Audio for Video Techniques-- Production Audio or Post-Production

[62stratplaya]

Gregg you said, "It didn't look like ADR." I am not familiar with that movie, however I've gotten ADR pretty darn tight. And I've also been fooled a time or two by synced audio that looked off but was not.

I personally like ADR, and a lot of high budget hollywood does it.

IMO, Even a ghetto "Rodriguez" style ADR is a decent choice when doing indie productions, especially action.

 

[Gregg Juke]

Hey 62SP,

Yeah, I guess it could have been. I've even done some pretty decent stuff with over-dubbing/ADR in the past (in the style of those commercials, where a particular actor's voice is replaced with one that is distinctly opposite, like a huge guy with a girly Southern-belle vocal take).

It just seems to me like that might not be their first choice, and they'd at least need reference audio, right? Interesting technical situation, in any event...

BTW, what condition is the '62 Strat in?

GJ

 

[Noiz2]

Hey Noiz (or anyone that wants to answer)-- In your experience, what has been the purview of the music superviser? I was under the impression that he or she would have an impact on the overall sonic character (at least as far as music) of the film, and that they would be the person that the composer would report to/liaison with, in addition to getting any outside music clearances. Is it usually just the legal/clearance end they're dealing with, and not the actual score/music edit/sound of the film? (I guess we're talking pretty big budget movies where there would even be someone with that title in the first place)...

GJ

Pretty much what NYVideo said. Composers have a say but music editors and supervisors are usually more on the "working stiffs" end of things. They may have some influence if they are hired early, as in before the composer, and so pick temp music that the director falls in love with and the composer has to mimic. Out side of the music they wouldn't have any say, as a rule. The big catch in all this is IF the music supervisor is old buds with the director and they go out drinking every night all bets are off. But that is true for anyone on the crew.

 

[Noiz2]

OK, so here's another one for you: I was watching the film "Soul Surfer" this evening (familiar with it?), and I got to thinking-- how did they get the dialogue in the ocean/surfing scenes? I mean the two-shots where people are really talking together closely, not something that could be dubbed because you only saw them in profile or the back of their heads or something.

It didn't look like ADR (or like that would even be possible), and I don't think they could've used lavs, and I was trying to figure out what kind of sea-going boom/recording rig the soundman would/could have been using?

Any takers? Anybody ever have to do any ocean dialogue recording before? What about that movie from a few years back where the people were left out at sea on the dive trip? How would you approach a gig like that?

GJ

ADR. I would bet big bucks. It's a lot easier to cheat when your not full face. But good ADR is never noticeable. Even if they could lav them it would be garbage in the surf and wind.

Films are an illusion. Now if you don't want to work in films you don't want to know too much about how they are made, just as you don't want to know how the magician saws the lady in half with out killing her.

 

[Noiz2]

Hey 62SP,

It just seems to me like that might not be their first choice, and they'd at least need reference audio, right? Interesting technical situation, in any event...
GJ

I'm not a fan of ADR on low budget films because they rarely have the money or time to do it right. And Hollywood works hard to not do ADR as a rule. But there are films with a lot of ADR. The original StarWars had a LOT of ADR. Generally if you look at a shot and go how the heck did they manage to get clean sound there.. They didn't. Or more correctly they didn't in what you think was the situation. With good CG there are plenty of "impossible" shots that are on a stage of some sort. In that case they probably did get good sound but the actors are not where you think they are.

A classic that I do know some details of is Titanic. About 20%-30% of the dialog you hear is ADR. Mostly because they were building the set during shooting. There are shots on the deck with heavy wind and rushing water. But they weren't on the water they were on a big sound stage in Baja. It's out side but it's in a tank. The wind is controlled and the water is all CG. You see them running through the engine room and you can hear them. Well there was no engine room. That is a moving plate shot on a single steam engine Liberty ship shot with flats around the engine so it would look larger and then cloned to make up the three engines in the shot. The scene was probably shot on a green screen on a stage. So it was pretty quiet. All of that sound that would have made hearing them impossible was added in post.

An illusion well done is very believable.

 

[DrDave]

One of my teachers kept a pair of mics on all the time in house on monitor through speakers in the next room. He would listen for the stereo image all day. Go out and move them every now and then. Nowadays we don't have the luxury of time, and quickly putting up more mics is a solid substitute.

 

[Noiz2]

One of my teachers kept a pair of mics on all the time in house on monitor through speakers in the next room. He would listen for the stereo image all day. Go out and move them every now and then. Nowadays we don't have the luxury of time, and quickly putting up more mics is a solid substitute.

Don't think he was working in film ;~)

There are a few different approaches (many more techniques) to stereo or recording in general.

There are nature recordists and the "capture reality" folks. They spend a lot of time trying to capture reality on "tape". Some of this is really cool but personally I think it's silly to think you can capture a subjective reality with an objective tool. And technically it's near impossible to even come close. But heck I do some silly things my self and some of the recordings theae guys do are fantastic (I just don't buy into the capture reality part).

Then there are the music folks. They can be a little like the first group when it's live performance. But mostly it's studio recording and stereo there is all about making it sound great. You know what your aiming for and you are trying to record so that when it all comes together it will sound fantastic and as a rule not like reality, but better.

Last there are the film FX recordist approach. There is no "reality" to capture, your capturing a building block that is going to be one small piece of a big puzzle that you are likely not a part of putting together. Other than backgrounds and ambiences most of your "stereo" recordings are going to be used mono. For ambiences you generally want as big a spread as possible, but often because of constraints your using the same stereo rig for everything so it's not generally going to be supper wide. But Everything is going to me manipulated and messaged so really that is not a huge concern. When your not so wide BG is played L&R on a big screen and some processed part is bled into the surrounds it's going to be HUGE. Now add the other five to ten tracks of ambience and BG and you have a film "reality".

I see a lot of talk by folks in the first group that think what they do is how films are recorded but it's really the complete opposite.
They are trying to capture a reality and film folks are trying to create a reality.

Many nature recordings are problematic in film work because they are too much about THAT reality and it's hard to transform them into the FILM reality. It's part of the reason that surround recordings are not the big deal in film that many think they ought to be. A surround recording is much more about THAT reality and so is much harder to transform into the reality that is where the film lives.

Narrative films are not "recorded" they are "created".

Anyway, you point is very true that time is not being taken today the way it used to be. But for narrative film work that isn't really about stereo perspective so much as not going out and recording new material specifically suited to the film and using more material out of the library, and not giving post enough time to do the subtle stuff.