talent ratings

Rich Gates · Posted: Sun May 20, 2007, 16:35 (GMT) Post subject:

Bobbin:

I am sure they are referring to database by db. I'm sure that the ranking is just added to our individual database entry so when they do the SQL query it makes it easier to sort.

I agree with you about the quality of uploaded custom auditions. I've tried all sorts of different quality settings and they always sound terrible when uploaded. To be honest, I haven't done a custom audition in a long time because of this.

J.S. Gilbert · Posted: Sun May 20, 2007, 17:35 (GMT) Post subject: Not sure what the problem is

I have been a bit too busy lately to audition via 123, but I have not had any issues with the quality of my uploaded audio. I'm not exactly sure what problems people are having, but my demos sounded okay at 32 kps and now sound better at 64 kps. If you're putting music behind your auditions, that might suffer. You might also experience phase cancellations with music and your voice. Also to some of you who state that your posted online demos sound perfect or very good, many of them have obvious clipping and most are way too hot and/or compressed. Remember that the processor that V123 uses to convert your file also compresses your file. It is quite possible that you will lose fidelity in the porcess, your files may become sybilant and/or muffled in places.

Bobbin Beam · Posted: Sun May 20, 2007, 17:35 (GMT) Post subject:

Tom Greenlee · Posted: Sun May 20, 2007, 17:41 (GMT) Post subject:

Rich and Bobbin....maybe this will be helpful. I mentioned it in a different thread a while back, but I had the same problem with the uploaded custom audition sound almost unusable the quality was so bad. What I ended up doing was, finding the perfect settings for my equipment, and then not processing my file at all. Record....edit....and give a little volume boost to bring it up to -3db....that's it. Then save the file as 64K mono. upload it and seriously, it sounds damn near as good as the original 44.1k wav file....a little grainier sounding but not that much. My whole problem was I used to process my files until I realized that they sounded better with no processing. When I processed them, they were perfect sounding before upload, but almost unusable after uploading. With no processing, they sound almost perfect after uploading. Hope that helps....give it a try on an audition you don't really care about and see if it works for you, if so, then you can do it for the auds you really care about.

Bobbin Beam · Posted: Sun May 20, 2007, 17:53 (GMT) Post subject:

Hi Tom,
The wierd thing is, I don't process my audio, or add music to auditions. I just record in ProTools, create a continuous file (if it's edited), bounce to wav at 44.1 16bit mono, convert to mp3 in itunes, importing at 128 kbps. Is there something I'm missing here?
What a hassle to change the itunes import mp3 settings to 64 each time I want to audition?
I actually tried to do all these things, and sent Freddie several resolution configs at 64, 96, 128 and 160. They all sounded terrible.

What am I overlooking? Help!

Rich Gates · Posted: Sun May 20, 2007, 17:53 (GMT) Post subject:

Tom,

That very well may be the issue. I am not used to having to submit completely unprocessed auditions. I know that on TOS there isn't a problem with my submissions, so it must be something with how V123 compresses the audio. I will try this week to submit something at 64k instead of 128k and give it absolutely no processing and see how it turns out.

Thanks for the tip!

Rich

Colin Campbell · Posted: Sun May 20, 2007, 18:03 (GMT) Post subject:

TOS doesn't do anything to the files. What you send is what they get.

Tom Greenlee · Posted: Sun May 20, 2007, 18:03 (GMT) Post subject:

Bobbin....if you don't process at all, the only thing I can see that you are doing differently is you are submitting at 128 k and letting v123 convert to 64k. after bouncing to wav....try saving it directly from wav to 64k and then upload that....whatever processing v123s engine does to your file won't include the conversion. Maybe that will help. It really worked great for me. If that doesn't help you, I honestly can't provide any other tips on that issue.

Freddie Molina · Posted: Mon May 21, 2007, 18:26 (GMT) Post subject:

Hello everyone,

Bobbin, please send me a PM, will like to check the files you are uploading with you, might be able to help.

Kathleen Keesling · Posted: Mon May 21, 2007, 19:00 (GMT) Post subject:

I am noticing something in common with the people that are having trouble with their submissions. They are all female.

When I listen to my audio, there is a distortion as if part of my voice is missing. I described it similar to a comb splitter effect.

Men may not have a high enough pitch to experiencing this problem. Could this be a clue?

If that's not the case, I have another question. Freddie, can you get back to us for the exact specifications of your re-sampling format that occurs on V123? I think with that knowledge, maybe we can tweak our systems to offset it.

Tom, your solution does not work for my files..I don't like normalizing, but I tried it and bounced to a variety of sample rates.

J.S. I don't normally compress, but MUST to limit / minimize the Darth Vader sound I'm getting on uploads.

Hey V123, why don't you STOP resampling our files?
[/i]

Rich Gates · Posted: Mon May 21, 2007, 19:05 (GMT) Post subject:

Last time I checked I was male. Smile

I am seeing the problem too. I'm going to try some tests recording at a lower bitrate with absolutely no processing to make sure. But I don't like the idea of not being able to provide the best sounding recording I can. I know that the performance is the most important thing, but it doesn't help your chances when your submissions sound unprofessional due to no fault of your own.

Colin Campbell · Posted: Mon May 21, 2007, 19:08 (GMT) Post subject:

It's all part of that instant little audio button that 123 uses. At TOS it's whatever file you sent but the seeker has to wait a minute for each download. 123 opted for speed over quality. It's a toss up.

Kathleen Keesling · Posted: Mon May 21, 2007, 19:28 (GMT) Post subject:

Ooops, sorry Rich....I thought I was on to something Confused

Quality over speed is my vote. Thanks for clearing that up Colin. Very Happy

Freddie Molina · Posted: Mon May 21, 2007, 19:31 (GMT) Post subject:

OK, let´s do this, A new thread was created and we can discuss the uploading issues there. Here´s the link: http://voiceoversavvy.com/ftopic1856.html

Colin Campbell · Posted: Mon May 21, 2007, 19:34 (GMT) Post subject:

I think too that 123 originally thought that audition quality shouldn't be good enough for the seeker to steal and use but most talent (us) feel that we want our best foot forward since there are varying levels of technical competence. I think the seeker wants to be assured that we can deliver technical quality. How can they know if they are listening to down-sampled "flangy" audio. I've got mine sounding pretty good but there will always be some artifact if they are down-sampled to 64k.