Microphones in Feature Films

[studiomprd]

"I guess that time there were no proper sound equipment... "

you don't know enough to make a proper guess...

 

" So the sound would be definitely different maybe even more natural/raw, compare to what we hear now and probably with low bit rate as well... "

in this case, you don't know what you are talking about, either...

 

" In those days, what gear did they use, the same mics with tape recorders/analogue?

 

Did they also used 5-10 mics for different purposes or was it all done with one mic/416? "

 

are you pulling our (collective) chain ?

Edited May 6, 2013 by Jeff Wexler

[Marc Wielage]

Ok... once I got sound from lets say MKH-50, is there some way to improve the raw sound to something better in Adobe Audition 6 for example to achieve that Hollywood sound without going to a professional studio? 

 

There are no shortcuts beyond learning the technique and getting experience. Many books discussed in these previous discussions cover the techniques:

 

 

 

The 50 is a great mic -- I use them myself, along with the 40 and the 60 (and sometimes the 30 in M/S situations) -- but it's not always the right choice in certain environments. I find often, it's a case of treating the environment first, provided you have the time and money (and crew) able to do that. 

[Joshua Anderson]

 

The 50 is a great mic -- I use them myself, along with the 40 and the 60 (and sometimes the 30 in M/S situations) -- but it's not always the right choice in certain environments. I find often, it's a case of treating the environment first, provided you have the time and money (and crew) able to do that. 

For wide shots on a courtroom drama, I've mixed 1 or 2 Schoeps CMITs with 1 or 2 MKH-50s. The CMITs were my main mics, but I needed to use the 50s as visible black plant mics (much more realistic looking than a flashy blue tube on a judge's bench). I've also mixed Schoeps CMITs on 1 boom with CMC-41s on another boom because of a low ceiling or a doorway. These are common problems/solutions for us, but they demonstrate why our job titles are Production Sound Mixers, not just Sound Mixers.

 

Likewise, I've had scenes that were better served with a 416 because of the acoustics of the location. It's not my favorite mic, but it's my favorite mic in those locations. And so, sometimes our job title is also referred to as the Location Sound Mixer. 

 

And then you get outside, in the midst of traffic, and have to mix 8 people talking. Everyone gets wired, but with a mix of 2 or 3 different types of lav mics, chosen partly by how the mic will handle that actor's voice, but mostly by what that actor is wearing. Adding in the boom and you have 9 mics with 8 inputs to be mixed to 1 track and only 7 ISO's, so then you're hot swapping XLRs to free up channels and tracks. We still keep the job titles of Production Sound Mixer and Location Sound Mixer, but it feels more like you're the guy at the chair who people shouldn't bother while you try to keep your hair on your head. 

 

I just watched a scene I mixed from my last show that was just like this last example. Of course, in editing, a third of the lines were removed and the difficult transitions from one group of characters conversing to another group were removed and the scene plays like a much easier collection of shots. As a Production Mixer, we try to predict what is necessary and what will be used, but a lot happens once the footage and sound leaves our arena. 

 

Josh

[VASI]

Also Michel Chion - Le Son Au Cinema it's good book.

It's not technical book but you can get an idea about aesthetic (both music and sound).

[Joshua Anderson]

Michel Chion is great! I've only read Audio-Vision. Hard to find in print, impossible to find as ebooks.

[VASI]

Michel Chion is great! I've only read Audio-Vision. Hard to find in print, impossible to find as ebooks.

 

I think "Le Son Au Cinema" it's the "Audio-Vision" in English.

Maybe someone with French language can help us.

 

If we talk for the same book; change me a lot about music in cinema and the whole sound (dialogues, ambiences etc). Not technical but "behind the image". Why violins at this time? Why that sound from the voice (especially in drama genre films).. Help me a lot to understand many things. Great book

[studiomprd]

" The 50 is a great mic -- I use them myself, "

sometimes, for various reasons, even experienced Pros with Schoeps in their kits pulls out a low cost octava mic, and few, if any can tell by listening to the results...(It is that golfer vs. golf clubs thing!)

[Marc Wielage]

" The 50 is a great mic -- I use them myself, "

sometimes, for various reasons, even experienced Pros with Schoeps in their kits pulls out a low cost octava mic, and few, if any can tell by listening to the results...(It is that golfer vs. golf clubs thing!)

 

I confess I haven't used an Oktava except in a friend's studio about 8-9 years ago, and I should try to get one and see how it compares to the Schoeps and/or the MKH40. Wasn't there somebody selling hand-picked Oktava's that got more Q/C or something? My memory is that there was a lot of controversy between the original Russian mics and some almost-identical clones made in China.

[John Blankenship]

In my experience, an Oktava (cardioid version, the hyper is a tad duller) sounds just like a Schoeps -- until you use it in the real world, then there's no contest.

[Constantin]

In my experience, an Oktava (cardioid version, the hyper is a tad duller) sounds just like a Schoeps -- until you use it in the real world, then there's no contest.

That is so true. I used to try out mics by connecting them to a mixer, putting on headphones and then speaking into the mic. Frequently I thought, well this doesn't sound too bad. And it didn't. But then I learned that a mic must be tested on set in real conditions. The handling, off-axis response, reaction to moisture and so on are all important factors. And surprisingly enough the MK41 is supposed to suck at most of these. But still I smile when I take off my headphones on set after a good take. Because it sounds so sweet

[Constantin]

" The 50 is a great mic -- I use them myself, "

sometimes, for various reasons, even experienced Pros with Schoeps in their kits pulls out a low cost octava mic, and few, if any can tell by listening to the results...(It is that golfer vs. golf clubs thing!)

Sure, it's the golfer. Who here would disagree? But if your oft-mentioned Tiger Woods hits the hole, no-one cares about the tools. Nobody would say "wow, great shot, but I bet it would have been better with his more expensive clubs". It's different for us. Sure, we may be able to make something sound good with a cheapo mic, but to make it sound great, we need a great mic. Even if the audience won't know the difference.

Or to use a sports analogy, which you seem to prefer: you can drive fast with a Mercedes, but to win the race you need a Ferrari. (Insert your preferred car maker). And yes, you also need a highly skilled driver

[Benjamin Gandy]

Sure, it's the golfer. Who here would disagree? But if your oft-mentioned Tiger Woods hits the hole, no-one cares about the tools. Nobody would say "wow, great shot, but I bet it would have been better with his more expensive clubs". It's different for us. Sure, we may be able to make something sound good with a cheapo mic, but to make it sound great, we need a great mic. Even if the audience won't know the difference.

Or to use a sports analogy, which you seem to prefer: you can drive fast with a Mercedes, but to win the race you need a Ferrari. (Insert your preferred car maker). And yes, you also need a highly skilled driver

 

I agree, the quality of your recordings is ultimately limited by the quality of your equipment.

[Marc Wielage]

And then you get outside, in the midst of traffic, and have to mix 8 people talking. Everyone gets wired, but with a mix of 2 or 3 different types of lav mics, chosen partly by how the mic will handle that actor's voice, but mostly by what that actor is wearing. Adding in the boom and you have 9 mics with 8 inputs to be mixed to 1 track and only 7 ISO's, so then you're hot swapping XLRs to free up channels and tracks. We still keep the job titles of Production Sound Mixer and Location Sound Mixer, but it feels more like you're the guy at the chair who people shouldn't bother while you try to keep your hair on your head. 

 

Yep, been there, done that. I just spent all week post supering on a small film we shot last year on which I worked as the production sound mixer. It's a sobering thing to hear what works on the mix stage, what doesn't, what the re-recording mixer can fix, what they can't fix, and what the limitations of the tools are. They were extremely grateful that we had provided alt lines, boom pretty much 100% of the time, wild lines, and iso lavs all over the place. Everything got used in the end, and I think the end result was surprisingly good. 

 

I agree with Jeff above that the "close-up" sound phenomena is an out-of-control trend these days, but it's far worse on TV than it is in features. What's sobering is that the re-recording mixers, who are just as sensitive to this problem as anybody, can "room up" the lavs and take the curse off them quite a bit. It's not ideal, but in guerilla shooting conditions where they're trying to knock out 15 pages of dialogue in a day, and shooting multiple cameras, I don't have a better solution. 

 

My favorite fix of the movie: a car interior that combined a plant mic, wireless lavs, and a boom (used for wild lines), plus some ADR (done without my knowledge, for performance issues). The re-recording mixer had some convolution reverbs that did a remarkable job at providing that claustrophobic "car interior sound" with minimal muss and fuss, and it made the scene that much more real. He laughed when I told him we still want the plug-in for "Digital Performance Improvement Filter." 

[Todd Weaver]

One of the many ways that the boring reality of economics crash the party. I suppose the good side is that noise reduction programs are getting pretty good nowadays (at least for some things). I'm very excited about the stuff that will be available ten years from now.

PeterE, I've actually seen the free noise reduction software that comes with the free Audacity actually work rather well for removing mild to moderate constant background noise. Download a copy of that software and play with your tracks a bit. The software will allow you to edit, eq, compress, NR, etc... Maybe get closer to the 'Cinema Sound' from your raw audio. Yes I did say free.

[Todd Weaver]

" The 50 is a great mic -- I use them myself, "

sometimes, for various reasons, even experienced Pros with Schoeps in their kits pulls out a low cost octava mic, and few, if any can tell by listening to the results...(It is that golfer vs. golf clubs thing!)

It is probably more of a burger flipper vs. spatula thing.