Upload quality

Michael Minetree

When you upload to 123 the files are further down sampled as many of us already know, but they are also converted to mono at the same time.

Try recording your voice file as mono, then convert it to a mono MP3 - 128 - 44.1, and upload your stuff.. It shouldnt give you any hassle. Also, dont send it audio signals any louder thatn -6 dB.

Dont ask the upload engine to do any more than it was meant to do and you should be fine. Uploading stereo files to the system is asking the conversion engine to do the stereo to mono conversion process for you. What it returns is sometimes not what you expected.

Send it a file that it has to do very little with in order of conversion and you might find it does less to your source audio when you do.

Anyway.. Why record your audition files as stereo? It is a mono signal to begin with..

Michael Minetree...
MineWurx Studio...
www.minewurx.com

Joni Lambert · Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006, 02:18 (GMT) Post subject:

I've been having a similar problem, so I called v123 tech support. They told me that is sounded fine on their end. Very odd.

Kevan Brighting · Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006, 03:05 (GMT) Post subject: May the force be with you

I contacted V123 soon after they had 'upgraded' to 64k because all of my demos were sounding awful (technically). I always record as mono 44.1k 16 bit. The irony is that my uploaded demos were fine before this so called improvement was introduced. Let's hope this gets fixed soon. What's the point of a voice audition site where all the talents sound like extras from Star Wars?
Kev

Louis Tristan · Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006, 03:33 (GMT) Post subject: The Force is Strong

Fear quality do you not?

Help me Obiwan, you're my only hope!

I hear you on that one..........

Bill Oxley

On SoundForge 8.0, I normalized to 96% peak level, wave hammered (-6.0/2.9:1/0db RMS/attack at 50ms and release at 100ms) and brought my 128 file down to 64 kbs at 95% modulation at 22,050...and it plays just swell. My earlier version at 128kbs was overdriven by the conversion, as many of you report. Mr. Molina's suggestion is correct, for me. Thanks all.

Alex Torrenegra · Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006, 06:45 (GMT) Post subject: Re: The Force is Strong

Louis Tristan · Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006, 13:41 (GMT) Post subject: Name that tune

We've been hearing this for the longest time Boo hoo!

All in all excellent work on the PHPBB layout and interface!

Nathan Lowe · Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006, 15:05 (GMT) Post subject:

Michael asks why record as a stereo file when mono will do nicely. I agree that mono will do a good job - these are by and large single track, dry vox trax. I use a session template with a stereo Master Fader on which I have a Mastering Limiter Plug-in and other goodies. This saves me time and the need to have multiple instances of any plug-ins I might need, and – if I need to submit with any efx or music, a stereo track for output is already there for me. Most of the time I keep the plug-ins bypassed - I don't need them for most applications, as I use outboard compresssion and EQ on my trax and have a hot mic (either a Senn 416 or Neumann M149), so my trax don't need a lot of help once in the box.

I agree too that asking the conversion engine to do a lot might not be a great idea, but remember - if the track is good coming in, it should be pretty good coming out. If there are no phase problems, if the signal is hot but not too hot, if the sampling rate and bit depth are right, and the mp3 you are uploading is a good quality, there should not be a problem if the conversion engine makes a stereo to mono conversion or a re-conversion from a high to a lower bit rate.

A lot of these issues - the 'Star Wars sound' and the distortion - sound like incorrect sampling rates and too much compression/Normalizing or trying to use a noise gate to mitigate unwanted ambience in a badly treated (or non-treated) recording space, IMHO. I am truly not trying to sound snobby - email and BB postings can be taken the wrong way too often - but I've found that a lot of people who are on V123 and other sites have just gotten a mic, a cheap interface, and a computer and start recording. The reality is that recording is an art - an art generally perfected by an engineer, who (unless you keep one in a closet) is not in the average home studio! Smile

IMO, the key to consistently good recordings is understanding the concepts behind what you are working with both hardware- and software-wise, and having, frankly good quality equipment and recording spaces. This does not mean that one needs to break the bank - a solid set-up can be had for about $1100 or so. But... even if you have a great mic, excellent convertors, top flight computer and software, &c., that does not mean you get a great recording. You have to know what you are doing with all that great stuff to get good results.

One of the easiest examples is someone who listens back to a recording on laptop speakers, small computer speakers, or run of the mill headphones. It sounds fine. But these don't generally have high fidelity in relation to the original recording. Is there some ambience you can't hear in the background because your speakers can't reproduce it? Are your speakers tinny - so you EQ for an uptick in bass response? Or are they biased for bass response, so you cut low freqs? I'd be willing to bet that the client most of the time will have good reference monitors which can reproduce with great fidelity the track. As for listening back to the V123 track with the same computer used to record that track - many times a flaw in the original recording that might go undetected initially will only be heightened once it is down-sampled or put in V123's system without any re-conversion.

Alright, sorry - I'm stepping off the soapbax now... I just want to see eveyone put out the best work possible - b/c I'd truly like them to do well, but honestly too for my own selfish reasons. If a potential client is listening thru 135 submissions and the majority sound terrible - be it V123's or the talent's fault, it doesn't matter - I can see the client saying "I'm not going to bother with V123 any more, all their stuff sounds like $#!^", going elsewhere, and telling all his/her contacts about how bad V123 is. As we all know – in this business, nothing travels faster than a bad reputation.

For those who have an engineering background who still get bad results, I don't know what to say. I can only go by my own experience - I've never had problems. *shrug*

Best,

Nathan

— BTW, I'm not an apologist for V123 - Freddie can well tell you some of the difficulties and frustrations I've had (can anybody say not receiveing leads in your home computer's email inbox?!?!). I've had some beefs with the service, but submission quality has never been one of them.

NAL

Eddie Eagle · Posted: Fri Oct 27, 2006, 16:33 (GMT) Post subject:

I noticed that too and started saving files as 64kbps and no more garble. When they update the system I'll save at better quality. 64 kbps is good FM quality anyway so most talent seekers would rather hear a clean demo than a garbled one that is at a higher rate.

Jerry Bruno · Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006, 13:33 (GMT) Post subject:

I am having a problem uploading my demos. I convert them from wav to mp3 and they give me an error message. I make sure the time and bit rate are correct, but still no luck.

Michael Minetree · Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006, 13:41 (GMT) Post subject:

Tell me the exact encoding you are trying to use and how long the demos are and I'll see if I can help..

Michael Minetree
MineWurx Studio
www.minewurx.com

Kevan Brighting · Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006, 15:54 (GMT) Post subject:

It's very interesting reading all these various responses to getting around upload problems, but surely the central issue is that this did not arise when we all uploaded under the old system of 32k. I certainly had no problem then - everything sounded fine and the quality was good enough for the client to make a judgement about who he/she wished to hire. I note that V123 want to introduce 96k soon as an improvement to the site. I see a problem with that - as the quality improves, then watermarking becomes a necessity to stop unscupulous clients just using a high quality uploaded demo without permission or payment.

Freddie Molina · Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006, 16:05 (GMT) Post subject:

Hello everyone,

Bobbin Beam · Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006, 16:37 (GMT) Post subject: Talent Audition Quality

Hi everyone. I too have been experiencing the same issues as many of the talent here have voiced. Let's keep it simple. Is it possible for the tech staff at V123 issue some SPECIFIC guidelines for mp3 conversion, and include directives for the most widely used types of recording software , like ProTools , Soundforge, etc., AND include settings for converters like itunes which will render success. Don't Tech me, I am a v/o artist-----just help solve the problem. I have spent a lot of time messing with my settings, and my auditions still have that hollow, distorted Darth Vader sound only after submitting to V123, ever since the change to 64kb. No EQ either! Thanks for the help. Bobbin Beam

Donna Matthews · Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006, 17:53 (GMT) Post subject:

I too have had that problem when loading my demos but I have no idea what to do either. Mine sounds very warbly. If anyone has an idea please let us know!