Dedicated sound guy... worth the money?

J

jthabel

Well-known member
On past shoots, I've used boom operators, but I've never hired a dedicated sound guy. Someone with a field mixer, etc. I'm wondering if it's worth the money. My audio experience is average to slightly above average. I know which mics to use in which situations, and I own a pretty decent mic spread (a shotgun, an Omni, a hyper, and a couple lavs). My results have been mostly positive. I monitor the audio feed on a pair of headphones through my camera (a Canon C100), direct the boom operator as needed, and generally get clean audio. Inevitably, I've had to perform ADR on occasion, but I've always gotten decent scratch audio in these situations. In post, I've been able to mix my audio to satisfaction within Adobe Premiere. So, again, my question is, what am I missing out on by not having a dedicated audio guy? What can they offer that I can't fix or address in post? Most of my shooting experience has been in the narrative short, documentary, or corporate vid realm. I might be shooting a low budget narrative indie in the near future. What should I be looking for if I decide to up the audio ante?
 
jthabel said:
So, again, my question is, what am I missing out on by not having a dedicated audio guy?
Click to expand...

What you are missing is putting your concentration into your vision for the film. Instead, you are splitting your concentration to also cover the audio parts. You are spreading yourself thin, intentionally. If that works for you, it works for you. Carry on.

But at some stage, you're going to want to tackle a project of sufficient complexity that this won't work for you any more. Then... hire a sound guy.

A good sound guy relieves you of the direct responsibility for mixer operation and sound capture. Just like a DOP relieves you of the direct responsibility for camera operation and video capture. If you don't yet need to delegate these things, then you don't need them. But once you do, you'll wonder how you ever managed without these people. Just sayin'.
 
x = (number of actors per shot × feet that actors move per shot) + (number of hours working per day) + (number of days working per week) + (dollars in budget × 0.001)

If x > 50, hire sound person! ;)

---

Okay, math may be unreliable. But as Bruce Watson said, it's all about the level of complexity. For very simple shoots, a dedicated sound person may be overkill (only one guy, sitting at a table, talking to the camera). For multimillion-dollar productions with actors moving around and shoots that last 12 hours a day for weeks, a dedicated sound guy is a no-brainer. Somewhere in between is your project.
 
Last edited:
I posit that it depends on who the client is (if applicable) and how high their standards are. I have worked on many shoots that were a single, sitting/standing, unmoving, talking head on a locked down camera, still used a 3-4 person crew including pro sound guy. Worked on same where I did everything.
 
No doubt my life would be easier as a director if I hired a dedicated sound professional, and I hear everything you guys are saying above. And I appreciate the fact that a larger scale production would benefit from this even more. What I'm looking for here is, what expertise (aside from the expertise that I possess, that I mentioned above in my first post), can a sound professional bring to the table? What am I missing out on, other than a task being taken off my shoulders? I guess this is kind of a broad question, but the gearhead in me is trying to figure what what I might be losing out on that I'm not already covering. For example -- having a guy with a field mixer on set. Assuming I get clear audio at solid levels, what's he going to provide for me that I can't correct in post? I'm trying to look at this from a technical angle.
 
Well first of all you'll get better quality sound. As you are feeding the mic directly into your C100, a mixer would produce a stronger signal, which in turn will produce a cleaner track. The operator him/herself has the expertise to get through tough situations (difficult to record shots, random noises popping up, increased efficiency/speed) and usually has better equipment as well (mics, lavs, etc.). It will also mean less time and money spent in post production.
You can make it work by yourself, but to get that clean, perfect audio that screams of a professional job, a sound guy is basically a necessity.
 
- I'm putting a foam core board beside this wall, to reduce echo
- I think that the hum of traffic is a bit louder out that window than you want it to be, let's see if we can dampen it more --- or move further away from it?
- I heard a brief hiss in the wireless mic. We should do another take.
- Boom guy, you got too far off axis when he stood up on his line. We should do another take.

I don't know if there's anything technical that you don't know. Like we've said, it's more a matter of attention.

Then again, I'm not a sound guy myself, and I'm still learning. Like just the other day I read something about how the MKH 416 is better protected against radio-frequency interference --- or was it humidity? Anyway, nothing that would make a huge difference --- except those few times you mentioned you had to do ADR. With a dedicated sound guy, maybe they would have been avoided.

Other than that, I would expect things in general to just sound a little bit cleaner, a little less echoey, a little warmer, a little fuller, than they normally would, at least more consistently. It's just a matter of a guy focusing all his attention on one particular aspect of a production.
 
Last edited:
what he said above. sound guys have a more critical rar than you, are more sensitive to reverb, background noise, etc. know how to troubleshoot thay noisy AC, understand sound and the way it reflects off various surfaces to know what mic to use in what situation and where precisely to place it to get the best sound, in addition to potentially (probably, these days) having a high end recorder that will record way better sound than your cam can even with a mixer in front. keep in mind we have to take you at your word that you are getting good soun ALREADY, without hearing it we dont know if it really is pretty good or if your ear is not refined enough to know when its lacking in some way. PS NOT a sound guy here, just know many of them.

i still say it depends on what level of polish youre aiming for on your projects/client demands, as well as distribution medium (greay sound somewhat not worth if only playing out of computer speakers or ipads)
 
combatentropy said:
- I'm putting a foam core board beside this wall, to reduce echo
- I think that the hum of traffic is a bit louder out that window than you want it to be, let's see if we can dampen it more --- or move further away from it?
- I heard a brief hiss in the wireless mic. We should do another take.
- Boom guy, you got too far off axis when he stood up on his line. We should do another take.
Click to expand...

This right here is a VERY strong argument for hiring a good sound person.
 
If you have the budget, always get a good, experienced sound PROFESSIONAL. Preferably with gear.
As the shoot budgets and expectations go up you will need to spend a lot more time with the clients, not messing with gear.
Unless you have top flight mics, there will be a noticeable difference in sound quality in a static studio situation. On a live location? The improvement in quality will be amplified. An experienced location mixer will be able to deal with and minimize sound problems as you discuss the shot, perhaps the delivery of dialogue with the client, maybe changes to their boards, what time to break for lunch etc etc etc.

You truly do not know what you are missing by not work with a good professional.

On the other hand, if you work with an amateur or poor mixer you will always think you can do a better job yourself- because you can. If it's in the budget don't be afraid to hire someone much more skilled than you. Learn what you can. I call it a free education.

my motto: the more I learn, the more I learn how little I know.

By having a decent pool of talented crew to work with you're always ready to take on different jobs and jump on new opportunities.

Another option is to really bone up on sound and hire good camera ops.

Media production is a collaboration. I'm always amazed at some of the people I work with. I'm always angered by some of the people I work with and vow to never hire them again. In time you'll have a solid list of crew to work with on any size project.
 
Not to be a politically correct ninny here, but I hate the term "sound guy". I know many very talented female sound mixers.

To answer the question:

You asked why would you hire a sound professional when you can fix problems in post? That right there is your answer. Wouldn't you rather not have to fix problems in post at all? If you have a noisy location, you don't have a sound problem, you have a location problem, and an audio professional that knows what they are doing will be able to tell you these things and can allow you to focus on your vision for your project.

I've been on a crew of about 5 people for sit down talking head interviews for the AMC tv network. All of us professionals, and it turned out really well and I was asked back to do them again. Could it have been done with one or two people? Probably. Would it have been as good? No way.

When you hire an audio professional you get an audio professional. If you think hiring a professional is expensive...just wait until you hire an amateur.
 
Speaking as a sound post profesional, post is the last place you want to "fix" things.

What do you get with a professional mixer?

With the right one you get better quality, less stress and a partner in helping you create the show you have in mind.

The catch is of course "the right one". There are chops and any pro should bring that but there is also the personality fit, if it's wrong it can be a worse situation than doing it your self.

But assuming the personalities work what you get is a Lot more experience, lots more ways to "fix" problems before they become big problems. And with that you get the freedom to focus on other things because you can depend on your sound department getting you good sound and letting you know when there are problems. So depending on how big and complex the shoot and how much you like micro multitasking it can be huge or not a lot.

Personally I will always opt for a team. A team of people will make a better project. They will think of things you don't and have skills you don't. But bodies are not a team, so that is the catch. Just getting bodies to fill the slots is usually a lot worse than not having anyone in the slot.

I would add a sound post person early also since IF you are trying to get that "Hollywood feature sound" in your film about 80% of what people hear will be added in post and the sooner you get them on your team the smoother that will go.

That said if you have a way of working that you are happy with then I wouldn't change just to change. Change because the situation has changed. Look at the project is it just like another that you did and are happy with or is it something more challenging where you can benefit from being able to focus on other things?
 
davefisk said:
Not to be a politically correct ninny here, but I hate the term "sound guy". I know many very talented female sound mixers.
Click to expand...

Sorry. What is the common name for this role? I kept wanting to write sound mixer, because I have often heard it. But something held me back, namely that just 1% of their job is mixing.

On that note, if I may interject a short tangent, when I've seen someone turning the knobs on an audio device during a take, I always think to myself, won't that sound weird? It seems like fiddling with the knobs while recording will make the sound volume go up and down and be very hard to even out in post. The editor will not know exactly when the mixer turned the knob. The editor will only be like, I think I heard it go up a little here, so I will turn it back down to even it out.

Or for that matter, during concerts and stuff, the same problem could be applied to the sound board operator. Look, they're fiddling with the knobs there too! During the song! How come it doesn't make the song sound uneven? (See, I told you I wasn't a pro.)
 
FWIW: When on set - I refer to the sound person as my "Audio Pro".
I think it helps remind everyone else on the set that this person is IMPORTANT and is a professional and is not to be disregarded.
 
jthabel said:
What I'm looking for here is, what expertise (aside from the expertise that I possess, that I mentioned above in my first post), can a sound professional bring to the table? What am I missing out on, other than a task being taken off my shoulders? I guess this is kind of a broad question, but the gearhead in me is trying to figure what what I might be losing out on that I'm not already covering.
Click to expand...

You're making an unwarranted assumption. That is, that everything is going to go right. If everything goes right, then you recording sound along with all your other duties might work out OK for you (if you have the years of experience as a sound pro, and the equipment, and the time to do a good setup, etc.). But when does everything go right?

The skills you are lacking include how to handle the situation when things go wrong.

Humans are notoriously bad multi-taskers. This means that your sound monitoring is probably very close to worthless. It's called attention blindness. You get into the fight for control with an actor, trying to get it done your way, and you can't hear the sound in your headphones at all. And that is when things go wrong. That's when a dropout occurs. Or the actor goes out of pattern, or drops his chin and mumbles, or you nudge the gain pot and record the take in the dirt, or someone's cell phone gives your wireless system an RF hit, or a dog barks, a car horn blows, someone on set drops a screwdriver, or any number of things happen.

It's the difference between simple stuff that could easily and more-or-less painlessly be fixed on set, and laborious and expensive post work that never really matches the rest of the dialog.
 
On a professional movie set THe person working the knobs is a sound mixer. Then you have a boom op and the third person if you have one is a sound utility.

I don't know any production sound women, but there are plenty of sound post women. And nobody in a big budget film setting is a "sound guy". In 1997 or so there were very few women in post except assistants and dialog (positions you can't get Oscars for). BUT by 2000 or so there were a number of women working as FX editors and supervisors and rerecording mixers. It isn't all that it should be but it is not that rare anymore to find women in any of the prime post positions.
 
Last edited:
as for the question about how they can adjust knobs during a take, theyre making generally very tiny adjustments that are nigh inaudible (but affect the recording level) and also probably adjusting between words/sentences so its not so obvious. they know what they can get away with. also, if someone goes from whispering to screaming suddenly, you have no choice BUT to ride the volume lest the take be way too loud/too soft.

this is my two cents anyway, again, not a pro sound PERSON myself but have to do this stuff occasionally
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top