|
Computer sound query
Sorry, not DIY, but help appreciated...
Can anyone suggest why my new (and excellent on the video side) Logitech webcam should give me horribly boxy and bass-heavy sound, and why the separate microphone I obtained to get round the problem should sound exactly the same, but my old, lower-then-bargain basement i.t.works webcam (hopeless visually) produces beautiful clear, clean, crisp sound? This is on a Windows 7 desktop PC. Thanks. |
Computer sound query
"Bert Coules" wrote in message o.uk... Sorry, not DIY, but help appreciated... Can anyone suggest why my new (and excellent on the video side) Logitech webcam should give me horribly boxy and bass-heavy sound, and why the separate microphone I obtained to get round the problem should sound exactly the same, but my old, lower-then-bargain basement i.t.works webcam (hopeless visually) produces beautiful clear, clean, crisp sound? The old one has a decent mic and the new ones don't. This is on a Windows 7 desktop PC. There is a decent mixer included with that. |
Computer sound query
Bert Coules wrote:
Can anyone suggest why my new (and excellent on the video side) Logitech webcam should give me horribly boxy and bass-heavy sound Doesn't really help you, but I purchased an external Behringer USB audio device with mic pre-amp and XLR connectors and a largish condenser mic (supplied with phantom power from the audio interface) and everyone told me I was very quiet using that on conference calls, I felt like I was having to "eat" the mic to be heard, or talk much louder than I am generally comfortable with. Later I bought a Logitech USB webcam HDPro C920 (perhaps the same as yours?) which I was expecting to use for camera only, but I did try the audio from the webcam and that seems great, I no longer have any complaints from people when I use it, so it's now my preferred audio device. |
UNBELIEVABLE: It's 02:20 am in Australia and the Senile Ozzietard has been out of Bed and TROLLING for OVER AN HOUR already!!!! LOL
On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 02:20:54 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again: FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread 02:20 in Australia??? ROTFLOL So it WILL be another LONG LONG NIGHT of INSIPID TROLLING for you again, you subnormal perverted senile sociopath! LOL -- addressing nym-shifting senile Rodent: "You on the other hand are a heavyweight bull****ter who demonstrates his particular prowess at it every day." MID: |
Computer sound query
"Jethro_uk" wrote in message ... No help either, but I bought an excellent HD webcam last year, and the audio is atrocious. I have to use my headset as well as the camera. Bearing in mind there presumably has to be some sort of de-echoing facility to prevent the microphone from picking up the speakers, I wonder if it's just not meant to be ? Cant be that because his old one does the audio fine. |
Computer sound query
Rod Speed wrote:
[Windows 7] There is a decent mixer included with that. I'm familiar with the the basic mixer which controls the volume settings on individual devices (input or output as required) but I don't know of anything more sophisticated that that. |
And the Trolling Senile Pest from Oz has been up and trolling for OVER TWO HOURS already!
....since 01:06 am in Australia exactly!
Poor sleepless trolling sociopath! LOL -- Richard addressing senile Rodent Speed: "**** you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll." MID: |
Computer sound query
On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 16:00:19 +0000, Jethro_uk wrote:
No help either, but I bought an excellent HD webcam last year, and the audio is atrocious. I have to use my headset as well as the camera. Bearing in mind there presumably has to be some sort of de-echoing facility to prevent the microphone from picking up the speakers, I wonder if it's just not meant to be ? That will depend on what application you are using for video chat, Wechat uses noise cancelling of simultaneous sounds within a very small time window. |
Computer sound query
"Bert Coules" wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote: [Windows 7] There is a decent mixer included with that. I'm familiar with the the basic mixer which controls the volume settings on individual devices (input or output as required) but I don't know of anything more sophisticated that that. I have one on my Win7 that has full control over different bits of the audio frequency spectrum. I have installed a few audio devices like headsets so maybe it came with one of those. |
Computer sound query
In article ,
Andy Burns wrote: Bert Coules wrote: Can anyone suggest why my new (and excellent on the video side) Logitech webcam should give me horribly boxy and bass-heavy sound Doesn't really help you, but I purchased an external Behringer USB audio device with mic pre-amp and XLR connectors and a largish condenser mic (supplied with phantom power from the audio interface) and everyone told me I was very quiet using that on conference calls, I felt like I was having to "eat" the mic to be heard, or talk much louder than I am generally comfortable with. If you download the Zoom app, in settings there is a test page for both audio and mic. It can record your mic and play it back to you - so should give an idea what it sounds like to others. Later I bought a Logitech USB webcam HDPro C920 (perhaps the same as yours?) which I was expecting to use for camera only, but I did try the audio from the webcam and that seems great, I no longer have any complaints from people when I use it, so it's now my preferred audio device. -- *I am a nobody, and nobody is perfect; therefore I am perfect* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Computer sound query
Rod Speed wrote:
I have one on my Win7 that has full control over different bits of the audio frequency spectrum. I have installed a few audio devices like headsets so maybe it came with one of those. Possibly, thanks. I'll have a search around and see if I can find something similar. |
Computer sound query
"jon" wrote:
That will depend on what application you are using for video chat, Wechat uses noise cancelling of simultaneous sounds within a very small time window. Mainly Zoom with occasional Skype. |
Computer sound query
In article ,
Bert Coules wrote: Sorry, not DIY, but help appreciated... Can anyone suggest why my new (and excellent on the video side) Logitech webcam should give me horribly boxy and bass-heavy sound, and why the separate microphone I obtained to get round the problem should sound exactly the same, but my old, lower-then-bargain basement i.t.works webcam (hopeless visually) produces beautiful clear, clean, crisp sound? This is on a Windows 7 desktop PC. Thanks. Wish I knew the answer. Use Zoom quite a bit, and there seems no common factor in who sounds OK and who doesn't. Although those using a decent headset seem to sound best. Dunno Win7 now, but on Win10 you could select the video from your new camera, and the audio from your old. -- *If you can't see my mirrors, I'm doing my hair* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Computer sound query
Dave Plowman wrote:
Dunno Win7 now, but on Win10 you could select the video from your new camera, and the audio from your old. Both Zoom and Skype allow that when running under Win7, but I don't know of an actual Windows setting which permits it. I've been looking around for a mixer program which could be put across the mic input but had no luck so far. |
Computer sound query
Mic output I meant, of course. Apologies.
|
Computer sound query
Jethro_uk wrote:
Bearing in mind there presumably has to be some sort of de-echoing facility to prevent the microphone from picking up the speakers, I wonder if it's just not meant to be ? I'm always wearing headphones when using the webcam for audio, so no feedback or echo cancellation necessary. |
Computer sound query
Bert Coules wrote:
Sorry, not DIY, but help appreciated... Can anyone suggest why my new (and excellent on the video side) Logitech webcam should give me horribly boxy and bass-heavy sound, and why the separate microphone I obtained to get round the problem should sound exactly the same, but my old, lower-then-bargain basement i.t.works webcam (hopeless visually) produces beautiful clear, clean, crisp sound? This is on a Windows 7 desktop PC. Thanks. Because it's expecting to drive tiny little loudspeakers which produce hardly any bass? Maybe? :-) -- Chris Green · |
Computer sound query
On Fri, 12 Mar 2021 16:57:39 -0000, "Bert Coules"
wrote: Mic output I meant, of course. Apologies. Zoom has a checkbox for 'disable Windows ducking', which might be relevant. -- Dave W |
Computer sound query
Dave W wrote:
Zoom has a checkbox for 'disable Windows ducking', which might be relevant. Where is this? I have the latest version of Zoom but can't find any such option. Thanks. |
Computer sound query
Chris Green wrote:
Because it's expecting to drive tiny little loudspeakers which produce hardly any bass? Maybe? :-) There's a difference between introducing a bit of bass boost and the dreadful sound I'm hearing. |
Computer sound query
I just found this YouTube review of the Logitech C920 and the reviewer
reports an audio problem ("as usual with Logitech webcams"). Watch and listen from 3 mins 30 secs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnSV_w0rxJQ |
Computer sound query
Bert Coules wrote:
I just found this YouTube review of the Logitech C920 and the reviewer reports an audio problem ("as usual with Logitech webcams").Â* Watch and listen from 3 mins 30 secs. There are four qualities of audio in that video start to 03:41 from an unknown mic while the logitech is unplugged and in shot, (clipping, with large amounts of treble and sibilance) like I'd expect a cheapo headset to sound? 03:42 to 04:18 From the logitech USB, which makes the room sound hollow, wouldn't say it was bass boomy though. 04:19 to 04:57 still from the logitech USB? but using different software package? bass sounds better, but he's closer to the camera/mic (though he does say he zoomed in so maybe not) is there actually less background noise, or is the extra software removing it somehow? 04:59 to end usingthe USB condenser mic, sounds best, personally I don't particularly want a condenser mic in front of my face when I'm on a conference call, I'm not some US talk show host, I'm not giving a presentation, I want the mic to do the work and pick my voice up, I don't want to have to obviously "project" into the mic like a performer, I'm only talking to colleagues. I do agree with what he says about the lens being extremely wide and having good HD video quality. If you want a physical privacy shutter for the logitech, I found this one is good. |
Computer sound query
Andy Burns wrote:
If you want a physical privacy shutter for the logitech, I found this one is good. That'll be this link ... https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001265973716.html |
Computer sound query
On 12/03/2021 16:37, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , Andy Burns wrote: Bert Coules wrote: Can anyone suggest why my new (and excellent on the video side) Logitech webcam should give me horribly boxy and bass-heavy sound Doesn't really help you, but I purchased an external Behringer USB audio device with mic pre-amp and XLR connectors and a largish condenser mic (supplied with phantom power from the audio interface) and everyone told me I was very quiet using that on conference calls, I felt like I was having to "eat" the mic to be heard, or talk much louder than I am generally comfortable with. If you download the Zoom app, in settings there is a test page for both audio and mic. It can record your mic and play it back to you - so should give an idea what it sounds like to others. A likely cause of trouble is mismatched microphone impedance to the PC. I think the PC is expecting a relatively high impedance fairly high output output cheap xtal mike. If you give it something else then the mismatch can show as much reduced amplitude and or distortion. I ran into it with a high end transmitting mike and a cheap and nasty karaoke set. The two units were utterly incompatible. I had to put an appropriate preamp in between them to make the pro audio gear work with the nasty consumer electronics. It only really worked right with Maplins cheapest ever xtal mike. But I got it close enough to be OK. -- Regards, Martin Brown |
Computer sound query
Martin Brown wrote:
A likely cause of trouble is mismatched microphone impedance to the PC. I don't think that describes my setup or Bert's, neither of which are using a PC's mic input. either this https://www.thomann.de/gb/behringer_u_phoria_umc204hd.htm plus this https://www.thomann.de/gb/marantz_mpm_1000.htm or this https://amazon.co.uk/Logitech-C920/dp/B006A2Q81M In my case the webcam audio good, in Bert's it's bad ... |
Computer sound query
On 13/03/2021 09:38, Andy Burns wrote:
Martin Brown wrote: A likely cause of trouble is mismatched microphone impedance to the PC. I don't think that describes my setup or Bert's, neither of which are using a PC's mic input. either this https://www.thomann.de/gb/behringer_u_phoria_umc204hd.htm plus this https://www.thomann.de/gb/marantz_mpm_1000.htm or this https://amazon.co.uk/Logitech-C920/dp/B006A2Q81M In my case the webcam audio good, in Bert's it's bad ... Start off by installing something like 'audacity' and make a sound recording from that to eliminate the code you are currently using. IME even a cheap microphone on a USB web cam is streets ahead of old fashioned mics from the dark ages.. -- "If you dont read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the news paper, you are mis-informed." Mark Twain |
Computer sound query
Often its with the computer sound card software. they do tend to assume
tinny naff microphones on headsets. Brian -- This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from... The Sofa of Brian Gaff... Blind user, so no pictures please Note this Signature is meaningless.! "Rod Speed" wrote in message ... "Bert Coules" wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote: [Windows 7] There is a decent mixer included with that. I'm familiar with the the basic mixer which controls the volume settings on individual devices (input or output as required) but I don't know of anything more sophisticated that that. I have one on my Win7 that has full control over different bits of the audio frequency spectrum. I have installed a few audio devices like headsets so maybe it came with one of those. |
Computer sound query
In article ,
Martin Brown wrote: If you download the Zoom app, in settings there is a test page for both audio and mic. It can record your mic and play it back to you - so should give an idea what it sounds like to others. A likely cause of trouble is mismatched microphone impedance to the PC. On a USB mic? I think the PC is expecting a relatively high impedance fairly high output output cheap xtal mike. If you give it something else then the mismatch can show as much reduced amplitude and or distortion. A crystal mic? Not seen one of those for ages. Most low priced ones are electret these days. And most PC mic inputs provide power for those. I ran into it with a high end transmitting mike and a cheap and nasty karaoke set. The two units were utterly incompatible. I had to put an appropriate preamp in between them to make the pro audio gear work with the nasty consumer electronics. It only really worked right with Maplins cheapest ever xtal mike. But I got it close enough to be OK. Think that is going back to the days before computers. ;-) -- *Marriage changes passion - suddenly you're in bed with a relative* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Computer sound query
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 13/03/2021 09:38, Andy Burns wrote: Martin Brown wrote: A likely cause of trouble is mismatched microphone impedance to the PC. I don't think that describes my setup or Bert's, neither of which are using a PC's mic input. either this https://www.thomann.de/gb/behringer_u_phoria_umc204hd.htm plus this https://www.thomann.de/gb/marantz_mpm_1000.htm or this https://amazon.co.uk/Logitech-C920/dp/B006A2Q81M In my case the webcam audio good, in Bert's it's bad ... Start off by installing something like 'audacity' and make a sound recording from that to eliminate the code you are currently using. IME even a cheap microphone on a USB web cam is streets ahead of old fashioned mics from the dark ages.. That depends on the model of 'dark ages' mic -- from KT24 in Surrey, England "I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle |
Computer sound query
In article ,
Andy Burns wrote: usingthe USB condenser mic, sounds best, personally I don't particularly want a condenser mic in front of my face when I'm on a conference call, I'm not some US talk show host, I'm not giving a presentation, I want the mic to do the work and pick my voice up, I don't want to have to obviously "project" into the mic like a performer, I'm only talking to colleagues. Quite. The most unobtrusive mic that is going to be close to the voice and cut down room acoustics and background noises to a minimum is a personal (lapel, etc) mic. As used near everywhere in TV. But for best results needs the frequency response tweaked due to being off axis. Usually some LF cut to get rid of chest resonances, and HF lift to get back the sibilants. Or even better a variable 'peak' at around 3 kHz. -- *Venison for dinner again? Oh deer!* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Computer sound query
Dave Plowman wrote:
The most unobtrusive mic that is going to be close to the voice and cut down room acoustics and background noises to a minimum is a personal (lapel, etc) mic. As used near everywhere in TV. But for best results needs the frequency response tweaked due to being off axis. Usually some LF cut to get rid of chest resonances, and HF lift to get back the sibilants. Or even better a variable 'peak' at around 3 kHz. I did also buy a "lav" mic, maybe I opted for the wrong pickup pattern? It didn't sound any better through the external USB interface (or so I was told by colleagues). |
Computer sound query
In article ,
charles wrote: IME even a cheap microphone on a USB web cam is streets ahead of old fashioned mics from the dark ages.. That depends on the model of 'dark ages' mic Be interesting to know what Turnip thinks these web cam mics are - and how they differ from 'the dark ages'? They may well have software to help them work better under this specialist use - but this has nothing to do with the mic itself. Which will normally be an electret. Which first became common in broadcast use some 50 years ago. I'd also guess Turnip never watches TV where interviews with the interviewee being at home via a webcam are common. And therefore doesn't know how much the sound quality varies on these. Even before the link or whatever does its worst to it. -- *If you must choose between two evils, pick the one you've never tried before Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Computer sound query
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , Andy Burns wrote: usingthe USB condenser mic, sounds best, personally I don't particularly want a condenser mic in front of my face when I'm on a conference call, I'm not some US talk show host, I'm not giving a presentation, I want the mic to do the work and pick my voice up, I don't want to have to obviously "project" into the mic like a performer, I'm only talking to colleagues. Quite. The most unobtrusive mic that is going to be close to the voice and cut down room acoustics and background noises to a minimum is a personal (lapel, etc) mic. As used near everywhere in TV. But for best results needs the frequency response tweaked due to being off axis. Usually some LF cut to get rid of chest resonances, and HF lift to get back the sibilants. Or even better a variable 'peak' at around 3 kHz. A couple of weekends ago, I made a recording as an introduction to soemeone else's recording. I spent a long time experimenting with microphones since I was expected to appear in vision standing up. That was far too far away for the mic on the camera and I ended up with a headset radio mic. Yes, I could have used a mic ona standm but that would have been intrusive. The recipient was very happy with the result. It will be another 4 weeks before I get to see the resultant product. See www.harpfestival.co.uk -- from KT24 in Surrey, England "I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle |
Computer sound query
In article ,
Andy Burns wrote: Dave Plowman wrote: The most unobtrusive mic that is going to be close to the voice and cut down room acoustics and background noises to a minimum is a personal (lapel, etc) mic. As used near everywhere in TV. But for best results needs the frequency response tweaked due to being off axis. Usually some LF cut to get rid of chest resonances, and HF lift to get back the sibilants. Or even better a variable 'peak' at around 3 kHz. I did also buy a "lav" mic, maybe I opted for the wrong pickup pattern? It didn't sound any better through the external USB interface (or so I was told by colleagues). They're usually omni. Best results I've had was using a Micron radio mic with a Tram TR50 (from my working days). The receiver having a balance line output. Fed that into a graphic equaliser and then into the sound card line input. Recording a Zoom meeting showed my audio to be as good as any - and far better than most. But too much faff. ;-) There are some cheap and small mixers around that accept a USB mic. And have EQ. But likely need to be fed to an analogue input on the PC. But not tried one. -- *If a thing is worth doing, wouldn't it have been done already? Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Computer sound query
On 13/03/2021 11:30, charles wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 13/03/2021 09:38, Andy Burns wrote: Martin Brown wrote: A likely cause of trouble is mismatched microphone impedance to the PC. I don't think that describes my setup or Bert's, neither of which are using a PC's mic input. either this https://www.thomann.de/gb/behringer_u_phoria_umc204hd.htm plus this https://www.thomann.de/gb/marantz_mpm_1000.htm or this https://amazon.co.uk/Logitech-C920/dp/B006A2Q81M In my case the webcam audio good, in Bert's it's bad ... Start off by installing something like 'audacity' and make a sound recording from that to eliminate the code you are currently using. IME even a cheap microphone on a USB web cam is streets ahead of old fashioned mics from the dark ages.. That depends on the model of 'dark ages' mic I was thinking dark ages computer mics, not a ribbon mic! -- In todays liberal progressive conflict-free education system, everyone gets full Marx. |
Computer sound query
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , Andy Burns wrote: Dave Plowman wrote: The most unobtrusive mic that is going to be close to the voice and cut down room acoustics and background noises to a minimum is a personal (lapel, etc) mic. As used near everywhere in TV. But for best results needs the frequency response tweaked due to being off axis. Usually some LF cut to get rid of chest resonances, and HF lift to get back the sibilants. Or even better a variable 'peak' at around 3 kHz. I did also buy a "lav" mic, maybe I opted for the wrong pickup pattern? It didn't sound any better through the external USB interface (or so I was told by colleagues). They're usually omni. Best results I've had was using a Micron radio mic with a Tram TR50 (from my working days). The receiver having a balance line output. Fed that into a graphic equaliser and then into the sound card line input. Recording a Zoom meeting showed my audio to be as good as any - and far better than most. But too much faff. ;-) There are some cheap and small mixers around that accept a USB mic. And have EQ. But likely need to be fed to an analogue input on the PC. But not tried one. There are some with a USB output, but I decided too much bother (and expense). -- from KT24 in Surrey, England "I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle |
Computer sound query
In article ,
charles wrote: A couple of weekends ago, I made a recording as an introduction to soemeone else's recording. I spent a long time experimenting with microphones since I was expected to appear in vision standing up. That was far too far away for the mic on the camera and I ended up with a headset radio mic. Not really ideal if appearing in vision. Although very likely to sound better 'out of the box'. If going for the very best sound quality, lapel mics are anything but ideal. But in this instance where it is only about 'legible' sound, I reckon them the least obtrusive compromise. There's also no reason why the response tweeks (approximate) shouldn't be built in, given every electret has at least impedance converting electronics - and a great deal more with a USB one. -- *How much deeper would the oceans be without sponges? * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Computer sound query
Dave Plowman wrote:
Best results I've had was using a Micron radio mic with a Tram TR50 (from my working days). The receiver having a balance line output. Fed that into a graphic equaliser and then into the sound card line input. Recording a Zoom meeting showed my audio to be as good as any - and far better than most. But too much faff. ;-) I ought to try making some recordings from the various mics I have available, to compare them myself, instead of relying on what other people have commented. Maybe look at virtual mixer/eq software, e.g. https://vb-audio.com/Voicemeeter/banana.htm |
Computer sound query
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , charles wrote: A couple of weekends ago, I made a recording as an introduction to soemeone else's recording. I spent a long time experimenting with microphones since I was expected to appear in vision standing up. That was far too far away for the mic on the camera and I ended up with a headset radio mic. Not really ideal if appearing in vision. Although very likely to sound better 'out of the box'. it was a lightweight flesh coloured one (pinkish), so pretty invisible. If going for the very best sound quality, lapel mics are anything but ideal. But in this instance where it is only about 'legible' sound, I reckon them the least obtrusive compromise. There's also no reason why the response tweeks (approximate) shouldn't be built in, given every electret has at least impedance converting electronics - and a great deal more with a USB one. The problem witn lapel mics is that the volume varies as the 'performer' turns their head. That's why I hate them. -- from KT24 in Surrey, England "I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:14 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter