- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 7,491
- Likes
- 12,640
Nope, not really.
Microphone choice on vocals alone has a huge impact on the sound of voices.
Correct. It can impact whether the voice sounds more or less natural.
That's why the guys who record dialogue for the movies I work on are careful with mic placement and mic choices/room reflections etc, to reduce obviously artificial artifacts in voices and obtain more natural voice recordings.
It's also why dialogue editors work assiduously to make production tracks and ADR sound more natural.
Hence why broadcasters pay so much attention to it and intentionally pick mics that make them sound good / better.
With one of the goals (among many) of obtaining more natural, less artifact-ridden vocal tracks.
And it's why as I said I spent time on making a baby sound "more real" and "less artificial." Even within the confines of imperfection there is a continuum to notice. Just as in movies themselves, where even though it's ultimately all artificial, there is still a continuum to notice between "more realistic" (e.g. in sets, script, acting, cinematography etc) and "less realistic."
Again, in no way do I mean to impugn how you personally approach audio! I'm just pointing out there certainly seem odd implications for audio in general, and in particular it would be essentially impossible to do my sound job if I thought the same way. I just did some horse and carriages for a time period show and my efforts were devoted to artificially cobbling together sound toward the goal of making it "sound more convincingly like the sound of horses pulling carriages." And if I failed, I'd be flagged by people in the mix on the grounds that it wasn't convincingly real sounding. Much of the time, although we certainly take some artistic liscence depending on the situation, if my efforts were not devoted to making sound "more like the real thing you see on screen" then I don't know what I'd be doing.