Best sound recording options?

rtc80 · Jun 20, 2016

Hi, all, new member.

My intent is to make a dramatic feature, not a documentary, using either the Canon EOS C300 or the Canon EOS 7D to shoot.

I won't be hiring a soundie due to budget constraints, and I'm currently attempting to get my head around the issue of recording sound while shooting.

I'd appreciate any input from experienced/knowledgeable parties regarding establishing a practical, versatile setup for recording sound while shooting. What are my best options, in terms of both cost-effectiveness and capturing clear, high-quality audio/dialogue in various conditions (outdoor as well as indoor and also in cases where actor mobility/roaming is required)?

Thanks,
Jack.

Alcove Audio · Jun 20, 2016

Budget?

A very basic prosumer quality production audio kit will set you back about US$1,500. (A cheaper kit will be made up of consumer products.) Then someone needs to run all of it, as you will obviously be directing. If you won't retain someone competent/experienced your options are rather limited, meaning you'll have to use whichever PA happens to show up that day. With luck s/he may actually know what a boom-pole is.

Not exactly a recipe for sonic success.

This topic has been discussed her on IndieTalk numerous times. Use the search function. (You may want to look up my $1,200 buying guide, which is now about $1,500.)

This may help, as well.

51%2BATLMrpsL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

rtc80 · Jun 21, 2016

Alcove Audio said:
Budget?

A very basic prosumer quality production audio kit will set you back about US$1,500. (A cheaper kit will be made up of consumer products.) Then someone needs to run all of it, as you will obviously be directing. If you won't retain someone competent/experienced your options are rather limited, meaning you'll have to use whichever PA happens to show up that day. With luck s/he may actually know what a boom-pole is.

Not exactly a recipe for sonic success.

This topic has been discussed her on IndieTalk numerous times. Use the search function. (You may want to look up my $1,200 buying guide, which is now about $1,500.)

Thank-you for the reply, man.

Around $3,000 would be my limit.

Does that extra $1,500 allow for any significant or worthwhile upgrades on the items in your guide?

Found the guide, btw;

Alcove Audio said:
Here's my $1,200 buying guide. It will cover the basics.

Shotgun mic kits will have the shotgun mic, boom-pole, shock-mount and simple wind protection (softie).

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/551607-REG/Audio_Technica_AT_875_Shotgun_Microphone.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/461493-REG/Rode_NTG_1_Shotgun_Condenser.html

Hypercardioid mic:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/867157-REG/Avantone_Pro_CK1_CK_1_Small_Capsule_FET_Pencil.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/359043-REG/sE_Electronics_SE1A_SE1A_Small_Diaphragm.html

Audio recorders:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/832911-REG/Tascam_DR100MKII_DR_100mkII_Portable_Linear.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/821259-REG/Tascam_DR_40_DR_40_4_Track_Handheld_Digital.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/821260-REG/Roland_R_26_R_26_6_Channel_Digital_Field.html

Headphones:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/49510-REG/Sony_MDR_7506_MDR_7506_Headphone.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/507447-REG/Sennheiser_HD_25_1_II_HD_25_1_II.html

You'll also need cables, cases, battery packs and other miscellaneous items - about $200+.

^^^ In what situations does the hypercardioid mic come into play as opposed to the shotgun mic? Forgive me if this is a stupid/obvious question, as I'm literally just starting out with regards to the audio aspect.

rtc80 · Jun 21, 2016

Ps. When you say "not exactly a recipe for sonic success", is that to say you believe it -- ie. capturing quality audio alongside the visual -- can't be done without the help of an experienced professional sound recordist and his kit?

Alcove Audio · Jun 21, 2016

rtc80 said:
… you believe [capturing quality audio] can't be done without the help of an experienced professional sound recordist and his kit?

Production sound, and especially booming, are highly refined skills. Just as an experiment put a camera (without a viewer) on the end of a long stick, then keep it steady and precisely aimed. Now you have an inkling of an idea of the skills required of a boom-op.

A far as the other skills and knowledge go… A hypercardioid is used for indoor locations; if properly used it yields a less "roomy" sound. Just one of the hundreds of little pieces that make up the production sound craft.

And yes, I believe - and get a lot of grief for it - that you need someone with the proper skills, technique and experience to capture solid production sound. If I were you I would use the $3k to retain someone who knows what they are doing. Is it your goal to collect a lot of gear or make a good film? From my point of view a writer/director should own nothing and hire experienced people to handle the production jobs, even if it's only and ambitious up-and-comer; they, at least, will have more knowledge and skill than you or anyone who just happens to be on the set that day.

Just because you own a hammer doesn't mean you're carpenter, just as owning a soccer ball doesn't mean you can play in the World Cup.

Crappy production sound destroys more otherwise worthy projects than any other technical issue.

Your project will only look as good as it sounds, because
"Sound is half of the experience"

If your film looks terrible but has great sound, people might just think it's your aesthetic.
If your film looks great and has bad sound, people will think you're an amateur.
Sound is the first indicator to the industry that you know what you're doing.

rtc80 · Jun 21, 2016

Alcove Audio said:
Production sound, and especially booming, are highly refined skills. Just as an experiment put a camera (without a viewer) on the end of a long stick, then keep it steady and precisely aimed. Now you have an inkling of an idea of the skills required of a boom-op.

A far as the other skills and knowledge go… A hypercardioid is used for indoor locations; if properly used it yields a less "roomy" sound. Just one of the hundreds of little pieces that make up the production sound craft.

And yes, I believe - and get a lot of grief for it - that you need someone with the proper skills, technique and experience to capture solid production sound. If I were you I would use the $3k to retain someone who knows what they are doing. Is it your goal to collect a lot of gear or make a good film? From my point of view a writer/director should own nothing and hire experienced people to handle the production jobs, even if it's only and ambitious up-and-comer; they, at least, will have more knowledge and skill than you or anyone who just happens to be on the set that day.

Just because you own a hammer doesn't mean you're carpenter, just as owning a soccer ball doesn't mean you can play in the World Cup.

Crappy production sound destroys more otherwise worthy projects than any other technical issue.

Your project will only look as good as it sounds, because
"Sound is half of the experience"

If your film looks terrible but has great sound, people might just think it's your aesthetic.
If your film looks great and has bad sound, people will think you're an amateur.
Sound is the first indicator to the industry that you know what you're doing.

I understand and respect what you're saying, man, and I'd been considering the issue from that perspective even before I made this thread. I was just curious as to whether or not it was a categorical POV on your part, ie. that you found it inconceivable that inexperienced guys with no professional sound recording background could do a solid/presentable enough job.

I *would* ideally like to be relieved of any share of that responsibility, and I've been looking into pro sound recordists with TV experience today. I'm not sure the 3k I'd be saving would cover the expense of hiring one for the duration of shooting (actually, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't), but the funds would at least contribute to it. However, it might just be that I should be looking elsewhere for someone with the skills but whose rate is a little more competitive. I'm a UK guy and I assume you're a US guy, but any advice as to where/how I might search for more competetively priced (but still competent and reliable) alternatives would certainly be appreciated.

Alcove Audio · Jun 21, 2016

If you're doing this for fun do whatever you want to do. However, if you are considering filmmaking as a career then you should take sound-for-picture very seriously - a "real" production sound person and a real supervising sound editor/sound designer. Why? Because "Sound is the first indicator to the industry that you know what you're doing." All you have is sound and picture to manipulate your audience; why do an amateur job on half of your film?

The problem with neophytes doing sound is that it's much too easy to get a lot wrong, and I see/hear dozens of variations on getting production sound wrong every year. And I hear multiple issues from people who really should know better.

Booming is HARD. Selecting the right mic for each situation takes knowledge and experience, as does signal flow, gain-staging and many other audio issues. And audio post gets even more complicated.

What I see quite often are people who want to be filmmakers get caught up in the low/no/mini/micro budget mindset of "I have to own it." They end up with bad sound a lot of money collecting dust until the next project - if any. As a mentor of mine remarked on numerous occasions "If you don't use it every day you shouldn't own it." I have a nice mic collection, but for field recording I always rent the recorder and mixer.

rtc80 · Jun 21, 2016

Alcove Audio said:
If you're doing this for fun do whatever you want to do. However, if you are considering filmmaking as a career then you should take sound-for-picture very seriously - a "real" production sound person and a real supervising sound editor/sound designer. Why? Because "Sound is the first indicator to the industry that you know what you're doing." All you have is sound and picture to manipulate your audience; why do an amateur job on half of your film?

The problem with neophytes doing sound is that it's much too easy to get a lot wrong, and I see/hear dozens of variations on getting production sound wrong every year. And I hear multiple issues from people who really should know better.

Booming is HARD. Selecting the right mic for each situation takes knowledge and experience, as does signal flow, gain-staging and many other audio issues. And audio post gets even more complicated.

What I see quite often are people who want to be filmmakers get caught up in the low/no/mini/micro budget mindset of "I have to own it." They end up with bad sound a lot of money collecting dust until the next project - if any. As a mentor of mine remarked on numerous occasions "If you don't use it every day you shouldn't own it." I have a nice mic collection, but for field recording I always rent the recorder and mixer.

Over the last day, I've pretty much resigned myself to the inevitability of having to hire a sound recordist in order to avoid killing the project at its technical inception, specifically as a result of the realization that "it's much too easy to get a lot wrong" when it comes to the sonic aspect. Plus, it removes a worrisome burden from my shoulders and puts it in trustworthy hands.

I'm not presumptuous enough to be talking about a career at this stage, but the movie is more than 'fun' to me. This one movie in particular is something I want to do in and of itself, and moreover something I want to do a good job of making, with a presentable end product worthy of submission to festivals, etc. I haven't indulged in an excess amount of thought regarding what comes after it. I'm not looking past this project and what it would mean to me, on a personal level, to complete it to my satisfaction (or relative satisfaction, as I realise that I'm not going to be able to reproduce the picture *exactly* as I see it in my mind's eye).

Again, the input of anyone with knowledge of the UK scene would be welcomed, re. the search for a sufficiently skilled sound recordist whose rates would be a little sweeter than the £420 per day TV pro's out there.

Alcove Audio · Jun 22, 2016

Go through the entire script almost as if it were a radio play. Think about all of the sonic aspects of the characters, locations and story, as well as the sonic emotional impact you want to have on the audience. Bring in your Supervising Sound Editor/Sound Designer - even if it is just an ambitious up-and-comer looking to take on his/her first feature - during preproduction; the PSM as well, who should probably accompany you when location scouting. Yup, don't choose a location just on it's looks, it should be relatively quiet. Find out about events occurring at and near your locations during your projected production period. Like the time a shoot was set up for the same day as a motorcycle rally in town. Even interiors were impossibly sonically polluted.

Since so many of you young-uns like Tarantino you should know that he will move props, lighting, even the camera or re-block the entire scene - and has indeed reshot entire scenes - to get the production sound perfect, meaning the boom-op can get the mic into optimum position. Tarantino absolutely abhors ADR and does dialog editing using the production sound from unused takes only as a last resort.

You also do things like "soundproof" all of the props that are handled. China, drink ware, chairs, shoes, etc,. etc,. etc,. are made to be as quiet as possible so they do not interfere with the dialog. The same goes for wardrobe, no noisy fabrics, squeaky shoes, etc. For a short vehicle approach shot you push the vehicle into frame. All of these sound are replaced during Foley and sound effects editing.

This might be of interest: https://vimeo.com/170948796

rtc80 · Jun 22, 2016

Alcove Audio said:
Go through the entire script almost as if it were a radio play. Think about all of the sonic aspects of the characters, locations and story, as well as the sonic emotional impact you want to have on the audience. Bring in your Supervising Sound Editor/Sound Designer - even if it is just an ambitious up-and-comer looking to take on his/her first feature - during preproduction; the PSM as well, who should probably accompany you when location scouting. Yup, don't choose a location just on it's looks, it should be relatively quiet. Find out about events occurring at and near your locations during your projected production period. Like the time a shoot was set up for the same day as a motorcycle rally in town. Even interiors were impossibly sonically polluted.

Since so many of you young-uns like Tarantino you should know that he will move props, lighting, even the camera or re-block the entire scene - and has indeed reshot entire scenes - to get the production sound perfect, meaning the boom-op can get the mic into optimum position. Tarantino absolutely abhors ADR and does dialog editing using the production sound from unused takes only as a last resort.

You also do things like "soundproof" all of the props that are handled. China, drink ware, chairs, shoes, etc,. etc,. etc,. are made to be as quiet as possible so they do not interfere with the dialog. The same goes for wardrobe, no noisy fabrics, squeaky shoes, etc. For a short vehicle approach shot you push the vehicle into frame. All of these sound are replaced during Foley and sound effects editing.

This might be of interest: https://vimeo.com/170948796

Really valuable insight. Thank-you. Much to think about in there, and I'll be adding to my notes from your advice.

I'm actually quite negatively opinionated on QT in many ways, but that makes the passage referencing him no less interesting. Thanks again for your thoughts and the time taken to share them. Very appreciated.