Starting my first dialogue mix and would like confirmation & some general guidelines. I am starting with pretty clean, flat sound from Countryman lavs, Zoom F4 (96K 24 Bit), and Senn MKH 50 on a boom. First doing a 30 band EQ and rolling off below 120Hz and above 12,000. Using Tube Based Compresser in Audition, I am using the hard limiter, boosting gain 3 db and doing 3:1 compression ratio. This is giving me a base room tone of about -42 to -45 in the lav track with limited peaks around -6. I think it sounds pretty good. I have gone through the track and "healed" any areas of fabric crackle that show up. As the actor moves away from the camera I am planning on dropping the volume slightly and adding a touch of reverb or delay to make him sound further away, as we could not use the boom in the first scene (inside an RV). Is this approach making sense to the experienced?
Dialoge Mix Guidelines
- Thread starter ric8138
- Start date
Noiz2
Sound Ninja
Well...
Not knowing whee you want to end up, maybe?
Personally No.
I would not generally roll off that high unless I really needed to. 120 is high enough that it could affect many male voices. With very rare exceptions I never use compression and when I do it would likely be on the dialog mix. But again, except to "fix" a particular problem I don't use compressors and then it's usually as an expander. Now I will say that a big budget "trick" was to use the "container" portion of the matrix encoder which is a compressor so it is certainly not a "crime" to use compression, as long as you are not trying to avoid mixing. I just find that once I have actually mixed the dialog there isn't a need for a compressor. An exception is for some web stuff where they want a "pop music" compressed to a block sound.
Here is the asterisk. I work the way it's done in features even when I'm doing a no budget short. So I am going to use a lot of layers of sound. I use only enough Room Tone to avoid a cut up choppy sound in the dialog, since I will be adding in full backgrounds. I also will replace every production FX that I can with something better and probably layering on to any I can't actually remove. So if that isn't how you are going to work my advice may not be of that much use.
Not knowing whee you want to end up, maybe?
Personally No.
I would not generally roll off that high unless I really needed to. 120 is high enough that it could affect many male voices. With very rare exceptions I never use compression and when I do it would likely be on the dialog mix. But again, except to "fix" a particular problem I don't use compressors and then it's usually as an expander. Now I will say that a big budget "trick" was to use the "container" portion of the matrix encoder which is a compressor so it is certainly not a "crime" to use compression, as long as you are not trying to avoid mixing. I just find that once I have actually mixed the dialog there isn't a need for a compressor. An exception is for some web stuff where they want a "pop music" compressed to a block sound.
Here is the asterisk. I work the way it's done in features even when I'm doing a no budget short. So I am going to use a lot of layers of sound. I use only enough Room Tone to avoid a cut up choppy sound in the dialog, since I will be adding in full backgrounds. I also will replace every production FX that I can with something better and probably layering on to any I can't actually remove. So if that isn't how you are going to work my advice may not be of that much use.
Because I have not worked in the narrative film area before (see below) and was basically learning as I went along, I wanted the best sound to start out with. I have noticed that higher resolution originals allow for more "massaging" without going to hell, sort of like better video (less compressed, sLog footage) can stand more color grading than MPEG or AVCHD. I understand that recording technique is more important than software used after the fact, but I needed as many good options as I could gather.
The project started as a small scale indie film that grew into a full scale production, and I kind of got swept along as it grew. It was a great experience and a new challenge that I am really enjoying.
Last edited:
I thought I replied, but my first post seems to have disappeared. Scott, I wonder if you could recommend some reading on this topic or expand further on your approach. I asked for advice because I need it. My background is commercial/industrial video that usually ends up on iPhones and laptops, viewed in less than ideal listening environments. The goal there is thick and loud so the viewer can understand the VO whether they are on a subway train or in their living room. I realize I have entered a new world here and seek theory, guidance, and insight. I got involved in a small indie project that has blossomed (due to an excellent script and some very talented people jumping in) into something much larger, and I am trying to do it justice.
Noiz2
Sound Ninja
Ric8138,
The first thing I would do is SR convert the audio down to 48/24. I read your reasoning and it's not a new argument, but I haven't heard it validated by experience. Plus you are rolling off at 120K so your tossing away the theoretical extra frequencies you recorded.
There is a decent argument for recording some SFX at higher SR since an editor is likely to slow them down and manipulate them but really very little benefit to dialog. And since most of the SFX you will find or buy are going to be at 48k OR 48K up-sampled because there is market. I have a couple of libraries of fight sounds and because it was requested I also offered an up-sampled version, that I pointed out in the description was just an up-sample because the original recordings were on DAT at 48/16, and they sold???? I charged only a minor increase in price because I felt it was silly for someone to buy them but they still sold.
Anyway, The expanded version of my post workflow is in the stickies.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?172106-Key-to-making-your-film-sound-like-it-had-a-budget
The parent stickie also has a lot of post sound related threads.
IF this film is intended for iPhones etc. THen you are really in more of a TV show mode, so compression is often used on dialog for just the reasons you mention. So if you take a film kind of workflow then you would probably add compression to the dialog stem and probably push it louder than a film would. The biggest thing in general for dialog intelligibility is not so much volume as conflicting sounds. So I would pay a lot of attention to carve out some of the vocal spectrum from the rest of the sound track when dialog is playing.
The first thing I would do is SR convert the audio down to 48/24. I read your reasoning and it's not a new argument, but I haven't heard it validated by experience. Plus you are rolling off at 120K so your tossing away the theoretical extra frequencies you recorded.
There is a decent argument for recording some SFX at higher SR since an editor is likely to slow them down and manipulate them but really very little benefit to dialog. And since most of the SFX you will find or buy are going to be at 48k OR 48K up-sampled because there is market. I have a couple of libraries of fight sounds and because it was requested I also offered an up-sampled version, that I pointed out in the description was just an up-sample because the original recordings were on DAT at 48/16, and they sold???? I charged only a minor increase in price because I felt it was silly for someone to buy them but they still sold.
Anyway, The expanded version of my post workflow is in the stickies.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?172106-Key-to-making-your-film-sound-like-it-had-a-budget
The parent stickie also has a lot of post sound related threads.
IF this film is intended for iPhones etc. THen you are really in more of a TV show mode, so compression is often used on dialog for just the reasons you mention. So if you take a film kind of workflow then you would probably add compression to the dialog stem and probably push it louder than a film would. The biggest thing in general for dialog intelligibility is not so much volume as conflicting sounds. So I would pay a lot of attention to carve out some of the vocal spectrum from the rest of the sound track when dialog is playing.
Scott,
Thanks, I will read the stickie. This project IS NOT for iPhone, that's where I came from, not where I'm going. I am not married to rolling off at 120, that was my first thought but you have talked me out of it, I will try 100 or 90.
As for the Sample Rate, as I have read more it appears that SR only effects frequency response, and it's the bit count (16 or 24) that effects quality of sound, correct? So 48 K 24 Bit files would be the best format to be working in?
Thanks, I will read the stickie. This project IS NOT for iPhone, that's where I came from, not where I'm going. I am not married to rolling off at 120, that was my first thought but you have talked me out of it, I will try 100 or 90.
As for the Sample Rate, as I have read more it appears that SR only effects frequency response, and it's the bit count (16 or 24) that effects quality of sound, correct? So 48 K 24 Bit files would be the best format to be working in?
Bruce Watson
Veteran
Most microphones that have a HPF roll off the bottom end at around 80Hz. Most mixers intended for dialog work have an HPF at 80 Hz. So you might want to start there.
There's darn little interesting dialog information below 80 Hz. A man's got to have a seriously deep voice to approach 80 Hz. But there's a big rise in crap audio (noise) at 60 Hz (HVAC noise, car doors, traffic rumble, etc.).
There are also some good reasons to apply an HPF during dialog capture and not wait for post. So you might want to consider using those HPF filters on microphones, or on mixers, or with serious LF noise problems, both (filters add, so a 12 dB/octave filter at 80 Hz and another 6 dB/octave filter at 80 Hz will give you effectively 18 dB/octave at 80 Hz).
Many think so.
Scott,
After reading your sticky it appears that what you are doing is cutting the dialogue tracks to just the spoken words and then building an artificial "noise floor" of your own making underneath? This makes a whole lot of sense, as it then gives the mixer a way to control the noise floor volume and consistency without processing the dialogue files at all, which will keep from degrading them in any way. After Foley and even after music these separate components can then be manipulated individually for the best result, no? I was making the assumption that I should use software to separate the dialogue from the background noise as much as possible, but that seems much more limited and more likely to effect the spoken words in a negative way.
After reading your sticky it appears that what you are doing is cutting the dialogue tracks to just the spoken words and then building an artificial "noise floor" of your own making underneath? This makes a whole lot of sense, as it then gives the mixer a way to control the noise floor volume and consistency without processing the dialogue files at all, which will keep from degrading them in any way. After Foley and even after music these separate components can then be manipulated individually for the best result, no? I was making the assumption that I should use software to separate the dialogue from the background noise as much as possible, but that seems much more limited and more likely to effect the spoken words in a negative way.
Noiz2
Sound Ninja
This is where what I do on low budget projects is very different than what a dialog editor would do on a big budget film.
On a big budget fill the dialog editor would also clean out just about everything between words, but would then fill with Room Tone so the track played back essentially like a studio vocal recording. There are a number of reasons to do that. One is historical (and no longer pertinent) which is that there wasn't necessarily going to be a lot of added sound, especially room tones because till the 50's it was all recorded on optical tracks with no noise reduction (magnetic recording didn't even start till after WWII). So noise would build up fast. Also optical readers on projectors can go bonkers if there is no signal so it was important to never have any silence. The other big reason is that dialog is premixed on it's own and a LOT of directors etc just can't imagine the track as part of a greater whole so if you have gaps in audio they will get distracted and think it's a problem. And since big films are edited by different editors with different specialties a dialog editor doesn't really know if there will be sufficient other sound to make a "gap" invisible and mix stage time is $$$$$.
So this is where a really small crew, or individual, has a real advantage. You don't ever have to play the dialog track back raw for the director, you know when there is going to be a lot of other sound or music. So you don't have to do a totally filled track, that will be mostly (the fill) not used in the final mix.
So I cut out any Production FX (non dialog sounds) and move them to PFX tracks, and I mostly cut out RT, though I will tend to leave the track intact Inside a sentence or even a block of dialog as long as it doesn't have a lot of other garbage on it. I don't spend a lot of time filling holes till after I put the backgrounds in. If the dialog feels choppy with the backgrounds in then you have to play with fill or the backgrounds.
IF the dialog tracks are pretty clean or you have noise reduced them to pretty clean 80% or so of the places you would have had to add fill you wont. If the dialog is noisy then you may have to fill with noise just to smooth things out.
I think this was an implied question but? Other than broad band noise reduction, which I do destructively* on a clip or section basis almost all of my "fixing" the dialog is by slicing and dicing. Want to remove a lip smack?, cut in a bit of empty air from close by. If I have to iZotope Rx can also remove things and fill the whole. It's a lot faster to cut and paste but if what you want to remove is on a line then Rx maybe the only way to go.
* When I say destructive I don't mean on the original. I copy and mute clips I'm going to do something destructive to so I can go back. I've started also doing something a friend recommended which is when you get the OMF or however your getting the production tracks, duplicate, disable, and hide the tracks before you do anything.
I'm working in ProTools so I don't know how or even if it's possible to do in other DAW's. If not a work around would be to do a save as right away with media. Not probably a big deal if you are getting just one or two tracks from the picture editor but when you have a 20 track OMF it can be a real butt saver to be able to see what the original tracks came in as.
On a big budget fill the dialog editor would also clean out just about everything between words, but would then fill with Room Tone so the track played back essentially like a studio vocal recording. There are a number of reasons to do that. One is historical (and no longer pertinent) which is that there wasn't necessarily going to be a lot of added sound, especially room tones because till the 50's it was all recorded on optical tracks with no noise reduction (magnetic recording didn't even start till after WWII). So noise would build up fast. Also optical readers on projectors can go bonkers if there is no signal so it was important to never have any silence. The other big reason is that dialog is premixed on it's own and a LOT of directors etc just can't imagine the track as part of a greater whole so if you have gaps in audio they will get distracted and think it's a problem. And since big films are edited by different editors with different specialties a dialog editor doesn't really know if there will be sufficient other sound to make a "gap" invisible and mix stage time is $$$$$.
So this is where a really small crew, or individual, has a real advantage. You don't ever have to play the dialog track back raw for the director, you know when there is going to be a lot of other sound or music. So you don't have to do a totally filled track, that will be mostly (the fill) not used in the final mix.
So I cut out any Production FX (non dialog sounds) and move them to PFX tracks, and I mostly cut out RT, though I will tend to leave the track intact Inside a sentence or even a block of dialog as long as it doesn't have a lot of other garbage on it. I don't spend a lot of time filling holes till after I put the backgrounds in. If the dialog feels choppy with the backgrounds in then you have to play with fill or the backgrounds.
IF the dialog tracks are pretty clean or you have noise reduced them to pretty clean 80% or so of the places you would have had to add fill you wont. If the dialog is noisy then you may have to fill with noise just to smooth things out.
I think this was an implied question but? Other than broad band noise reduction, which I do destructively* on a clip or section basis almost all of my "fixing" the dialog is by slicing and dicing. Want to remove a lip smack?, cut in a bit of empty air from close by. If I have to iZotope Rx can also remove things and fill the whole. It's a lot faster to cut and paste but if what you want to remove is on a line then Rx maybe the only way to go.
* When I say destructive I don't mean on the original. I copy and mute clips I'm going to do something destructive to so I can go back. I've started also doing something a friend recommended which is when you get the OMF or however your getting the production tracks, duplicate, disable, and hide the tracks before you do anything.
I'm working in ProTools so I don't know how or even if it's possible to do in other DAW's. If not a work around would be to do a save as right away with media. Not probably a big deal if you are getting just one or two tracks from the picture editor but when you have a 20 track OMF it can be a real butt saver to be able to see what the original tracks came in as.
Rick R
Veteran
Vegas Pro integrates with Sound Forge (and Spectral Layers) nicely.. (though I'm not sure about the new VP14 since Magix GmbH bought the SCS (Sony Creative Software) family of products from Sony). Unfortunately VP never could import OMF files, but the third party converters work. I do lots of 'destructive' editing in Sound Forge which has a lot of great tools for editing dialog, including redrawing, replacing/overwriting the waveform down to the sample level.
Noiz2
Sound Ninja
Actually I forgot about that. Redrawing the wave form is great for fixing weird spikes and glitches, I do that all the time in PT.
Here is a preliminary mix of the opening scene of the film I have been referencing,
https://vimeo.com/user8773489/review/192952339/b70ed364e0
I look forward to your comments and/or suggestions. I have edited the dialog in the manner Scott suggested and used a mix of wild sound recorded from the lavs as well as SFX from an online source. This scene was recorded with just 2 lavs as the interior of the RV was so tight we could not get a boom operator in with the dolly tracks, and additional personel. The "tin can" sound on the actor in the "transporter" was retained on request of the director.
https://vimeo.com/user8773489/review/192952339/b70ed364e0
I look forward to your comments and/or suggestions. I have edited the dialog in the manner Scott suggested and used a mix of wild sound recorded from the lavs as well as SFX from an online source. This scene was recorded with just 2 lavs as the interior of the RV was so tight we could not get a boom operator in with the dolly tracks, and additional personel. The "tin can" sound on the actor in the "transporter" was retained on request of the director.
graywolf
Well-known member
Audio levels seem to be about right. I did not have to turn my monitors up or down from their standard settings.
Everything comes through clearly.
From that, I would continue watching the movie.
I am not experienced enough to give you more detailed feedback; and my hearing is not what it was, so I can not hear much above 10K any longer.
Everything comes through clearly.
From that, I would continue watching the movie.
I am not experienced enough to give you more detailed feedback; and my hearing is not what it was, so I can not hear much above 10K any longer.
The environment sounds (that's levers operation, keyboard clicking, car's motor etc.) are way too loud. Also, the voices (of the main character and that coming from the screen) are of inconsistent signature, like different shots were recorded with different mikes, or in different environments.
Richard Crowley
Veteran
The music seemed unusually loud relative to the dialog. I expected a more "electronic" effect (and slightly lower level) from the dialog of the guy on the screen. They seemed like they were both standing there talking to each other. We would expect that the sound would be coming from a little "voice-grade" speaker somewhere in that conglomeration of gear.
But generally great. Good to start with nice clear and clean dialog. You can always "dirty it up" and "worldize" it in post.
Ref: http://www.editorsguild.com/v2/magazine/Newsletter/MarApr04/marapr04_worldizing.html
But generally great. Good to start with nice clear and clean dialog. You can always "dirty it up" and "worldize" it in post.
Ref: http://www.editorsguild.com/v2/magazine/Newsletter/MarApr04/marapr04_worldizing.html
Thanks to both of you. I was going for a kind of intensity to the soundtrack and maybe I over shot. Here's a replacement with the Foley and wild sound dialed back 4-5 db, and I agree, it does sound a little more "civilized". It's interesting that both of you saw the man in the "transporter" as "on a screen". He is in the same room with the "mad scientist", he's about to be transported to another dimension in the chamber he's enclosed in. It get's explained more as the plot goes on, but we may have to reconsider that aspect.
https://vimeo.com/user8773489/review/192952339/b70ed364e0
https://vimeo.com/user8773489/review/192952339/b70ed364e0
Noiz2
Sound Ninja
Don't pay attention to numbers, how does it feel? Is this a big music scene? Do things sound like they are in the World of the story?
You have to take criticism with the understanding that those giving it may be coming at something from a very different place than you are AND maybe your choices are better for what your particular director wants.
That said if I were the "decider" here is what I would say.
I would say not a bad first pass but you are missing a lot of things. You have a lot of blinky lights in the BG, I wanted to hear something for them. Yes the FX that are there are probably a bit too hot but part of that is that they are not "in the space" of the shot. Almost everything sounds like it was close miced. It probably was but if it's a fair distance away it shouldn't sound that way. You seem to have picked highlight sounds and not covered everything else. To really evaluate though you should drop the music. The music should be added after everything else, make sure the scene works with out the music then add some in. The exception is where the director wants BIG music and you can not talk them out of it.
My argument in this case would be "Why is there big music here?" It's not a battle scene, or a flash back or a dream sequence so why is it slathered in music? Usually it is slathered in music because of insecurity (or no sound post). Either the director doesn't trust his/ her direction to convey the scene or the sound designer/ editor doesn't trust that they can pull it off with out the crutch of a booming score. More often the former than the later. The only way to convince them is to drop the music and cut the hell out of the scene. You may even get them to drop the music all together. I can see music as book ends on this scene but I don't understand why there is music IN the scene. A no-budget film does it because they can't imagine covering the scene properly so they mask it with music.
With that much music you have to punch the hell out of everything else to keep it audible.
So with out music, I want to hear the machine that is doing all of this. It must have fans and things that make noise. The room probably has some AC so it's not so hot or? It's a bit "grungy" so maybe things arc a bit when the switch. I would have put some sounds in toward the end for the assailant. He had to get in some how, doors must have opened or? Not big, our hero doesn't hear it, but we should. I get the microwave beep but it was running right? Where was that? The hit seems to be a double (bam-bam), I would use a swish and a hit, the double doesn't make sense to me.
Dialog in general sounds to close mic'd, or maybe over processed? Also they essentially stay in the same spaces so their voices ought to stay the same. I think this is the different cut change noted above. The guy in the chamber is a bit muffled. That could be a choice but I think a better one would be a small hard surface room because that is what it looks like.
Guy gets clobbered then suddenly we are tossing the body. Some how some dragging and door opening should be there. If no time then one or the other, right now it becomes a jump cut. One or the other could probably come in over the prior shot? Body fall sounds like you picked a sound, it needs some layers so it is not A thing but a sequence of things. What hit first, what slid down?, what it last? Anything bounce? What did he land on? what does it sound like? Door close? FS heading back? BG's for out side?
Plus all of these sound should sound like they LIVE in the environment, small room, outside etc.
So if I had handed this in that is basically what I would have gotten as feedback, though maybe a bit harsher. I have had some of those WTF were you thinking critiques...
RE: music. I have found that it is more effective to not have a constant music bet. In your case I would maybe come in with the music at the top them loose it while we live in tech land and get a chance to really feel the high tech space. Then maybe bring it back with the assailant. Maybe ON the hit? Or maybe it comes in to foreshadow the assault?
You have to take criticism with the understanding that those giving it may be coming at something from a very different place than you are AND maybe your choices are better for what your particular director wants.
That said if I were the "decider" here is what I would say.
I would say not a bad first pass but you are missing a lot of things. You have a lot of blinky lights in the BG, I wanted to hear something for them. Yes the FX that are there are probably a bit too hot but part of that is that they are not "in the space" of the shot. Almost everything sounds like it was close miced. It probably was but if it's a fair distance away it shouldn't sound that way. You seem to have picked highlight sounds and not covered everything else. To really evaluate though you should drop the music. The music should be added after everything else, make sure the scene works with out the music then add some in. The exception is where the director wants BIG music and you can not talk them out of it.
My argument in this case would be "Why is there big music here?" It's not a battle scene, or a flash back or a dream sequence so why is it slathered in music? Usually it is slathered in music because of insecurity (or no sound post). Either the director doesn't trust his/ her direction to convey the scene or the sound designer/ editor doesn't trust that they can pull it off with out the crutch of a booming score. More often the former than the later. The only way to convince them is to drop the music and cut the hell out of the scene. You may even get them to drop the music all together. I can see music as book ends on this scene but I don't understand why there is music IN the scene. A no-budget film does it because they can't imagine covering the scene properly so they mask it with music.
With that much music you have to punch the hell out of everything else to keep it audible.
So with out music, I want to hear the machine that is doing all of this. It must have fans and things that make noise. The room probably has some AC so it's not so hot or? It's a bit "grungy" so maybe things arc a bit when the switch. I would have put some sounds in toward the end for the assailant. He had to get in some how, doors must have opened or? Not big, our hero doesn't hear it, but we should. I get the microwave beep but it was running right? Where was that? The hit seems to be a double (bam-bam), I would use a swish and a hit, the double doesn't make sense to me.
Dialog in general sounds to close mic'd, or maybe over processed? Also they essentially stay in the same spaces so their voices ought to stay the same. I think this is the different cut change noted above. The guy in the chamber is a bit muffled. That could be a choice but I think a better one would be a small hard surface room because that is what it looks like.
Guy gets clobbered then suddenly we are tossing the body. Some how some dragging and door opening should be there. If no time then one or the other, right now it becomes a jump cut. One or the other could probably come in over the prior shot? Body fall sounds like you picked a sound, it needs some layers so it is not A thing but a sequence of things. What hit first, what slid down?, what it last? Anything bounce? What did he land on? what does it sound like? Door close? FS heading back? BG's for out side?
Plus all of these sound should sound like they LIVE in the environment, small room, outside etc.
So if I had handed this in that is basically what I would have gotten as feedback, though maybe a bit harsher. I have had some of those WTF were you thinking critiques...
RE: music. I have found that it is more effective to not have a constant music bet. In your case I would maybe come in with the music at the top them loose it while we live in tech land and get a chance to really feel the high tech space. Then maybe bring it back with the assailant. Maybe ON the hit? Or maybe it comes in to foreshadow the assault?
+1 to Noiz2.
Yet, to my taste, the environment sounds are still way too loud - it doesn't sound natural. For instance, when I'm next to someone talking and clicking the keyboard, the voice sounds much louder than the keyboard clicks.
As for the sound of the man in the 'transporter', if it's kind of enclosure there's very good reason for him sounding differently than the man outside the 'transporter' .
As for the music, it's way too loud to my taste, however I didn't comment about it, since it may be director's or artistic choice
Yet, to my taste, the environment sounds are still way too loud - it doesn't sound natural. For instance, when I'm next to someone talking and clicking the keyboard, the voice sounds much louder than the keyboard clicks.
As for the sound of the man in the 'transporter', if it's kind of enclosure there's very good reason for him sounding differently than the man outside the 'transporter' .
As for the music, it's way too loud to my taste, however I didn't comment about it, since it may be director's or artistic choice
OK! This is EXACTLY what I was looking for! Thank you. Scott's evaluation gives me a basis for decision making that is what I was trying to get to in the earlier posts, a "philosophy" or "approach". For back ground, the edit came with the music from the writer/director/editor (I told you this was a small production), and frankly, I didn't really question the use of the music. The scene is the opening of the film, before the opening titles, and may function as a "teaser" promotional piece, so maybe "big music" is justified here, but I agree, it's worth trying a version with less to build some tension rather than start at a 10 and crank it up to 11 or 12.
I will re-evaluate the dialogue, and yes it was close mic'd, but I did no processing, just volume adjustment. The working environment in this RV was extremely limited, as the DP had a Dana dolly set up in the passage way. We tried to boom and I tried attaching some small mics to the ceiling in the individual areas, but they sounded so much like they were in a tin can that they were unusable, and the boom was just impossible. My impulse here is to put a little "tin can" back in the wide shots and stay "close" in the close ups. The muffled man in the transporter could be mixed with his close lav to reduce but not get rid of the muffle, or maybe just notch out some of the resonance from the enclosure.
As for the SFX, I will do some more work there as well. Thanks again. As I develop my own style and voice these will be the building blocks that I will stand on, and I am grateful for the time you guys have spent helping out. I will post some more files here as I progress.
I will re-evaluate the dialogue, and yes it was close mic'd, but I did no processing, just volume adjustment. The working environment in this RV was extremely limited, as the DP had a Dana dolly set up in the passage way. We tried to boom and I tried attaching some small mics to the ceiling in the individual areas, but they sounded so much like they were in a tin can that they were unusable, and the boom was just impossible. My impulse here is to put a little "tin can" back in the wide shots and stay "close" in the close ups. The muffled man in the transporter could be mixed with his close lav to reduce but not get rid of the muffle, or maybe just notch out some of the resonance from the enclosure.
As for the SFX, I will do some more work there as well. Thanks again. As I develop my own style and voice these will be the building blocks that I will stand on, and I am grateful for the time you guys have spent helping out. I will post some more files here as I progress.