Harlan’s mic. Hogan’s new hero?
It’s been a few months since Harlan Hogan came out with the VO: 1-A Microphone. Made by MXL, this is the first mic designed for voice-over performers by a voice-over professional.
When I first wrote about it in August, Harlan claimed that this mic “will sound great on about 99% of the population”. That’s quite a statement, and as always, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
So, what’s the verdict? Before we can answer that question, we have to ask ourselves a different one: What makes a good voice-over mic?
A good microphone is like the ideal partner. It has to be, because you’ll be spending a lot of time together (and usually in a cramped, dark space). Personally, I love my mic because it’s such a good listener. But as in any type of committed relationship, what works for me, might not work for someone else.
BANG & BUCKS
Just as it does not make sense for a budding violinists to get a Stradivarius, beginning voice-overs should get a decent mic that doesn’t break the bank. But simply because something is relatively inexpensive, doesn’t mean that it will only take you so far.
My wife is a professional flutist, and the instrument she’s playing is a true work of art. Her students often complain that they don’t sound so well, because they’re playing on an entry-level flute. It’s a common excuse for those who forgot the way to Carnegie Hall.
At that point, my wife will take the cheap flute out of their hands, and she starts playing the inferior instrument. You should see the eyeballs pop out of her student’s sockets and jaws drop to the floor, because she sounds better than Jimmy Galway. After that, no more excuses!
HOGAN’s SLOGAN
So, is the VO: 1-A “The Voice Over Microphone made for Voice Over Performers”?
George Whittam has a Bachelor’s degree in Music and Audio Technology and he runs the well-respected ElDorado Recording Services. He gave the Harlan mic a spin, along-side the venerable Neumann U87.
Mind you, the new Harlan mic costs $249. You can get the Neumann for about $2,700 on eBay. Is that even a fair comparison? George concludes:
“While the U87 has that smooth, almost dull top end in comparison, the VO: 1-A’s response is almost identical to my ear across nearly the entire frequency spectrum. The VO: 1-A is slightly hyped at the top, but not overly so, and sounds very even and natural all the way down.”
We’re so impressed with VO-1a that we’ll begin bundling it in our “The Audition” package beginning in 2010. Coupled with the MicPort Pro, the two work wonderfully together either as a budget home studio setup, or as a travel companion for the working voice actor. “
You can read the full review on George’s blog.
Steve Cunningham reviewed Harlan’s mic for the February 2010 issue of Radio And Production Magazine. He writes:
“In use the microphone provides a nicely balanced sound with a bit of high-end crispness, but much less than I have found in other MXL microphones. The low-end is present and certainly meaty enough for Big Voice male voiceover, but the proximity effect was not nearly as pronounced as I had expected it to be. (…)
Self-noise in this microphone appeared to be on par or slightly better than other sub-$200 microphones I have tested. In particular, the VO:1- A is noticeably quieter than the Audio Technica AT2020, a microphone I had recommended to students on many occasions. But for general voiceover work, including soft and intimate reads, noise was not an issue during my evaluations.
I had several opportunities to test the VO:1-A with both male and female voice talent. Overall, I would have to say that I preferred the VO:1-A over several of the mics in this price range that I have recommended to voice talent in the past. (…)”
MY TWO CENTS
By putting his name on this mic, Harlan put his reputation on the line. Based on his career, his writings and products like the Porta-Booth, Harlan’s got it down. If you’d ask me, his voice-over mic is a safe bet for those who’d like to get their feet wet in the voice-over business. Yet, there’s always a chance that it might not be the right mic for you. If that turns out to be the case, are you going to be stuck with it? Harlan Hogan:
“Every microphone will sound different on different voices but most retailers and manufacturers don’t allow you to try and return their microphones easily. I vowed we’d change that approach with the VO: 1- A and you can buy one, try one and return it with no questions asked – it only seems – and is – the right approach.”
Well, it turns out that Harlan was right on the money. His signature mic took the voice-over world by storm, and it has received countless favorable reviews from voice-over colleagues such a Julie Williams, Dave DeAndrea, Linda Ristig and Dan Lenard. I have used it for about two years and I never heard a client complain.
PORTA-BOOTH
As for his famous Porta-Booth, Harlan’s new and improved version is on the market. This is what the new Porta-Booth Pro looks like:
To me, it appears to be a cross between a bowling ball bag and a pet carrier. In fact, should you choose to take your cat to the vet in this contraption, the feline cries of anguish will be nicely muffled by the isolation foam.
Remember: these types of portable booths will take care of unwanted reflections, making your recordings more dry and less boomy. They’re not a substitute for thorough soundproofing. If you want to protect yourself from the sound of snowblowers, weed whackers and noisy neighbors, you should read my guide “Building a Vocal Booth in a Budget.”
Harlan’s new booth is $349.00 and the optional Porta-Stand is $100.00 and this includes two adjustable shelves and a set of four hooks for headphones, etc. An angled (sheet music) holder is also available.
A limited number of these contraptions sold out quickly when they were first offered. They can be ordered from Harlan’s Booth-tique. Catnip not included.
Paul Strikwerda © 2010
PS For more Harlan Hogan factoids, read my article “What about Bob?“
PPS Although it’s pretty obvious that Mr. Hogan is one of my voice-over heroes, I am in no way compensated for featuring his products on this blog and I’d like to keep it that way.
Related posts:
-
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Linda Ristig, MichaelCMurphy and Paul Strikwerda, Paul Strikwerda. Paul Strikwerda said: The Harlan Hogan voice-over mic. Is it any good? http://tinyurl.com/yfel8z4 [...]
Paul, as a journalist you should know better than to quote a shill. I’m not referring to Harlan promoting his product, but rather George comparing Harlan’s mic to a U87 – and you reposting his blog post. The comparison is beyond laughable; it is pure and utter nonsense! George is selling this mic in his package…err…shilling this mic with a bait & switch on the U87′s long established reputation. If George cannot hear the difference between the U87 and Harlan’s mic he needs to clean his ears or improve his audio chain.
I’m not saying the MXL mic is garbage, but advise giving expert weight to Harlan’s comments which are fair and honest: “will sound great on about 99% of the population” and “with the VO: 1- A …you can buy one, try one and return it with no questions asked.” (if you don’t like it) That’s all it should take to convince any beginner to buy that mic.
The bottom line is that it is not the flute, it is the flutist.
Dear Steve:
Thanks for offering your concerns on my ability to hear.
First, I will direct you to my latest hearing test results:
http://eldorec.com/eldoblog/2010/1/19/hire-me-i-can-hear-stuff-good-and-heres-proof.html
Second, there’s no need to trust my opinion, listen to the comparison recording: http://eldorec.com/storage/U87_test.wav & http://eldorec.com/storage/HarlanHogan_VO1a_test.wav
Third, if you still don’t trust me, just get one and do your own independent test and come to your own conclusion. You fall pray to judging a book by its cover, I believe.
Also, if I was truly a shill, would I have announced that I now sell the microphone in my blog post?
Well, Steve, as a journalist I was taught to always check my sources. I happen to believe that George Whittam is an expert in his field, and in my opinion he’s a reliable source. As far as I could tell, he’s the only audio technology specialist who has put Harlan’s mic to the test.
Comparing the VO: 1-A to the Neumann U 87 might not be fair, but it does make sense to me, because so many colleagues see the Neumann as the gold standard.
As I mentioned, there’s a $2500 gap between the Neumann and the MXL. That price difference can’t be justified simply because the Neumann is made by Sennheiser in Wennebostel, Germany.
If a trained ear like that of Mr. Whittman can barely hear the difference between a Hogan and a Neumann, Harlan must be on to something…
I’m happy to hear that your ears can hear tones, George.
I actually worked with an MXL mic last year that had the same body design as Harlan’s mic and I had no complaints; the mic did as good a job as me.
I took your two files, George, and spliced your commercial reads into a single track to legitimately A:B them. In that room, the U & the VO do sound similar; but I would expect that result in a dead room because the room itself doesn’t sparkle.
Where the U87 got its rep long ago was in the delivery of the transient sounds that dance in a large studio room with acoustics good enough to record symphonies. However, because of its rep everybody started buying U87s and putting them in moderately dead to absolutely dead recording rooms which deprive the U87 of the opportunity to display its greatness. I know this because in the 80s, one of my biggest clients only recorded in just such a fine studio with high-end gear to match the room; I’ve never heard sonics like it since.
So perhaps it is fair to say that Harlan’s mic sounds a lot like the U87 in a typical recording studio. But I heard considerable differences in the microphones. I wouldn’t decribe the U’s high end as “dull,” nor do I think the VOs high end “slightly hyped”; the U’s high end just accurately portrayed a dull room and the VOs high end is pretty splashy. Did I hear $2500 difference in the microphones? Not recording in that room. To drive home the point a little further, I have a U87 and do not use it in my recording booth because it sounds terrible; instead, a 416 hangs in the booth.
>>>…would I have announced that I now sell the microphone in my blog post?
By my definition, declaring you sell the product does not absolve you of shilling. A more tempered and fairer comparison between the U and the VO and I might have reduce the charge to “used car salesman.” But that’s OK George, everyone has to make a living and you’re not selling a bad product, just your ears were influenced by your wallet in writing the review.
IMO, Harlan’s own description of the mic is perfect: “most people will sound fine on the mic and if you don’t like it I’ll give you your money back.” That’s as honest as it gets. Were I in the market for a large condenser microphone, I’d buy Harlan’s mic.
And Paul, my career started as a journalist. Despite George’s exceptional credits and expert standing in the industry, his vested interest would disqualify him as a source the way I was taught, but then I was brought up in the old school and was a purist until rock ‘n roll radio put me to work.
Hi Steve:
I’ll let George respond to your “vested interest” comment (if he feels so inclined). Ultimately, all of us should make up our own minds about any mic. The great thing is that we don’t have to agree. There are shotguns, white snow balls, blue mice and dragonflies from China, Australia, Germany and from the US of A.
The best tests and the most sophisticated ears mean nothing, if the mic doesn’t flatter our very unique voice.
If you’re interested in how a Neumann is put together, here’s a link to an episode of “How it’s made”. The mic shown looks like a U 87.
Let’s see..a Chevy Aveo and a Mercedes both will travel at 70mph. One will do so with a much better ride, and feeling of confidence don’t you agree? Certinly a label like Neumann serves to “impress clients” (or at least those who have a clue about gear) but in many respects the reputation is earned by the test of time.
Certainly the MXL offering will “produce a similar sound” like the U87. but that is like saying a telephone handset can “produce a similar sound” like a Voice of the Theatre speaker..both indeed “produce a sound”
So I am not so sure that a lot of this is not semantics, and clever placemtnt of assumed comparisons. MXL makes a very good product for the money, and a good VO person can make money with it. No harm done there.
However if another company came out with a “signature” series mic like the “Don LaFontaine series” a whole lot of us would scramble to get one..me included of course.
I’m gonna buy one and give it my own road test.
Thanks for driving by, Jeff. Mercedes and Chevy Aveo owners are both welcome!
It is almost impossible to make general statements about microphones, other than about the specs. The best mic for your money is the one that flatters your voice the most at a price you can afford.
However, we have experts in our field such as George Whittam with sensitive and trained ears who can draw certain comparisons. Since the U87 is considered by many to be the gold standard, it makes sense to compare Harlan Hogan’s microphone to the venerable Neumann.
Personally, I am curious about the Mic Mod software from Antares. According to the maker, you can now make any mic you own sound like the mic you wish you had…
I’d bet that MicMod software would be fun to play with, but physics rules. Still, plenty of fun and maybe even interesting results, but you cannot change the laws of physics governing how different microphones hear.
I won’t bother to rehash the expert vs shill matter. When I consider expert recordists, I think of the people enlisted by the world’s finest musicians and singers to record their next gold or platinum record. Even those experts argue endlessly about how this mic or that preamp would have been better on this or that instrument. Because I’m continuing to study ribbon microphones, in the hope that I live long enough to build my dream studio and complete my dream recording project, I’ve picked a few famed recordists, “shilling” for Royer:
Bruce Swedien – http://www.royerlabs.com/audio/bruce/bruce1.mp3
Ron Searles – http://www.royerlabs.com/video/winonazelenka_video.html
Ross Hogarth – http://www.royerlabs.com/video/RossHogarth-drs.html
Randy Kohrs – http://www.royerlabs.com/video/randyonroyer.html
Fab – http://www.royerlabs.com/video/fabvideo.html
NOTE: It would be disingenuous of me to elevate the opinions these professional recordists using a word other than the one previously used. Please accept my apologies.
Paul, I think you’ll especially enjoy the Ron Searles piece.
Ribbons are making a comeback, indeed! There is one solution to the mic dilemma: we just have to win Sweetwaters big mic locker giveaway, and we’ll win all the mics we’ve been dreaming of.
I will check your links after Faffcon!