Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Higher quality audio makes people sound smarter

tips.ariyh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 510 posts

Re: Higher quality audio makes people sound smarter

#391

Post by blablabla123 »

Cd00d wrote: post #301
nvarsj wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ModMic is also excellent, and you can attach it to existing headphones [1]. I use this at home with my prized Sennheisers. It baffles me that some people don't seem to care about their audio quality on calls. The most obnoxious are those who use speakers and you get echo on all your talking, and despite telling them, they still never bother to get a decent mic. Another common offender are the Bose QC35s: they hav…

> It baffles me that some people don't seem to care about their audio quality on calls. The most obnoxious are those who use speakers and you get echo on all your talking, and despite telling them, they still never bother to get a decent mic. I see comments along these lines here all the time, and I don't get it. I'm on zoom a majority of my day, and have maybe two colleagues that don't just use the laptop mic/speake…

> In fact, those with headsets will sometimes be worse because they're making a lot of mouth sounds close to the mic.

Yes this also freaks me out. Also when people use headsets in a room with lots of background noise, it sounds as if they use an open mic.

I'm also quite convinced that the Mac with just the internal mic/speaker is quite good for most cases. But I definitely want to look further into the issue. Also I certainly don't want to use a dedicated external mic, that seems total overkill to me.

Re: Higher quality audio makes people sound smarter

#392

Post by anigbrowl »

enragedcacti wrote: post #17
diarrhea wrote: post #2

People vastly undervalue good audio quality. It also often makes the difference (given equal visuals) between great amateur and pro in e.g. the YouTube scene. I didn't have data to back this up before, but I bought a good microphone specifically for this purpose. People will simply like the audio, and by extension what I am saying and also me as a person, better. Meanwhile, my ears will continue to bleed from the awf…

In my discord calls we have effectively resorted to shaming people into accepting a gifted clip-on amazon mic if they have an awful microphone. $10 every couple of months and no ear bleeding. That said, I really think some people are just immune to it. My mom for instance prefers to use the standard definition channels because the channel numbers are easier to remember and type. She says she can't tell the difference…

Pro sound engineer here. There is not that much difference between SD audio and HD audio. SD only allows stereo and not surround, but can deliver perfectly good quality, assuming a clear broadcast signal.

Re: Higher quality audio makes people sound smarter

#393

Post by anigbrowl »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #170
BeFlatXIII wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add to the audio quality discussion, well-meaning people who want to improve their quality often make the mistake of buying the mic with the best spec sheet. That ultra-sensitive microphone will make you sound more natural than your built-in mic, but it will also pick up dogs barking down the street and your neighbor mowing her lawn. If you’re not in a studio-like office, a less-sensitive dynamic microphone is oft…

As someone who knows nothing about audio: wouldn't it make more sense to get a top quality microphone and apply post-processing, rather than deliberately getting inferior hardware?

Sure...if you know what you're doing. Dynamic microphones are not inferior hardware, they are the best tool for a particular sort of job. In film production I would use condenser microphones most of the time, but still made frequent use of dynamic microphones for work in noisy situations and so on. Live music performance typically uses dynamic microphones because if you brought a condenser microphone on stage you'd have a lot of trouble getting a clear signal out of it, plus they're much more likely to distort when a performer lets rip.

Re: Higher quality audio makes people sound smarter

#394

Post by crazygringo »

jakebasile wrote: post #378
crazygringo wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, a camera like that is super overkill. There are really only three things that matter for image in video calls: lighting, exposure, and background. Lighting is by far #1. Then some kind of exposure adjustment to lock it in during your call at the brightest level that won't blow out any areas of your face. As long as you've got those, there will then be zero difference between a cheap Logitech webcam and a fa…

Oh, it's definitely more than most people will need. I had the camera for photography and just decided to repurpose it. That said, a webcam can only do so much even with proper lightning and a clean background. They're never going to be as sharp, or as bright, as a nice fast lens on a quality camera.

> They're never going to be as sharp, or as bright, as a nice fast lens on a quality camera.

If you've got decent lighting, that's not true.

My Logitech C920 -- the most popular webcam of all time -- outputs a fully sharp 1080p. With normal front lighting, it handles 30 fps perfectly without visible noise, i.e. full brightness. There's zero quality difference versus using my DSLR. It's as sharp and as bright.

Now sure it can't do low-light conditions well or do 4K or depth of field or a fisheye lens or the other million things a DSLR can do... but for videoconferencing purposes it's literally indistinguishable in quality.

Re: Higher quality audio makes people sound smarter

#395

Post by blablabla123 »

Nasrudith wrote: post #342
nvarsj wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ModMic is also excellent, and you can attach it to existing headphones [1]. I use this at home with my prized Sennheisers. It baffles me that some people don't seem to care about their audio quality on calls. The most obnoxious are those who use speakers and you get echo on all your talking, and despite telling them, they still never bother to get a decent mic. Another common offender are the Bose QC35s: they hav…

You are wondering why people who prioritize something else "don't care about audio quality"? Remember open offices? The likely culprit for them going with noise canceling headphones? Yeah they still have their old gear and are accustomed to it and the form factor. Philosophically it is also why would you go with something big and cumbersome for a feature you seldom use? You don't carry a glass bed scanner in your lap…

> You are wondering why people who prioritize something else "don't care about audio quality"? Remember open offices? The likely culprit for them going with noise canceling headphones?

Exactly that. I've been working for 5 years in more or less noisy open offices. Some of them so noisy that there were regular arguments between the self-proclaimed quiet ones and the noisy phone callers. I followed this with amusement.

So yes, it is quite an exaggeration to now ask for Hifi audio quality during meetings. Apart from that, I think a little noise makes the lockdown in the home office a bit less boring, the majority of people worked on-site before the pandemic.

Re: Higher quality audio makes people sound smarter

#396

Post by asimpletune »

anigbrowl wrote: post #392
enragedcacti wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my discord calls we have effectively resorted to shaming people into accepting a gifted clip-on amazon mic if they have an awful microphone. $10 every couple of months and no ear bleeding. That said, I really think some people are just immune to it. My mom for instance prefers to use the standard definition channels because the channel numbers are easier to remember and type. She says she can't tell the difference…

Pro sound engineer here. There is not that much difference between SD audio and HD audio. SD only allows stereo and not surround, but can deliver perfectly good quality, assuming a clear broadcast signal.

This is random but universal audio (interfaces + plugins) way overrated?

Follow up question, but once you get to a certain point of converter+preamp quality, is focusing on something that improves workflow what really matters?

Re: Higher quality audio makes people sound smarter

#398

Post by eertami »

ghaff wrote: post #327
brundolf wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're using external speakers, the only reason you're not hearing echo is because it's being software-cancelled. Different systems are better or worse at this software-cancelling; phones are good, Apple computers are good, otherwise YMMV.

Interesting. I normally use the external speakers on my iMac. I have verified with a number of different people that they're not getting echo. Yet one sees other people utterly convinced that using external speakers is bad, bad, bad. That may explain it.

Try talking while they are also talking. You'll see the problem.

It's easy to have conversations with friends on discord where 3-4 people are talking at once all with headphones. However this has never worked on a zoom or hangout with less techy family members or work colleagues using ext. speakers.

Re: Higher quality audio makes people sound smarter

#399

Post by tokamak-teapot »

rectang wrote: post #335
tokamak-teapot wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of us at work don’t wear headphones on calls. I used to think this might be a problem and occasionally asked how the sound is from my end. The response has always been that it’s great. Others sound great too. No echo. We have a mix of the enterprise type Dell laptops and MacBooks. Both seem fine. Software is usually Teams.

As discussed elsethread, asking how you sound as you switch between headphones and speakers doesn't tell you anything . People who don't wear headphones make others sound bad (when the echo cancellation software fails). I experience this problem all the time: Zoom, Whereby, Google Meet, Slack etc. If people are disciplined about muting their mic when they aren't speaking, that helps. But as soon as you have one parti…

I’m just saying that I’m in meetings probably 4-5 hours a day with usually between 3 and 15 people and the proportion of people wearing headphones is probably 20%. We don’t seem to have echo issues, though with previous conferencing software this was sometimes an issue. I used to use headphones but they don’t seem necessary any more. Maybe Teams is just good at this?

Re: Higher quality audio makes people sound smarter

#400

Post by asimpletune »

yarcob wrote: post #364
MaxBarraclough wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who knows nothing about audio: wouldn't it make more sense to get a top quality microphone and apply post-processing, rather than deliberately getting inferior hardware?

Dynamic mics are usually directional and less sensitive to background noise. If you talk into them from the right side they'll mostly pick up your voice. A lot of echo will be rejected because it comes from a different direction. Condenser mics are a lot more sensitive and omnidirectional. They are great in a studio to pick up every detail, but if you use them in a normal room you'll end up with lots of echo/reverb w…

You’re right in the sense that condenser are more sensitive than dynamic (ie better signal to noise ratio) but one isn’t like more directional than the other due to it being condenser vs dynamic.

On the other hand, one that that does matter a lot is that dynamic mics can handle a lot more sound pressure. So, yeah, you often see them recording things like drums and the likes. This on the other hand is actually intrinsic with the mic itself.

Post reply on HN