There is a time when a tv ad actually doesn't need a voice over.

It is a time when the graphics are fabulous, the music sets the graphics dancing and what would at least be a word or so of vo at the end is instead punctuated visually with the printed word and accentuated by great music that reaches a fantastic ending.

But there is an argument against an all music, all-dancing graphics ad. As good as it may be, many argue that the ad would be better served with a few well chosen words voiced at the end, the middle or the beginning, even if they're the same as the graphics.

Long copy or short copy, some of that copy is meant to be spoken. The human voice conveys emotion that can't be equaled by music and graphics. Because music and printed words originally came from the sound of the human voice.

Click on a few of these demos and imagine the vo missing from the ad. Even if the vo just said, 'Right', or, 'Exactly', it would give the finality required.

The final hammer, the button-down, the final shoe dropping. More often than not it is the human voice, the voice over and narration that makes the point, the sense of an ad, documentary and movie.

But now we need music to put finality to this statement. (Boom!) Ok, an explosion. But to create thee closing moment, there would have to be a vo that said, 'Wow!'