Google
 
Showing posts with label TV. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TV. Show all posts

12.14.2007

The Noise Has Already Been Broughten

Hey, kids.

Today's treat comes from DV Magazine, in the form of a brief overview entitled Bring the Noise — Simple Steps To Ensure Solid Sound Recording On Location. The author, Jay Holben, is a former cinematographer, but we'll overlook that, as he has the right idea. Snip:

General audiences will forgive poor images, but they will rarely forgive poor sound, especially if they can’t clearly hear what the subjects onscreen are saying. Obtaining good sound just takes time, consideration and a willingness to get it right—adding artistic talent to the mix can then make it great.


See? Even DP's can be taught. :)

Link, via dv.com.

10.25.2007

C.A.S. RF Spectrum Seminar

On November 5th, the C.A.S. is hosting a seminar on the upcoming spectrum auction . Snip:

Expert speakers will provide an interesting and informative learning experience for everyone about impending issues with the FCC’s policies as well as the general principals of wireless applications.


Link, via coffeysound.com.

9.29.2007

New Sound Mixer Blog

Whitney Ince, pro sound mixer, has started a sound-for-picture blog, prolocationsound.com.

The interwebs could certainly use more in-depth coverage of production sound and gear. To that end, Whitney has a ringing endorsement of iPower rechargeable batteries. Snip:

For anyone who hasn’t tried these rechargeable batteries they are a must. I use them as my primary battery in all my 200c and 250c Tx with zero issues. On my last project I saved over $1000.00 over using standard


Link.

The 700 Club

On January 28th, 2008, a chunk of the sky is going away.

The FCC will officially open bidding on this date for the 700 Mhz band of the RF broadcast spectrum. Since the US is mandated to finish transitioning to a digital broadcast infrastructure by 2009 (yes, this means that your ol' Zenith nineteen-incher will no longer work without a set-top box), the folks in charge of something invisible, weightless and tasteless have decided to sell it.

What does this mean for the world of audio? Plenty, if you have Sennheiser wireless in the C block, or Lectrosonics in blocks 27-31 (which is quite a few folks out there). By all accounts, either the effective range will be greatly diminished or unusable in urban areas.

What happens to big shows that depend on a lot of wireless? Either they'll have to redesign how the show is shot (unlikely, given that many of these programs are popular and very profitable due to their low production costs), or audio companies will have to get more innovative with their wireless technologies.

Already, some companies (notably Zaxcom and Ricsonix) are developing digital systems, some of which operate in the 2.4 GHz range, using the Bluetooth protocol (yes, the same tech in your little Borg-style phone earpiece) or a similar variant, and Audio Technica recently announced a new, wide-band analog RF system that skirts the issue altogether.

What's being put in its place? A portion of the band has been allocated to emergency communications, but a good chunk is up for grabs (if you happen to have, say, $15 billion or so just laying around). Obviously, major telco companies are jockeying for position, looking to gain a foothold in the ever-expanding mobile wireless market, especially as people get used to having things like the interwebs and media delivered directly to their phones. Others, including Google, want to extend wireless internet access in metropolitan areas, via a "third-pipe" (alongside the traditional channels of broadband cable and DSL).

Now, I'm lucky enough to make a living as a freelance sound mixer, but I personally believe that every person on the planet should have internet access (along with, you know, clean drinking water, food, shelter, etc. But we're talking tech here, so..:). If that means that I have to get new gear, or come up with a more creative solution to limited available spectrum, so be it.

Having better access to the greatest repository of information since the Library of Alexandria can only help people; I, for one, greatly benefited from the internet. I never went to film school, but having access to volumes of information about sound and audio electronics gave me a foundation to begin the career I have today. If you ask any working professional out there, they'll tell you that they've learned a thing or two by having access to industry veterans, by way of online forums and the like.

Would things be easier if we could keep the freq's as they are? You betcha. But Uncle Sam says they're going away, and we all have to plan accordingly. As with all things, the only constant is change; this axiom is no more relevant than in a technology-based industry such as ours.

Article round up:

Ars-Technica; Wired's FAQ; Shure's White Space Info (very in-depth); Sports Video Group's press release (explains considerable use of wireless by pro sports); Apple Eyes Wireless Auction (via businessweek.com); What DTV Means to Wireless Microphone Users.

But this blog takes the cake for spectrum info: publicknowledge.org.

6.24.2007

The Fifteen [drops tablet]...Ten! Ten Commandments of Sound for Picture! (Part Two)

Okay, kids, here is Part 2:

6. Thou shalt arrange/budget for a dedicated audio post mixer. (aka: Avoid being a Jack of all trades, master of none).

Granted, at the low/no budget level, you have to take what you can get, and many non-linear video editing systems have rather impressive audio features. But that doesn't mean that you can skimp and just be a one-person-band: writing, directing, shooting, editing, then mixing your project, and expect professional results.

There's a reason why you get a DP: they know how to shoot better than you do, and they worry about picture so that you don't have to. Same thing applies to audio post. While it's all well and good to do a temp mix for screening purposes, nothing screams "amateur" more than rough sound, no matter how pretty the picture.

Pro sound mixers fill in the rest of the picture with a full, rich sound track. They have access to more diverse sound effects, making your track fresh and dynamic. They have tricks up their sleeve that may end up saving you from having to loop that one line after all.

They are definitely worth it.

7) Thou shalt make an effort to commission an original music score.

Don't cheap out in the end. You created an original screenplay, got actors to create original performances, got a DP to create original images, and then at that critical final step, you shrug and say "just use pop music. They'll never find out. No one will ever sue us".

There are numerous resources for new, affordable and even legally free music out there. Use them. You crewed up through Craigslist; now keep going, and find a hungry music school student or a local band. There are plenty of talented musicians out there who could use the exposure, and would be willing to score your film, sometimes for little to no money.

And, for the bazzilionth time, there's a reason why that track you bought from iTunes won't work in your Final Cut Project: you're not allowed to use it. (Yes, I'm well aware of the myriad technical workarounds for this, which shan't be discussed here).

8) Thou shalt learn about "headroom" and "standards".

There's a very specific reason that mixers insist on making that annoying "bloop" tone when you record color bars at the head of each tape. This tone represents the nominal bus voltage output of the mixer, and thus must be generated by the mixer, not by the camera (I've had more than one heated discussion with many a DP on this issue).

WWCD: just as you must record the bars from the camera actually used in production (to get an accurate representation of the gear's output), so must you utilize the tone from your field mixer. The reason for this is that if any discrepancy is found in either picture or sound from a particular camera (too low of a red level, sound is 2 db higher on channel 1, etc), they can reference the bars and tone, and trouble-shoot to see if it's just a temporary issue, or consistent across the entire shoot, and then compensate for it if possible. Think of it as a Rosetta Stone for post.

Headroom: it can be a wonderful thing, if it's paid attention to. Just because you're not seeing every segment of your meter lighting up does not mean the audio level's too low. Your mixer will set the nominal reference level (usually -20dBfs for pro stuff), and then mix accordingly, giving you enough signal to have a clean recording without going "full scale" on loud or unexpected sounds (which, once reached, can't be undone, and sounds horrible).

Trust them, and it will turn out fine.

9) Thou shalt learn how to consider sound when scouting locations. (aka: "Well, they weren't using jackhammers here yesterday...")

I recently worked on a short where a dialogue scene was scheduled to be shot in a city alley at night. Good looking place, power nearby, permission from adjacent business owners. Everything seemed in order.

Until I asked about sound.

See, one of the neighbors to the alley was a nightclub, and right there on the front door of the place was a flyer for the reggae/dub band scheduled to play that night at 8 pm...precisely when we were supposed to roll. The band's prodigious bass (common to the genre) would have obliterated any chance at clean dialogue. Since this was a low-budget indie, there was little to no chance of guaranteeing the actor's availability for looping (or the money and facilities to do it properly, for that matter).

To their credit, they had the locations manger re-scout, and do a last-minute company move. At the end of the night, we had another location that fit their needs and ended up being just quiet enough.

Point being, you can avoid just this sort of thing by including your mixer in your pre-production and scouting process, just like you include your DP.

10) Thou shalt accept the fact that, once and for all, there is no such thing as a "remove echo" filter.

I've seen more than a few panicked posts on the boards out there asking about how remove the echo from their track. See, they used a shotgun, but it was at the other end of the room (or worse, mounted to the camera), rather than in close proximity to the subject, and now it sounds like everything's in a big bathroom. Guess what, Chachi, there is a solution: it's called the "shoot-it-again" filter.

Short shotgun microphones (easily one of the most misunderstood pieces of equipment in indie filmmaking) are not like zoom lenses. They do not bring the subject acoustically closer. Think of them more like a ring of Vaseline around a medium lens, with a clear circle in the center: the subject isn't any closer, but everything around the center of the frame, while not completely blocked out, is now "de-emphasized" and blurry.

The interference tube (the slotted "barrel" of the shotgun) filters sounds from the sides, and, in concert with the native directivity of the capsule, helps to "reject" (but not completely block) those sounds (and only at certain frequencies. Once you learn how complex short shotguns are, it's easy to see why they're so misunderstood).

If you want it to sound closer, you have no choice but to get the mic closer. You can't argue with the laws of physics (well, you can try, but the last guy who did ended up as the Incredible Hulk).

Whew. Rant over.

If anyone would care to submit addenda and/or criticism, please don't hesitate to comment...nicely. :)

5.09.2007

Shotgun Shootout

Good morning, sportsfans.

Whilst perusing the internets, I came across this comparison by Bryan Beasleigh over at DVFreelancer. Entitled Shotgun Shootout, the article details how Bryan made some basic field comparisons of some of the most popular short shotgun and hypercardiod microphones on the market.

Snip:

I managed to record samples of the Sanken CS-1, CS-3e, MKH 416, MKH60 and even Sennheisers top hypercardoid small condenser, the MKH50. This past week I returned and recorded some sample of the AKG Blue Line and the C480b ULS system as well. I also own an MKH60, a Schoeps MK41 a Sennheiser K6 / ME66 and two Oktava MCO-12 kits

Comparisons have been done singularly and with mics mounted in tandem directly in front of the speaker. Distances are between 12 and 24”. No effort was made to boom because of time and space constraints


Some files have been recorded using a Sound Devices Mix Pre or 302 fed at line level into a Marantz PMD670 flash recorder. The others were recorded directly into the marantz PMD670, using the onboard phantom and preamps.


Bryan's made the recordings available in either uncompressed WAV or MP3 formats. As I've mentioned before, this kind of comparison is worth its weight in gold for people who are just starting out, who live in smaller markets, or for whatever reason can't afford to travel to a pro dealer in order to try out a mic before they purchase it.

Link to the shootout, via dvfreelancer.com.

4.23.2007

NAB Video A-GoGo

Steve Eagle over at Coffey Sound has posted three videos from the floor at NAB 2007, giving a brief walking tour of the pro audio booths. Items of note include:

-A brief demo of the Ricsonix Camlynx, a new digital stereo wireless hop to camera

I'm very interested in this one. Unchaining yourself from the camera can be a wonderful thing, especially with a forgetful cam op who takes off running and gives your neck a hell of a yank. Pressing two wireless into service gets the job done, but being able to send line-level and receive a warning beep when you lose signal could be a boon to mixers at this price level.

-The new Lightwave carbon fiber ENG boom pole (no links just yet)

Multi-stage carbon fiber, with a new locking mechanism that makes for a lighter pole as well as being easier to clean and maintain.

-The K-tek Zeppelin

Redesigned cage, along with sturdier foam end caps.

-The PSC Miranda, a high-end film mixing console

A Big Boy Toy. Someday....{sighs longingly}.

Plus, a lot more. It's just like being there, only without getting food poisoning from that All You Can Eat Shrimp-O-Rama Buffet.

Link to the forum post, where the clips are linked as streaming Windows Media.

(Some of you Mac users out there may wish to download Flip4Mac, a free plugin that allows WMV files to be played back in Quicktime).

2.04.2007

Double Fault

Received this link to a funny German tennis commercial via email today:

http://www.lovo.be/uploads/1862_DAB_tennis_vl30_ws.mpg

Thanks to Gonzo for sending it in. Be sure to drop by Gonzo's website at t2audio.com.

1.03.2007

Boom Stick

Welcome back, campers.

Today, we're going to be given a brief glimpse into the much-fabled world of the boom operator. Hopefully, some of you out there will learn that the boom op is neither "that one person who keeps dropping some fuzzy phallic thing into my frame and ruining the shot", nor are they merely a "carbon-based stand" upon which you can drape equipment and derision.

In this interview panel by Mark Ulano, we learn that the boom op is more of an equal partner to the mixer, the "set ambassador" who assists with mic choice and coverage tactics, among many other things.

Snip:

The Boom Operator is the Sound Department's eyes and ears on the set. Shot after shot he or she performs on the front-line, in the trenches of film sound production. The efficiency and timing of my decisions are very important factors in gaining the trust of the mixer you are working with. I believe that the boom Operator is to the mixer like the Camera Operator is to the Director of Photography.
Directors: "don't piss them off"
Actors: "don't piss them off"
Utility person: Well, if the shot calls for it "piss them off", but take them out for drinks later.


Additionally, they discuss the mystical nature of the utility sound person, which, due to shrinking budgets, is a rarely-glimpsed luxury outside of the big shows nowadays.

This is more of that real-world stuff, people. Read early and often.

Link, via perchman.com.

(P.S. According to his CV, Mark Ulano was production sound mixer on Breakin' 2: Electric Boogaloo. How cool is that? :)

12.28.2006

The Basics Numero Dos

Bienvenidos, gauchos.

The most useful thing to have on set is the one thing you can't get in film school, which is experience. A veteran willing to share their wisdom is as valuable as a year's tuition, in my book.

Since this is, of course, just a blog, I can only offer the next best thing: a great article written by Dr. Fred Ginsberg, C.A.S., PhD., entitled Introduction To Pre-Production Planning for Audio. He covers set etiquette, hierarchies, and generally stuff that can bite you in the behind if you happen to be fresh out of school and new to the pro world.

Snip:

There are no apologies nor excuses run under the dailies. Good sound is always expected (and taken for granted). Bad sound, on the other hand, is always attributed as your fault. You will never heard [sic] it said that "even though the soundtrack was poor, the Mixer did a good job considering that we made him use bad equipment and no boomman." Instead, they will remark that they should have hired so-and-so, since that Mixer did a fine job on the last shoot.


Pay attention, kids. This is the kind of stuff that can save your future career from being a non-starter.

Link to article, via equipmentemporium.com. Many useful articles in them thar hills, so be sure to dig around the rest of the site as well.