Thinking of shooting a feature on HV20 - need advice on how to record audio

C

c.g._eads

Veteran
I just bought an HV20 and I would like to shoot a feature film on it. The big question is audio. I am by no means an audio expert (so please speak in simple terms) but I'm trying to find a cheap approach to record dialogue and sound.

Here are the options I've come up with.

1) ADR - Record dialogue later. I know no performance with ADR is as good as on the day, but this solution would be good for me since my crew will be so small (5-7 people) and that way I wouldn't have to worry about dialogue as much. The bad part of this is I think it would cost a lot more money to do it this way, right? I wouldn't just be able to do ADR in my house with an XLR adpater connected to my camera, right? (although I think that's what Rodriquez did on El Mariachi).

2) Use an XLR adapter - record directly into the camera. I don't know if the audio would be good enough under this scenario. Any thoughts on this? This seems like it would be the cheapest solution though.

3) Use a separate audio recording device (mixer and mics). This is the choice I know the least about as I have always recorded into a camera. Can someone lay out the equipment I'd need, crew required, and how much it would cost? I think this is the costliest choice, right?

4) Anyone know of any other options?

I really am a novice when it comes to sound. But I'm sick and tired of waiting to get enough money to hire a dedicated sound guy (and camera guy, and prop guy, etc. etc. etc.) to make my film so I have to make some sacrifices. Any suggestions would help.

Thanks,
Chris
 
Don't even think about doing everything in ADR. Yeah, it's expensive and time consuming, but you'll lose all of your emotional performances from the actor. It will come off very flat, performance wise.

Don't go with the cheapest solution... go with the one that makes sense and is the least amount of trouble. Spend a little money if you have to... just my thoughts...
 
I'd personally go with #3.

They make cheap (sub-$200) recorders that you can use. It's relatively time-consuming to sync audio in post but It's not a deal-breaker.

You can run audio with just one person if you need to. The boom operator just holds the recorder himself.
 
Yeah #3 sounds like your best bet - you'll get the bonus of your sound guy not being tethered to the camera as well. I'd avoid ADR at all costs - you could do it on a home computer in a makeshift soundbooth but I think you'd be alot happier with option 3 as far as sound quality and time invested goes.
 
i figured 3 was probably the way to go. any suggestions on equipment? Or at least a couple of words to search for so I can do the research myself. This is a retarded question but it shows how little I know. A mixer is not the same as a recorder, correct? Or can there be two-in-one?

I need the mixer, the recroder, the tapes (if there are tapes), the mic, and the boom, right?

Another question. If I use the tapes (they're called "DAT" tapes right?), how do I get those tapes onto my computer?

Chris
 
To get a DAT tape into your computer a S/PDIF stream keeps it pure digital so you don't have to worry about signal loss as much. This would require a S/PDIF input on your computer and if it doesn't have one you're going to need a soundcard that has one. While DAT is still used, the solid state recorders have pretty much taken over as the dominant equipment. They use Secure Digital or Compact Flash or an internal hard drive and getting the files into your computer is as easy as a file transfer with a card reader.
 
If you can't budget at least $1500 for audio, don't even try to do a feature, go find an audio guy in town and talk him into doing it for you. Even $1500 is bare, bare minimum to even think about a feature. That would buy you a Beachtek XLR adapter, a cheap mixer, a cheap boom pole, an Oktava with KSSM, BBG and fuzzy and some cables.

You need to step back and ask yourself why you want to plow into a feature when you don't have your audio game won. Don't do it man, do shorts until you can do one good on both visuals and audio. The questions you asked are good, and are to be expected, but not right before a feature. Step back and do it right, or get someone else to do it for you.
 
jdajda said:
Yeah #3 sounds like your best bet - you'll get the bonus of your sound guy not being tethered to the camera as well.
Click to expand...
Tetherring the sound to the camera needn't be a bad thing. Even when recording double-system, I like to also record single-system as a backup whenever possible.
Synching the footage becomes far easier when you have good, clean guide already on the tape. Often enough the picture editor will simply use the single-system sound, which the dialogue editor will later replace with the conformed double-system sound.

Most portable recorders have line-level outputs (often unballanced) which can be easily used to provide an audio feed for the camera. Such a setup isn't perfect, but its great for guide. A better solution is to run the mics into a portable mixer with two ballanced stereo outputs. In my case, my PSC mixer's XLR outputs feed my Fostex FR-2, while the mixer's 10-pin hirose output lets me plug an ENG snake into the camera. The ENG snake has a quick-release connection, which makes connecting and disconnecting a breeze.
 
shawneous, i get what you're saying. And there are about a dozen other things that I should know before I make a feature. But if every director waited until they understood everything about filmmaking before they made a film, no film would ever get made. I believe with some good suggestions and some practice I'll be able to acheive good audio. I know the importance of audio and I will not shoot the feature until after I've cut together a test scene with audio that I am satisfied with.
 
I don't believe Shawn was implying you personally need to learn sound before proceeding but you need to "nail down" how you are going to get it done.

As you stated, movies would never get made if the director had to do it and understand it all themselves, but someone on set has to understand the each department. You don't have to know makeup, but you do have to address that need by getting someone who does know makeup. At the low/no budget end, you won't get the make-up chick from Die Hard but find a non-pro who is interested in it and wants to learn more (for this go to dept store makeup counters).

Same for sound; get someone who knows a bit and would like to explore further. Community colleges often have a sound dept with people studying music recording. You can solicit them for volunteers. Personally I have no idea how these people work for 30 days with no pay (ahhh to be young and un-morgaged :) ) but they are out there.

Your sound, make-up, wardrode, sets, and lighting and not going to be ideal but always to some extent you get what you pay for. The indies with truly horrible sound are the ones who just gave up, passed the boom around from free-hand to free-hand and prayed for a miracle.

If you truly put the thought and effort into finding someone to head your sound dept then you will be miles ahead of them. The more time you put into finding someone and the more time you give them to practice on shorts, the better your end product will be.

Cheers
 
saneproductions said:
....and the sound is at least 60% of your movie!

If it is not good, you are wasting everyone's time.
Click to expand...

People are always quoting ridiculous percentages like this. Sound is NOT 60% of the movie. Sound is an important part yes but you can't break it down that way. And you have to define what you mean. The implication is production recording is 60% and that is clearly not the case. For some parts of some films the sound is close to 0% and for other parts it's almost 100%. The burial scene in Kill Bill 2 starts as a 100% sound bit, but that is very rare. Music videos could be considered to have great sound, but they have no production sound, and often no post sound - just the music track. In that case there is no real down side to a director than knows squat about sound and has no sound crew.
The biggest thing with production and post sound (excluding music) is that it can negate a lot of good work in the other departments. A really scary shot wont be scary unless it also sounds scary. Great dialog wound seem great if it is hard to understand or sounds really bad. Bad production hamstrings your potential for a good film faster than most things. Bad lighting might be taken for "artistic" bad sound will never be.
Bad post can destroy good production work, great post can maybe salvage so so production tracks. One does not "fix" the other. But production is the most important first step because you can re-post, you can't re-shoot. ADR is a last step desperation move 99.999% of the time. The only real exception is with a film that will be dubbed always. It takes a lot of time and money to do right and done wrong it's not worth doing.

So back to the top. Sound is not accurately a % of your film. That's like saying yeast is only 1% of French bread. While it may be an accurate statement on some scale try making French bread with out it. (I had to be specific on the bread so some wise-ass didn't start naming unleavened breads).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top