Jump to content

split track mix.


Jatb51

Recommended Posts

hello, quick question, I'm working a couple of days pickups on a feature - have been told that the mix handed in for dailies is split tracks boom L, wires R,  isos to be recorded too. Just to clarify I mix as normal  - i.e. listen in mono and create a mix as if handing in a straight mono mix, and if I don't use wires then the wire track has nothing.. or is it expected that I'm delivering the wires no matter what on the wireless track even if  boom track best..? thanks for your help in advance.

Best

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, i don't see how we can answer the question of what your production expects. Every workflow is different, so you may want to ask the existing production mixer or their post supervisor, our whomever is recommending the split mix.

Boom on left, lavs on right, plus iso's sounds pretty clear though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a weird narrative workflow.

You best ask the mixer who did the rest of it.

If I were asked to do this, I'd first try to talk them out of it. It's difficult to monitor on set and neither mix track is a real mix, insuring everything will need to be remixed. If ISOs are being delivered, I don't get the need for split track mix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thats how I do 2 track too. Pretend, mix and listen as if you are doing mono but send Boom to the left and radios to the right. If you are fine with Boom only just have nothing on RM-mix or even disarm it. That's when you are pretty sure to not need any radios for a single line somewhere in the scene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

J51: " Just to clarify I mix as normal ..."

WHY are you asking us ??

first of all, we don't know what your "normal" is, and we also have no further clue as to what this production wants and expects... ASK THEM!

marc: " And I would assume... "

bad move,  I would assume nothing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a weird narrative workflow.

You best ask the mixer who did the rest of it.

If I were asked to do this, I'd first try to talk them out of it. It's difficult to monitor on set and neither mix track is a real mix, insuring everything will need to be remixed. If ISOs are being delivered, I don't get the need for split track mix.

You can save on post if done correctly.

 

                                 J.D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Us older "mixers" for earlier days became used to mixing a boom and several radio mikes to one track,

and when DAT came along we mixed to two tracks.

 

With wireless I would put the actor with the most dialogue one one track then mix the rest to the other track.

 

Nowadays with the pressure of time and perhaps lack of rehearsals mixing is made harder so I guess a good effort

mix to one or two tracks is OK if backed up by ISO tracks.

 

mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dialogue is already mixed---pick either boom or wireless mix---think "old school"

I don't quite get it.

Why would keeping the boom on one track, and everything else on another mix track, be an advantage over a properly done mono mix incorporating boom, plants, and lavs as needed? That's what I think is "old school".

 

I can only see the assistant editor thinking it was a stereo mix, panning the boom left and the lavs right, then calling the producer about the sound guy having f*ked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't quite get it.

Why would keeping the boom on one track, and everything else on another mix track, be an advantage over a properly done mono mix incorporating boom, plants, and lavs as needed? That's what I think is "old school".

 

I can only see the assistant editor thinking it was a stereo mix, panning the boom left and the lavs right, then calling the producer about the sound guy having f*ked up.

 

explain on sound report----yes, what you say can happen----the reason is we used to mix to one track but with the advent of stereo DAT machines,the use of two tracks makes it less dangerous and more usable-----the boom sometimes is just getting sound effects,like doing dialogue around a car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just finished the job and I thought it was pretty useful having the mix track split - I even split the booms with one getting sound effects and the other on dialogue when not using wires. I can see how on a smaller budget project it could be really useful and done well may save some time and money and give you more part of the final mix as oppose to someone remixing the isos. But having said that, if post is just going straight to the isos then perhaps not much point, you're really just mixing for dailies, and the editor - I favor the mono mix, but as always got to keep the client happy - whatever they want..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

j51: " I thought it was pretty useful having the mix track split "

so..?

and then "they" just do a hard L+R mix of your carefully split trax and..??

" whatever they want.. "

 

" give you more part of the final mix :blink:

getting good dialog the way "they" want it is my job,  and in (by) itself gives me plenty of a part of the final mix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

explain on sound report----yes, what you say can happen----the reason is we used to mix to one track but with the advent of stereo DAT machines,the use of two tracks makes it less dangerous and more usable-----the boom sometimes is just getting sound effects,like doing dialogue around a car.

 

IME those who actually read the report will also be smart enough to not frantically call a producer if they don't understand what's on which track. They will understand by reading the report, and if not, they will call the soundie first.

I can see the advantage of having a mix without boom in that "sound effects gathering" scenario when dialogue comes from lavs only. However this isn't the most common scenario in most shoots, and I certainly wouldn't sacrifice a well-established workflow for such an exception. We can - using isos anyway - safely leave the boom out of our location mix track in such a situation.

Can't imagine listening to a split mix with boom in my left ear and everything else in my right ear. So I'd sum to mono for the phones (and comteks, and camera hops, and video village link) anyway.

 

more part of the final mix as oppose to someone remixing the isos. But having said that, if post is just going straight to the isos then perhaps not much point, you're really just mixing for dailies, and the editor - I favor the mono mix, but as always got to keep the client happy - whatever they want..

 

One of the jobs I did last year specified they would only need the isos because they'd remix everything anyway, but if I wanted to, I could record the comtek mix. So I did mix+isos as usual.

What they used in the final mix was - of course - that "comtek" mix.

Turns out they had never before heard location sound that was actually mixed. At least they saw that the mix saved them lots of post work and money. It gets bad when a "producer" says, "anybody can wire the actors and hit record, why are you so expensive?".

 

Point is: client doesn't always know what makes them happy. I tend to ask twice if they require something non-standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IME those who actually read the report will also be smart enough to not frantically call a producer if they don't understand what's on which track. They will understand by reading the report, and if not, they will call the soundie first.

I can see the advantage of having a mix without boom in that "sound effects gathering" scenario when dialogue comes from lavs only. However this isn't the most common scenario in most shoots, and I certainly wouldn't sacrifice a well-established workflow for such an exception. We can - using isos anyway - safely leave the boom out of our location mix track in such a situation.

Can't imagine listening to a split mix with boom in my left ear and everything else in my right ear. So I'd sum to mono for the phones (and comteks, and camera hops, and video village link) anyway.

 

 

One of the jobs I did last year specified they would only need the isos because they'd remix everything anyway, but if I wanted to, I could record the comtek mix. So I did mix+isos as usual.

What they used in the final mix was - of course - that "comtek" mix.

Turns out they had never before heard location sound that was actually mixed. At least they saw that the mix saved them lots of post work and money. It gets bad when a "producer" says, "anybody can wire the actors and hit record, why are you so expensive?".

 

Point is: client doesn't always know what makes them happy. I tend to ask twice if they require something non-standard.

 

The difference between "new school" and "old school" is I look at isos as safety back-up trks.

 

                                                     J.D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

What doesn't seem to work in this splits mix scenario with the boom on one track and mixed wires on the other is that if the boom sounds good then most of us would NOT mix in the wires. So there would be nothing on the wire mix track for this. The iso's would still be there to use if needed but this wouldn't seem to me to be any faster.

 

Then say on another setup I mix the wires and a boom for a shot. The folks down the line still have no mono mix of the scene unless they sum the 2 mix tracks together which adds an extra step. Cumbersome, and more likely than not the dailies would have a hard pan of boom on one side and wire mix on the other.

 

I've never understood how the split mix helps more than a mix and iso's version ever could. No one has ever illustrated how it works better to me other than to say this is how I like it dating back to the DAT or beta cam era.

 

But... if that's what they want, that's what they get. Fortunately I haven't been asked to see something like this through so far.

 

Scott

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many times the boom is used to get FX and the wireless gets the dialogue, like shooting actors talking inside a car thru the windshield and then the car pulls away or door slams or ect.

 

                                                                                    J.D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well dudes, I get asked for that split on nearly every shoot, esp if I'm feeding 2 tracks of a camera in addition to recording isos.  Re having the splits be an extra step to sum to mono, it isn't an extra step, the editing system sums the two channels automatically or not as the editor pleases--it's no extra work or time at all.  Editors often appreciate having the boom/lav mix split when they are trying to bang together a quick version for approval, without having to mess with the isos at that point.  Later on they might dump the split mix and go to the isos for the finish, but they are often under huge time pressure to deliver temp cuts and often tell me the appreciate the flexibility the split gives them.

 

philp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...