Sitcom recording? PLZ HELP!

[BIGBANGBUZZ]

Originally Posted by mini jack

!
Also, it looks like I will be able to make use of the Digidesign deal that is currently on, before they are done with cutting. I can trade my 003 for an HD system,

I wouldn't bother upgrading unless your at least going HD2.
I seem to run into less track issues on my LE DV Toolkit system than my HD1.

[mini jack]

Originally Posted by Jfriah

Tried the plugin today. I must admit: same thing could be done with gating/expansion/volume automation around dia but...for the time factor?


Saved my bacon today. (DEMO)

Jeff

of course, I don't want the clients finding out we corrected some more of their crap audio. Because..... "hey, they can 'fix' that"

Yeah I aggree, if you push it too far it sounds no different than just another Gate. But it is easy and the demo is 14 days, which is just enough to get the job done, so why not :P

[madtheory]

Originally Posted by jjb

Shotguns may employ hyper / super capsules but their response is modified by the interference tube design. As a result, shotguns pick up reflections from the space in strange ways and can sound unnatural. There are exceptions, and it depends on the space, but in general a hyper is a better bet inside.

AFAIK it's the interference tube (or the object containing the capsule) that creates the pickup pattern, not the capsule itself. A naked capsule is omni directional.

Directional Microphones

If the room reflections sound bad, they should be treated. A hypercardioid might "hear" better sounding reflections compared to some shotgun mics, but at the expense of speech intelligibility.

[jjb]

The tube design doesn't do a ton with lower frequencies, so a directional capsule is employed. You'll see some manufacturers will label their pattern as "supercardiod/lobe" or similar.

An example is the Neumann KMR81i, a short gun. At lower frequencies, the polar pattern is supercardiod and as you move up the frequency spectrum, the pattern is modified by the tube design to a tighter, lobar pattern.
See: Georg Neumann GmbH - Products/Current Microphones/KMR 81 i/Technical Data
There's a popup that lets you pick your frequency and see the polar pattern ("Interactive view of diagrams") above the specs.

In a longer gun, you've got a longer tube, and the frequency at which the tube starts really impacting the response is lower as a result, giving you that extra directionality.
see: Georg Neumann GmbH - Products/Current Microphones/KMR 82 i/Technical Data

They've also got a great book on mic design: Georg Neumann GmbH - Company/Publications/Basics of Microphone Technology

[madtheory]

Great! Clearly I need that book . Sorry to harp on about it but... cardioid mics are omni at LF... so I still don't understand what you mean. Perhaps it's a problem of semantics? Is a "capsule" actually a "diaphragm" that's been put into a container that creates interference to give it "directionality"?

[jjb]

Diaphragm(s) in the capsule, sorry if my semantics are all off.

[minister]

Originally Posted by madtheory

If the room reflections sound bad, they should be treated. A hypercardioid might "hear" better sounding reflections compared to some shotgun mics, but at the expense of speech intelligibility.

A shotgun works by putting directional capsule in the tube and then partially cancelling any sound energy from the sides by means of its interference tube design. In a reverberant indoor space, the sound coming from the sides are reflections of the very voice you are trying to capture which "confuses" the microphone and you get that harsh shotgun sound. Yes, the pickup pattern is narrower in the upper bands, but a shotgun is the wrong mic for an interior dialogue scene in a reverberant room.

A smaller directional mic with smother off-axis response, like a Supercardioid, is a better choice over a shotgun . You can also often get closer to the subject, certainly closer than the recommended distance for many shotguns.

[madtheory]

Thanks!

Originally Posted by jjb

Diaphragm(s) in the capsule, sorry if my semantics are all off.

Nope, it's mine that are "off"!

[mini jack]

Hi all, yes the noobs back!

Little less nooby, but never the less, still a noob

It will be almost a year since I started this thread and begun recording, in total panic, wow, don't know what I would have done without GS help! I don't write often but I do read a lot!

Anyhow, just wanted to update in case anyone might care, and also ask more questions, or you can just skip to the end as well

After that sitcom, I was on about at the beginning of the thread (which never got sold by the way, but made way for many more jobs after) I spent all year recording and in post, did some commercials, most of them boring smalltime local brands and a few big international brands. I have been shouted at, ripped off, insulted, forgotten at the site, hurt my back carrying gear (offline for a week), and even got my work sabotaged, yes sabotaged! Idiot video editor decided he would just "add more sounds to the ending" of the commercial I finished and finally went home, after days of sleep depravation. He thought, hey whats the big deal, how hard can it be right, it is just sound after all and I am a VIDEO editor!? Wrong! The commercial was aired the next day with a lip synch error(!!), and has been up circulating like that everyday since, my blood boils every time I see it, so embarrassing.

Anyhow it's all experience and I do not care and fortunately hold a pretty thick skin I dont know how I will ever get into cinema by keep doing commercials, but I have to survive to soo nothing much I can do about it at this moment.

Sorry about the emo gibberish, back to the real issue now.

In 10 days I have to shoot a 4 episode web series for a major international brand. It is the most important job I got so far and the expectations are much higher.

I am unfortunately still on my MBPro and 003 yes lame, but with the addition of an Audient preamp, Euphonix MC Control, Sonnox plugins and hopefully some mics, which is what I want to ask about. After this job, I will hopefully be able to upgrade to a real recorder. I have been investing more on my home studio until now, because post is what I really want to do, but can't seem to get away from recording either!

Basically I want to be able to get the best sound possible for this particular job and I have a small pre-budget to spend on mics as well this time, as opposed to before when I had to just "make do" with whatever I could get my hands on, or was given.

We have 4 talents to record and it is set in a (yes again) large depot that has been turned into a set, with very high ceilings. I have got them to divide the place as much as possible with huge curtains to minimize the reverberation, it is still there but not nearly as bad. There is the occasional city noise, planes, mosques (very annoying), kids (even more annoying). The talent will also be fixed for each scene, so they dont move around the place too much.

What kind of micing would you recommend? I can rent 2 Senheisser lavs and will buy 2 more. I also have a Rhode NT1A (never used it before) and have access to a Boom mic. What would be the best possible option for this scenario?

What I had trouble with before, was that when there are more than 2-3 people it gets pretty hard to follow them with 1 boom, so maybe 2 booms and lavs for everybody? Also, is the Rhode worth setting up in the front for an overall wide angle, or is that plain stupid? As I do the post as well I always found that the Boom captures way too much ambiance and the Lavs are somewhat "muffled", layer them both with some noise suppression is OK, people are satisfied, but not exactly the quality I could be proud of myself. Is there another option where I could get something in between?

Thanks in advance and sorry about the huge post and the numerous questions, I hope someone can help

[Jfriah]

Originally Posted by mini jack

reverberation, it is still there but not nearly as bad. There is the occasional city noise, planes, mosques (very annoying), kids (even more annoying). ......is the Rhode worth setting up in the front for an overall wide angle, or is that plain stupid? As I do the post as well I always found that the Boom captures way too much ambiance and the Lavs are somewhat "muffled",

You pretty much answered your own question there. You found boom captures too much ambience and are wondering about setting it up for a 'wide angle' in the front? Don't do it.

Use lavs in your situation and if talent is static, get in there as tightly out of frame with your boom as you can. Better to have options.

Good luck.

Jeff

[mini jack]

Originally Posted by Jfriah

You pretty much answered your own question there. You found boom captures too much ambience and are wondering about setting it up for a 'wide angle' in the front? Don't do it.

Use lavs in your situation and if talent is static, get in there as tightly out of frame with your boom as you can. Better to have options.

Good luck.

Jeff

Hey Jfriah!

You are right, I was just under the impression that maybe too much ambiance comes when you cannot get too close with a boom, otherwise the talents voice seems to mask the ambient noise. Also I found it pretty hard to record too many people with a boom.

How do you go about recording large number of people? Do you increase the number of booms?

Thanks

[Jfriah]

Oh trust me... a recent project simply couldn't get in many shots with a boom. I stopped calling it 'boom mic' and called it 'room mic'

Well, yes, getting in as close as you can and having talent speak at a decent level is helpful for a boom (and trust me, I've also had many roomy lav recordings... mixer gained up the mic channel to try to compensate for quiet-talking actor and there you go).

As for recording multiple people-- I'd think of it this way: who is speaking at one time? How is it being shot? Do you have, say, 3-4 people in a 'scene' and they take turns talking? Do they all stand around in the camera frame while the one person talks, then the next talks? Does the camera pan or push in to each person speaking? Is it going to be CUT as it goes from one person to the next? If yes to this latter--there's your answer. Record it in segments and edit it later.

If not, do your best. Get 'in the vicinity' with the boom mic and you may have to follow the conversation a bit (careful: mixers and editors dislike 'fading up/moving in' mid-line). Otherwise, you're either recording multiple lav mics to multiple channels or mixing together (careful!).

Jeff

[mini jack]

Thanks Jfriah, I will keep all these in mind!

Good news is, I have been given access to a 788T, yeah!

Also need some wireless mics, been renting Sennheiser ew 122-p G3's until now, but am now able to buy some, so do you have any recommendations?

Can't really afford to pay more than about 1.5K for a pair, I guess that narrows it down to very little options.

What do you think?

Cheers

[pkautzsch]

Yeah, booming more than 2 people is an art. Well, actually, a craft. You can learn it, but it takes time. And you better concentrate fully on working the boom! That's why a sound department usually has at least 2 people.
BTW a good boom and shockmount helps a lot.

4 talents would, today, usually mean: 4 lavs + 1 boom. Muffled lavs are way better than rustling lavs. A little EQ (or a little more EQ) helps. Often one can hide them in a way the capsule just peeks out behind a button or in a tie knot. This works best with Sanken COS-3 due to their shape. If you know the script (and if talents stick to the script) it is possible to mix all lavs to one track, that's how they did it before portable multitrack recorders were available.

If you need really good wireless kits, it's Lectrosonics, Zaxcom, Audio Developments, in no specific order. But you're in with $ 1,500 for about one transmitter. Depending on where, how long and how heavily you intend to use them, the cheaper stuff can work too. Pitfalls are RF frequency choice (interference with other transmitters in busier places), self-noise, durability, diversity. I don't particularly like the Sennheiser EW stuff for the last three reasons, plus - any ENG team has them, so chances are high I don't like them for the first reason as well.

[pmx]

i'm not working in production sound except for the odd job, but i must say this thread it a GREAT read for everyone who thinks the music bizz is a tough job. it's not.

sticky!

[PostFade]

Although they are something of a dying breed now 'sitcoms' have been one of the mainstays of UK TV almost since it started.
The process was the same throughout the BBC and ITV companies and on to the 'independent' production companies that appeared in the 80's.
Perhaps you'll let me explain the UK 'production method'.

It assumes a TV studio, say with 4 or 5 pedestal mounted video cameras and proper control rooms for production ('The Production Gallery'-Producer, Director, Vision Mixer and 'PA'), sound ('Sound Gallery'-sound mixer and 'grams operator') and vision ('Vision Gallery'- Lighting Director and Lighting Console Operator and a couple of 'racks engineers' tweaking camera exposure etc).
The show is recorded virtually 'as live' infront of a studio audience and every shot is scripted.

You start with that bare script and during the rehearsals the director decides on his camera shots and notates them against the dialogue and action in the script.
So for instance he'll start a scene on a wide 'establishing' shot and then make cut ins to individual mid-shots or close-ups during the dialogue. He may have 4 or more video cameras on the show, but perhaps be using say 3 on any particular scene.
The next step, after the actors have been through say three days of 'rehearsals' is to bring them into the studio and there will might be a day of 'pre-records' during which you tape any 'sets' that can't be placed directly infront of the studio audience or which perhaps present some difficulty for the 'live show'.
Normally however during one long day the director runs through his script with the PA calling the 'shots' and the camera and sound guys (and gals!) getting to rehearse all the shots assigned to them in sequence.

Sound is always handled by 'studio booms'. These will be the big Fisher studio booms and will often have either Neumann U-87, Sennheiser 416 or perhaps an AKG mic on them...depends on the 'house style' and the likes of the 'sound supervisor' (mixer) on the show. Mics are cardiod or short shotguns. Too directional and the boom ops will have trouble with coverage in fact.

Everyone of course is listening on headsets to 'talkback'.
That's the PA calling the shot numbers ('96 on canera 3'), the director adding details ('tighten please camera 3) and occasionally the vision mixer butting in ('lift the boom...coming to camera 4'). The sound boom ops also hear the sound mixer over the top of that ('bit off mic John ...can you get any closer on shot 96').

The booms work very, very tightly to the cuts, reading off the script placed infront of them on a small 'script rack'. So a wide-shot requires the cameramen to keep to a 'known framing' that just avoids the boom, but the moment the cut to the mid-shot occurs...the boom dives down to give a mid-shot coverage. 2 booms may share dialogue where necessary, but the mixer needs to beware of phasing so lines are assigned to separate booms.('boom A..can you take Pauls entry..then I'll go to boom B').

It takes some years of experience with a Fisher boom to get really good at operating so that the final result works seemlessly but it's a system that has resulted in much more natural sound coverage than any 'radio mic' set up will ever achieve.
The sound mixer has an added complication however...he has to mix in the audience laughter to make it 'exciting' but still retain clarity in the dialogue.
He does this by close miking the audience and yes there are small PA speakers aimed at the audience to let them hear the dialogue well. All the audience mics are brought up through an 'overall fader' and that is well and truly 'ridden' by the mixer.
He learns to 'go for a laugh', lifting the audience fader perhaps 20 db from it's resting position and then ducking it again fast to let the next line of dialogue come through.
Compessors and limiters become the mixer 'friends' in keeping the sound tight....ahh those lovely old Neve's!
Post Production...well picture wise it's just a case of joining the takes as obviously there are stops between 'scenes' and dropping in a few 'iso shots' when the cutting can be improved a bit. Sound wise, it's adding any 'missing' sound effects and perhaps music but mainly sorting out any of the audience laughs that got chopped in the edit. The mixer will have recorded some 'clean laughs' for the post that cane be dropped in to cover the edits.

So you need a purpose built TV studio, not a bare 'hangar' and a proper set of control rooms or OB Truck; experienced production, vision and sound staff; the right way to get your mics to work to the 'picture's perspective' (and out of shot) and actor's who know when to let the audience laugh before they continue with their next line!
David Taylor
(I mixed sit-coms once...now I sit at my Fairlight and 'dub'!)
www.postfade.co.uk