archived-videos Sounds (Short Film)

Well, the only sound I noticed is a very, very loud distorted pulse every couple of seconds that almost blew my speaker the first time around. It makes the piece unwatchable.
 
Alcove Audio said:
Well, the only sound I noticed is a very, very loud distorted pulse every couple of seconds that almost blew my speaker the first time around. It makes the piece unwatchable.
Click to expand...

Very sorry about that, I forgot to put in a warning in my original post. The sound is surprisingly, necessary and intentional. Reading my extended notes may help you get a better understanding of the piece. However, I do appreciate your feedback.
 
Nat,

People don't pay $12 to be slapped in the face,

which is essentially what your video does to people.

I recommend viewing your video at a fair volume with unsuspecting viewers and watch their reactions... They'll be pissed and ask for their money back most likely.
 
Isn't art supposed to appeal to people? Artistry on the unconscious level is a sign of a master. Artistry that evokes an immediate negative response isn't art, it's an afternoon with your mother in law.
 
Whoah, Sound Guys, you're gonna scare this little chickadee off! :)

Nat, perhaps this video doesn't belong in the "narrative" category, especially since you yourself say that it doesn't have a narrative. Doh!

This is "experimental", and that's cool. As you alluded to in your video notes, no two people will see it the same. I'm sure you know that many people won't get it at all. Such is the nature of this type of experimental work.

I'll be honest -- I thought I saw where you were going, and I really liked your editing, but then at the end I didn't really get it. Maybe I'm just a boring straight-forward narrative kinda guy.

P.S. An effective narrative can be told in seconds. Making one stretch for 3 minutes, without it falling apart, is actually really difficult, but a fun challenge.
 
NatDurman said:
Reading my extended notes may help you get a better understanding of the piece. However, I do appreciate your feedback.
Click to expand...

I shouldn't have to read notes (which I will not read - much too long) to understand your piece; it should be able to stand on its own without explanation.

Your job is to communicate with your audience. Now, if you want to communicate ideas with sound, you need to have an understanding of sound and its effects and affects upon the listener psychologically and physiologically. The distorted sound you chose, and the ear and speaker shattering volume level you chose, will put off 99.99% of your audience; it was a blatant aural/sonic assault and they will not put up with it, they will just stop watching and listening.

The use of sound for picture is usually supportive; when it is given a "starring" role you need to expend a lot of care and technical know-how to use it effectively. In your piece all I got was a major disconnect between sound and picture.

I would suggest that you get and thoroughly read and digest "Sound Design: The Expressive Power of Music, Voice and Sound Effects in Cinema" by David Sonnenschein (I've read it at least four times) and "The Sound Effects Bible" by Ric Viers (which I'm currently re-reading for the third time). Davids book is a very philosophical discussion of sound; Rics book will give you the technical base to read Davids book.

Cracker - If he has the audacity to call his piece "Sounds" he had better be prepared to take the consequences from us "soundies". Wouldn't many of the visuals folks here jump just as hard on someone who dared to call their piece "Light"?
 
Alcove Audio said:
Cracker - If he has the audacity to call his piece "Sounds" he had better be prepared to take the consequences from us "soundies". Wouldn't many of the visuals folks here jump just as hard on someone who dared to call their piece "Light"?
Click to expand...

Yes. Your point is valid, and taken. Cheers.

It's the inner-high-school-teacher in me. I see a high school kid, and I gotta offer encouragement. Can't help it.

Nat, these guys have offered some sound advice (pun intended). Actually, to be honest, reading their warnings, I turned my volume WAY DOWN before watching this, and it still startled me. I would've been kinda pissed off if my volume were at it's normal level.

So, maybe it's not just mis-categorized, but maybe it would work better with a different title?

And please, turn that volume down on the distortion-whatever-that-nasty-noise-is!
 
As a note: I listed to it on my laptop speakers and it wasn't particularly startling and i didn't find it unbearable (as they are rubbish and lack bass) . I imagine you guys above are listening on a proper sound system. Through a subwoofer i expect that could pretty horrific.
Maybe next time use headphones when you are doing your sound design. Give people a chance to get what your going for.
 
Last edited:
As a review on the film: There was lots of interesting imagery there though. But personally what i enjoy and find a lot more inspired and interesting is when the imagery is worked into an engaging narrative.
 
Something that i wish i knew when i started making films a couple of yeas ago, was that you can't just stick a shotgun mic to the front of your camera. Also a lot of sound effects in a film are recorded separately then dubbed over (like the sound of you sitting down on your chair could have been).
If you have a bit of money then read some of the discussions on this site about audio, then get a mic and boom.

I personally never had enough money: this is a film i made using Canon HG21 and a £14 Hama Lapel mic (then i used "noise removal" software to take out the hiss).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQj8sVELdqA

Its fare from ideal and i'm sure many people here can tell you the audio isn't amazing. But it is a massive improvement for £14 (compared to using my old £50 shotgun mic inside).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top