I have a disagreement between the production sound mixer and the audio engineer.

[harmonica44]

I want to shoot a short film and have a possible PSM and AE lined up. I have also talked to a couple of others. No casting has been done yet, as I want to get the crew in first possibly, so I am not scrambling to find any before it's too late later.

The PSM wants to record all the dialogue 'dry'. I know that means no or very little reverb. But the AE said she is not qualified in doing reverb in post and that that is the PSMs job. I talked to another AE and he said the same thing, but the PSM really thinks the AE has to do it.

Now I know that typically in a movie, it's the AEs job, but I cannot find an AE that will agree with that, or says they know how. They know how to mix well from their demos, but not reverb much. So I have to decide what to do based on my resources where I am I guess. Should I just give in and tell the PSM to record it not dry with it already added, as long as it's all planned out right for the editing, or should I just hold off and turn them both down, even though I told them they have the job? They were the best to pick from based on their demos at the time, and had I known the AE would spring this on me, I wouldn't have told them that.

 

[ChimpPhobiaFilms]

I want to shoot a short film and have a possible PSM and AE lined up. I have also talked to a couple of others. No casting has been done yet, as I want to get the crew in first possibly, so I am not scrambling to find any before it's too late later.

The PSM wants to record all the dialogue 'dry'. I know that means no or very little reverb. But the AE said she is not qualified in doing reverb in post and that that is the PSMs job. I talked to another AE and he said the same thing, but the PSM really thinks the AE has to do it.

I looked at the AEs projects they have mixed before to see how good they are, and those projects have reverb in. Perhaps it was already recorded that way before it got to post? Anyway, I cannot find any other AEs or PSMs right now, so what decision should I make here? They will still do it I think, but I want the sound to turn out good, and I have to decide who is right.

I could also hire from another city, and just do all the communication through the net, but I tried that with an editor before, and it was just hell of misleadings, and I would rather work with people in person.

1. Do you have a properly-formatted screenplay together? Just curious.
2. You don't want to record dialogue with reverb. It makes audio editing a pain in the @$$.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks. I am doing what was suggested on here before and going to do direct a sequence from a larger feature script, and have that as a short.

I thought maybe I could just plan the audio in the storyboards. Little bit more reverb for the shots were characters are further away, less reverb for the shots when they are close up. Then in post I would make sure that I don't mix audio mastershots, with audio close ups, and keep it the same with the video.

 

[wheatgrinder]

gosh no, don't do that! Just get the best mic'ed, UNMIXED audio you can. Ill let the pros that know best, but I think you only need to MIX if you have more mics than you have inputs on your recorder. If your just booming dialog then your only using one mic at a time (though you might be using 2 inputs)

NO STEREO!

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks but I don't understand. What does one mic have to do with it, as oppose to using two? I thought we were talking about reverb?

 

[Alcove Audio]

I want to shoot a short film and have a possible PSM and AE lined up. I have also talked to a couple of others. No casting has been done yet, as I want to get the crew in first possibly, so I am not scrambling to find any before it's too late later.

The PSM wants to record all the dialogue 'dry'. I know that means no or very little reverb. But the AE said she is not qualified in doing reverb in post and that that is the PSMs job. I talked to another AE and he said the same thing, but the PSM really thinks the AE has to do it.

Now I know that typically in a movie, it's the AEs job, but I cannot find an AE that will agree with that, or says they know how. They know how to mix well from their demos, but not reverb much. So I have to decide what to do based on my resources where I am I guess. Should I just give in and tell the PSM to record it not dry with it already added, as long as it's all planned out right for the editing, or should I just hold off and turn them both down, even though I told them they have the job? They were the best to pick from based on their demos at the time, and had I known the AE would spring this on me, I wouldn't have told them that.

Are you fookin' kidding me? If she can't use reverbs properly then she has no business calling herself an audio engineer - especially if she's too chickensh!t to try it on a no-budget short by a nobody.

Production sound should be recorded as CLEAN and DRY as is humanly possible under the given circumstances. ALL processing should occur during the mix (or predubs).


And if you can't find an audio post person who can handle reverbs then you are A) not really looking at all; or B) looking in all the wrong places.


L'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace!

You never admit that you don't know; you just keep working at it until you get it right! How the hell do you think anyone gets anywhere?

 

[AudioPostExpert]

There are hundreds of jobs which can be described as Audio Engineer, from sound system designers and installers to satellite audio broadcast engineers, the type of audio engineer you need is one who does audio post for Films/TV!

If they are calling themselves a film/TV audio post engineer but don't know how to use reverb and are telling you to record your production sound with reverb then they are lying about being an audio post engineer. After all your posts on film sound is it really possible that you don't know this or are you just trolling?

G

 

[harmonica44]

Well they have convincing reverb in their demo reels so either they know how to do it, and just don't want to, or they are using other people's work in their demo reels.

 

[sfoster]

Well they have convincing reverb in their demo reels so either they know how to do it, and just don't want to, or they are using other people's work in their demo reels.

I remember playing with a few audio tools when my friend worked at a radio station. Seemed like added reverb was very simple..

I like in films when they are on ships that go under a bridge and it's all reverbed until they come out on the other side

 

[AudioPostExpert]

Look H44 it's simple, ff the PSM records the production dialogue with reverb then what happens in audio post when all the Foley, Sound FX and ADR are added to the scene? Do you want your production dialogue to sound like it's in a different physical space to the rest of the sound and pull your audience out of the scene?

It's impossible to record production sound without also capturing some reverb but if there's too much reverb, ADR is likely the best solution. If there's not too much reverb the Re-recording mixer has to program a reverb to match the production sound reverb. If instead the dialogue is ADR, the Re-recording Mixer has to place that ADR in a physical location (using EQ and reverb) which matches the visuals rather than in the ADR booth where it was recorded, unless of course the scene in question actually occurs in an ADR booth! Either way, an in-depth knowledge and skill in using reverb is an absolute basic requirement for any Re-recording Mixer or anyone acting as the Re-recording mixer. In fact, of all the audio engineering roles (inc. Music mixing and production), a Re-recording Mixer needs to understand the application of reverb better than anyone!

With all this in mind, taking the advice of (or worse still, hiring) someone who doesn't know reverb inside out is like taking the advice or hiring a racing driver who doesn't know how to use the brake pedal!

G

 

[harmonica44]

Well I am doing Foley and FX for the feature movie I am working on right now. The director wanted me cause I am the only one she could find who will do it for free. When I do Foley and FX, in a dry environment, I have a lot of trouble making it sound like it is in the same room. I just cannot add reverb the right way, and keeps coming out sounding synthetic or off.

If I go to a similar acoustic location or the same location used during shooting, and do the Foley and sounds there, it sounds much more natural, and similar. The director said she liked and showed it her friends and her friends said they cannot tell that it was recorded in a different room, just so long as the room is made of similar materials, and similar size. Like a kitchen for a kitchen and a bathroom for a bathroom. I have been doing it this way so far, cause I spent literally months of trial and error in Adobe Audition and still couldn't get things to sound right. That was for the short I did before. I am using this new method for this newer feature.

I recorded a conversation by putting a mic to a telephone, and it sounds a lot more real than me trying to make a voice sound like it's coming through a phone when it's not. I know I am doing something wrong in the program but I just cannot get things to sound right or convincing myself after a lot of trial and error.

So I figured if the director and her 'test viewers' agree that if recording it all acoustically and no reverb added works better for me, than maybe I will just add sounds that way to the short I want to make afterwards. But if that's a bad idea than of course, I don't want to do it. I'm still trying to figure out how to blanket a room properly for recording dry dialogue.

As for an audio engineer, if I can't find one willing to do a convincing reverb job, than I try it myself. I've been paying a lot of attention to sound in movies to try to get the hang of what I can do. Here's a scene in a movie where the reverb changes from shot to shot:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwQ0IL2_UIQ

At 1:59 into the movie, Matthew McConaughey says 'Listen carefully, both of you... I performed a service for this family'. Right on the "I" in that sentence, the reverb changes before the shot changes. This also happens a couple of more times in the video, like at 2:15. Reverb changing just before the shot. Why is that? Will the audience find it too jarring if the reverb changes right with the video shot, so they have to have it change before to add a smoother flow to it?

I will keep an eye out for that in other movie scenes.

 

[AcousticAl]

I don't know why I'm getting into another one of these threads, but...

Well I am doing Foley and FX for the feature movie I am working on right now. The director wanted me cause I am the only one she could find who will do it for free.

That should tell you something...

When I do Foley and FX, in a dry environment, I have a lot of trouble making it sound like it is in the same room. I just cannot add reverb the right way, and keeps coming out sounding synthetic or off.

It's been mentioned, but I'll reiterate: using reverb convincingly in situations like this is as much technical knowledge as it is art form. Now, I could tell you that your average stock reverb plugin that comes pre-loaded with your free audio editing app is not the right kind of plugin, and that what you need is a convolution reverb (a specialized reverb that is adept at emulating various types of rooms)... but I doubt that will do you any good. Go ahead and buy a convolution reverb, but simply having the right tool doesn't mean that you'll be able to use it properly.

I'm still trying to figure out how to blanket a room properly for recording dry dialogue.

This isn't always necessary. Only if the room is terribly reflective and the mic simply won't behave in that environment. Sometimes, it's okay for a kitchen to sound - in a sublime kind of way - like a kitchen. "Dry" dialog or "clean" dialog don't mean that they sound like they were recorded in an isolation booth. What these mean is that the dialog was recorded with as great a dialog-to-ambient ratio as possible. It's more about eliminating background noises like refrigerators, AC, fans, traffic, etc., than it is killing every trace of reflection in a room.

As for an audio engineer, if I can't find one willing to do a convincing reverb job, than I try it myself. I've been paying a lot of attention to sound in movies to try to get the hang of what I can do. Here's a scene in a movie where the reverb changes from shot to shot:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwQ0IL2_UIQ

At 1:59 into the movie, Matthew McConaughey says 'Listen carefully, both of you... I performed a service for this family'. Right on the "I" in that sentence, the reverb changes before the shot changes. This also happens a couple of more times in the video, like at 2:15. Reverb changing just before the shot. Why is that?

If I recall correctly, you've run boom on a couple of these amazing projects you keep talking about, right? Have you not yet figured out how mics behave in different locations, and at different distances to the subject?

What you're hearing here is a seam between two takes, on both ends. With the close-up, the mic is very, very close. With the wide shot, the mic cannot be as close. But this works, because the perspective of the sound follows the perspective of the camera. Close-up shots, close-up sound. Wider shots, wider sound. You should have figured this out by now if you've been booming anything.

 

[harmonica44]

Okay thanks. That's what I am saying as well. It's an artform, so it will take years to master like lots of arts, and I still haven't been able to figure it out yet. I know it's an artform but I've already one trial and error for months and unless I want to become an audio engineer only, I have to devote time to other areas of filmmaking.

I thought blankets were used more commonly.

I know that different mics behave differently in different environments, but I was told before on here, and in this same thread, that all the sound has to be of the same or similar tone, for editing, otherwise it's a pain in the A$$, as one user put it.

So therefore, I didn't know that was okay to put the mic at different distances, for close ups, mastershots, etc, since different the tones would be a pain.

 

[AcousticAl]

I know that different mics behave differently in different environments, but I was told before on here, and in this same thread, that all the sound has to be of the same or similar tone, for editing, otherwise it's a pain in the A$$, as one user put it.

So therefore, I didn't know that was okay to put the mic at different distances, for close ups, mastershots, etc, since different the tones would be a pain.

You aren't paying attention. I'm talking about perspective, not tone.

First rule of audio club: get the mic as close as you can without getting into frame. Therefore, different frames will allow for different distances. Wide shots on a boom will not allow the mic to be as close as on a tight shot. The viewer's perspective in that case is more distant from the subject, so it follows naturally that the sound will be just a bit more distant. It's not a difference in tone, assuming the same mic in the same room (though proximity effect may need to be factored in... but then we're still in your realm of "similar" tone). It's a slightly more "roomy" sound based on the distance of the mic, and a narrower ratio of dialog to room reflections.

Even if this is created in post... it simply sounds unnatural to have an up-close voice when the subject seems distant.

Hell, haven't you used the trial scene from Kubrick's "Paths of Glory" for one of your inane threads? That's a perfect example. It was shot in a large (very large) hall in a palace outside of Munich: marble floors, hard walls... nothing but reflection. The wide shots have a much more cavernous, reflective sound. The tight shots have the same reflections, but minimized by the fact that the mic is merely inches away from Douglas as opposed to a couple of feet.

Don't want to have to think about any of this? Use a lav. It won't sound as good as a boom in most scenarios, but at least it simplifies the placement issue.

The other thing you aren't paying attention to: you said that you've been told (I assume by your trusted sources who always seem to feed you BS) to record dialog with reverb. This is not about natural reflections in a room. Recording with reverb suggests that you have an effects processor and are adding synthetic reverb on set/location. That is what folks are talking about here that will make your dialog, Foley, and FX editing to be sheer hell.

 

[AudioPostExpert]

Okay thanks. That's what I am saying as well. It's an artform, so it will take years to master like lots of arts, and I still haven't been able to figure it out yet. I know it's an artform but I've already one trial and error for months and unless I want to become an audio engineer only, I have to devote time to other areas of filmmaking.

Every thread of yours is the same. You want a simple answer to solve your audio difficulties but simplifying an answer to the level you are after renders the answer virtually worthless! Just look at the section I've quoted, you seem to realise it takes years to master the art and then in the very next sentence you say that you haven't mastered it after a few months?! Duh, please explain why you expect to master something in a few months that takes everyone else years. Actually it doesn't take years, it takes decades because you are trying to do a number of different audio roles, each of which takes years to learn proficiently. PSM, Boom Op, Dialogue Editor, Foley Artist, Foley Recordist, SFX Editor an Re-recording Mixer. If all that isn't enough you don't even have any of the right tools for all these various jobs! And, just because you have to devote time to other areas of your filmmaking doesn't somehow magically mean you will be able to master sound in months rather than years. Either buy the equipment and put in the time or put up with audio which doesn't sound quite right, but endlessly starting threads trying to find answers which will result in your audio sounding right without expending serious amounts of time, money and effort is nothing more than an exercise in futility!

If you are getting acceptable results recording your SFX/Foley on location with reverb then do it that way. There are three potential downsides to this approach which both you and the Producer should be aware of: 1. If the locations are just a kitchen or a bedroom then no problem but it starts to get difficult (and expensive) when you have slightly more unusual locations or public locations. 2. Once you've recorded your SFX/Foley with included reverb that's it, if you find you've recorded too much (or too little) reverb on one or more of your recordings there's not much you can do but go and record them again and 3. If the film ever needs a 5.1 or LtRt mix or just a higher quality stereo mix for a particular pitch, screening or distribution channel, the most likely solution will be to dump all your recorded sounds, start again from scratch and record all new sounds without reverb. This will of course be many times more time consuming and expensive than just remixing the material from your mix.

G