Audio Post for Desperate Housewives

[smarsland]

I was just reading a thread on our Remote Possibilities forum and it got me thinking about something...

whoever watches Desperate Housewives....

Has anyone noticed how inconsistent the sync is? What's up with that?
Wouldn't there be better control on this for such a great show?

My wife and I both like this show, but I am REALLY bothered by these continual sync problems!



s

[ndogg]

I've heard that new technology may be the problem. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but:

The show, being a major network American series, is probably mixed in surround for broadcast (Dolby Digital 5.1). Before the audio signal is broadcast as AC3 stream, it is shipped around to network affiliates, etc, with the audio as a Dolby E stream. Dolby E can handle editing and encode/decode a few times (much better than the AC3 stream can handle that kind of abuse), but for each decode/encode, a frame (or is it 2) of delay is introduced to the audio, but not the picture.

Because it's still rather new, I think it isn't always compensated for, so a lot of HD broadcasting has the potential for sync issues.

Either that, or someone isn't doing a very good job of checking lip-sync when they mix.

[Henchman]

Originally Posted by ndogg

Because it's still rather new, I think it isn't always compensated for, so a lot of HD broadcasting has the potential for sync issues.

Either that, or someone isn't doing a very good job of checking lip-sync when they mix.

If it's in and out of synch int he same show, then it's obvious someone isn't paying attention.

We had some synch issues when we started on The L-Word, which is also an HD show. And the error was definitely created in Video post AFTER the mix.

[David Herbert]

Jeez, I thought for a second this was a thread for wives of Gearslutz who's husbands had gear addiction problems. David

[drundall]

I've been noticing lots of synch issues lately. I was wondering what it was all about.

[BruceTheProduce]

Originally Posted by David Herbert

Jeez, I thought for a second this was a thread for wives of Gearslutz who's husbands had gear addiction problems. David

Originally Posted by ndogg

Because it's still rather new, I think it isn't always compensated for, so a lot of HD broadcasting has the potential for sync issues.

Either that, or someone isn't doing a very good job of checking lip-sync when they mix.

Does the broadcast medium ( Satellite, Digital Cable , VOIPTV, etc) have anything to do with this too? I don't have a HD TV yet so I can't really speak about it. Though there's been the case when I've gotten bad sync, from my Satellite receiver. I reboot it and the problem is solved. Just a thought

Originally Posted by Henchman

We had some synch issues when we started on The L-Word, which is also an HD show. And the error was definitely created in Video post AFTER the mix.

I'd love to to ADR with those chicks in the studio. Are they nice people Henchman?


Bruce

[ndogg]

[QUOTE=BruceTheProduce]



Does the broadcast medium ( Satellite, Digital Cable , VOIPTV, etc) have anything to do with this too? I don't have a HD TV yet so I can't really speak about it. Though there's been the case when I've gotten bad sync, from my Satellite receiver. I reboot it and the problem is solved. Just a thought


Yikes... I haven't heard of that before... one more place things can go awry...


Henchman:
When mixing the L-Word, what did you deliver in the end? Dolby E stream? Are you familiar with all the Dolby gear, like the Multichannel Audio Tool? I'm curious to learn a bit more about this stuff.

ndogg

[BruceTheProduce]

Originally Posted by ndogg

Yikes... I haven't heard of that before... one more place things can go awry...

ndogg

Seriously, Its terrible. ( its only happened like 3 times but still) its the whole time on some channels, I only noticed it when its snowing or raining really bad

[Henchman]

[QUOTE=ndogg]

Originally Posted by BruceTheProduce

Henchman:
When mixing the L-Word, what did you deliver in the end? Dolby E stream? Are you familiar with all the Dolby gear, like the Multichannel Audio Tool? I'm curious to learn a bit more about this stuff.

ndogg

We deliver a 6 track DA88. The video post house does the DolbyE transfer.

[ndogg]

Doh! So you don't do an Lt/Rt or straight stereo mix either? I'm surprised, actually.

Have you considered getting into the Dolby gear? You can get control of metadata to dictate how the folddown mixes are done and the where the dialnorm value sits, etc. I don't know how much work this entails, but that's sorta what I'm trying to find out...

Anyone else know much about this stuff? Is the Dolby encoding process only taking place in video post/distribution houses or are some mix rooms dealing with it?

[Inner Light]

i heard in a podcast that sometimes it's the actual satelite box or the hd tv that may be the problem, the guy says when it goes out of sync he shuts down and everything is fine.

we now need to reboot our tv's !

[maskedman72]

who cares, i just wanna bang eva.....and terri.

[jhg]

With Dolby E there is a one frame delay for the encode and decode process. Not a big deal: tapes are labeled with how the audio is in comparison to the video - if these labels are taken into account is a different story. Problems can occur at local distribution plant where the E stream is decoded/de-embedded and brought to baseband, local insertion done, then re-encoded to AC3.

Here's a scenario: The network specifies the master tape to have the multichannel mix 2 frames ahead of the video to compensate for E encode/decode. This doesn't happen and it isn't caught. So far the audio is 2 frames behind(some people can't tell to easily at this point I've heard) when it hits the local plant. The minimum internal processing delay for a Dolby DP569 AC3 encoder is 187 msec, so after the local feed is sent there can be an appreciable delay if these issues aren't paid attention to.

[ndogg]

Originally Posted by jhg

Here's a scenario: The network specifies the master tape to have the multichannel mix 2 frames ahead of the video to compensate for E encode/decode. This doesn't happen and it isn't caught. So far the audio is 2 frames behind(some people can't tell to easily at this point I've heard) when it hits the local plant. The minimum internal processing delay for a Dolby DP569 AC3 encoder is 187 msec, so after the local feed is sent there can be an appreciable delay if these issues aren't paid attention to.

Is this scenario hypthetical or actually the norm? Do networks ask for multichannel audio master tapes to have the audio 2 frames ahead of video? Or is the Dolby E encode/decode supposed to be compensated for otherwise? Or do networks prefer the mix to be delivered as Dolby E in the first place? If not, who is deciding on the metadata settings if not the mixer? Aaaaaaaand, in reference to Henchman's post, are networks only asking for multichannel mixes now (5.1) and not Lt/Rt or stereo on Tracks 7+8 of DA-88?

ndogg

[Rader Ranch]

re: sync inconsistences...sync is relative. you get x people in a room checking adr or foley and you most likely get x # of opinions, sometimes stupidly different.

[Snatchman]

Hummm...not only "Desperate Housewives", I've seen this happening on several channels lately..!....

[BruceTheProduce]

Originally Posted by ndogg

Is this scenario hypthetical or actually the norm? Do networks ask for multichannel audio master tapes to have the audio 2 frames ahead of video? Or is the Dolby E encode/decode supposed to be compensated for otherwise? Or do networks prefer the mix to be delivered as Dolby E in the first place? If not, who is deciding on the metadata settings if not the mixer? Aaaaaaaand, in reference to Henchman's post, are networks only asking for multichannel mixes now (5.1) and not Lt/Rt or stereo on Tracks 7+8 of DA-88?

ndogg

The post facility I used to intern at, delivered all 5.1 mixes in DA88's. The same way as Henchman does it, I assume that is the norm. Is it Henchman?

I don't get it. HDTV being the cool thing it is, normally has 5.1 sorround for delivery. Why not going all the way to 96Khz? Is it a bandwith issue? That way you wouldn't have to use DA88s, but could just provide the video post people with a hard drive of the mix. I don't know, It just seems more convenient to me.

[ndogg]

Originally Posted by BruceTheProduce

The post facility I used to intern at, delivered all 5.1 mixes in DA88's. The same way as Henchman does it, I assume that is the norm. Is it Henchman?

I don't get it. HDTV being the cool thing it is, normally has 5.1 sorround for delivery. Why not going all the way to 96Khz? Is it a bandwith issue? That way you wouldn't have to use DA88s, but could just provide the video post people with a hard drive of the mix. I don't know, It just seems more convenient to me.

The 5.1 surround mix that is broadcast is encoded as Dolby Digital AC3, which takes relatively little bandwidth (most of which is reserved for video, I guess). I think (correct me if I'm wrong!) that the data compression ratio is around 4:1 with AC3. Soooo, 96 kHz would push the limits, I think. I'd have to check the Dolby site to see if it's supported.

One place I used to work would make MO disks for Dolby theatrical releases of the final mixes, but that was before the whole HDTV thing. Where I work now, we're hoping to build a new surround room and I guess I'm trying to figure out which, if any, of the Dolby gear we need. It ain't cheap. The MultiTool seems useful, but if someone else is deciding on all the metadata settings, I begin to wonder what the point of that is. Perhaps all we need is a ProLogic encoder and decoder... or is that becoming obsolete as well?

[BruceTheProduce]

Pro Logic is still used man. I think that everyone will have a 5.1 setup for TV viewing in quite a while still. So for the time being Its still a great option.

I don't quite understand the metadata thing. I know you put a lot of vital info that is not only audio as well as the actual AC3 encoding. Can anyone explain a bit more about it?

thanks

[Henchman]

Originally Posted by BruceTheProduce

The post facility I used to intern at, delivered all 5.1 mixes in DA88's. The same way as Henchman does it, I assume that is the norm. Is it Henchman?

That's correct. We do deliver an LTRT that we make from the 5.1 mix.

Why would the studio pay for the dolby gear, and spend the time messing around with doing the encoding, when in reality, the clients wouldn't pay extra for the service anyway. They woudl expect it to be part of the already under budgeted audio budget.

[ndogg]

Originally Posted by Henchman

That's correct. We do deliver an LTRT that we make from the 5.1 mix.

Why would the studio pay for the dolby gear, and spend the time messing around with doing the encoding, when in reality, the clients wouldn't pay extra for the service anyway. They woudl expect it to be part of the already under budgeted audio budget.

True enough... but let's just say you could convince the client(s) that it was a necessary part of mixing. Wouldn't you like to have control of how your 5.1 mix is manipulated as opposed to someone else deciding on the levels for dialnorm or how the folddown is executed? If it's just straight encoding, then sure, let someone else do the transfer and hope they are good at duplications, but what about the metadata?

[Henchman]

Originally Posted by ndogg

True enough... but let's just say you could convince the client(s) that it was a necessary part of mixing. Wouldn't you like to have control of how your 5.1 mix is manipulated as opposed to someone else deciding on the levels for dialnorm or how the folddown is executed? If it's just straight encoding, then sure, let someone else do the transfer and hope they are good at duplications, but what about the metadata?

For one, we do our own LTRT.

And as far as having to spend time and pay someone out of an already slim budget to perform another time conuming task that nobody wants to pay for, then in all honesty no. I don't feel the need to have that control.
I see no need to care more about a TV show than the producer, who makes more money, lives in a nicer house, and drives a nicer car.

Those days are long gone. A service is happilly provided, and the utmost care taken to deliver a quality job.
But they need to pay for it. I certainly won't donate MY time. Business is Business.

[jhg]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ndogg
True enough... but let's just say you could convince the client(s) that it was a necessary part of mixing. Wouldn't you like to have control of how your 5.1 mix is manipulated as opposed to someone else deciding on the levels for dialnorm or how the folddown is executed? If it's just straight encoding, then sure, let someone else do the transfer and hope they are good at duplications, but what about the metadata?



For one, we do our own LTRT.

And as far as having to spend time and pay someone out of an already slim budget to perform another time conuming task that nobody wants to pay for, then in all honesty no. I don't feel the need to have that control.
I see no need to care more about a TV show than the producer, who makes more money, lives in a nicer house, and drives a nicer car.

Those days are long gone. A service is happilly provided, and the utmost care taken to deliver a quality job.
But they need to pay for it. I certainly won't donate MY time. Business is Business.

If correct metadata regarding the program material is tramsmitted, excellent. If the facility is sending Dolby E with correct metadata values, and if this data is taken into account, the mix will be a more accurate vision of the control room. The final layback stage plays into this.

regards,

jhg

[ndogg]

Originally Posted by Henchman

And as far as having to spend time and pay someone out of an already slim budget to perform another time conuming task that nobody wants to pay for, then in all honesty no. I don't feel the need to have that control.
I see no need to care more about a TV show than the producer, who makes more money, lives in a nicer house, and drives a nicer car.

Those days are long gone. A service is happilly provided, and the utmost care taken to deliver a quality job.
But they need to pay for it. I certainly won't donate MY time. Business is Business.

Yup. Business is business. I whole-heartedly agree. Sorry if my post wasn't clear:

"... but let's just say you could convince the client(s) that it was a necessary part of mixing."

By that, I meant 'let's say clients would pay for the metadata tweaking as mix time'... or even over and above mix time.

It's about how the mix translates in peoples' homes. I agree, if no one wants to foot the bill, reality kicks in and you let it go. But if they were willing to pay either the mixer (you) to do it, or someone else at a video post house, wouldn't you rather keep control of your mix?

ndogg