I was talking informally with someone who listens to AM talk stations in Portland. He said he couldn't understand why stations would hire news people who "talk funny". I probed deeper, and eventually figured out that what he was hearing and not liking was the mic technique and audio processing.

After thinking about it more and listening around, I think that nasally, froggy sound may be nothing more than the combination of bass-heavy RE-20 kick-drum mics and multi-band audio processing, made worse by talent working too close to the mics. Many on-air people seem to work these mics so close that you can hear all sorts of unflattering artifacts like popping plosives and other clipped consonant sounds, and distracting breath effects and other mouth noises.

I can aproximate the effect in my own studio with the RE-20 and compression, but I believe multi-band processing makes it sound even more like the talent has a head cold.

Some of the new, cheap condenser mics aimed at the home studio / podcast market sound much more flattering than the RE-20 after processing, especially if you stay a few inches away. I bought a couple $99 Audio Technica AT2020 mics to evaluate, and they sound almost as sweet as the old RCA ribbons if you can find the right distance and angle to avoid popping P's.

I notice that Rush uses an RE-20, but stays back off it, and sounds natural.

Thoughts? Does anyone else hear this? If our goal as communicators on radio is to make the delivery medium transparent, is this important?

Did your didcussion include mention of other stations besides KEX? For example, KXL has far better audio quality than does KEX. Focus on the local morning news program for a moment {some syndicated programs add more audio issues).
Did your friend only mention KEX?
His observations may be due to KEX sound filtering (excessive midrange, lack of treble, raspy popping distortion) which sounds nasally. Most obvious on a radio with wide audio bandwidth. On the other hand, his (car?) radio could likely be 3 khz narrow, possibly with excessive bass and no treble, which affects listening to all AM stations. [Then he switched to FM stations there where voices sound "natural".]

then again he could have been listening to Neil Penland who actually does have a funny voice.

digressions aside, I would add the a good mic and ones own vocal cords are probably two of the most important tools an on air talent has at their disposal.

I find it shocking how many of the current generation of air talent have no idea how to properly use either, and from what i can tell they also have no desire to know.

I have actually seen many a professional talent talk into the top of a $1000.00 large diaphram condenser mic (with the capsule clearly visible inside the front grill). they do that because they cant tell it from an RE20 which you do talk into the top of.

nobody has ever shown the majority of todays talent how to find the sweet spot in a mic or how to control the plosiveness of their own voice.

its a shame if you ask me.

It's sort of the radio equivelent of ashley simpson,,, pop star who cant even be bothered to master the tools she has right in front of her.

I think you are onto something notalent.

AM issues aside, Rush does sound good. IMHO, it's a combination that's getting to people. You should grab a stream or a program archive and play it to the person and see if they still think they talk funny.

I'll bet they do, but the highs kind of make up for the effect.

There are times when the voices of some hosts are just over modulated period. They are literally eating the mic!

Edit: Ever notice the producers sound really good? Once in a while, they will end up on air, for whatever reason. IMHO, this is the loudness wars affecting talk.

I think Paulwarren's friend was just listening to Tim Riley talk funny - which he does. But he is also the greatest radio newsman ever!!!!!

Another unnatural aspect of some newscasters is some really talk fast. Kex has one guy who does that, it almost sounds like he is speeded up somehow.

In my opinion, one of the most annoying announcer sounds is very loud inhaling between sentences. Most likely, this is a combination of "eating the mic" and using a very high compression ratio with fast attack/release times and a low threshold.

What, in your opinion is the best technique for using a RE-20 or other dynamic mics of similar construction? From my days in radio, what was recommended was to be about 3" from the mic but to have it about 45 degrees off to the side so that you don't pop your Bs and Ps.

In various photos/films of recording studios i have seen, there is usually a round thing between the singer and the microphone. I think its called a "spit screen". Do any radio stations have that piece of equipment? Why/why not? Budget issue? Does it affect the sound? Or is it just too disgusting?

I was always taught to use the mic like a cigar out of the side of your mouth. It keeps you from popping your "P's" and you avoid mouth noise.

In my own home studio I have the challenge of having two mics on in a small sound booth when my wife and I do our voice tracks for our morning show. If one mic is too hot I'll get that "sounds like a bathroom" verb. I use two different mics. An old Stedman N90 (no longer made) and a Rode N1. I have each of those mics processed with an Alesis NanoCompressor (again no longer made). It took me awhile to find the sweet spots on both mics. My wife uses the Stedman and I use the Rode. Stedman is warmer and the Rode is a bit brighter. I put Bill Schonely on the Rode as well.

In my final mix I add more processing and try not to over process to keep the sound natural.

It can be a challenge in the voice over industry too where you go to different studio's and record. Each has different mics and processing and sometimes you're at the mercy of the engineer.

I don't think that I have ever seen a spit screen used in a radio studio. I have only seen foam windscreens in use.

The only reason that I can think for this is that the round spit screens are typically used with large diaphragm condeser mics in which the entire body of the mic is too big to fit in a standard sized wind screen. Large diaphragm condensers are not often used in radio studios. RE-20s, which are too big for standard-sized windscreens, usually are not used with any spit-blocking device.

62KGW, funny you picked up on KEX without my mentioning the station. I hear some of the same effect on KXL, but not as severe.

Alfredo, you're right about "eating the mic". There's a natural tendency to do that when wearing headphones, especially if they're turned down too low. It's a bad habit, but many air talent don't notice it in their own airchecks. Many people want that artificial bass boost from working the mic close. Others work too close to minimize the natural reverb of a hard-walled room.

I think the old KKJZ had the round "spit screen" style filters on RE-20s when I was there. I have one in my studio. The foam rubber windscreens usually used with these mics make the already muddy, low-output RE-20 worse. I tried an RE-27, and while it sounded "brighter" and had a little more output, it had a brassy, "gritty" sound that I found very harsh. I sold it on ebay soon after I bought it, and got the -20.

Chris, if that Alesis processor has a mode which links left and right for stereo use, turn it on when using two mics in the same room. It will solve that "gymnasium effect" by preventing the mic not in use from going wide open.

By the way, the cheapo Behringer stereo processor, the MDX 1600, costs $99 and does a terrific job with two mics used in the same room, or for mild ducking with a mic on one side and a Telos on the other. It has no mic preamp, but can be run on the line-level channel inserts on most new small mixers. (Much better than the Telos internal AGC.)

I've seen the "spit screens" in prod rooms...but those are with different mics than in the studios. We just have the foam windscreens in studio.

Chris, I too...was taught about the 45 degree angle approach. It makes me cringe when I hear talent popping everything. Once in awhile is ok...it's live radio (most of the time)...things like that happen. But every p? Every B?

The RE20 does not need a windscreen because it IS a windscreen. there is 3 inches of foam inside the body in front of the (dynamic) element. they do make really good bass drum mics.

Large diaphram condenser mics are generally no longer used in radio studios precisely because nobody knows how to use them and it can be tedious to teach "talent" how to properly use the tools they are paid well to use.

spit screens work well with condenser mics by forcing the speaker to stay back. this also reduces the plosives.

I remember seeing lots of condenser mics at Entercom in PDX... maybe just in production? cant remember.

AM's in Seattle and the mics in use... RE20's on KIRO, KTTH, KOMO, KVI... large diaphram condensers on KJR. the condenser difference can be heard.

I believe another reason you rarely see condenser mics in radio studios has to do with studio design. In the cluster mentality, "studios" become closet-sized rooms crowded with computer monitors and hard-surfaced equipment. If you back off the mic at all, ungated compressors suck up all the reflections and computer noise.

The new studios at KPDQ AM/FM were equipped with condenser mics throughout, but they're all covered with thick foam, requiring corrective EQ, and gated so you have to work them close. They still sound cleaner than the RE-27's in the studios of 104.1, next door.

A related question: If you're running an AM station formatted Talk, and already started limiting bandwidth intentionally, is there even an excuse for running multi-band processing anymore?

I remember when multiband processing started showing up everywhere in the late 70s. Many AMs were still playing music, and disco was influencing other genres, so the prevailing production style was thumping bass lines. Some earlier processors had one, separate channel for the lows, which kept LF dynamics from "pumping" the highs. But it became a sort of arms race. Some of these processors radically re-mixed music, making foreground solos out of what the artist intended to be background brass accents.
I was working in 1979 at a small station which upgraded from the old CBS Audimax/Volumax processing chain to an Innovonics MAP-III, run very aggressively. It certainly made the station louder, but that was when I first noticed that effect of making everyone sound like he had a cold.

I'd bet some AMs with aggressive multiband processing could be about as loud, but much better-sounding, if they just used a steep roll-off below 75 Hz, good mics (and mic technique), and single-band processing.

Lars and Rush don't have the same audio processing needs as Chic and The Bee Gees.

Paul-
Unfortunately the Alesis compressors are low end and don't have that left/ right stereo link, however I have found that if I just don't put my mics wide open that seems to help. Also I do tweak my threshold, attack and release depending on which mic I'm using.

It probably would help to add some more soundproofing too. Details, details details. Thankfully the only time we have two mics on is for our morning show where things are a bit looser with dynamics, unlike a voice over.

But thanks for the heads up.

just in case someone runs down to an audio store...to avoid a bit of embarrassment...they are called pop screens. You could probably spit in them but that would be gross.

KDUK used one for about a month. I would guess they are not real practical because they are a bit bulky and you continually have to adjust them plus adjust the distance between the screen and the mic.

The one I have has a brand name of "Popless", and uses a bracket made specifically for the RE-20's shock mount. It moves with the whole unit on the end of the boom, even tilts with the mic to stay in position, and works pretty well. The distance between the two round screens is adjustable, and the screens can be washed and disinfected. Some stations order separate screens for each jock to avoid passing germs. They snap in and out of the mount easily.

If you're "eating" the mic, the Popless screen will block your view of the copy stand. Might encourage you to move back a little and sound better!

I have used the term "popper stopper" over the years. The Popless attach to our mic booms and yes you did need to adjust them so you can read copy. But even using the popper stopper doesn't completely elminate popping "P's" so good mic technique is still needed.

there are methods available to learn how to control the ammount of air emanating from your mouth on those certain troublesome consonants.

this training is above and beyond "mic technique" it is voice coaching and usually is taught by people who teach singers. I believe years ago they taught this in radio schools (like in the 50's and 60's)

any serious radio voice talent should be aware that they can control the ammount of air bursting out of your mouth as you speak.

one of the old tricks is to hold a feather in front of your mouth as you speak so you can see the effect visually. then you can practice saying "P" words until the feather does not move so much.

of course if you use an RE20 none of this is necessary, nor is a pop filter. though bad technique is still bad technique and will show through an RE20

Hey I like that feather training idea. I remember the old "putting a pencil in your mouth" to help with diction.

I took some singing lessons from a neighbor of mine a couple of years ago. His background was in opra. Those few months with him were very helpful in breath control.

Some people actually take that feather training too far, learning to mute the plosive so much you can't tell a "P" from a "B".

I always liked the old Urei LA-4 for mic processing. Very easy to set up (check out this picture).

http://cgi.ebay.com/Xlnt-pair-UREI-LA4-s-LA-4-recapped-cal-d-matched-extras_W0QQ itemZ270076423211QQihZ017QQcategoryZ23793QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem#e bayphotohosting

If you like the old RCA ribbon microphones, check out this link.

http://www.coutant.org/ribbons.html

My first job in radio was in 1975, at a Beautiful Music station. The control room used an RCA 77 DX ribbon mic with no processing. If you listened on a good receiver and speakers with flat EQ, it sounded like the announcer was there in the room with you, it was so clean.

Interesting to see that the mic I used would have been at least 8 years old at that time.

Also neat to see an article co-written by Mike Dorrough, godfather of multi-band processors!