrating note: we use RingCentral/Zoom at work, and they only work with the Elgato CamLink once. After one call with proper video, I have to reset my PRAM.
Another audio option I don't see mentioned often is a headset with a boom microphone. Some of my best sounding coworkers have these. They also typically have ambient sound rejection, meaning you can be in a relatively noisy environment (AC) and still sound good.
A nice pair of headphones can have a boom mike added with little hassle, using something like an Antlion Modmic.
I have the Elgato Camlink, which is way cheaper, but I’ve been wondering whether the Web Presenter would be a more foolproof solution. For OBS the Camlink is fine, because I’m able to get a signal by manually configuring the source frame rate. But non of the cameras I’ve tried will show up in Skype—or if they do, they drop out at some point. How is your experience with the Web Presenter, does it show up as a webcam reliably across software?
From my experience it shows up reliably, using any web related platform, and also dev work with webcam related react/JS libraries, the BMD device works well. (No different than the built in Mac/etc camera.
One item that the author didn't touch on was internet connection. I would imagine that streaming with a 4k camera, even with codecs and compression and stuff that i know little about, would both take a decent sized upload pipe as well as no capping on uploaded data.
Does anyone have more info about this piece of the set up?
15-20 Mbps uplink will be enough for most situations, at 4K. It's not like you'll be streaming ProRes or some other minimal/no-compression data. You should be encoding a compressed stream and sending that to the streaming service. For 1080p, you can probably get by with 10-15 Mbps up, though it is better to have more bandwidth since you might have other things pushing data up at the same time.
What remote meeting app even supports 4K? Of all the ones I’ve seen they barely can even do 720 and even then it’s almost always pixelated at some point.
I've recently been thinking about really improving my home office lighting setup. For example, most of my meetings are with Zoom and on video, and proper studio lighting can go a long way to making a good impression. We all want to look good, right?
I've been thinking the same, well that I need to get better lighting in general - I have remote calls daily and during the summer that's fine because there's sunlight all the time whilst I'm working.
But now in the winter, it gets dark quite early and my normal room lighting is not bright enough. Doesn't make me look exactly as if I'm sitting in the dark but it's close to it :P
A little off topic: has anyone managed to have chroma key effect on Mac ? I'm also thinking to have almost same concept youtube channel. But, I also want to have chroma-key background. any ideas ?
Also look at Black Magic ATEM Mini https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/atemmini - you need to connect a camera with HDMI output to it (i.e., something like a Panasonic G7) rather than a webcam, but it'll do the green screen in-device and output an HDMI signal. You can then run that into a USB3 HDMI capture device that will show up as a normal webcam.
iMovie, Adobe Premier, Final Cut Pro, and Screenflow (screen casting software) all have chromakey.
The Zoom app, and the Logitech C922, each have live background replacement ("virtual green screen").
For post-production without a physical green screen, you can use a green rectangle as your virtual background in Zoom or with the Logitech, import into iMovie etc., and chromakey there.
I've done it without too much trouble. I did have to compile and load a small kernel module, but it wasn't too hard. I have notes on how I did it if you're interested. Most of my time was spent in OBS tweaking the look.
I hate doing video on calls. But I might be more willing with a stylish red beanie. My appearance is my biggest concern and a stylish hat is a good idea.
If you goto the OP's Youtube channel and listen to his recordings, for example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lh0sTxLs9VA, there is a HUGE amount of hiss / static in his audio, to the point where I would be uncomfortable listening to his voice for a long period of time at a medium volume. He's using the $400 Shure mic in that video too.
The $100 for the dedicated 2nd pre-amp with the Triton seems pretty wasteful. As an alternative, for $299 you can pick up the DBX 286s pre-amp[0] which also acts as a noise gate (helps filter hiss / static), de-esser, compressor and basic EQ together. It's an awesome piece of hardware and offers way more bang for your buck.
Also the AT2005[1] mic is a solid upgrade from the AT2100 that he recommends, and both are about the same price. IMO the AT2005 is worth using as an end-game microphone. The AT2005 is one of those crazy mics where it almost feels like it's mis-priced at $80 and the DBX 286 has enough knobs and buttons to make it sound good with a number of different types of voices.
Ultimately your real natural voice is going to play one of the biggest roles in how you sound in the end.
[0]: https://amzn.to/2VPbmMc
[1]: https://amzn.to/39hyQwI
(Yes these are affiliate links, I've been using both pieces of hardware for years)