POST Sound Help

[kastout24]

Hello all,

Recently had a short film mixed in 5.1. All went well except for one line that is horrible. It was a bad mic that we had in mix (didn't have time to go back and search through source files for a better one - I'm operating on very low budget and we were already hours over) so ended up using it. But it basically drops off quite a bit compared to all other lines of dialogue in the scene.

Here's the issue. Out of money, so I can't go back and reedit that in, change in mix and reexport the 5.1 tracks as that's already been done.

Is there ANY way, I can do this myself? I have access to all source files, original offline edits. So I can easily find the better take (if one exists). But my question would be what's the best way to slip that dialogue into the 5.1 mix that already exists? Is it as easy as just dropping it over into the timeline in Premiere (what I'm editing on) and matching as best as possible to existing dialogue? Or should I be running it through Pro Tools or Adobe Audition and exporting with particular settings? But again, I'm sure I'd have to layer it over in Premiere since I don't have access to the original ProTools workflow from the mixer.

I'm fairly green when it comes to audio mixing and so forth so hopefully something like this is doable. Again it's pretty short line so hopefully there's a quick fix to this.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Alcove Audio]

You'll have to open up all six channels and replace the line of dialog and then work to match as best you can. Then you have to run the entire mix again. But this is not a "quick" fix that should be attempted by someone who is admittedly green, and I very seriously doubt that it would be seamless or that you won't somehow compromise the rest of the audio.

I'm just curious as to why this issue was not taken care of when doing the dialog edit; for me, at least, the dialog is the first that gets done and receives the most attention.

 

[kastout24]

Hi Alcove,

The dialogue was the first thing. Remembering back the other takes might have had some BG sound in them, but I'd take that over it sounding as if he's stuck in a cave. I believe the editor mentioned he could boost that in the mix, but that obviously didn't happen... Whether that's because we were out of time and money, or they truly couldn't do it I don't know. I would hope it wasn't because of budget and time concerns and they just blew it off.

I should mention the dialogue is in channel C only. So I wouldn't have to go into the other 5 channels correct?

Thanks Alcove.

 

[AudioPostExpert]

... my question would be what's the best way to slip that dialogue into the 5.1 mix that already exists? ... Is there ANY way, I can do this myself?

You might be able to do it yourself, it depends on several factors. Firstly, is the final 5.1 mix in Dolby Digital format or (6) discrete wav files? If it's the former, there's no easy way to do what you want without going back into the original ProTools mix/print-mastering session. If it's the latter then it maybe possible for you to do it yourself, depending on exactly what the re-recording mixer did:

You will want to load just the centre channel wav of the 5.1 mix into premiere. Locate the line of dialogue, cut in your new line and balance it with the other dialogue around it. You'll need to make sure the new dialogue matches the timing exactly of the old. Then, locate the room tone for the scene, cut in two sections of room tone of a few seconds each on another audio track overlapping each of the edit points of your new dialogue. Crossfade the room tone "in" under the existing mix and then gradually fade it out under your new dialogue, do the same with the end edit point of your new dialogue. You'll have to play around with the amount (faded in level) of room tone and the duration of the in/out fades to make them as invisible as possible. When you're done, just export your two audio tracks (original centre channel/new dialogue + room tone track) as your new centre channel, taking care not to change the levels (add any other processing or change anything else) in any other part of the centre channel mix.

How effective this suggestion will be depends on what processing the re-recording mixer has applied to the other, surrounding dialogue. For example if noise reduction has been applied to the rest of the scene and your new dialogue doesn't have matching noise reduction, the edit to and from your new dialogue may be obvious. It also depends on whether or not there was anything else in the centre channel at that point besides dialogue (Foley, ambience or other sound FX, a surround processor like a reverb for example). If was other material, then getting your new bit of centre channel to match (not sound like an obvious and distracting edit) is going to be increasingly tricky without going back to the ProTools mix session.

If the simple centre channel edit I've suggested above does work, I strongly recommend you check this new mix (all 5.1 channels) on a 5.1 system, just in case the re-recording mixer did anything unusual.

Good luck!

G

 

[AudioPostExpert]

For some reason, Alcove's reply and your response were not present when I wrote and posted my reply above.

If your alt/new dialogue has a fair bit of background sound, it's not a just a case of taking that noisy background over the existing dialogue. The problem is that you probably won't get that new line to match with the rest of the centre channel, the edit will be obvious. In other words, my suggestion above is far less likely to work. It might still be worth giving it a go but most likely the scene will need to be remixed and probably the only way of doing that will be to go back into the Protools mix session.

G

 

[kastout24]

Hi All,

It is indeed 6 discrete channels. There's not a lot going on in BG. No reverb or anything different in that context. Just him talking. Now if there was anything applied to the rest of the scene there could have been (in terms of dialogue sweetening), but nothing too out of the ordinary.

Really the take sounds so bad even if I brought the new line in and it didn't match exactly it would still sound loads better than what's already there.

So really I'm not sure if I should be bringing these tracks into protools to do this, or if I can indeed do this in Premiere?

If I do make the cut in Premiere, drop in the new line, and manage to match with room tone and volume, etc. pretty close. I can literally just export the dialogue and it should come out fine? (granted checking it in a 5.1 studio?) Or would Premiere potentially do anything funky to the overall volume upon export? Any way to ensure that doesn't happen? Despite simply making sure all the settings match the source files? Or is that the only and/or best way?

Okay all ,thanks for the replies!

 

[Will Vincent]

I should mention the dialogue is in channel C only. So I wouldn't have to go into the other 5 channels correct?

Really? All the dialogue is only in the center channel?
That's gotta sound pretty thin.. Even if it's center weighted, I'd think you'd want some in the L/R front channels as well.

 

[Will Vincent]

So really I'm not sure if I should be bringing these tracks into protools to do this, or if I can indeed do this in Premiere?

If I do make the cut in Premiere, drop in the new line, and manage to match with room tone and volume, etc. pretty close. I can literally just export the dialogue and it should come out fine? (granted checking it in a 5.1 studio?) Or would Premiere potentially do anything funky to the overall volume upon export? Any way to ensure that doesn't happen? Despite simply making sure all the settings match the source files? Or is that the only and/or best way?

If you have protools at your fingertips, that's certainly the better tool for the job. If you don't, you might take a stab at it with Reaper, which would be better suited to the task than premiere.

If you can keep the levels consistent, and the sound quality is 'better' for that errant line, yeah.. it could work. Keep backups though, just in case it all goes to hell and you just have to suffer with the crappy quality line of dialogue. One bad line would be easier to stomach than an entire mix that's gone wrong.

 

[Alcove Audio]

Really? All the dialogue is only in the center channel?

When mixing in surround 99% of the dialog is in the center channel.

 

[AudioPostExpert]

There's not a lot going on in BG. No reverb or anything different in that context. Just him talking.

That's a little bizarre. I'm assuming that the mix was done by a professional, as it was done in 5.1 with Pro Tools HD. There would virtually always be some reverb, Foley or BG, and commonly all three! From what you've said so far, it does not sound like a particularly professional mix, although in your current specific situation the lack of these usual audio elements might be to your advantage.

So really I'm not sure if I should be bringing these tracks into protools to do this, or if I can indeed do this in Premiere?

As Will said, Pro Tools is certainly the right tool for the job. However, unless you know Pro Tools well, it's probably not the best tool for the job in your case. If you are more familiar with Premiere, I would stick with that, we are only talking about a relatively basic mono edit, no complex processing or routing.

Or would Premiere potentially do anything funky to the overall volume upon export? Any way to ensure that doesn't happen?

Premiere shouldn't do anything funky to the sound. The only way of knowing if it has would be to check it on a calibrated 5.1 system.

Really? All the dialogue is only in the center channel?
That's gotta sound pretty thin..

How many Hollywood blockbusters have you heard which sound "pretty thin"? As Alcove said, in 5.1 or 7.1 theatrical sound, the overwhelming majority of dialogue is placed only in the centre channel.

Even if it's center weighted, I'd think you'd want some in the L/R front channels as well.

This is very poor advice! Even in a small cinema there is going to be at least 10ft between each of the front speakers and probably a great deal more. Diverging the dialogue across all three front speakers is going destroy the positioning of the dialogue for anyone not sitting on the centre line of the cinema and also, the probability of causing serious phase issues is very high. It is therefore definitely NOT recommended to use any divergence on dialogue!

Some TV stations/networks specify the dialogue is diverged a certain precise amount across all three front speakers. This is because the centre speaker in many/most home cinema systems is usually improperly positioned and smaller/less powerful than the L/R speakers and as there is considerably less distance between the 3 front speakers in a home system, the risk of serious phase issues is reduced. However, the general consensus in the professional audio post community (and my personal opinion) is that even given these circumstances those TV stations which specify dialogue divergence are making a mistake.

If you can keep the levels consistent, and the sound quality is 'better' for that errant line, yeah.. it could work.

Really the take sounds so bad even if I brought the new line in and it didn't match exactly it would still sound loads better than what's already there.

I think you are both missing the point. Whether or not the new line of dialogue is "better" is to a large extent irrelevant! It would only be the most relevant factor if the current line of dialogue is: A. Particularly important to the story and B. Virtually inaudible/incomprehensible. Otherwise, the most relevant factor is not that the new line is "better", it's that it is different! A basic rule of audio-post is understanding that particularly as far as background noise/ambience is perceived, the brain works as a pattern matching machine, an extremely sensitive pattern matching machine! If the pattern suddenly changes (even a relatively tiny amount) and there is no visual or other sensory explanation for that change, the brain immediately raises a big red flag! If the current line of dialogue is poor but matches with the rest of the dialogue, that line of dialogue is preferable to a new, "better" line of dialogue which doesn't. In other words, which is preferable; a slightly more difficult to understand line of dialogue or a cleaner line of dialogue which screams "Edit point", "different" and/or "wrong"? Two other points to bare in mind: 1. After spending time concentrating on this line, what you are hearing/perceiving either with the existing line or the new line may not correlate with what a first time audience would hear/perceive and 2. What might sound like an even perfect match on your consumer, prosumer or even professional studio monitors, might sound like a glaringly obvious mis-match when played out of a full size theatrical sound system! It's still probably worth giving my suggestion above a go but even if the new mix sounds good to you on your sound system, you need to check it on a properly calibrated system or better still, on an actual theatrical system.

I'm very much with Alcove's initial statement: This issue should have been identified during the dialogue editing and addressed at that point or at the very latest, addressed during the dialogue pre-mix. To identify the issue and then to effectively ignore/forget about it demonstrates either severe incompetence, a lack of professional pride, or both! Either way, I hope you weren't charged much for their services!

G

 

[kastout24]

Hey all,

Thanks for the responses.

AudioPost good advice. I actually found a mixer locally who said he can make some changes for relatively cheap. Using ProTools and the discretes. So that's good news in terms of not doing it myself or being gouged for additional costs.

As far as quality of the new line. It's not a flub or stutter or something. It's picking up his line on the wrong mic. Meaning I used the other actor's mic for his line. So it's a complete shift in tone/pitch (fill in the blank there). Which makes it sound like garbage and sends the red flags waiving. I would have said leave it alone but it's been 50/50 on people noticing. I agree if it alters the mix overall then I'll leave it, but definitely will give swapping it out a try.

Thanks again everyone for the help and advice. This forum's been great.