just basics on rec. dialogue/ boom op.

Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 8:31 am

Alright... we'll be using a Sennheiser ME66... with an in field mixer... and we'll be going into camera from there... the audio will stripped from that and loaded/ edit on my computer....
but to get to the point... with that mic, will i be able to get close to hollywood sound.

Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 10:51 am

Instead of writing you a long response, read my blog on MySpace:

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll&friendID=111888913

Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:02 pm

Hello Uncle,

I'm new here, was about to post, and saw your reply to Fried Rock. I went to your blog in search of the answers to my questions.

I use reasonably good quality microphones for sound pick-up when making videos, and the way we handle them is reasonably professional. Thus far I have used the camcorders I shoot with as the recording devices, though I'm aware of other options.

When I play back the tapes on the cam and monitor them with headphones, the soundtrack sounds the way I expect it to - very good. It is always degraded however, during the non linear editing process, and when I finally burn the DVD the quality is nothing like what I hear on commericially released DVDs. I should add that when I record voice-overs in the controlled setting of my studio using my Sennheiser shotgun mic, a mixer as a pre-amp and a good sound card in the computer, I have a similar experience. The sound from the mixer is great. The final result is anything but.

Seems like it is not neccessarily a function of the mics, though I know there is a big difference between a 500$ condensor and one that costs $3,000. There is also no doubt a big quality differential between my Azden wireless system and those that cost 6 times the price, such as Lectronics.

Or, is it function of the audio circuitry in my camcorder, which is a SONY Z1U and considered to be at the low end of "professional" quality cams?

Or, is this more a function of some audio engineering that needs to take place during or after the video editing process?

Or, is it a function of what happens to the audio when it is compressed as MPEG2 by my non linear editor (Avid Liquid)'s codec?

In short, what do the pros do differently from what I am doing, to get the great sound that comes from the commercial DVDs I watch on my TV?

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:00 am

MartinAmada wrote:

When I play back the tapes on the cam and monitor them with headphones, the soundtrack sounds the way I expect it to - very good.

Quote:

Or, is it function of the audio circuitry in my camcorder, which is a SONY Z1U and considered to be at the low end of "professional" quality cams?

Okay, the first question is, what headphones are you using? Many headphones, especially consumer cans, have a tendency to color the sound. They can make the audio that is recorded sound beefier and crisper than it actually is. This doesn't mean that the headphones are bad, they just have a different purpose than what "professionals" use. In the field I use Sony MDR-7506s, but I bring along my AKG K-240DFs as a reality check. The K240DFs are flat reponse studio headphones not really suited for field work, but occassionaly I like to hear everything "flat" if I am in a suitably quiet environment.

My understanding is that the Z1U records at 32kHz and 48kHz. You should be using 48kHz. I also understand that the audio is compressed, which can reduce the audio quality to some degree depending upon the compression scheme. You should also turn the limiting off unless you know that you definately are going to have extreme transients (volume spikes) during a scene.

One thing to remember is that even pro camcorders are dedicated to capturing great visuals, usually at the expense of audio quality.

Quote:

Seems like it is not neccessarily a function of the mics, though I know there is a big difference between a 500$ condensor and one that costs $3,000. There is also no doubt a big quality differential between my Azden wireless system and those that cost 6 times the price, such as Lectronics.

Keep in mind that a "Hollywood" sound cart can cost $100k. They are using those $3k mics and $4k wireless systems onto multi-track DEVA recorders running at 24bit/192kHz. So yes, there is going to be a big difference. The other thing is that you have highly trained professionals with many years of experience operating the gear.

Quote:

It is always degraded however, during the non linear editing process, and when I finally burn the DVD the quality is nothing like what I hear on commercially released DVDs. I should add that when I record voice-overs in the controlled setting of my studio using my Sennheiser shotgun mic, a mixer as a pre-amp and a good sound card in the computer, I have a similar experience. The sound from the mixer is great. The final result is anything but.

How are you transfering the video/audio into your editing system? Check the audio conversion settings, that may have something to do with it. You didn't mention what type of sound card you are using, that can make a difference as well.

Is it just the production sound/dialog that sounds poorly or all of your audio?

How are you treating the production sound tracks? EQ, compression, limiting, noise reduction? Used incorrectly you can make the sound worse instead of better.

One thing to remember is that "Hollywood" budget films can be over 90% ADR, using $3k mics and $5k mic pre-amps into $100k Pro Tools systems in acoustically perfect rooms operated by seasoned professionals. The sound is processed on the same PT system with many tens of thousands of dollars of plug-ins and listened to on $5k speaker systems, again in an acoustically perfect environment and operated by seasoned professionals.

Quote:

Or, is this more a function of some audio engineering that needs to take place during or after the video editing process?

Audio post production is an art and a science. I am about five years into my audio post career with an additional 10 years of engineering music behind me and I am still learning something new and improving my skills every day.

The audio of "Hollywood" films, indeed even many indie projects, are edited and mixed on a separate system than the visuals, usually Pro Tools, although many other applications may be used as well.

What is your audio mixing environment like? That makes a HUGE difference, as do your speakers. Again, "Hollywood" projects are mixed in an actual "theatre" environment. Some re-mixing engineers go so far as to play tapes of AC hum and crowd noise as a reality check to make sure that subtleties are not being lost.

Something that all sound engineers need to learn is the concept of "translation". What sounds good in your studio may not sound good in other places and on other systems. I often play DVDs of other movies as a reference while working on a project to check the translation and then run preliminary mixes of my project, lay it back to the visuals, and listen in my living room, other studios and, if the budget allows, a local theatre.

Quote:

Or, is it a function of what happens to the audio when it is compressed as MPEG2 by my non linear editor (Avid Liquid)'s codec?

You should check the conversion settings, Dolby/Non-Dolby, etc. I don't know at what bit/sample rates you are working in regards to the audio, but I work at 24bit/96kHz and have to dither down the final mix to 16bit (DVDs are 16bit/48kHz). I also add a little compression/limiting.

As I said, audio post/sound design and re-recording are scientific art forms. You should really have one of your projects done by a pro and kibitz while he/she is working. You will obtain a much better understanding of the process.

As a point of reference, according to members of my on-line sound design forum, audio post on a "Hollywood" budget project takes anywhere from 2 to 10 man-hours (sometime more, a LOT more) per minute per category of sound design/mix.

The six categories are:

Dialog
Foley
Sound FX
Ambiences
Music
Mix

ON a 100 minute film thats 1,200 to 6,000 man hours of audio post work, all of it done by highly trained professionals. On my most recent indie feature length film I put in over 600 hours. On the recent release "Ratatouille", Randy Thom and Co. spent two twelve hour days just mixing one kitchen sequence.

So don't be discouraged, I'm sure that you have neither the budget nor the experience with sound to get that "Hollywood" sound. My work doesn't sound like that either... YET... but I'm getting there.

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:43 am

Hey unclebob,

Thanks for all the interesting info on this. I checked out your Myspace page as well. I was just wondering if you'd post a link to the on-line sound design forum you mentioned.

Smile

This topic sponsored by: