I want to shoot a fight scene indoors but a cardioid (at least the kind I got), can only record sound from about two feet away, and even then the quality is better if you can get the mic closer. Is there any type of mic that has a good sound for indoors, that can reach about say 15 and still sound good, but sound further away in the room as well? I don't wanna use lav mics since the sound is not as good.
Question about getting a type of microphone.
- Thread starter harmonica44
- Start date
There is no mic that can reach 15 feet and still sound good; that's why you use lavs. If the sound of the lavs are poor you are using cheap lavs or do not know how to use then properly or both; that's why you hire a pro.
When it comes to action scenes - fighting in your case - you do the best you can to capture dialog and ADR afterwards. It's all about control. Action/fight scenes get their impact, if you'll pardon the pun, from the audio post process. Fight sounds in film have nothing to do with reality, you are using sounds to create the emotional impact or to represent how something feels. One of the most fun things to do in audio post...
When it comes to action scenes - fighting in your case - you do the best you can to capture dialog and ADR afterwards. It's all about control. Action/fight scenes get their impact, if you'll pardon the pun, from the audio post process. Fight sounds in film have nothing to do with reality, you are using sounds to create the emotional impact or to represent how something feels. One of the most fun things to do in audio post...
Any fight scenes I've been responsible for have always been completely ADRed afterwards.
Reason being is that fight scenes are almost always tightened up and made quicker in editing and so the original dialogue is nearly impossible to keep and use even if you do have a good recording.
So, it's better to start with a fresh edit of the film to start doing your efforts and impacts.
Plus, everyone knows punching a chicken breast or slab of steak sounds way more like a punch to the chest than an actual punch to the chest...
Here is a wonderful library:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYRqJDoQsbU
Reason being is that fight scenes are almost always tightened up and made quicker in editing and so the original dialogue is nearly impossible to keep and use even if you do have a good recording.
So, it's better to start with a fresh edit of the film to start doing your efforts and impacts.
Plus, everyone knows punching a chicken breast or slab of steak sounds way more like a punch to the chest than an actual punch to the chest...
Here is a wonderful library:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYRqJDoQsbU
Last edited:
Well yeah, I would definitely wanna do ADR for the sound effects. But I was hoping not to have to dub the dialogue. Here's the thing. I have a fight scene in mind I wanna practice before shooting the real thing. About 20-40 people will be fighting. How do I make the people in the background, actually sound like they are in the background, voice wise, if using ADR?
ADR stands for Automated Dialog Replacement - you can only ADR dialog. Punches, kicks, smashed heads, stabs, broken bones, weapons sounds, clothing, footwork, "whooshes", etc. are done with Foley and sound FX.
It's called a Loop Group; voice actors whose job, during the audio post process, is to supply various types of "crowd" noises, everything from a courtroom murmur to 100 men involved in a brawl. Loop Groups are usually 10 to 20 people, and if you need more voices you just record more tracks and use various audio effects. The balance and perspective is achieved at mix-down.
Movie sound is the use of multiple layers of sounds to create an emotional representation of the feel that the film and the scenes require. Most of those sounds usually have nothing to do with reality.
Additional looping
Additional voices
Additional ADR
ADR group
Walla group
Walla voices
Quite often these folks are not credited at all. It's also not unusual for some crowd walla to be done by extras on the set.
Just remember that the extras stay silent during the shoot and you record their walla afterwards.
Okay thanks. So it's better to use ADR than lavs then because of editing. That's good to know.
You still need to capture the dialog on-set so you have something as an ADR reference, and lavs will do a better job than a mic at 15 feet.
K thanks. I'll reconsider the lavs, but I am on a tight budget and was hoping to just use a cardioid and a shotgun, and ADR. Isn't ADR an option instead of lavs since they used it before lavs were invented?
I have another question that is a little off topic. I have practiced recording with my mics at about two feet away. Since I need to keep them out of frame. When I listen the sound through the headphones while recording it sounds loud and clear. But when I play it back through a speaker it sound further away, and not clear as it did while recording. Why does it sound good while recording, but poor after playing it back?
I have another question that is a little off topic. I have practiced recording with my mics at about two feet away. Since I need to keep them out of frame. When I listen the sound through the headphones while recording it sounds loud and clear. But when I play it back through a speaker it sound further away, and not clear as it did while recording. Why does it sound good while recording, but poor after playing it back?
Because when you are in the field there is always a lot of background noise to mask the recorded noise even during playback. A growing number of professional PSMs are using ear protectors (you know, what they use on shooting ranges) modified into headphones - very pricey. The isolation is outstanding - up to 85db of external noise reduction - so you are really hearing what is being recorded.
When you finally get the files home you are listening in a (hopefully) quiet, controlled environment on (again, hopefully) nice speakers. There is (once again, hopefully) no extraneous background noise to mask the recorded noise. Besides the background noise you recorded you will also hear how well (or badly) you aimed the mic (if you aimed poorly you have more noise and less dialog), the adequacy of your wind protection, and whatever self-noise your mic, mixer and recorder produce; it all adds up in a big hurry. This is one reason why there should be a sound mixer who is not immediately on the set and a boom-op. As I have mentioned dozens of times in the past, booming is an art!
You also have to remember that mics do not hear the way your ears do, and playback is not what your ears are used to hearing; it is a forced artificial perspective that heightens the way that we perceive the extraneous noise, our "mental editing function" which edits out our awareness of sounds we don't need to hear is negated by technology.
If you really want to see how hard a great boom-op works, try the following experiment.
Put your mic on a stand with the mic exactly the height of your mouth. Speak at six inches, then back up to a foot, then two feet and then four feet. Each time you do so speak directly at the mic, at 45 degrees off-axis and at 90 degrees off-axis. You'll see how much difference being off even a few degrees can make in your dialog to noise ratio.
When you finally get the files home you are listening in a (hopefully) quiet, controlled environment on (again, hopefully) nice speakers. There is (once again, hopefully) no extraneous background noise to mask the recorded noise. Besides the background noise you recorded you will also hear how well (or badly) you aimed the mic (if you aimed poorly you have more noise and less dialog), the adequacy of your wind protection, and whatever self-noise your mic, mixer and recorder produce; it all adds up in a big hurry. This is one reason why there should be a sound mixer who is not immediately on the set and a boom-op. As I have mentioned dozens of times in the past, booming is an art!
You also have to remember that mics do not hear the way your ears do, and playback is not what your ears are used to hearing; it is a forced artificial perspective that heightens the way that we perceive the extraneous noise, our "mental editing function" which edits out our awareness of sounds we don't need to hear is negated by technology.
If you really want to see how hard a great boom-op works, try the following experiment.
Put your mic on a stand with the mic exactly the height of your mouth. Speak at six inches, then back up to a foot, then two feet and then four feet. Each time you do so speak directly at the mic, at 45 degrees off-axis and at 90 degrees off-axis. You'll see how much difference being off even a few degrees can make in your dialog to noise ratio.
Last edited:
Okay thanks. When you said sound mixer before, I didn't know you meant a person. I thought you meant the sound mixer gadget.
It's the Recording level control and the L and R I have to get the hang of. Even though it all sounds good in the headphones while shooting.
Last edited:
K how do I record sounds like crickets, just to fit a scene? Crickets are far away from the mic while recording, so how do I make it sound good?
With ears, talent and experience.
"Talking about music is like dancing about architecture."
Audio editing (dialog, sound FX, Foley, music) and mixing are all art forms. You make it "sound good" by selecting the proper sounds and building layers, and then using EQ and 'verbs to put everything into a cohesive whole. There have been books written about this, which tell you nothing until you actually start editing and mixing. You want my 30+ years of experience in a post; it can't be done.
You can start with these books.
"Sound Design: The Expressive Power of Music, Voice and Sound Effects in Cinema" - David Sonnenschein
"The Practical Art of Motion Picture Sound" - David Lewis Yewdall
"The Foley Grail: The Art of Performing Sound for Film, Games, and Animation" - Vanessa Theme Ament
"The Sound Effects Bible: How to Create and Record Hollywood Style Sound Effects" - Ric Viers
"Dialogue Editing for Motion Pictures: A Guide to the Invisible Art" - John Purcell
Additional reading:
"The Recording Engineer's Handbook" - Bobby Owsinski
"Critical Listening Skills for Audio Professionals" - F. Alton Everest
"Modern Recording Techniques" - David Miles Huber and Robert E. Runstein
"Master Handbook of Acoustics" - F. Alton Everest and Ken Pohlmann
"Fundamentals of Physical Acoustics" - David T. Blackstock
Last edited:
Okay thanks. I'll see if I can find a newbie soundman wanting to work on his craft with me still, but still no luck. Does The Sound Effects Bible: How to Create and Record Hollywood Style Sound Effects, tell you a lot about capturing sound in all cases, or just sound effects specifically?
Last edited:
Typically, on set, L and R have a very different meaning. If I'm sending a mix to the camera, I have my boom sent to the left channel and a mix of the lavs sent to the right channel of the camera. This information is included on the sound report given to the first AD or Scriptie.
It is becoming more and more common for location sound mixers to record iso tracks of each input and provide those as well. The only thing recorded in a true LR arrangement is ambience. I typically have a pair of Avantone CK-1s with cardioid caps set up on a stand in a ORTF configuration to capture ambience at an opportune moment.
One last note about this. Record keeping is an absolute must for the production sound mixer. When recording tone and ambience, I'll verbally identify the take in the first 5 seconds, announcing the scene number and location being recorded. Later, when naming the files, it's quite easy using something like Wave Agent to audition the beginning of each file, enter the scene and take number as announced by the person slating, and hit the rename button to have all the files named for scene and take. This makes the editor's work of matching sound and visuals much easier.
It is becoming more and more common for location sound mixers to record iso tracks of each input and provide those as well. The only thing recorded in a true LR arrangement is ambience. I typically have a pair of Avantone CK-1s with cardioid caps set up on a stand in a ORTF configuration to capture ambience at an opportune moment.
One last note about this. Record keeping is an absolute must for the production sound mixer. When recording tone and ambience, I'll verbally identify the take in the first 5 seconds, announcing the scene number and location being recorded. Later, when naming the files, it's quite easy using something like Wave Agent to audition the beginning of each file, enter the scene and take number as announced by the person slating, and hit the rename button to have all the files named for scene and take. This makes the editor's work of matching sound and visuals much easier.
Okay thanks, that's good to know. So when you are done recording, how do you turn it into 6 channel surround sound? Do you actually need to record 6 channels separately on 6 mics possibly, or can you just turn it into surround in post?