Doc Bernard
Indie Arms Member
It does filter out some......but not all. You will hear "smear" even with a hyper.
Why do sound guys want to record dry, and add room reverb later?
- Thread starter ironpony
- Start date
Because cutting dialogue with reverb is a nightmare. Let's say you have a scene with two actors. You shoot the wide, and then you shoot coverage for each actor. That's three different audio recordings, all with three different mic placements. The reverb is going to change from one cut to the next, and this causes dialogue editors and re-recording mixers to have to "fix" rather than be creative. For a single shot, like a walk and talk or a talking head, it's as big of a deal, but still a pain. The idea of recording production dialogue is to get as clean a dialogue track as you can get. Reverb gets in the way.
Also, it should be noted that reverb and echo are two different things.
Also, it should be noted that reverb and echo are two different things.
Bruce Watson
Veteran
90 years of experience working with the laws of physics as it pertains to recording dialog and sound has shown without doubt that this is the easiest, fastest, most accurate, and highest quality way to work the audio. It's not because people want to do it this way; this way is painful. But it is the result of millions of hours of hard won experience since the end of the silent era.
If you can do better, faster, or cheaper, the industry will embrace you like a hero. So have at it.
That's true, I have had dialog mismatch at points and was not sure why and had to pay to fix. Since we are on the subject, I have a bigger problem. When I borrow or rent locations to shoot at, we are not allowed to turn off certain appliances, that make noise. What do we do then? I've been told before to rent places where you can shut them off, but so far no place has said yes. They all say no. What then?
Doc Bernard
Indie Arms Member
Then nothing you can really do. Except "blanket" what you can.
Okay thanks. So my friends are making a feature though, which they hope to get distribution out of. I want to help them as much as I can, since they have helped me with projects. But I keep reading that distributors want a dialogue track before they even consider your movie. If this is true, then what? Do we record the best we can with appliances on? Then give them clean dialogue tracks with all the hums removed in post? Can that be done and still sound good enough up to their standards?
unclebob6958
Well-known member
"An amateur learns from his mistakes; a professional learns from the mistakes of others."
Probably the most accurate "remove reverb" analogy is trying to remove the cherry from a Cherry Coke. Sure, it can be done, but it's extremely difficult, unbelievably time-consuming, and the tools required are incredibly expensive.
Let's face it, great filmmakers - and the crafts people who support them - are control freaks. Our job is to create a believable illusion for the audience. Cameras do not see the way our eyes do, microphones do not hear the way our ears do; and you can apply all of that to the reproduction systems - projectors (TVs) and speaker systems. So we must use various techniques to compensate for the deficiencies of technology.
Dry dialog means that the rerecording mixer can place the audience in the exact sonic space required by the story, not one dictated by the production sound - in other words, complete control.
It's the difference between fixing things and creating things.
Probably the most accurate "remove reverb" analogy is trying to remove the cherry from a Cherry Coke. Sure, it can be done, but it's extremely difficult, unbelievably time-consuming, and the tools required are incredibly expensive.
Let's face it, great filmmakers - and the crafts people who support them - are control freaks. Our job is to create a believable illusion for the audience. Cameras do not see the way our eyes do, microphones do not hear the way our ears do; and you can apply all of that to the reproduction systems - projectors (TVs) and speaker systems. So we must use various techniques to compensate for the deficiencies of technology.
Dry dialog means that the rerecording mixer can place the audience in the exact sonic space required by the story, not one dictated by the production sound - in other words, complete control.
It's the difference between fixing things and creating things.
This is where clever micing can sometimes save the day, where you pick-up as little of the environment as possible by selecting and positioning your mics.
GaryNattrass
Veteran
Sorry to chip in here but in 32 years I have never had to resort to blankets or changing room acoustics to suit things, OK it will help but a correct placed microphone and a dedication to getting the best clean sound possible that will edit together is the primary task no matter what you are doing.
I have done indie and mainstream films with just one mic (sennheiser 416 or AT 875r) but it is all down to the placement and making sure that any background noises do not get in the way or can be sorted in the dub or the edit.
This comes with experience and to try and do a feature or any other film without any experience is quite frankly asking for trouble.
Sometimes pure budget doesn't come into it and if you listen to these two examples they were both done with low/no budget on location with one mic on a boom straight into the camera.
http://vimeo.com/44760907
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C5zy1l4c_U
The second one had the kids working as boom operators but the key thing on both was that the audio was monitored at recording and quality control done on each take.
Note the reverb that has been added to the senator scenes to create the effect as the room (a real auditorium) was far too dead.
OK they are by no means perfect but the sound as recorded on location was useable without resorting to anything fancy or by spending huge amounts of money on kit or making rooms different.
I have done indie and mainstream films with just one mic (sennheiser 416 or AT 875r) but it is all down to the placement and making sure that any background noises do not get in the way or can be sorted in the dub or the edit.
This comes with experience and to try and do a feature or any other film without any experience is quite frankly asking for trouble.
Sometimes pure budget doesn't come into it and if you listen to these two examples they were both done with low/no budget on location with one mic on a boom straight into the camera.
http://vimeo.com/44760907
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C5zy1l4c_U
The second one had the kids working as boom operators but the key thing on both was that the audio was monitored at recording and quality control done on each take.
Note the reverb that has been added to the senator scenes to create the effect as the room (a real auditorium) was far too dead.
OK they are by no means perfect but the sound as recorded on location was useable without resorting to anything fancy or by spending huge amounts of money on kit or making rooms different.
Last edited:
paulears
Veteran
Hooray Gary!
The solution to poor audio is a good operator!
When I was working for an exam board who had media studies on their list, I always used to smile when I heard dreadful audio. The reason would be that part of the rules required photos of people doing the production - studio photos, or pictures of them in the recording studios, that kind of thing. 18-20 year olds with good facilities in most cases, and when I heard bad audio, I'd look at the pictures and see a 416 on a boom. trouble was, it was VERY heavy, so the boom end was stuck on their belt, going up at 45 degrees with both hand holding it, and because the boom would have been in shot diagonally across the frame corner, to solve this one meant a couple of steps back. Actually pointing the mic at the actors was, of course, optional. Instead of holding the boom almost vertically over their heads, ending up maybe a couple of feet away from the mouth on the wide shots, it was ten feet away, pointing past them at the wall!
Seriously - it was this bad more times than it was good. I don't think I ever saw a boom photo with the person wearing headphones!
A good sound op knows that if there is noisy zircon, then you can use the mics nulls to minimise it while maximising the wanted sound. Maybe other room noises will intrude? The good op spots these very early on and changes their technique to cope. Other people buy nice kit and stick it on the camera - which is universally the worst place for a microphone for so many reasons.
Reverberant spaces need different treatment, and in most cases, it will be tighter mics and closer distances - nothing more. You can get good audio in a cathedral, but NOT if the mic is more than a few feet away from the speaker. A wide shot, with no boom in sight is never going to work, and give the editor a nightmare. If you have wide shots, you also need lav mics.
The solution to poor audio is a good operator!
When I was working for an exam board who had media studies on their list, I always used to smile when I heard dreadful audio. The reason would be that part of the rules required photos of people doing the production - studio photos, or pictures of them in the recording studios, that kind of thing. 18-20 year olds with good facilities in most cases, and when I heard bad audio, I'd look at the pictures and see a 416 on a boom. trouble was, it was VERY heavy, so the boom end was stuck on their belt, going up at 45 degrees with both hand holding it, and because the boom would have been in shot diagonally across the frame corner, to solve this one meant a couple of steps back. Actually pointing the mic at the actors was, of course, optional. Instead of holding the boom almost vertically over their heads, ending up maybe a couple of feet away from the mouth on the wide shots, it was ten feet away, pointing past them at the wall!
Seriously - it was this bad more times than it was good. I don't think I ever saw a boom photo with the person wearing headphones!
A good sound op knows that if there is noisy zircon, then you can use the mics nulls to minimise it while maximising the wanted sound. Maybe other room noises will intrude? The good op spots these very early on and changes their technique to cope. Other people buy nice kit and stick it on the camera - which is universally the worst place for a microphone for so many reasons.
Reverberant spaces need different treatment, and in most cases, it will be tighter mics and closer distances - nothing more. You can get good audio in a cathedral, but NOT if the mic is more than a few feet away from the speaker. A wide shot, with no boom in sight is never going to work, and give the editor a nightmare. If you have wide shots, you also need lav mics.
GaryNattrass
Veteran
and just to add to what Paul said the number of times I have seen a mic in a blimp but pointing the wrong way, i.e up in the sky!
I think it's also fair to add that that 'some' noises are removed more easily in post than others, as long as they are constant, e.g. a constant AC unit is easier to remove than one that is constantly changing direction, a computer fan that is constant is easier than one that keeps changing speed etc.
While the result may not be perfect, once you add your own reverbs etc it can cover a lot of minor imperfections.
Trying to remove things like an AC 'and' room reverb and then cover all that up is much harder.
While the result may not be perfect, once you add your own reverbs etc it can cover a lot of minor imperfections.
Trying to remove things like an AC 'and' room reverb and then cover all that up is much harder.
This is the truest thing I have ever read on this forum.
GaryNattrass
Veteran
adding ambiences and room tones in can also create mood and help mask edits and small changes in mic placement.
when I edit dialogue I always go through each edit first, create overlaps and add room tones if required to mask the edit points.
I would then do a mono dialogue pre-mix and then add stereo room or sound beds to create a sense of space and depth for each scene, this also creates a noise floor that is consistent and it can be done from all sorts of sound effects I have to hand.
You would be amazed what I use but if it sounds correct then it gets used, I have even done whole soundtracks for mute scenes that use no audio that has come from the shoot,
and in this scene all I had was the few lines of dialogue recorded straight into the camera using a 416: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSgs4fcFa4E
everything else came from my sound library.
But that is the art of sound design and editing and if you cut corners it will show in your end result.
when I edit dialogue I always go through each edit first, create overlaps and add room tones if required to mask the edit points.
I would then do a mono dialogue pre-mix and then add stereo room or sound beds to create a sense of space and depth for each scene, this also creates a noise floor that is consistent and it can be done from all sorts of sound effects I have to hand.
You would be amazed what I use but if it sounds correct then it gets used, I have even done whole soundtracks for mute scenes that use no audio that has come from the shoot,
and in this scene all I had was the few lines of dialogue recorded straight into the camera using a 416: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSgs4fcFa4E
everything else came from my sound library.
But that is the art of sound design and editing and if you cut corners it will show in your end result.
Last edited:
Steve House
Veteran
No it's not impossible, just needs more legwork on the part of the producers. If you need a shot of two kids walking along a railroad track between the rails and Union Pacific won't shut down traffic on their mainline for you to get your shot, you move and find a unused spur. If the location owners won't let you shut down noisy equipment so you can't get clean sound, you move to an alternate location. Selecting locations for BOTH picture quality and sound quality is just part of the job. It doesn't more dollars to do that (other than gas money), it just costs you more time in the location scouting process.
Steve House
Veteran
Hypers don't filter out reverb from the room but they are better behaved in the presence of short-term reflections. The interaction of direct sound and phase-shifted reflected sound in the interference tube of a shotgun mic can change the tonal quality, the 'timbre', of the sound recorded - certain frequencies getting emphasized, others suppressed. The result can be an unnatural sounding recording. Since hypers don't have an interference tubes that doesn't happen when they are used.
paulears
Veteran
Lavs have no special properties apart from the critical one - they are CLOSE to the source, so the inverse square law works for you, not against you.
The rule with shotguns in hard surfaced rooms means that it is harder to get uncoloured sound - but not impossible. Most news crews work a short shotgun as almost the only mic, even perhaps when they have other types available. I personally don't like hyper-cardioid mics unless they are the only ones that will work for me in a situation. I always start with a short shotgun. Alternates only being considered when they produce the wrong sound.
You can easily teach yourself about sound - but you need headphones that give you maximum isolation. These are rarely the best 'quality'. Lots of people love HD25s, or the ever popular Sony's - but your ears need training before you start using them. Something like beer DT100s, or 150s are not that nice to wear, clamp your head in a vice like grip and sonically are a bit compromised, BUT what you hear is what is being recorded - you will hear subtle background sounds after a while, and you will be able to hear as a voice goes slightly off mic so you can move. It's the same thing that a good cameraman uses to give clues to your brain that something is slightly off with focus. You detect the slight softening early, or if presented with a soft image on a re-frame, you know if you need to focus forwards or back, and don't have to guess, and have a 50% chance of going the wrong way.
You can detect the hard reflections from walls, you can hear excess reverb, you can recognise the sound of aircon rumble. It's all to do with practice and experience. For many good video people, as long as the meters in the viewfinder are moving, sound is sorted. I've become so aware of sound, I can hear when there is a noise that will mess up the edit. Many people seem to filter out the clicks, bangs, trains, aircraft and creaks and only hear them in the edit.
I too spend quite a bit of time layering sounds, and blending the edit points rather than leaving them as pure cuts. Hearing the perspective change really makes me jump - the voice level is about the same, but the change in camera angle brought up the burbling brook in the background, then it abruptly drops again when the shot goes back. I find that very annoying.
Most of my work is in theatre venues, as I've said before, and despite the sound designer trying to get every seat in the house to have good sound, every position has very different sound, and I often end up with two or three audio tracks that need blending. My own pet hate are those people with distinctive laughs, who are too close to the camera mics. So I have good clean, but dead audio from the radio mics, some boundary mics on the stage edge, and then the audience noise from the camera mics to deal with. Each source sounds slightly different and it's hard work making a solid sound track from them.
The rule with shotguns in hard surfaced rooms means that it is harder to get uncoloured sound - but not impossible. Most news crews work a short shotgun as almost the only mic, even perhaps when they have other types available. I personally don't like hyper-cardioid mics unless they are the only ones that will work for me in a situation. I always start with a short shotgun. Alternates only being considered when they produce the wrong sound.
You can easily teach yourself about sound - but you need headphones that give you maximum isolation. These are rarely the best 'quality'. Lots of people love HD25s, or the ever popular Sony's - but your ears need training before you start using them. Something like beer DT100s, or 150s are not that nice to wear, clamp your head in a vice like grip and sonically are a bit compromised, BUT what you hear is what is being recorded - you will hear subtle background sounds after a while, and you will be able to hear as a voice goes slightly off mic so you can move. It's the same thing that a good cameraman uses to give clues to your brain that something is slightly off with focus. You detect the slight softening early, or if presented with a soft image on a re-frame, you know if you need to focus forwards or back, and don't have to guess, and have a 50% chance of going the wrong way.
You can detect the hard reflections from walls, you can hear excess reverb, you can recognise the sound of aircon rumble. It's all to do with practice and experience. For many good video people, as long as the meters in the viewfinder are moving, sound is sorted. I've become so aware of sound, I can hear when there is a noise that will mess up the edit. Many people seem to filter out the clicks, bangs, trains, aircraft and creaks and only hear them in the edit.
I too spend quite a bit of time layering sounds, and blending the edit points rather than leaving them as pure cuts. Hearing the perspective change really makes me jump - the voice level is about the same, but the change in camera angle brought up the burbling brook in the background, then it abruptly drops again when the shot goes back. I find that very annoying.
Most of my work is in theatre venues, as I've said before, and despite the sound designer trying to get every seat in the house to have good sound, every position has very different sound, and I often end up with two or three audio tracks that need blending. My own pet hate are those people with distinctive laughs, who are too close to the camera mics. So I have good clean, but dead audio from the radio mics, some boundary mics on the stage edge, and then the audience noise from the camera mics to deal with. Each source sounds slightly different and it's hard work making a solid sound track from them.
GaryNattrass
Veteran
One easy way of learning is to listen to the sound of empty rooms that way you can teach yourself what ambient noises could be problematic for recording.
Plug in your mic and put on the headphones and just listen to what is happening when you point the mic in different directions, also listen to what happens when the mic moves around, can you hear any problems that cables or grips and booms may be causing.
Click you fingers to see what the reverb is like and listen to see if you can get rid of any LF rumble by using the filters that you may have on the mic or the mixer if you are using one.
I still do this with all my kit so I am aware of what everything is capable of and what parameters they show up when just switched on with no voice or talent speaking.
But as Paul says you need to have decent headphones to hear things and a lot of the time on location it is more about finding out what your potential problems are rather than trying to listen to the talent, lights and cameras can also cause problems so the more aware you are of listening out for such things the better chance you have at getting clean dialogue or sound effects.
Plug in your mic and put on the headphones and just listen to what is happening when you point the mic in different directions, also listen to what happens when the mic moves around, can you hear any problems that cables or grips and booms may be causing.
Click you fingers to see what the reverb is like and listen to see if you can get rid of any LF rumble by using the filters that you may have on the mic or the mixer if you are using one.
I still do this with all my kit so I am aware of what everything is capable of and what parameters they show up when just switched on with no voice or talent speaking.
But as Paul says you need to have decent headphones to hear things and a lot of the time on location it is more about finding out what your potential problems are rather than trying to listen to the talent, lights and cameras can also cause problems so the more aware you are of listening out for such things the better chance you have at getting clean dialogue or sound effects.
Last edited: