Video examples of good sound and bad

[Henchman]

Hmm how about a low budget feature?

 

Sawrab

That list is endless.

[old school]

Not to blow any smoke, but a lot of examples of good production sound and well mixed by post mix can be found in "An Officer and a Gentleman"  All of it was on location. The film sounds as it looks and it so much helps tell the story in every aspect. Just my POV.

  I think this is an interesting exercise for teaching students sound in the end product, but I have a feeling the bad sound is what many will remember because it will be so obvious. The good sound examples might be too subtle that one might take it for granted because most Pro Movies and TV sound tracks are above average and this is what we are us to. 

Curious to hear how it turns out. Good luck.

CrewC

[John Blankenship]

A good learning exercise for a class is to analyze the sound in a Spaghetti Western such as "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly." 

 

It was done "the Italian way" with all the dialog replaced, however, as a teaching exercise it would be worthwhile.  It would give the students a chance to experience, when in the hands of a master, how much power sound has and the contribution it makes to the whole, even if the dialog was obviously dubbed.

[old school]

A good learning exercise for a class is to analyze the sound in a Spaghetti Western such as "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly." 

 

It was done "the Italian way" with all the dialog replaced, however, as a teaching exercise it would be worthwhile.  It would give the students a chance to experience, when in the hands of a master, how much power sound has and the contribution it makes to the whole, even if the dialog was obviously dubbed.

Love the film. Excellent example of 'Bad for Good" sound. What ever works is legit in film making, even the Italian style sound for picture recording and post sound work in The G, The B, The U. 

CrewC

[Henchman]

Referencing moves from 30-40 years ago is pointless. As the expectations today are unbelievably higher. Even in TV.

A great sounding film is "Michael Clayton". One line of ADR in the entire movie. And it was an added line.

And lets not forget most f Tarants films are good examples of how to do things right. He does not use loop at all.

[John Blankenship]

Referencing moves from 30-40 years ago is pointless... 

...

 

I disagree with this statement.  For those capable of listening and learning, there's much to be learned.

[Henchman]

I disagree with this statement. For those capable of listening and learning, there's much to be learned.

Well, being on the dubstage in the dialog chair almost everyday. I strongly disagree.

In fact, I really don't like the sound of a lot of those old movies, even though I love the movies themselves.

The dialog in a lot of them sounds barky and midrangey. And the expectations that they have from a two day mix for an hourlong TV show today, is higher than features from back then.

[Richard Ragon]

Worked on a pilot some time years ago..

 

Before I worked on the show..

 

After I worked on the show..

 

Production value went up a bit you might say.

 

-Richard

[Henchman]

So, back to the original question.

It's almost impossible to judge the quality of the original production sound by the final mix.

Adif something has oceans ADR, then that's due to a poor mix, poor performance, poor recording or all three.

[John Blankenship]

Film sound technology has evolved by leaps and bounds. Television sound especially has made massive improvements over the last couple of decades.

However, it's all too easy to be mesmerized by the bells and whistles of technology. The important role that sound plays still stems from how well it works in consort with picture to convey a myriad of emotions, a sense of place, and a feeling for character.

To advance one's understanding of the role sound can play, watch films whose sonic character was crafted by the master, Walter Murch, in movies such as American Graffiti (1973), The Conversation (1974), The Godfather II & III (1974 & 1990), Apocalypse Now (1979), The English Patient (1996), and many more.

Good film sound benefits greatly from technology. Great film sound comes from conveying emotion, place, and character.

[Henchman]

Except the original question isn't about sonic character. Its about good and bad dialog production sound.

And the quality of dialog in movies, as you have said, has improved drastically. So, IMO, using movies from time periods where the sound wasnt as good as it is now, is kinda pointless.

This isnt a discussion about the artistic process. But more the technical aspect.

And there are more than enough movies from the last decade that can be used a s examples of good and bad.

[John Blankenship]

I think it's up to the O.P what he considers "good sound."

[Chris Woodcock]

I think it's up to the O.P what he considers "good sound."

I suppose Les Mis is a good example of production sound, there is some dialog in the movie Hunger that I think its really good production sound. I am going to quote the senator about the importance of working as a team to get good sound. Regards Chris W

[Johnathan Sessoms]

 

Production value went up a bit you might say.

 

-Richard

 

Did you supply the pillows?

[Jeff Wexler]

For me, the important lesson to learn is how the production sound recordings fit into the whole process. The greatest benefit, I believe, for students to grasp this is to show them clips of raw production sound (some good, some bad, etc.) and follow it through to the final mix. I am searching for some video that I think Walter Murch was involved in producing, that did just that. Used a movie as an example that ultimately had a pretty good soundtrack when it was shown theatrically. Started by showing each angle shot in production and pointed out the challenges that each angle within the scene posed, then moved on to picture editor and what they did to put the scene together. Hand over to sound editor discovering what job they had to accomplish, and on and on. Very instructive video training tool. The movie was NOT "Apocalypse, Now" (which of course is another fascinating journey to discover since there was no useable production sound in the movie, but would not serve the purposes we are discussing here).

[studiomprd]

" Adif something has oceans ADR, then that's due to a poor mix, poor performance, poor recording or all three. "

back to WaterWorld, like Apocalypse Now, a "special case"...

 well yes, the recordings were "poor", but there is a valid "why" to that, and the thorough and terrific post work earned a nomination.

 

yes, I believe there is a lot to be  learned from the older films, done with different equipment and skills than much of today's movies. 

The results the moviemakers achieved without wireless equipment, without comteks, and with the heavier mic's with limited frequency response and lower output, with all the bigger, heavier, single track equipment requiring more power, generating more heat and noise, and requiring more wiring, crew, and attention can teach us all loads about storytelling and moviemaking ...

[Jay Rose]

Slightly OT, but now that I see what direction the thread has headed...

 

You might want to take a look at http://www.dplay.com/aes/filmsound.html.

 

This is a two-hour talk I gave at a joint SMPTE/AES meeting, basically explaining to station engineers and music mixers some of the things we go through in production and post to make a dialog track work.

 

It's fixed-camera but I was able to feed them with a clean mic and direct sound from my examples, so it's listenable. The pix is pretty awful, but who wants to look at me anyway? It also has chapters so you can point students to topics.

 

From AES's summary:

 

* How does Hollywood record actors so cleanly, with everything else
going on and no visible microphones?
* Why don’t background noise and room acoustics interfere?
* Most scenes are shot in multiple takes, with a single camera
that’s moved to various positions: How can the voices and backgrounds stay
so consistent, start to finish and shot to shot, even through scenes that
took hours to set up and shoot?

 

Surprisingly, the answer usually isn’t ADR or “looping” [long deletion here]...

 

The real trick? Carefully specialized technique, a workflow that’s based on
decades of sound filmmaking and being constantly tweaked…
and a little smoke-and-mirrors.

[John Blankenship]

...

And the quality of dialog in movies, as you have said, has improved drastically.

...

I didn't say that.

I said, "Film sound technology has evolved by leaps and bounds."

There's a big difference. While there's so much more we can do with our magic toys in post, location sound remains primarily the domain of skill and experience.

My post facility has Pro Tools, SADiE, Avid Media Composer, Final Cut Pro, After Effects, Premiere, and more, along with tons of state-of-the-art plugins, however, while we can do more with dialog in post, and as the quality of dialog coming from the set has the potential to be as good as ever, the steep decline in set protocol all too often compromises the quality of contemporary dialog.

Like Crew said. Watch "An Officer and a Gentleman" (1982). It was, no doubt recorded on one of those antiquated old sweet sounding analog Nagras, complete with a bit of tape hiss that needed to be carefully massaged generation to generation.

The best location sound comes from a properly controlled set, with a properly placed Schoeps, wielded by a skilled operator, recorded by a competent mixer. THAT hasn't changed. And many argue that the sound quality of those antiquated old sweet sounding analog Nargas is still superior to anything digital. That part is a moot point since the world has moved on. What isn't a moot point is that it's still the skills and abilities on set that gets good dialog, not the technology. The most massive sound improvement on set, the evolution of wireless technology, still doesn't result in the best sound possible. By far the best dialog is still via a boom mic wielded by a top notch operator, and that part isn't about technology, it's about skill and many years of experience.

A lot can be learned by understanding both the old and the new.

[Chris Woodcock]

Slightly OT, but now that I see what direction the thread has headed...   You might want to take a look at http://www.dplay.com/aes/filmsound.html.   This is a two-hour talk I gave at a joint SMPTE/AES meeting, basically explaining to station engineers and music mixers some of the things we go through in production and post to make a dialog track work.   It's fixed-camera but I was able to feed them with a clean mic and direct sound from my examples, so it's listenable. The pix is pretty awful, but who wants to look at me anyway? It also has chapters so you can point students to topics.   From AES's summary:   * How does Hollywood record actors so cleanly, with everything else going on and no visible microphones? * Why don’t background noise and room acoustics interfere? * Most scenes are shot in multiple takes, with a single camera that’s moved to various positions: How can the voices and backgrounds stay so consistent, start to finish and shot to shot, even through scenes that took hours to set up and shoot?   Surprisingly, the answer usually isn’t ADR or “looping” [long deletion here]...   The real trick? Carefully specialized technique, a workflow that’s based on decades of sound filmmaking and being constantly tweaked… and a little smoke-and-mirrors.

Thanks Jay I will watch it this weekend. Regards Chris W

[Jeff Wexler]

+1 to John Blankenship doesn't do it justice --- what John has said needs be read very slowly and carefully by everyone interested in this topic. Specifically, pay special attention to the relationship between advancements in technology and the abysmal decline in discipline and set protocol in today's world and the ultimate affect on the quality of the soundtrack.

[old school]

+1 to John Blankenship doesn't do it justice --- what John has said needs be read very slowly and carefully by everyone interested in this topic. Specifically, pay special attention to the relationship between advancements in technology and the abysmal decline in discipline and set protocol in today's world and the ultimate affect on the quality of the soundtrack.

Another +1 to JB's post. 

For the sound class purpose's I think some history should be a part of the series, then onward to the state of todays production sound and post production sound. It seems like a hard task without some raw production tracks to play against some cleaned up dialog from post, and then the whole magilla with music and effects all mixed together. 

Best of luck.

CrewC

[Chris Woodcock]

God its only a 3 hour class with a talk and some practical not sure how I am going to fit all this in but some fantastic suggestions by everyone Regards Chris W

[Henchman]

" Adif something has oceans ADR, then that's due to a poor mix, poor performance, poor recording or all three. "

back to WaterWorld, like Apocalypse Now, a "special case"...

 well yes, the recordings were "poor", but there is a valid "why" to that, and the thorough and terrific post work earned a nomination.

 

yes, I believe there is a lot to be  learned from the older films, done with different equipment and skills than much of today's movies. 

The results the moviemakers achieved without wireless equipment, without comteks, and with the heavier mic's with limited frequency response and lower output, with all the bigger, heavier, single track equipment requiring more power, generating more heat and noise, and requiring more wiring, crew, and attention can teach us all loads about storytelling and moviemaking ...

Except again, this isn't about moviemaking or storytelling.

[Henchman]

I absolutely agree with John.

It is absolutely about the mixers onset.

I think one of the problems we have today, is the disadvantage of digital.

Just like there was a learning curve when music engineers switched to digital.

The magic of what analog tape does is gone.

Also, other issue is that back in the day, more stuff was done on closed sets.

I wish that more people were learning proper recording techniques on set.

I just mixed a film where the lavs were almost as good as the boom.

So, you add all the able up, and t's kind of pointless waxing on about the good old days.

Students need today's examples of good and bad. Using today's tools. Learning with today's pitfalls.

[Jay Rose]

The magic of what analog tape does is gone. 

 

Please explain. 

 

We definitely lost a lot of training opportunities and professionalism during the same time that sound switched from analog to digital, no argument there. 

 

But what magic did 1/4" tape do to production dialog? Or the multiple generations of analog mag in the same workflow?