Joe Riggs

Hi, I'm working on a production where the sound mixer is using a Zaxcom Deva V or 5. I think because it's an older piece of equipment and its usb/firewire port is broken the mixer has to burn a DVD at the end of the day of the sound files, which we then have to transfer. This process is painfully slow, from the burning of the disc to the transfer, and the disc is not the most reliable. I'm so used to working with mixers that record to a CF, SD card or even plugging into a usb port on their recorder that this is really time drain. Any ideas on how we could transfer from this recorder or speed up the workflow? is it possible to pop out the internal drive? Thank you

On bigger productions they probably have the budget to afford a great post house and days of ADR which is not a total or ideal solution but it enables them to get away with more. Where it really hurts are the smaller productions with inexperienced or naive Director/DPs (when it comes to audio) or green mixers that think everything can be fixed in post.

How was working with Beatty and Caleb Deschanel? Do they favor a more meticulously planned method or working or do they prefer to figure it out on the set?

Yep, if possible give both timecode and scratch track, it all helps.

I would prefer 0 empty tracks but 1 is manageable, in the past I've received 8 track poly files, with 4 of the those tracks being empty, which makes it really cumbersome in the edit.

Amen

Premiere and Protools

I have a bunch of polyphonic wavs from production with 8 tracks for a 2 person stationary scene. Some mics sound inferior than others ( I do want to keep all the tracks in the end) just for the offline edit that amount of tracks per clip makes it really cumbersome. I'd like to reduce the number of tracks to the strongest/cleanest ones (which seem to be the first 3), then sync....or I could sync first, then reduce. I just want to make sure that by working this way, post sound will still be able to conform to the 8 track original wav file. Has anyone done this with Wave Agent or some other program? Are there issues conforming to all tracks in the original files, if you create new ones with only 3-4 tracks in that program?

No problem with the sound quality. Just that amount of tracks per clip makes it really cumbersome in the initial edit. As long as post sound can re-conform to all tracks, I could reduce them.

I'm editing the actual picture, so no camera audio, just the polyphonic .wav file. That dual wires is interesting, good to know, although probably not the case in this instance because there is no physical interaction.

Hi, Would there be a reason to record 8 tracks on a stationary 2 shot? Even if you were to use 2 booms (which is pretty rare in indie stuff), 2 lavs and a mix track, it would still be less. Obviously some tracks sound inferior to others but I didn't receive any sound reports, so I have no idea, what's what.

Late to the this as well, so glad you're ok Marc.

One of the greats, his work left an indelible impression on myself and many of my peers.

I'm coming for a very indie perspective, where there's usually no assistant editor and sound reports are a luxury, I've worked on more projects without reports, then with them. Example, I worked on a project without sound reports but the files were named by scene and take, so when it came time for post sound to take over, they could simply go by the file names if they needed to replace a line or word with another take. If in that case, the mixer went by some sequential naming convention, the post sound job would be infinitely more cumbersome and most likely would have cost more money. If you are starting at and only labeling T01 every new shooting day, I would welcome the "dy46" in a filename, anything to help differentiate the files to give it a unique name. By only organizing by day on the harddrive level, one could wind up with a "T01" for every shooting day, I don't want 24 files named "T01", that could cause a ton of confusion, such as if that were done in the example above. If you're generating sound reports, that's a whole different story and I could see how file names could be less critical, however, I still prefer naming to be scene and take. Question, if you have one sound mixer who is doing double duty and also booming, does he have time to do reports as well?

It can work but at the very least it is an inconvenience and it would take longer/more money for them to complete their job. If they need to replace a line or word, it's much easier for them to find the corresponding takes when they are labeled as "101A-1" vs "ASD1001" or just "Take04", as examples of sequentially numbered file names I've received in the past. Another Thank you

I do, 101A-1 please, files should be named by scene and take, period. This is helpful from the start all the way through to the post sound process.

If one has a flattened quicktime file and wants to create a DVD with a 5.1 mix from it, using compressor or adobe media encoder. What does that flattened .mov file need to have audio wise? If it has 6 discrete channels, can I then take that, and create a 5.1 mix with one of the above programs? Or does the MOV file need to be 5.1 from the start?

Any there any low end portable recorders, that are capable of naming files by scene and take #? never used them but I'm talking about gear like the H6, Tascam DR-680, rolad R-44.

What about films that say Dolby Digital in select theaters? Does that 5.1 to Dolby Digital encoding happen when they create the DCP?

I'm trying to understand what constitutes a 5.1 track being Dolby Digital? If one receives a 5.1 mix, is it autpmatically Dolby Digital or are there other aspects that determine if it is a 5.1 "DOLBY DIGITAL" track? Thanks

Some interesting discussions on the facebook page. First, the Sound Mixer for the film Kevin Compayre Second, Richard Van Dyke vs Michael Howard regarding the 2 mic and 1 boom technique which wouldn't have worked for this issue (overlaps), but for recording 2 actors who are relatively close to each other, when you have limited crew it is interesting.

Embarrassing at even this level of production that the producers don't see the value in it. However, I'm curious, is the director's idea of 2 mics on 1 boom that ridiculous? I've never seen it done before but it doesn't seem like that terrible a suggestion. Although he then says he wants 1 at a higher volume and 1 at a lower volume, when I figure he initially wanted a stronger/cleaner signal on the other actor. I do love the look on the Sound mixer's face and his response. Director: "I used to do sound myself" Sound Mixer: "Sounds like it" hahahaha

What's the big deal if you accidentally recorded some takes in higher quality at 96k? It's not like you recorded 44.1

Great info, thanks. When it comes time for the mix, I'm assuming most of that time is spent putting elements at their desired audio level, panning, placing sounds within a 5.1 space. However, what flexibility is there during the mix for adjusting content? Such as adding sounds (ambiance, sfx, etc...).

What is the standard protocol when working with a post house after you deliver the sound materials from the client end? I'm assuming, general cleanup and dialogue are done with them but at one point is the director brought in to give feedback/notes? Is this during the mixing stage or before? Can stuff be changed during the mixing stage?