Comments

bakerja wrote on 10/11/2006, 6:00 AM
This is totally objective and really depends on the footage. If it is a nature clip, you can get away with louder levels than a clip with people talking. The key is to ride the levels of the nat track to compliment the pictures without competing with the VO. It's more a feel thing than a science, IMO.

JAB
Bill Ravens wrote on 10/11/2006, 6:35 AM
u might want to start with something like -6dB RMS under the VO level.
Spot|DSE wrote on 10/11/2006, 8:36 AM
typical settings range from -6dB to -18dB, depending on sound, as mentioned. Also, if you want louder nats, you can use an ultra widener to carve out the middle for dialog. With a touch of EQ along with extreme widening, you may not need to dip the nat at all, however, it's not commonly done that way. But it works....
mrBun wrote on 10/11/2006, 7:31 PM
Google "sidechaining, ducking and compression"...might save a bit of hairpulling and "fader riding"
newhope wrote on 10/11/2006, 7:47 PM
"fader riding"???

Gee where I come from I call that audio mixing as oppossed to sidechain ducking which is considered the way you do when you can't mix, i.e. an editing suite with no mixing console.
But then this is the 'video' part of the Vegas forum isn't it?

Sorry but next I'll be seeing audio post referred to as "sound sweetening" .... I guess that's a way of getting a "fatter" sound.

Stpehen Hope
New Hope media
mrBun wrote on 10/11/2006, 10:46 PM
and your point is?

Actually on second thoughts... ducking is a very common practice in audio...used most often when one wants to tighten a kick drum and bass part.
In my industry (gaming), I use it to punch out "hero" sounds...I can't be looking over your shoulder whilst you explore/frag or interact in a gaming environment, so we write a ducking process into our game engine for certain classes of sound.
I have also used compression in this way to pull the VO up in a live broadcast.. I felt that this suggestion may provide a few clues as to how to do this with a minimum of pain.



newhope wrote on 10/12/2006, 1:44 AM
My point is ...
All fine when you don't have the time....live broadcast.. to manually intervene and control the levels all of the time e.g. fast paced sports, news, live audience shows... or where you aren't going to be there to control them.. gaming...that's not to say I'm suggesting eliminating compression, limiting, and oher dynamic control devices in an audio post production but in the end you have to listen to what you are mixing and the best end result is a combination of plugins and manual control... or what was it you called it???
fader riding.
But what would I know only having spent 30 years as a professional audio post production engineer?
mrBun wrote on 10/12/2006, 3:16 AM
Riding the faders is a folksy expression to be sure. Back in the 70’s when I started as a humble “go-fer” at Festival studios, and later engineered at EMI, and the ABC on the early Harrison’s, Neves and SSL desks…before automation. we would “ride” the faders on mixdown …I would mark points on the surface of the desk with a china graph pencil, and on occasion as many as 4 people would be “riding” those suckers…and getting it right as fast as possible on a medium prone to deterioration, and maxed out to boot.

Riding the faders is an anachronistic phrase to be sure.

These days as head of audio and composer in residence for a major gaming manufacturer with representatives across the world (17 Countries), and being a grumpy old man to boot, I figure I am allowed the odd anachronistic phrase.

I read the original post…thought; “Hey, ducking should get this sorted pretty swiftly with a minimal learning curve!”

Obviously, my turn of phrase has caused offence, and for that, I am truly sorry! My bad.
BTW, did you actually offer up a workaround? or did I distract you whilst you were in the process of formulating a viable solution to this problem?
farss wrote on 10/12/2006, 4:52 AM
Stephen,
you and me should have a beer some time!
The amount of time I've spent reading about studio recording only to realise it was pretty irrelevant when it comes to post for location recording.
Just for the record I hate it when nat sound and / or background music is being ducked, not only is it so damn obvious, it's so crude.

Bob.
Spot|DSE wrote on 10/12/2006, 5:24 AM
I still ride the faders, but now my software remembers those rides/movements. Gone are the good ole' days where an intern would be there to help ride em'...Course', gone is our sweet Euphonix as well. I miss it's Vegas mode.
newhope wrote on 10/12/2006, 5:40 AM
mrBun
No I too was distracted by the 'turn of phrase'
ABC ??? as in American or Australian Broadcasting Corp? No hang on i just checked your web site.. Australian...must be the water, or lack of it, in Sydney that is producing us grumpy audio types.. (sic) me...so I'm guessing ABC radio as I was at Gore Hill doing TV from 79 to 95 or is my memory failing me as well?

Basically like you I come from the days of chinagraph, no automation and hanging on to faders which, even though there's automation these days and I use it , I still think is the best way to achieve a mix...

I didn't think I needed to add my thrupence (sorry Non-Oz) as the first reply and Spot'ss basically got it in one..ah two, my reply would be similar I just took umbrage to the terminology in yours, not the info on ducking.

Though I believe that is probably a more difficult process to get right for a novice hence ears and fingers are 'usually' a safer option.... there are so many people out there that just don't understand what a compressor does that offering sidechaining and ducking as a first course of action wouldn't be my first choice of help... and I take that from my experience as Head of Sound Workshop at AFTRS where even specifically chosen Sound Students often had difficulty coming to terms with the use of dynamics early in their course.

Didn't mean to cause personal offence, it's hard to see the smile in the eye's ;-} when leaving a post ina forum... lot's of tongue in cheek about Sound Sweetening, a term I hate, not that you used it, hence my reference to it creating 'fatter' sound as we do have an obesity 'epidemic' here in Oz don't we?

Anyway no offence meant hopefully less taken.

Bob
Love to have a beer some time... need to pick a time and a venue

Regards
Steve
Bill Ravens wrote on 10/12/2006, 5:48 AM
damn, i just love the brotherhood around here..no judgment..just the facts. ma'am.
Spot|DSE wrote on 10/12/2006, 6:05 AM
Stephen,
Sweetening is still a common term here, but it bears no resemblance to "fattening" the sound, but rather adding ingredients to make the overall mix more interesting, in conjuntion with visual elements. If you notice the additional sounds, we've screwed up.
It's all part of post, but to some, sweetening refers to EQ, compression, gates, NR, etc. That's just post, to us. Sweetening (for us) is adding the frosting to a nicely posted mix.
newhope wrote on 10/12/2006, 7:26 AM
Spot

I'm sorry you're missing the Aussie humour... sweetening is an American term that has recently crept into Oz but wassn't in general use here prior to the mid 90's.

I was using a play on words though in that if you have a lot of sweet things in your diet you end up fat... ;-}

I do understand the terminology just don't particularly like the term sweetening as it is often used to denegrate the audio post process, particularly in TV... like calling video editors picture cutters.

Personally I'd be happier if both disappeared particularly when management call an Audio Post studio an Audio Sweetening facility.

I see the difference in your use of the term though.
It's in the mouths and minds of others that it gets changed.

You'll be down in Oz again soon and, if I don't get to see you, i'm sure farss can help update you on Aussie humour.

Regards
Steve
Spot|DSE wrote on 10/12/2006, 7:32 AM
Steve, just two more weeks, I'll be there. Tropfest, training sessions, and some skydiving/filming on the ticket. Hope to see you there.

Yeah, never thought about sweetening (via adding more audio elements to tank up titles, overlays, add excitement to a move, etc) would "fatten" up the sound, but can see how that might create some confusing concepts vs "sweetening" with EQ, compression, BBE-types of improvement.
mrBun wrote on 10/12/2006, 4:18 PM
Steve ;
“ABC ??? as in American or Australian Broadcasting Corp? No hang on i just checked your web site.. Australian...must be the water, or lack of it, in Sydney that is producing us grumpy audio types.. (sic) me...so I'm guessing ABC radio as I was at Gore Hill doing TV from 79 to 95 or is my memory failing me as well?”

Nope… Darlinghurst… Briefly in the early ‘80s, then back again on the other side of the desk in the mid 80’s… One of the producers (no names) had a habit of telling artists that the session was a “winner”, then phoning his mates to come in and learn the parts of the song he wasn’t happy with. …um…young bands mostly, could be anything from sloppy timing to a cheap instrument with poor intonation,.. so I also did a bit of “ghosting” for them from time to time… funny thing is, in all the time I did this, only one band questioned the final mix…. The other thing about the ABC…. I have a very common name (Barnes), and there already was a Geoff Barnes working for them…the ABC had just decided to become a corporation, and my (freelance) cheques kept going missing…hmmm .

As to the taking offence… no, I couldn’t work out where the hostility was coming from.
But then I work in a very young industry these days, and am used to waffling on about something whilst concentrating on my monitors, only to look up and realise the person sitting next to me has no idea what I’m on about…
What is that saying… “as soon as an Englishman opens his mouth, another Englishman despises him”
No harm done… gives me something to type about whilst the renders are cooking.

Back to the original post.. to be honest, I read this as “how long is a piece of string?”.
Too many variables.
The solution offered up by Spot /DSE is on the money to be sure .
I also thought, what if the levels are “up and down like a bride’s nightie”.

So my opinion was offered as a “while you’re up, also look at this”

Is compression too complex?
Sitting in the control room at 301 (Central not Alexandria), waaaay back when, I can remember a rave about the Bedroom studio as a potential threat…and P***ing ourselves laughing… Millions of bucks worth of blinking lights around us, it just seemed inconceivable…. Today, the home studio has successfully wounded the Demo studio to be sure, and has produced some serious inroads into the majors as well.. .. I just figure today, that people are a lot more techno savvy than I was… however I am not trying to train people…. I don’t get to see them coming through the ranks though as you would at AFTRS.
Cheers,
Geoff