BAB414 Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 Hello, Did a scene today with a practical SM58. Didn't amplify it to the room through the speaker until take 3. My question is, how easy is it to fake the speaker sound in post and make it sound realistic? We also had a boom in the room far from the practical, picking up the distant perspective and then the speaker sound once it was powered on. Second question is, how easy is it to make it match the aesthetic we got once we started using the speaker? To make takes 1-2 match the rest. Thanks, Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacob Gustavsson Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 Recording sine sweep impulse responses of the speaker is usually a good solution. Keep the microphones in the room at their normal positions as during the takes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAB414 Posted January 29, 2020 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 Thanks Jacob. So play a sinusoidal sweep through the speaker with the mics in the same places and then post can analyze that recording vs the clean sweep, correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shastapete Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 They would turn that sine sweep (IR) into a convolution reverb and then that room/PA speaker would just be a patch in their reverb plugin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAB414 Posted January 29, 2020 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 5 hours ago, Shastapete said: They would turn that sine sweep (IR) into a convolution reverb and then that room/PA speaker would just be a patch in their reverb plugin Pete, are you saying that the speaker/PA effect is a standalone plugin or would they need that sweep as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constantin Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 3 hours ago, BAB414 said: Pete, are you saying that the speaker/PA effect is a standalone plugin or would they need that sweep as well? There is something like Speakerphone by AudioEase (or at least there used to be, it’s been a while). This can emulate all kinds of speakers, but also load Impulse responses of speakers. It works quite well and is very easy to do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Perkins Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 Answer to first question: easy, no problem. Actually you are doing the RRM a favor by not locking them into a particular reverb and letting them make one that works for how the scene will be mixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacob Gustavsson Posted January 29, 2020 Report Share Posted January 29, 2020 The recording of the sweep will have to be deconvolved in post, then it can be used as a reverb/filter in Altiverb, Reverberate or any other convolution reverb plugin. Here's some good info from AudioEase: https://www.audioease.com/altiverb/sampling.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAB414 Posted January 30, 2020 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2020 2 hours ago, Jacob Gustavsson said: The recording of the sweep will have to be deconvolved in post, then it can be used as a reverb/filter in Altiverb, Reverberate or any other convolution reverb plugin. Here's some good info from AudioEase: https://www.audioease.com/altiverb/sampling.php Got it. But does that carry the "voice" of the speaker in addition to the reverb? 2 hours ago, Philip Perkins said: Answer to first question: easy, no problem. Actually you are doing the RRM a favor by not locking them into a particular reverb and letting them make one that works for how the scene will be mixed. Thanks Phil. That was my old philosophy but I like making it live when the director is cool with it because it definitely does something to the performing actor and the people they're performing in front of, in a good way. And since we're using a dynamic mic, there is little to no bleed so it can be remixed ti taste with our 2 other mics in the room for reverb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Immoral Mr Teas Posted January 30, 2020 Report Share Posted January 30, 2020 3 hours ago, Philip Perkins said: Answer to first question: easy, no problem. Actually you are doing the RRM a favor by not locking them into a particular reverb and letting them make one that works for how the scene will be mixed. 53 minutes ago, BAB414 said: ... Thanks Phil. That was my old philosophy but I like making it live when the director is cool with it because it definitely does something to the performing actor and the people they're performing in front of, in a good way. And since we're using a dynamic mic, there is little to no bleed so it can be remixed ti taste with our 2 other mics in the room for reverb. I might suggest the question was wrong! It is certainly easier to record the practical mic (to multitrack) without on set amplification, from a post point of view. Aside from problems of matching between positions/cuts there is the high probability that the reverb chosen may be somewhat enhanced or stylised, at the very least to draw attention to it being 'different' to (the also enhanced...) ordinary dialogue, although extra stylisation is often decided upon. Adding such reverb to the 'compromised recording situation' resulting from on-set sound for picture and post has suddenly got many extra problems to deal with ... chances are they might resort to salvaging close dialogue from lavs or decide on adr in the worst circumstances. For such reasons any talk of sweeps for convolution reverbs become totally irrelevant. They won't help in repair or in creative choice of enhanced reverb for storytelling. (Where they do help is for the latter especially as reference since they might come up with something idiosyncratic yet realistic). Although if the director wants it then one has no choice but to do it. Then let post do their stuff! Having said all that when I worked in radio drama all the effects (including voices) were in fact routed back to set playback for the actors' benefit as you suggested. And it was this amplified sound which went into the mix, not a clean feed. But it was a controlled and consistent set: playback at correctly set volume over Rogers speakers; without the differences in perspective brought by positions or cuts one has in film; and crucially in a sound recording (rather than picture recording) environment that allowed this control. Jez Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacob Gustavsson Posted January 30, 2020 Report Share Posted January 30, 2020 11 hours ago, BAB414 said: Got it. But does that carry the "voice" of the speaker in addition to the reverb? Yes, the impulse response is not purely a reverb, it also contains the tonal characteristics. Sort of like an EQ. For instance; if you record a sweep through a telephone line, you'll get the frequency response of that setup. Hope that helps! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAB414 Posted January 30, 2020 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2020 6 hours ago, Jacob Gustavsson said: Yes, the impulse response is not purely a reverb, it also contains the tonal characteristics. Sort of like an EQ. For instance; if you record a sweep through a telephone line, you'll get the frequency response of that setup. Hope that helps! Excellent. That's exactly what I wanted to hear. I took the advice and did the sweep yesterday. Very excited to see what post does with it. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.