Jump to content

Old/New school


Guest Mick

Recommended Posts

I haven't been in the film biz as long as some of you but I'm old school enough to remember mono Nagras being the cutting edge and VHF the latest in wireless. I used to own Vega and Micron systems until Lectro came out with their VHF quad box, but I'm "new school" enough to really appreciate non linear technology, UHF wireless and the envelope pushing that Zaxcom has done for our industry along with using monitors for cueing and just for the heck of being able to "record to picture". I don't lament the passing of old tried and true technology and I adopt and endorse any new advances that allow us to keep abreast of the times. The only "old school" aspect of the job I miss is the assumption that we will be given the time and opportunity to provide the best sound possible without having to compromise because of the location scout's indifference to the major freeway next to the location of a three page dialogue scene and similar stuff like that, but even then I adapt, assimilate and most of the time, come through. The biz is changing and some would say not for the better. On some levels I agree, but for the most part I like what I see on the horizon and enjoy learning new stuff about the "workflow" from me to post. It's an ever changing job, especially with the advent of HD video which continues to improve and will, I think, inevitably challenge film both in TV and projection situations, thus rendering the dual recording system less valid than it once was. I'll probably be retired before any of this and.....snore...where was I?

Love this biz and this forum.

Regards

Mick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

very nice post mick :) im in the new school, 26 years old and a huge fan of technology and its implications in the film industry and everything else in our lives for that matter. the problem with the incredibly fast world of technological improvements is the long-term value to cost ratio. there's a new "so-or-so" released every year that raises the bar and demands another chunk of you change, should you wish to be along for the ride of course. but what really matters to this type of industry are the BIG improvements - the ones that tell us "Hey, I'm changing things!" don't be impressed by a "new and improved" version of an old technology - invention should always be at the forefront.

i have much respect for Zaxcom, Sound Devices, Sonosax and all the other companies out there paving the way with form, function, quality and innovation first in mind. sometimes it seems like that update to your recorder's firmware is sooooo far off in the distance... but looking back, it happened far quicker than you thought possible. things are extremely fast right now, and may never slow down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't lament the passing of old tried and true technology and I adopt and endorse any new advances that allow us to keep abreast of the times. The only "old school" aspect of the job I miss is the assumption that we will be given the time and opportunity to provide the best sound possible without having to compromise because of the location scout's indifference to the major freeway next to the location of a three page dialogue scene and similar stuff like that, but even then I adapt, assimilate and most of the time, come through. The biz is changing and some would say not for the better.Regards

Mick

Thank you, thank you, thank you! You have summed up much of my feeling about our "business" and I right with you regarding the attitudes towards new stuff vs. old stuff and so forth. The saddest thing in my mind is that we can always choose to use certain equipment, we know for sure that the march of technology (driven by unbridled capitalism amongst other factors) will produce all sorts of new dazzling equipment. Once the human and social elements have been so seriously altered, the discipline, the procedures, even the simple respect for a fellow worker, then we find ourselves in many of the situations we see today. I think Mick you have been better at adapting to these changes than I have been. Next year I will try harder...  or maybe just retire, either voluntarily or by virtue of just not being offered a job because I am not able to work this "new" way.

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I don't belive that for a second Jeff! About the retiring or the lack of job opportunities. A man with your resume and work ethic will always be at the top of the consideration list even when the young "dogs" in charge think that anyone over thirty is "past it" I had a discussion with a colleague the other day about the relative merits of youth versus experience and surmised that sound mixing has a large contingent of still working "over fifties" who bring a wealth of hard won talent to the business and contribute many an unsung rescue to sound and occasionally camera issues, not to mention the myriad of script discrepancies that we seem to cure. Personally I hope to work until pine box time if my health permits and I'm glad that a job like this has the potential to allow that to happen.

Regards

Mick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got to listen in on a conversation Michael Evje (a now retired sound mixer) had with someone about how he recorded some of the courtroom etc scenes in "Tucker", and how he had carefully constructed an ambience that he felt was important to the drama.  I remember those scenes sounding great-- very natural but still very clear.  I also thought that that sound is very much out of fashion today, as much because it's easier to ignore what it takes to do scenes that way (like a quiet set) as an aesthetic choice.  I'm mixing a TV special (in post) right now--low-budg with a lot of fuzzy-focus "recreations".  Cheesey TV fare to be sure, but the director and sound guy went to a lot of trouble to record scenes that didn't have dialog and get their set quiet enough that we can use a lot of this unique location sound almost as is, instead of generic CD fx which is all we have time for.  So there ARE still people who want to work the old way--just so many anymore.

Philip Perkins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quoted from Mick: "The only "old school" aspect of the job I miss is the assumption that we will be given the time and opportunity to provide the best sound possible without having to compromise because of the location scout's indifference to the major freeway next to the location of a three page dialogue scene and similar stuff like that, ..."

As a serious question, what does this have to do with technological developments or, to refer to Mr. Wexler's comments in another thread, with recording on CDs rather than certain brands of tape?

As a guy who is doing small projects with digital gear that is reasonably up to date, and who has built and uses old-style gear (eg. tube amplifiers), I don't see how technological advances lead inevitably to slipshod/compromised work. If that is happening, I can think of other reasons, but technology isn't one of them.

There is one caveat to what I am saying. I am inclined to think that expensive media results in good planning, that cheap media results in bad planning, that bad planning results in bad product and that if enough bad product is broadcast, it becomes the norm/expectation. On the question of expectation, it is kind of interesting that High Definition television is proving to be a hard sell.

On the other hand, some extraordinary films have been made using cheap media (which has always been the case, whether one is talking about 16mm, or 35mm shot with sound added or video - indeed, I'd say that in the last few years, most of the good films that I've seen were shot cheap, and that the quality of professional product coming out of Hollywood and Toronto, etc. has been progressively deteriorating).

Maybe there are two issues: (a) the fact that we are going through a period of feature films, at least in North America, that lack imagination and (B) the perception, at least on this forum, that there is a declining respect for craftsmanship. If these are real phenomena, my bet is that technology is not the real cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got to listen in on a conversation Michael Evje (a now retired sound mixer) had with someone about how he recorded some of the courtroom etc scenes in "Tucker", and how he had carefully constructed an ambience that he felt was important to the drama.

Philip Perkins

Michael Evje was very serious avbout the work that he did and was fortunate to have been in the business when there were still many people making movies who valued his sort of sensibilities and commitment. When you say "carefully constructed an ambience" for the courtroom scenes, it should be pointed out that most of the really good sound people always strived for this "construction" or "design" (with a small "d") for the sound of a scene ands this included many factors, not just the dialog. It was also back in the time when sound editors were just that --- people with amazing skill and sesne to enhance the sound for a scene to help establish character, place and story. So often now, sound editors have their hands full doing extensive reparative and corrective work to the production track with little time left to do much else. Often the job is to "save" the production sound (even when it should not be saved) and unfortunately the intrinsic value of the production sound recordings has been lost way earlier in the project for all the reasons we have talked about here.

Michael finally left the movie business because it became less and less satisfying and more and more of a no win situation to carry on trying to do the creative work he wanted to do --- you can't do it alone and if you have no allies, not even the director in many cases, it is very tough to just tough it out and do the job.

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So often now, sound editors have their hands full doing extensive reparative and corrective work to the production track with little time left to do much else. Often the job is to "save" the production sound (even when it should not be saved) and unfortunately the intrinsic value of the production sound recordings has been lost way earlier in the project for all the reasons we have talked about here.

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

Exactamente.  Often my post audio work seems to be "bulk dialog cleaning".  I have two indie features on offer right now that have ridiculous production sound, and pretty good pictures.  What does that say?  Of course the other thing that feature sound editors have to contend with these days is constant changes and updates right thru the mix.  There is no such thing as a locked picture anymore, and on many films nearly 50% of sound editorial time is spent conforming new cuts.

Philip Perkins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a guy who is doing small projects with digital gear that is reasonably up to date, and who has built and uses old-style gear (eg. tube amplifiers), I don't see how technological advances lead inevitably to slipshod/compromised work. If that is happening, I can think of other reasons, but technology isn't one of them.

Redge, where's the connection? I get the impression that you think I blame tech developments for the decline in respect for our job, which is not the case. My job is made easier and I can achieve a better product with superior tools. It's the human aspect that has changed as it inevitably will in any metier that relies on human judgement, opinion and decision. In the so called "old days" when the quality of the final product was the sum of the quality parts from which it was comprised, different criteria influenced the outcome. Money was and always will be an issue, but  the application of budgetary necessity has evolved into something ugly in today's T.V.(and film) world. I agree that there are exceptions being made by the indies and more power to them, but even they sometimes get caught up in the commercial, money hungry, instant gratification mainstream and then become what they so often decried in the first place. Times change and so must we. I have no problem with the way things are, other than the minor gripes I mentioned earlier, but I am experienced enough to have seen major changes and developments in our end of the biz and some I like and adapt to and some I don't but adapt to them anyway.

I never meant to give the impression that I resent technology for any of the beefs I have with the state of this business. I embrace every new advance that emerges and use it if it is to my advantage, That doesn't stop me from lamenting the passing of certain aspects of the job which I enjoyed in the past and still miss.

Good luck mate,

Regards

Mick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope that via this forum (and others like it) the "old school" will be willing to share enough advice and the "new school" will be humble enough to listen (and ask the right questions) that our standards will only continue to rise -- I know it sometimes seems the battle is unwinable -- apathetic directors and/or producers... the aforementioned location scout (probably my biggest bitch)... the overwhelming (and growing) percentage of people in the industry that actually think 'fix it in post' can be applied to any circumstance across the board... if we do want to maintain our standards we absolutely have to communicate -- with each other, with editors, producers, directors... take any opportunity we can to educate ourselves and others about our craft.

We might not always agree, we might not always understand each other, we may use different technology to achieve our goals, but our common denominator should speak for itself.  I want to get the best production sound possible -- I'll never stop learning, probably never have enough gear... probably never be 100% satisfied with any given job... but I do know for certain that since I found this forum (and others like it) my game has improved.  Thank you Jeff.  BTW, I would set my cart aside (brand new CS208 included) and pick up a boom for you anytime.  Like Mick said -- your reputation speaks for itself.  Our standards are high because of guys like you.  We have a lot to live up to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could I ask, what does it say?

I think it says that the filmmakers don't understand the sound aspects of filmmaking either because they never have been taught or don't think they are important.  In these cases I'm just talking about production dialog only--nothing extra, but their dialog is distractingly bad in many ways, often at the same time.  I wonder if someone was even wearing headphones during some of the recordings.  They do not want to ADR--the actors aren't available even if they did.  In some cases it is obvious from the pictures that something simple could have been done that would have saved the production sound for a scene--as simple say as using a zepplin on a boom mic outdoors, or not recording closeups with radically different mic placement or choice than that used in the master.  We can fix a lot of these things in post, but to my ears the results are never as interesting or germane to the drama as the original production sound, and, having made these many fixes, we've spent a lot of time that is now not available for making the film better--longer mix, more considered sound design etc..

Philip Perkins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mick,

Sorry, I wasn't criticizing your post. On the contrary, I was using it as a counterpoint to some other posts lately that seem to raise the question about whether technological advances are a contributing factor to the undermining of professionalism/quality. It is an interesting question, that goes beyond the immediate focus of this thread, on which I expressed a view with which others may disagree. In fact, I think that the part of your post that I quoted pretty much hits the nail on the head. I should have expressed myself more clearly. Again, sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Redge, no offense taken whatsoever. As has been said before the intent behind some of these posts is always obscured because of the absence of facial expressions and voice intonality which would accompany a face to face conversation. Your point is well taken and appreciated.

Regards

Mick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am excited to be part of this group.  I have worked as utility sound for the last few years, and booming too, and agree there has been a steady decline in respect (and pay) for the sound department as a skilled crew.  It seems that with compressed schedules comes the attitude that production sound needs to be just good enough.  But i LOVED working with both the OLD and the NEW school guys.  I learned so much just listening and watching and discussing.  But what I learned the most is that no matter how little time or respect we feel we are given, that we must continue to always do our BEST.

Now that I am mixing, I have taken the lessons I have learned from people I have worked with for years and people with whom I was fortunate to work just one day.  Thank you to those of you who have shared their wisdom with me, and I hope to learn more as I work and as I read posts and talk to other mixers

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...