wst3

Danny Danzi
Honest Paul, with the right mic on the right voice at close range, you seriously have to have a problem in that room to literally hear it messing up a voice on a recording.

I may be coming at this from a different direction, but I have to respectfully disagree.


First, you'd be surprised at how bad some rooms are. People record in really bad spaces. As someone that grew up working in purpose built studios I find it disturbing, but that's a different topic. As someone that has designed a few studios (some of which even worked), and been asked to help correct quite a few studios (both critical listening and recording spaces), I can tell you there are some really bad rooms out there, and $300 is not a lot to spend to fix them!


The problems can be mitigated for less, but some folks do not wish to spend the time building gobos, or even draping moving blankets on mic stands. To each their own.


For the record, but not directly OT, I don't really like the sound of most of the reflection filter type designs. You have to know quite a bit about selection and placement to get them to sound good - and if you know all that stuff you may not need one<G>!


I have a space right now that is pretty bad - not awful, but bad enough that I do have to think about it. I use a music stand covered with old Sonex panels to provide some noise reduction and isolation. It's a real poor man's gobo<G>!


Second - you might be surprised at how many folks do not have the microphone they need to record their voices. Microphones, good microphones anyway, are still not cheap. And that makes it a bit tricky! My microphone locker is modest, but I can usually find something that can works. When I can't then I rent what I really want<G>!


All this to say that you aren't wrong - the key to recording is the proper microphone in the proper spot. With these two dragons bested you minimize the need for compression or filters. (All this assumes that you have a good performance to record<G>!)


But, by the same token I'm not sure I think it is good advice to dismiss, out of hand, something like the SE Reflexion Filter. It is a tool, and in the proper hands, used properly, it can be a really good tool.


That's all...

That's quite ok in my book, Bill. It's perfectly fine to disagree. :) That said, if neither of us have had the experience of the other, it's easy for us to not be able to relate. In my experience (been at this over 30 years, not that it means anything...but it's experience lol) a room has never ruined a vocal take at close range to the point of that vocal take being un-useable.
 
Bad rooms or not...I've never encountered an issue like this. Even with cheaper mics. I just really don't feel enough room gets into the scheme of things to ruin the take or make you feel a reprint is in order. Once the music is behind the vocal, if there IS any room artifacts, you will not hear enough of them in my experience. But even there...if you are close range at a mic, how much reflection are you going to hear? I guess I've just gotten used to processing and eq-ing a vocal as an entity within the room.
 
Sure, some rooms make a difference in the quality of the vocal. But the same can be said about the person singing. Even in a bad room, a terrific vocal performance says it all. Though at times we may get some artifacts, there's never been a vocal that I couldn't make work is what I'm saying. There's never been enough of the artifacts to ruin the take.
 
I think that any skilled engineer that knows what they are doing can make things work with little to no work really, don't you? I mean seriously...enough to justify a $300 purchase? So to me, I think it is good advice because if a person were to hone their skills a bit, they wouldn't need to rely on a contraption like this unless they literally recorded in a bathroom. I just can't see a basic office, bedroom, basement or whatever, being so much of a problem, that a close range vocal would be ruined because of it.
 
After reading this thread and then your respectful reply of disagreement, I took the liberty to experiment a bit in several rooms in my house using a 57 into my lap-top with a little Joe Meek pre. I can't hear any room artifacts that would ruin anything....and this includes both of my bathrooms. There's a little something there in my main bathroom, but nothing that ruins anything like people are making rooms out to do.
 
Definitely with you on choosing the right mic. But even there, I've never had a room destroy a close range vocal take. There are many ways we can process a vocal to take artifacts a bit more out of the recording if we need to. I've never been faced with having to do that other than when someone literally got too much room in the recording from being far away from the mic...that's all I'm trying to say.
 
We're talking rooms in people's homes though....bedroom engineers, right? How truly bad can they be? A bit different from someone that builds a studio that may have an "empty, untreated room" ya know? Even there...give me the close range vocal take where the room destroyed the take, give me the stems of the music beds and I will make it work. I just can't fathom this until I hear it and deal with it myself. That's the best way *I* can explain it.
 
Honestly, I'm not trying to be confrontational....it's just that in all my years, none of this has happened to me and I'm not just a bedroom wannabe. I've worked with artists from all over the world, recorded myself for 100 years, have worked in several big recording studio's as well as smaller project studios in the USA and have been in some really messed up situations. Yet I've never encountered a room destroying anything but a drum sound. Maybe I've just been lucky...and if that's the case, thank you Jesus. :)
 
-Danny

Hey Danny

    In my room, the reflection filter has definately earned it's keep.  Prior to making any money in music, I recorded all my stuff with no reflection filter, the recordings were not "ruined" per se, but they certainly got alot better sounding, and cleaner with the filter.  My room has a certain ..'uglyness' going on.  I have no idea why, but it it's very obvious on my acoustic guitars and less obvious on vocals, but still annoyingly there.

    Danny has much more experience than me, I can only give perspective from 'my' experience in 'my' room.  A vocal take might not be ruined without a reflection filter, just like a vocal take would still be usable with a, less than ideal mic.  But having the right tools for the right room can sound better from the get-go, instead of having to EQ shape stuff later. 

    Just my 2 cents.  I am not one to jump on audio bandwagons with subjects I can't hear..like, if different EQ's really 'sound' different, or the tone difference between using Duracell or Energizer batteries in my wah pedal...but with the reflection filter, I can honestly say that it was worth the purchase, for me.

    If I had the mixing skills of Danny, I'm sure using a reflection filter or better mic would be less important, but at my stage, I am trying to get all the advantage I can get, before I ruin it with plugs, EQ's and faders :)

(I recently purchased Waves Renaissance and can't help but throw all the RCompressors on everything! Someone stop me!)

One cannot argue with another's experience. My experience is that a vocal track recorded in a bad room my not be that noticeable on a poor monitoring system, but, listen to that vocal track on a high-end monitoring system and you will hear quite clearly the phase issues due to the bad room. Larger rooms are more forgiving, but small rooms that are poorly treated require some mitigation. The Reflexion Filter is one way. Is it worth the money? That's up to you to decide.

In professional studios they go to extremes to avoid a poor quality vocal tracks (or any other track) before hitting the recording device. It is always better to record clean tracks going in than try and repair them after the fact. This is based on my more than fifty years making music and being owner of a professional studio for more years than I care to admit to. 

Danny is a very knowledgeable and capable engineer, not to mention being very talented musician. However, our experience has not been the same as far as this topic is concerned.

Just so you guys see I'm not totally out of my tree. Mic's don't get any worse than this.

Logitech cam mic 2 ft away: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/4909348/Logi2ftAway.mp3

Logitech cam mic up close: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/4909348/LogiCloseRange.mp3

I hear the room in effect in the first one....the second one however, is not giving me anything to be concerned with other than the mic and fidelity are horrible.

-Danny

Actually Danny, the problem can be worse with more expensive (more sensitive) mics. As pointed out earlier in this thread, there is a reason that 57 & 58's are used in live venues. They are less prone to picking-up anything not in close proximity to the mic.

Also, there are so many variables to take into consideration. The volume of the recording space (room), the room treatment, the mic, and the level at which the singer is singing. Obviously, if the singer is singing very softly in close to the mic the less chance of the room having much of an impact.
Conversely, even up close, if the singer is singing loudly into a sensitive condenser mic the room will be more prominent.

I think I was first to reply to this thread..............so have given it a re think after the views here....
 
Danny, I've read so many of your posts and you have just a great way of communicating and supporting so many people with your knowledge. I just watched your transient shaper videos. Great. I learned  things and your presentation technique is so personable. Because of this I went back a re asked my self the question first asked re re reflection filters.
 
All I can say is than I can give an unequivocal statement. The vocal recordings I make in my room are very much more usable within a mix if I have used a reflection filter. It happens to be one of my best purchases. I've fooled myself many times that kit that I've bought, mainly plugins or audio interfaces or even amps, sound great or better than what I had before,  I wanted to justify to myself the money I spent on the damn things. However, when I first used a reflection filter with and added duvet behind, the improvement made the biggest +++ impact on the quality of my recordings. I also use it for brass, acoustic guitar (mono is my go to for acoustic) and harmonica. 
 
There was a certain No 1 UK album (girl singer) 2 years ago where a Rode NT1a and a reflection filter were used on all the vocals in a room with little treatment. Add to that talent,  a beautiful voice and great songs, then thats all you need for a vocal set up. At least I've got the first two !!!!
 
Now where is my talent booster...........

I'd make a test recording for you but I gave my SE reflector to someone who thought it looked cool.


That seemed like the easiest way to get rid of it.


best regards,
mike

I think it can change things, rarely for the better, but it can certainly make changes you can hear. 

I liken it to the types of frequency response modification that happens when a mic capsule is installed in a different windscreen. There are a examples of mics that use the same capsule but sound different, I think this extends that idea a bit.

I've tried it at the place where it ended up... I didn't use it at my place. I already have 2' x 4' x 12" thick gobos so it seemed like an ineffectual size compared to anything I can do with them.


If and when I use the gobos I use them as absorbers rather than reflectors.



I think if you are hearing a difference that you like with one of the smaller reflectors that you could probably just put any old 18" x 24" board back there to create the reflection induced comb filtering.


best regards,
mike

bitflipper


As stated above, there is a good reason for using SM58s in a live setting. It's the same reason putting an SE filter behind them is useless. One thing folks forget is that it's not the walls that are the nearest reflecting surface - it's the ceiling. If there is no absorption above you, and your ceiling is less than 12-15 feet high, you're going to have issues with your vocals. Issues the SE filter does not address. Good point about expensive microphones being potentially more prone than a cheap 58 to room problems. But that's mostly a matter of polar pattern. An LDC is more sensitive, true, but all you have to do is turn down the gain and get closer to the mic. You then have to deal with the proximity effect, which is not impossible. Of course, if you had a great-sounding room you could put your expensive mic in omni and avoid the proximity effect. But if your room sounded great, you wouldn't need an SE filter, either. (Sorry about the lack of formatting. I'm not used to using Firefox, but it's what I have on my laptop.)

bit, I think you nailed it. I just went through a few rooms in my house with various mics. One thing I didn't mention because it didn't dawn on me until I actually read your post was...all my rooms down stairs have a drop ceiling with tiles. Some are plain weak foam-like, but most are those heavy duty things that are nearly like little pieces of sheet-rock and weigh like 3 lbs or so.
 
I happened to go up stairs in my house where I have regular ceilings. Of course my main living room has a pop-corn ceiling type thing going on, so nothing happened there. Room is pretty big too. I noticed a slight reflection in one room I have that is pretty empty, but there is a catch to that. It's a guest room with nothing in it but a bed and a dresser. The reflection was nothing that would bother me nor would it be something that would force me to perform surgery on a vocal track.
 
The weird thing is...this only happened on my good mic's while switching through the different patterns like figure 8 and omni. This happened with every good mic I tried, but hyper cardioid and regular cardioid totally eliminated the problem. So for me, I'm still back to square one and can't see a neeed for this filter thing. My Shure 57/58, EV PL 60, 357, 457, 757 all showed 0 room reflections at close range.
 
-Danny

I guess I should have added that I don't ever use any type of reflection filter if I am close micing a SM57 or 58 either; only when using a vocal mic and recording 8"-12" off the mic.

Danny you mentioned that your ceilings have thick, drop ceiling type treatments in the rooms you record in.  I think that is a great observation.  I suspect that building materials and the way structures are built in different parts of the country can contribute to the way a room sounds or reflects.

In my area, homes are built on concrete slabs and exterior walls are often made of brick. We usually have lots of very large windows in these homes.  The room that gave me the most issues was a small bedroom that was almost completely cubical, 10'-6" x 11' x 9'h (ceiling), concrete floor (carpeted) 2 exterior walls brick, with a large window on one wall, and a large double French door entrance.  Just a lot of reflective materials.

So yes, it seems to work well for me to cut down on some of the reflections for vocal and acoustical type recordings.

Everyone has made some good points and observations. Reflexion Filters do not solve all of your room problems. But, they can help somewhat if used correctly. Are they worth $ 300.00? Not to me.

I do, however, own one that was given to me several years ago. I use it once in a while for vocals and do notice some improvements. Even in my well treated room with absorption panels suspended overhead in my vocal tracking area.

Hey, if you like what it does to your track, use it. There are certainly less expensive ways of getting isolation around your vocal mic.

Spend the money on a Shure SM7b and keep the change.

JazzSinger


Spend the money on a Shure SM7b and keep the change.

But then all your recordings will sound like someone singing into an SM7b!

Danny Danzi

wst3

Danny Danzi
Honest Paul, with the right mic on the right voice at close range, you seriously have to have a problem in that room to literally hear it messing up a voice on a recording.

I may be coming at this from a different direction, but I have to respectfully disagree.


First, you'd be surprised at how bad some rooms are. People record in really bad spaces. As someone that grew up working in purpose built studios I find it disturbing, but that's a different topic. As someone that has designed a few studios (some of which even worked), and been asked to help correct quite a few studios (both critical listening and recording spaces), I can tell you there are some really bad rooms out there, and $300 is not a lot to spend to fix them!


The problems can be mitigated for less, but some folks do not wish to spend the time building gobos, or even draping moving blankets on mic stands. To each their own.


For the record, but not directly OT, I don't really like the sound of most of the reflection filter type designs. You have to know quite a bit about selection and placement to get them to sound good - and if you know all that stuff you may not need one<G>!


I have a space right now that is pretty bad - not awful, but bad enough that I do have to think about it. I use a music stand covered with old Sonex panels to provide some noise reduction and isolation. It's a real poor man's gobo<G>!


Second - you might be surprised at how many folks do not have the microphone they need to record their voices. Microphones, good microphones anyway, are still not cheap. And that makes it a bit tricky! My microphone locker is modest, but I can usually find something that can works. When I can't then I rent what I really want<G>!


All this to say that you aren't wrong - the key to recording is the proper microphone in the proper spot. With these two dragons bested you minimize the need for compression or filters. (All this assumes that you have a good performance to record<G>!)


But, by the same token I'm not sure I think it is good advice to dismiss, out of hand, something like the SE Reflexion Filter. It is a tool, and in the proper hands, used properly, it can be a really good tool.


That's all...

That's quite ok in my book, Bill. It's perfectly fine to disagree. :) That said, if neither of us have had the experience of the other, it's easy for us to not be able to relate. In my experience (been at this over 30 years, not that it means anything...but it's experience lol) a room has never ruined a vocal take at close range to the point of that vocal take being un-useable.
 
Bad rooms or not...I've never encountered an issue like this. Even with cheaper mics. I just really don't feel enough room gets into the scheme of things to ruin the take or make you feel a reprint is in order. Once the music is behind the vocal, if there IS any room artifacts, you will not hear enough of them in my experience. But even there...if you are close range at a mic, how much reflection are you going to hear? I guess I've just gotten used to processing and eq-ing a vocal as an entity within the room.
 
Sure, some rooms make a difference in the quality of the vocal. But the same can be said about the person singing. Even in a bad room, a terrific vocal performance says it all. Though at times we may get some artifacts, there's never been a vocal that I couldn't make work is what I'm saying. There's never been enough of the artifacts to ruin the take.
 
I think that any skilled engineer that knows what they are doing can make things work with little to no work really, don't you? I mean seriously...enough to justify a $300 purchase? So to me, I think it is good advice because if a person were to hone their skills a bit, they wouldn't need to rely on a contraption like this unless they literally recorded in a bathroom. I just can't see a basic office, bedroom, basement or whatever, being so much of a problem, that a close range vocal would be ruined because of it.
 
After reading this thread and then your respectful reply of disagreement, I took the liberty to experiment a bit in several rooms in my house using a 57 into my lap-top with a little Joe Meek pre. I can't hear any room artifacts that would ruin anything....and this includes both of my bathrooms. There's a little something there in my main bathroom, but nothing that ruins anything like people are making rooms out to do.
 
Definitely with you on choosing the right mic. But even there, I've never had a room destroy a close range vocal take. There are many ways we can process a vocal to take artifacts a bit more out of the recording if we need to. I've never been faced with having to do that other than when someone literally got too much room in the recording from being far away from the mic...that's all I'm trying to say.
 
We're talking rooms in people's homes though....bedroom engineers, right? How truly bad can they be? A bit different from someone that builds a studio that may have an "empty, untreated room" ya know? Even there...give me the close range vocal take where the room destroyed the take, give me the stems of the music beds and I will make it work. I just can't fathom this until I hear it and deal with it myself. That's the best way *I* can explain it.
 
Honestly, I'm not trying to be confrontational....it's just that in all my years, none of this has happened to me and I'm not just a bedroom wannabe. I've worked with artists from all over the world, recorded myself for 100 years, have worked in several big recording studio's as well as smaller project studios in the USA and have been in some really messed up situations. Yet I've never encountered a room destroying anything but a drum sound. Maybe I've just been lucky...and if that's the case, thank you Jesus. :)
 
-Danny

To be fair Danny you should have used a different mic to do your test. The SM57 has an extremely effective cardioid pickup pattern that isolates the main sound while minimizing background noise. You should have used a condenser instead of a dynamic mic. The higher end will bring about more room reflections. Something like the Sure beta 181. That is a condenser mic that is bi-directional. It will pick up a lot more room reflections then the sm57. 


I agree that mic choice does play an important role. although the 57 is good for what it does, When I record vocals and acoustic guitar I like to use a condenser. These mics will produce more room reflections. I think a product like this is marketed towards a guy like me. I just have a little project studio. I would never be able to record live drums here due to the limited space. I have a single room for recording and I am lucky to have that. this room is also my office and my storage for all my gear. Sound proofing is bad. I would like a better room for just recording but that is something I just don't have or can afford.


That being said I would never spend 300.00 on this thing. I have made my own reflection filters by using mic stands and a blanket. I have made my own pop filters by using panty hose and a coat hanger. When your on a tight budget and the money has to be divided up between software, instruments and live gear, Things like this fall by the wayside. I could find a much better use for 300.00


don't get me wrong, I do agree with most of your points. The further back you are from the mic the more room reflections you are going to get. my mic collection is modest and so is my gear collection.


In the end your not going to get as many reflections using something like a sure sm57 as opposed to a high end condenser. But I understand your points. 

Does all this mean room treatment is for monitoring only?...

I am someone who uses a nice sounding space for monitoring, band tracking and vocal recording. Read my post #26. It describes the use of a nice treated room and a makeshift vocal recording space using two baffles. It works because the sound inside there is quite superior to any reflection filter.  Also it features a roof, stopping any sounds from above being picked up. The use of a downward expander during tracking renders the whole recording pristine and near perfect.