the words we use

[Jeff Wexler]

This is in reply to statements made in another thread

This nomenclature was discussed earlier in another thread.  We are transitioning our technology and I feel that there's a need to adapt the way we describe what we're doing.  We all seem to agree that we are recording on "file based" machines, and those files are held in "folders."  But some still call them "sound rolls" that contain "tracks." 

Evolution takes time I guess.

Cheers,

RVD

Even though I consider myself very much an insider with regards to most of this technology, I think I am an outsider with a minority opinion on the subject of nomenclature.

Firstly, I maintain that there is nothing wrong with continuing the use of the term "sound roll" and the use of the term "track", no matter how we are actually accomplishing our recordings. If we just through out the use of the word "track" it would make it very difficult to understand and talk about the differences in file formats, like monophonic files and polyphonic files, without recognizing that it is just a new way of recording tracks.

I am VERY interested in all of the ways we talk about what we do and how we do it. For example, I have very conflicting feelings when referring to working on a "film" when in fact there may be NO film involved in any part of the process. So, I have taken to consciously trying to use the word "movie"  instead of film because the word "movie" I think will have a longer life in our daily language even when there is no film. When I got my first TiVO unit at home, both my wife and I continued to say things like "did you TAPE that show?" even though there was no tape involved. We now say "was that show recorded" which accomodates, technically, the TiVO's use of hard drive based "tapelesss" recording. Of course we also say "let's TiVO that show" so what does that say about the new technology?

I have more to say about this later.

-  Jeff Wexler

[John Blankenship]

We should have no fear of hanging onto established terminology.  After all, language is about communication.  If always being literally correct were the requirement, most human interaction would quickly break down -- except for sex, of course.

If another department takes you to task for your terminology, keep in mind how often you hear camera people refer to CinemaScope as having an aspect ratio of 2.35:1 when, in fact, the format was modified to 2.40:1 by the SMPTE in the early seventies (to help hide splices).

John Blankenship, C.A.S.

Indianapolis (Super Bowl Champions!)

[old school]

Hey Jeff n John n all posters, I can't find anything I don't agree with in your posts, but for me, I enjoy making up my own terms and slang for the gear we use and how we use it. It makes it fun and evolving for me to riff about what we are doing. All the great Boom ops I've had the pleasure to work with, and I always develope a slang type shorthand for what we are doing, and the gear we are using in our quest to do a scene. I can speak geek and I can speak slang with the best of them, but for me it's all good as long as you understand what I'm saying. Evolution in all things is the natural order of life and all it's funk, so file/trk., roll/folder, or whatever we call them today, will change with time, and so should we. I think this is a good thread and I hope many others put their 2 cents in.

Inagadadavida honey.

CrewC

[miker71]

Hmmmm, I don't have much problem calling a sound file a track or a BWF or a dialogue recording or a wild/buzz track. I tend to say track or take a lot more than file though. I can't remember the last time I said sound roll instead of folder or CF or disk (although the heading is sound roll on my report). I establish naming conventions with the production early on, just as I establish on-set protocol first thing. The language I use (outside of expletives!) isn't something I think about too often ...

[gpiegari]

How many of you still like an AD to call "roll sound" and wait for you to say

"sound speed" even when it's a single aspect video job?

It's necessary protocol that communicates readiness.  It's what we're used to

and it works. 

And now for a tangent:

The biggest difference I see is with the term sound roll.

I'm remembering my linear documentary days when "sound roll"

meant something: It was a roll of tape that was everything

the machine had recorded, in order.  It was a volume of known size

and was a physical reference; and a static archive.

When someone said sound roll four, we were talking about the same thing.

Obviously, the sound log or report was very important.

Sometimes a knowledge of that linear 'archive' was more helpful than my

notes to find sound I was looking for later. 

(These were the days of 16mm docs and I would be syncing my

sound on a flatbed).

Now we produce files that can easily be organized into folders

for a scene, a days work, and project title. 

Each file has a unique name, a take number and the tremendous benefit

of metadata.

When I burn a disk (sound roll?),  I may be making several versions,

not just copies.  One for transfer with a single track of camera takes,

one for post with everything, one of just interviews for transcription, etc.

Each of these are named accordingly and contain sound reports.

Glen P.

[studiomprd]

I'm with Jeff on the term "movie"!!

I deliberately use it, especially with my classes, as I am a bit put-off by students, and others, who make video's and call them their "Feature Film".(usually to make them sound more significant!)

BTW, I also emphasize "Feature Length" as the proper term, unless and until it is actually "featured" beyond the cast and crew screening!

and also, BTW, there are far too many video movie-makers calling "roll sound" who have no idea why!

[Jeff Wexler]

I'm not saying either is right or wrong, and I frequently find myself speaking in terms that I feel the majority in the conversation will understand.  While speaking to upms, or producers I usually speak in the more traditional terms...

Excuse me now while I evolve a little more before my next posting.

Cheers,

RVD

Good observation. Not that it happens very often these days but certainly I would call out to an AD "Sound's re-loading" even though what I am really doing is going to another partition or folder. On my present job, the AD always calls out to Video Assist: "tape this rehearsal" even though there is no tape whatsoever on the video cart.

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

[ptalsky]

Jeff, think of the confusion you would cause if you called out "Sound's moving to a new partition" or "Sound's moving to a new folder" instead.  Might be fun to do sometime, just to see how people react.  :-O  (Presumably, Video Assist will get it.)

Phil

[taylormadeaudio]

Instead of, "Sound speed..." we could say, "Acquiring..." though it would probably illicit blank stares from all but the sharpest of crew members. 

Personally I'd like to implement a light-based system (kinda like a bell-and-light circut)... but one that uses high powered lasers and mirrors -- it would temporarily light up the set... much like the Pink Floyd laser shows we used to watch at Griffith Park...to alert the rest of the crew that we were using up our precious ones and zeros.  The camera department would (naturally) get really nervous... momentarily... as a result of the rogue light elements invading the set -- it might make a few actors nervous as well (something about the possibility of... light poisoning... or blindness...)  The 1st AD would flashback and possibly go into seizures... laser pens might be an inexpensive solution, though would still require mirrors if not line-of-sight.

Seriously, other than the occaisional boom dip or mis-concealed lav mic, when do we ever really get to invade that section of the electromagnetic spectrum like they invade our airspace... with their creeky dolly moves and noisy mags?

Sorry, I'm a dork.

[BVS]

Many years ago when I was younger and less aware of what happens on set,I was recording a dramatised sequence in Greece with a largely Greek crew.I had been calling "Speed"  on turnover for a while when the Greek camera assistant said 'Why don't you call what we use for a change".

So he told me the words"Traaki o ehos" or words to that effect.I thought yeah that sounds a possibility- "traaki" could mean "tracking".So on the next turnover I call out"TRAAKI O EHOS" in a loud voice.The Greek female 1st AD falls about laughing as did the rest of the Greek crew.It was some time before order was restored and we shot the scene.Some years later I was relaying the story to someone who spoke Greek and he said I'm not to sure about your pronunciation but basically it means "I've got a small dick".

[taylormadeaudio]

That's a bummer they never told you what it meant.  I love a good joke even if it's on me, as long as they let me in on it at some point.  Too funny!  : )

[Arnold F.]

Strange, I've been yelling out "I've got a small dick" since I started production and no one's said anything.

Track still seems like an indispensable word to me.  My 702T records two tracks.

What irks me is the perception, and some older people with more experience may correct me, that camera now says speeding when it used to say rolling.  I thought cameras rolled and recorders sped.  A DP told me I confused him and the AC's when I said just speed instead of sound speed.

Arnold

[John Blankenship]

He was confused because he didn't know if it was you or the voices in his head.

JB