Sound mix of documentary

Fernando Lino

Fernando Lino

Active member
Hi guys,

Can someone please say how much does it cost from your experience a sound mix for a doc feature?
With just one track of sound - direct sound -, no effects, and music in 15% of the film.

Some teasers of the film:




Many thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:
There are too many variables to answer that question.

How long is the finished film?

How much work will be required on the dialog? (If the recording and/or the initial dialog editing are rough, that takes time to smooth out.)

What's the turnaround time? The amount of time alloted for audio post may impact both the work that can be done, and the cost to do it.

And effects editing shouldn't be discounted. It may be a documentary, and you may only be providing production sound from the edit, but to really sell the images the sound must be convincing. That can require creating some of the "natural" soundscape in post, and even in documentary can mean some minor Foley/effects editing in certain shots and scenes.

As they say, "Cheap, fast, good: pick two."
 
The film is not yet finished but it should be around 95 min.
The sound designer that I'm in contact with said it should take 1 day to work on the film - and make one version for cinema and one for tv.

I don't think I want the effects creating landscapes, as you say. I want to stick to the original sound and work with it - direct school of documentarism style.
Thanks for the reply, Alex H.!
 
I hope I didn't sound rude, Alex H.!
I just had dinner and am a bit spaced out from the wine :)

I asked as an estimative - your range goes from where to where in a feature doc as I described?
Thanks
 
"no effects, and music in 15% of the film"
-- That means nothing. Far to many variables to put a $ figure on it.
The projects I've worked on (PBS, Discovery. A&E) 'usually' equal out to about $300-400 per B'cast ready minute (cheap). YMMV
 
Thanks, Rick R!
That's quite a lot more than I'm expecting to pay but cool to know...
Did you did any doc for the program in PBS, POV? Been in contact with those guys and seen the documentaries they showed, great program...
 
Hi again, Fernando... Sound mixing is a specialized art that requires a great deal of skill and experience... but that being said the most frustrating thing in the world is waiting for someone else to make your movie. Do you have the technical know-how to at least do a very basic mix (leveling audio, fixing basic audio problems, etc.)? If you can get the film to a decent point you may be able to sell investors or a mixer on the project... If not maybe you can find a mixer in your area with whom you can barter services with?... In any case don't discount what Alex says about creating a "natural soundscape" to sell the images. As you know we both do "verite" but the reality is that "verite" is just a stylistic choice that must be creatively embellished by the artifice of sound and image.
 
scorsesefan said:
Hi again, Fernando... Sound mixing is a specialized art that requires a great deal of skill and experience... but that being said the most frustrating thing in the world is waiting for someone else to make your movie. Do you have the technical know-how to at least do a very basic mix (leveling audio, fixing basic audio problems, etc.)? If you can get the film to a decent point you may be able to sell investors or a mixer on the project... If not maybe you can find a mixer in your area with whom you can barter services with?... In any case don't discount what Alex says about creating a "natural soundscape" to sell the images. As you know we both do "verite" but the reality is that "verite" is just a stylistic choice that must be creatively embellished by the artifice of sound and image.
Click to expand...

Hi Scorsesefan!
I know, it's not really my domain, sound, at least the specificities of it.... You do the sound of your docs, right?
In the case of the mix of the soundtrack I gave a lot of input about levels, filters, which takes to use for each instrument in each song, and the composition in general. But it was only the creative part, because how to work in softwares and what to do, I haven't done a lot of work and I respect who does it.

I know the basic: keyframes, levels and how to use a few filters... I did the sound mix for the teasers... And I've been doing that in the film as well...
In the case of this doc I don't if it'll make sense to add more sound landscapes or textures. Because the music covers the part when there isn't much happening in the in between of scenes and the direct sound is the sound of that place... But yeah, I'm open to try things in the mix if there's time.

The sound designer that I'm in contact is really one of the best in my country. He's like "the guy" to go to when it comes to sound. It was quite great that he accepted to mix the sound of this film...
I asked the question because he didn't gave me the budget yet and I wanted to have a term of comparison...
 
Last edited:
There is a wide range in what you may have to pay. And that isn't nec. based on quality. Independent doc's never have a lot of money, well at least the ones I have come across, so most of them work deals with folks. One of the first doc's I worked on was on breast cancer and they had talked someone at Skywalker into being a "sponsor". So they got to use some edit rooms that were not in use at the time and a bunch of us editors gave them some days between gigs, and a mix tech (who know is a mixer with a number of Oscar nominations) did the mix in off hours on a small stage that wasn't on a show. Not sure if they paid anything, but probably hard costs.

If the film seems important to an editor and they are between gigs (or better a facility) you can get really good deals. You don't get to go back to that trough a lot so you should make it count and you really do need to be a poor filmmaker, not just a producer trying to cheap out, but deals are there if you look hard enough.

As to SFX etc. There are a couple of schools in the doc world. One is VERY determined that anything that didn't happen when the camera was rolling IN THAT SHOT should be on the screen or in the speakers. The rationale is that this makes it "honest" and adding anything is a "cheat". I find the argument full of holes and kind of BS. If that were really true then you shouldn't edit either since that can change the context of the interview.

The third school is more along the lines of propaganda and will do anything to sell their point. I dislike this camp also because I feel that once the audience figures out one thing you "lied" about or misrepresented they will disregard everything you put on the screen. I like truth and facts in news and documentaries.

The second school (you thought I skipped...) thinks it's OK to add stuff providing you are adding to the truth of the film. So if you got really clean dialog on a factory floor it's OK to add in factory sounds because it's what "should" be there. Also adding in sounds that relate to still images is OK providing they are the correct sounds for the photo. There is actually a split in this group also where one side is only OK using sounds FROM THE ACTUAL location, just not nec recorded at the same time as the video and the other is OK with anything that is not misleading, or misrepresenting the "truth" of the shot. So if there is gunfire in the BG, one group would only use it IF they happened to get a recording of it and the second would use whatever gunshots they had provides they matched or came close to what had happened on the shoot.

I'm very much in the second branch of this group. I will use location sounds if they exist but I feel it's more truthful to make it sound like it should even if they didn't manage to capture it when they were there.

It sounds like you are very music heavy so you probably don't want to add a lot of sound over that. I'm assuming the music is integral with the doc's topic not just filler to cover a lack of production recordings. You do have to watch out if the music is not played by folks on screen that you don't drift into "music video" territory or you might loose your audience. Some hard FX and Foley will go a long way to keeping your audience in the world of your film rather than in a theatre listening to music.
 
Noiz2 said:
There is a wide range in what you may have to pay. And that isn't nec. based on quality. Independent doc's never have a lot of money, well at least the ones I have come across, so most of them work deals with folks. One of the first doc's I worked on was on breast cancer and they had talked someone at Skywalker into being a "sponsor". So they got to use some edit rooms that were not in use at the time and a bunch of us editors gave them some days between gigs, and a mix tech (who know is a mixer with a number of Oscar nominations) did the mix in off hours on a small stage that wasn't on a show. Not sure if they paid anything, but probably hard costs.

If the film seems important to an editor and they are between gigs (or better a facility) you can get really good deals. You don't get to go back to that trough a lot so you should make it count and you really do need to be a poor filmmaker, not just a producer trying to cheap out, but deals are there if you look hard enough.

As to SFX etc. There are a couple of schools in the doc world. One is VERY determined that anything that didn't happen when the camera was rolling IN THAT SHOT should be on the screen or in the speakers. The rationale is that this makes it "honest" and adding anything is a "cheat". I find the argument full of holes and kind of BS. If that were really true then you shouldn't edit either since that can change the context of the interview.

The third school is more along the lines of propaganda and will do anything to sell their point. I dislike this camp also because I feel that once the audience figures out one thing you "lied" about or misrepresented they will disregard everything you put on the screen. I like truth and facts in news and documentaries.

The second school (you thought I skipped...) thinks it's OK to add stuff providing you are adding to the truth of the film. So if you got really clean dialog on a factory floor it's OK to add in factory sounds because it's what "should" be there. Also adding in sounds that relate to still images is OK providing they are the correct sounds for the photo. There is actually a split in this group also where one side is only OK using sounds FROM THE ACTUAL location, just not nec recorded at the same time as the video and the other is OK with anything that is not misleading, or misrepresenting the "truth" of the shot. So if there is gunfire in the BG, one group would only use it IF they happened to get a recording of it and the second would use whatever gunshots they had provides they matched or came close to what had happened on the shoot.

I'm very much in the second branch of this group. I will use location sounds if they exist but I feel it's more truthful to make it sound like it should even if they didn't manage to capture it when they were there.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the post and for the great insight!
I'll have to see what is best in the sound mix.

Noiz2 said:
It sounds like you are very music heavy so you probably don't want to add a lot of sound over that. I'm assuming the music is integral with the doc's topic not just filler to cover a lack of production recordings. You do have to watch out if the music is not played by folks on screen that you don't drift into "music video" territory or you might loose your audience. Some hard FX and Foley will go a long way to keeping your audience in the world of your film rather than in a theatre listening to music.
Click to expand...

It's not heavy on music, it might be in around 15% of the film. A few montages and music to fill the in between of scenes.
And what you mention, about the music video style, that's something that I had quite a great care in the edit. Hate that Baywatch kind of montage, "ok let's burn some time here with music, and a dude flexing his muscles!!".

scorsesefan said:
Yes, I would agree with you about the schools, Noiz, and I would also subscribe to the second school.
Click to expand...

I know that a lot direct cinema guys used landscapes in their films but there's some cases that don't. Do you use that in your films?
I think that Pennebaker didn't in "Dont Look Back" for instance and he would sometimes use accidental sounds captured on camera as a transation... That's something I like, to use the accidents and show a bit of the bones and blood of the film... It's like punk rock music!

In this particular film I don't think it makes much sense because there isn't much sound that you can hear when you're inside the building, from the exterior.
And there's a lot of sounds that the camera captures that makes us listen to the thing you'd listen if you're there - the tv, people yelling, chairs being moved, and silence... That's how it is there and I don't think that to add cars passing by, for instance, or birds chirping will help.
But I'm open to try things if there's time in the sound mix.
 
Fernando Lino said:
In this particular film I don't think it makes much sense because there isn't much sound that you can hear when you're inside the building, from the exterior.
And there's a lot of sounds that the camera captures that makes us listen to the thing you'd listen if you're there - the tv, people yelling, chairs being moved, and silence... That's how it is there and I don't think that to add cars passing by, for instance, or birds chirping will help.
But I'm open to try things if there's time in the sound mix.
Click to expand...

The problem usually is that your cutting back and forth and the sounds get jump cut so it really makes every cut stand out and it can be very distracting. Background does not translate to exterior sounds, just whatever you should hear in the space the scene is shot in. But you may have that covered with production, it might be fine.

Also this is a generalization so even if it were "the" answer it might not be "the" answer for your film. For instance BG sounds getting jump cut could be a stylistic choice that works, really hard to tell with out knowing the film. Generally polishing up a doc. track is a good thing, but not always.
 
Hey Fernando, I have not done final mixes on my films -- I am lucky enough to have met a great collaborator who is very good technically (color and sound). We do create a "soundscape" in the sense that non-diegetic (and to some extent diegetic) sound is creatively enhanced but always within the feel and logic of the film/scene... I think silence (the absence of sound) can be used very effectively in your particular film (given it's the largely internal world of a nursing home). I would really recommend studying "Raging Bull" and its use of sound -- really the lack of sound for dramatic effect...
 
I would point out that "silence" was never silent. You could probably get away with actual silence now on an all digital project but true silence on an optical track will tend to freak out the reader and you will get noise instead of silence. So all "silent" sections were filled in with "air". There were a number of ones that were popular, a favorite was "Yellow Sky", which was just a long recording of a silent sound stage (Goldwyn maybe?). I'm guessing it was named after the film it was originally recorded for but?

Now that you can actually get something close to silence in the track you may not need to fill. But remember there is no silence except in a total vacuum so if you don't put in any sound then the sound of the space the film is playing in is what is going to be your "silence". For the big screen it can be an impressive choice, small screen less so. If your watching at home then the sound of the dishwasher, or music from another room, or??? will greatly diminish the impact of having no sound from the film.
 
I would say a minimum of five days audio post to track lay and mix a feature length doco, it all depends on the deliverables too as it may take another day just to output main, M&E and stems if they are required.

As others have said even a simple location audio based production may need extra fill and effects added to enable a full stereo or 5.1 mix to be achieved, even with a mono dialogue track I would add stereo room atmos to give it space and depth as if a foreign version is required they will need something on the M&E to work with.

M&E (Music and Effects for foreign version dubbing) you need to check if this is a delivery requirement as most films need it.
 
The problem usually is that your cutting back and forth and the sounds get jump cut so it really makes every cut stand out and it can be very distracting. Background does not translate to exterior sounds, just whatever you should hear in the space the scene is shot in. But you may have that covered with production, it might be fine.

Also this is a generalization so even if it were "the" answer it might not be "the" answer for your film. For instance BG sounds getting jump cut could be a stylistic choice that works, really hard to tell with out knowing the film. Generally polishing up a doc. track is a good thing, but not always.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's true about the sounds getting jumped cut, that's something I had that in mind in the editing :)
Sometimes I used that to my advantage to create rhythm, but some cuts I'll have to diminish that effect in the mix....

Hey Fernando, I have not done final mixes on my films -- I am lucky enough to have met a great collaborator who is very good technically (color and sound). We do create a "soundscape" in the sense that non-diegetic (and to some extent diegetic) sound is creatively enhanced but always within the feel and logic of the film/scene... I think silence (the absence of sound) can be used very effectively in your particular film (given it's the largely internal world of a nursing home). I would really recommend studying "Raging Bull" and its use of sound -- really the lack of sound for dramatic effect...
Click to expand...

Raging Bull is brilliant in the use of sound! I did my homework about that one...
And it's amazing what Scorsese does in his docs. He's amazingly sparsed and subtle in the characterization of his subjects...

I would point out that "silence" was never silent. You could probably get away with actual silence now on an all digital project but true silence on an optical track will tend to freak out the reader and you will get noise instead of silence. So all "silent" sections were filled in with "air". There were a number of ones that were popular, a favorite was "Yellow Sky", which was just a long recording of a silent sound stage (Goldwyn maybe?). I'm guessing it was named after the film it was originally recorded for but?

Now that you can actually get something close to silence in the track you may not need to fill. But remember there is no silence except in a total vacuum so if you don't put in any sound then the sound of the space the film is playing in is what is going to be your "silence". For the big screen it can be an impressive choice, small screen less so. If your watching at home then the sound of the dishwasher, or music from another room, or??? will greatly diminish the impact of having no sound from the film.
Click to expand...

Didn't knew that movie, "Yellow Sky", cool...
It's cool to know the those terms in english. Didn't knew about the difference of "air" and "silence".

I would say a minimum of five days audio post to track lay and mix a feature length doco, it all depends on the deliverables too as it may take another day just to output main, M&E and stems if they are required.

As others have said even a simple location audio based production may need extra fill and effects added to enable a full stereo or 5.1 mix to be achieved, even with a mono dialogue track I would add stereo room atmos to give it space and depth as if a foreign version is required they will need something on the M&E to work with.

M&E (Music and Effects for foreign version dubbing) you need to check if this is a delivery requirement as most films need it.
Click to expand...

I was thinking of doing a mono mix. I think it might be the safest and less expensive route. I have to make sacrifices in this one...
For now I don't seen a reason to spend more time/money working on the dubs in the formats that I'm thinking of distributing it.
But later on it might make sense... (in Spain they're very much into dubs) Thanks for the mention!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top