How do they record audio in feature films?

[ForwardLooker]

Hi,

I've been searchn the net and I can't find how or what equipment (mics etc) they use in feature films?

I just want to get an idea to what length and cost they go to.

thanks

:hv20-smilie51:

[Rikki]

$100 million usually :D

j/k

Good question though, anyone recommend "getting you started" guides for indie film making?

[ForwardLooker]

The reason I asked this question is because I was watching the behind scenes extras on a DVD called Kidulthood and in one of the scenes you can see a mic, possibly a directional condensor and i think it would be intersting to try and find out what mic that is.

Look at the attached image.

[Mal]

The simple answer:
MOST audio on feature films is recorded using shotgun mic[s] with some wind protection on a boom pole. That will cover 90% or so.
Alternatives to the shotgun are hypercardioid condensers if the shotgun records too much reverberation.

For the remaining 10% they might hide mics in plants, in the actors' hair, or anywhere else.

But a boom + shotgun or hyper + windprotection + boom operator + sound mixer (might be same person) is your best bet to cover most situations.

Mics: Sennheiser MKH416 is about $1100.00 and is THE standard. Audio Technica AT4073a is half price and almost as good. Then there's other mic manufacturers that offer even better mics.

If you are thinking of shooting a film, and have no audio experience, it is recommended you hire that side of the production out to a sound pro. They will bring along all their own equipment and expertise. They might have an audio "kit" with mics, recorders, etc, that would be worth $10,000.00+

If you are thinking of doing audio yourself, at a bear minimum you'd need a shotgun, a hyper, a boom, wind protection, shockmounts, and a mixer.

[ForwardLooker]

Thanks for that info MAL thats a great help!

I dont really want to try and achieve what pro films have becuase that is way out of my leauge equipment wise etc but I have been producing music for over ten years now and I think I have a decent understanding of Audio. So really just wanna get the basics idea of what they do and what mics they use to record speech.

[Mal]

Cool.

With recording audio for film/video, there's really only ONE major thing you need to know: PROXIMITY IS KING!
The closer you can get the mic to the speaker's mouth, the better.

A $150.00 mic that is close to the sound source can sound infinitely better than a $3000.00 mic that's further away.

[ForwardLooker]

Totaly agree!

It all depends on your recording technique, I've found that to be same in the studio too.

[Mal]

It all depends on your recording technique...

Truer words have seldom been spoken! :hv20-smilie77:

(My recording technique leaves a lot to be desired, by the way, but I'm always willing to learn. :))

[wwjd]

I think more than 80% of audio in movies is rerecorded. I am not in the film industry, and don't know anything, but I listen intently to movies and notice lots of artificialness to everything: car sounds, door slams, walking [foley] all background ambient sounds of the city or nature or wind - all added after the fact... then there is ADR Automated Dialog Replacement - having the actors listening to the live boom mic recorded dialog and replacing it in the comfort of the recording studio with quality mics, great dynamics, FX, compression, EQ. I assume nothing in a movie is live recorded unless you can really tell by the bad quality. :) My perspective. Yeah that doesn't help us home brewers, but that is how alot of it is. Oh and what is that other part - the "NAGRA" unit where they record on set audio for future insertion and clean up, or remixing. I don't think any car chases or wrecks have real sound - it would never sound that magnificent. And gun shots..... real guns go "POCK POCK" not "KAPHLUGE!!!!!!"

[Mal]

Good points, wwjd, but I think dialogue is still recorded live a lot of the time. ADR costs money.
But effects is another thing, aye.

[ForwardLooker]

yeh wwjd alot of audio is added in post and I also can notice when they splice in a studio recorded audio like in the middle of dialogue.

I also agree with MAL that the majorty of dialogue is recorded live thats why its so obvious when audio is spliced in.

[marshallarts]

I've worked with many major actors as their assistant and had to book their ADR sessions. For example, on a major $100M+ film, my old boss was called in maybe 10 days, usually short sessions, and he is always the lead (one of those $15M salary guys). But those days were spread over awhile during editing.

From my experience we certainly do not go into a film planning on ADRing the entire thing, no matter what the budget is, unless it's that type of film that requires it.

Unless you are a smaller actor you don't really like hearing, "we need to schedule some ADR sessions". My job was to break the news, but I've definitely put some coordinators through hell. :hv20-smilie36:

[wwjd]

I've worked in Studios and believe a lot of dialog is replaced. with actors moving around or even just turning their head to deliver lines, I don't think any mic could pick them up as clear or unphasing as a planted studio session mic.

for us, there is a lot of places with free sound effects online [most of them suck] but stock up and start fiddling with audio replacement. the audio can be as fun as filming! :)

[hdvbymark]

There are a variety of systems. Assuming they are working in film, there is a basic process that has been in use from early on called double system which means there are two systems - a camera for picture and a separate recording system for audio. Both are precisely speed controlled so that they remain in sync. Earlier systems linked them by cable to keep sync. Later a crystal sync was used as a common reference to both.

Until the digital age, a professional analog recorder called the Nagra was the standard. Nowadays a variety of digital recorders are used, but I would not be surprised to see Nagras still used.

Sometimes it is impossible to get clean audio at a location, so a scratch track is recorded. Later in the studio the actors re-record their lines while watching a playback, one phrase at a time. This is called looping or ADR - something Dialog Replacement.

To help match up audio and picture clips later, the shots are slated with a clapstick.

For traditional film editing, the sound is transferred to magnetic film or fullcoat, which is matched up with the film and cut in parallel. The sound track is then mixed down from dialog, effects, and music, and the result is placed on the edge of film as an optical or magnetic track.

[ToTo]

One thing that will most likely be necessary at some point is an upgrade in the audio aquisition if the HV20 is your primary camera. 99% of professional mics run on 48v phantom power via an XLR plug.

Mics that can run on battery OR phantom power are electret condensers... TRUE condensers run on phantom power. Once you run a true condenser you will hear a rich, full sound, that is more reminiscent of a hollywood soundtrack.

So the first thing that you need to accept to get the hollywood sound is that you need some way to run phantom powered mics. This is not a hard and fast rule... the Audio Technical 897 is a pretty good sounding shotgun which can run on battery... but you still need the XLR interface one way or another... that part is pretty much a solid rule. XLR = professional.

Once you get that covered, you also need to be increasingly aware of the acoustics of the place in which you're recording. This will impact the overall quality of your sound more then ANY other factor. < you can write that down, because that is pure fact.

Next... as Mal pointed out... PROXIMITY is KING... a crappy mic placed close will do more good then a great mic placed too far away.

In the thumbnail above... you're seeing a boompole, a rycote softie grip with a traditional rycote shockmount at the top... then the mic pictured is PROBABLY a Schoeps (but it looks too long)... but one thing's for sure, it's a hypercardioid or similar, and not a shotgun... the short little ball windscreen gives away that it can only be a hypercardioid or cardioid. Also... that is an XLR mic... as again... all pro mics will be.

My specialty is location sound... and in my kit I have wireless mics with good lavs... and then ALL kinds of other microphones... plus a mixer and a digital recorder. Then of course all the support gear and cables, plus stands and blankets and other stuff. But in a nutshell... everything I have is about interfacing with professional mics... and GETTING THE MIC PLACED PROPERLY.

You CAN have hollywood sound on your projects... but you have to dedicate yourself to doing everything right. It isn't hard... but in the heat of the moment people tend to skimp on good location audio practices, then they blame the poor results on gear or something else... when it was giving up on technique or acoustics that made the sound bad.

[dwmonroe]

95% of all movie dialogue is RE-RECORDED in a studio during port production. They use the mics on-set simply to have a guide track for the RE-RECORDING later.

[Rumpelgeist]

Good points, wwjd, but I think dialogue is still recorded live a lot of the time.
In modern American movies (modern means like from 1960-ies), yes. In Russia, for example, they used ADR even in 1980-ies. Noisy cameras? Bad mics? Short poles? Tradition? I don't know why.

I can come up with another reason: it is easier to rewrite the lines with ADR. Movies were edited to comply with ideology. If something were wrong, a director could either edit a movie, including dialogs, or put it on the "shelf" until better times.

With live recording, rewritten and ADR'd lines sound differently. You can hear it all the time on TV when you watch an R-rated movie castrated to a G- or PG-rated TV version. Sounds really awful to me.

[Rumpelgeist]

95% of all movie dialogue is RE-RECORDED in a studio during port production. They use the mics on-set simply to have a guide track for the RE-RECORDING later.
Are you REALLY REALLY sure about that?

[Nightfire]

95% of all movie dialogue is RE-RECORDED in a studio during port production. They use the mics on-set simply to have a guide track for the RE-RECORDING later.

Is this just your opinion? I'm not saying you're wrong, but if that's the case than actors must be pretty damm skilled to replicate the delivery of their lines in the same speed, etc. in the studio later on as they did in the movie. I highly doubt a Brad Pitt would spend hours and hours in post repeating ALL his lines. I have no clue though, and you probably do so I'm not bashing you, just very surprised.

[Rumpelgeist]

Is this just your opinion? I'm not saying you're wrong, but if that's the case than actors must be pretty damm skilled to replicate the delivery of their lines in the same speed, etc. in the studio later on as they did in the movie.
That is what they did 50 years ago.

[dWyZaK]

It's not true.

[dwmonroe]

Yes it is true.

I have 2 family members that work in the field in Hollywood. The process is called "looping" and it is not difficult to achieve. There are many pro software packages used in-studio specifically for this purpose. It does not take a great deal of talent to match in a studio what you said "on camera"... quite simple actually.

I also use this technique in any circumstance that does not REQUIRE live sound. All the additional elements, like in Hollywood, are added in post: footsteps, wind, traffic, etc.

This is the ONLY way to achieve true Hollywood sound... having 100% control of ALL your elements in post... that's why Hollywood does it that way.

[Ian-T]

I have to say...I have indeed heard of this many times. In a lot of cases when watching a flick I can tell also. Matter of fact it works out quite well here at home.

[1]

95% of all movie dialogue is RE-RECORDED in a studio...


This absolutely absurd and 100% UNTRUE.

If you want to be more specific about what movies you are talking about then yes, maybe the percentage is rather high.
As it stands though, it's just another flippant, inaccurate statement.

[alef]

The simple answer:
MOST audio on feature films is recorded using shotgun mic[s] with some wind protection on a boom pole. That will cover 90% or so.
Alternatives to the shotgun are hypercardioid condensers if the shotgun records too much reverberation.

For the remaining 10% they might hide mics in plants, in the actors' hair, or anywhere else.

But a boom + shotgun or hyper + windprotection + boom operator + sound mixer (might be same person) is your best bet to cover most situations.

Mics: Sennheiser MKH416 is about $1100.00 and is THE standard. Audio Technica AT4073a is half price and almost as good. Then there's other mic manufacturers that offer even better mics.

If you are thinking of shooting a film, and have no audio experience, it is recommended you hire that side of the production out to a sound pro. They will bring along all their own equipment and expertise. They might have an audio "kit" with mics, recorders, etc, that would be worth $10,000.00+

If you are thinking of doing audio yourself, at a bear minimum you'd need a shotgun, a hyper, a boom, wind protection, shockmounts, and a mixer.
thanks mal for the explanations.. but how did you know that?

[dwmonroe]

This absolutely absurd and 100% UNTRUE.
If you want to be more specific about what movies you are talking about then yes, maybe the percentage is rather high.
As it stands though, it's just another flippant, inaccurate statement.

I'm not going to debate this as my experience with it is first-hand. Granted NOT ALL movies are "looped"... but the vast majority are... well into the 90 percentile. Perhaps you should do a little research on this before saying it's an "flippant, inaccurate statement". It simply proves your ignorance and lack of knowledge.

FACTS:
1) ALL movies are mixed in multi-track studios.
2) ALL movies have 95% of their sound effects added in post = FOLEY ARTISTS
3) Dialogue recorded ON-SET is MOSTLY used only for referencing the looping process. An exception would be a scene in an extremely quiet sound stage.
4) ** since ALL films are mixed in multi-track form, a single boom mic overhead a table of 5 actors would give a SINGLE audio track. Hollywood knows this is USELESS in case one of the actors volume needs to be raised. The solution? The are LOOPED in studio in POST. Period.

You can choose to disbelieve this... that's your right, it's America.
However, if you choose to embrace this STANDARD Hollywood practice, you will find you can achieve similar results on your laptop with a decent multi-track program, a small sound board and a mic. You will find your "movies" SOUNDING as good as we try to make them look.

Whew...

[Gymnut808]

From sound classes taught by working professionals, not a whole lot of production dialogue is used on feature films. As to what percentage is of anyone's guess and varies from film to film, but much of the audio is done in ADR and Foley because it gives the most flexibility in the mixing process.

[1]

95% of all movie dialogue is RE-RECORDED in a studio during port production.


If you want to be more specific about what movies you are talking about then yes....


...STANDARD Hollywood practice...

There you go, I knew you'd see it my way eventually! :hv20-smilie77:

[dwmonroe]

Sorry, yes... I was only referring to Hollywood movies. Most non-Hollywood movies do not, in fact, use this method.

[1]

Aye, then naturally you are correct.

Statements like those you made do really need specific qualifications, otherwise
they get misunderstood. Hence my getting to the bottom of it.

[dwmonroe]

Statements like those you made do really need specific qualifications

Ha ha, ya I know... got a little excited...

However, I wish people would seriously look into how EASY and affordable it is to do your own "looping" in your own home. I'm glad this thread started to possibly shed some light on it for people who didn't realize it. I'll add another post later with specifics on "home looping".

[dWyZaK]

Your way over generalising buy saying that 95% of hollywood dialogue is ADR'd.
It's preposterous.

No way can you capture the same feeling and emotion by overdubbing and it is mainly used when there is a problem with the sound or its felt a bad performance was let slip.

The example of 6people round a table doesn't cut it cause it takes 10seconds to change someone's volume in post (unless there's more than one person talking or continuity problems with the background noise).

Sometimes excessive background noise will mean dialogue will need re-recording.

You really think people dedicate their whole careers and thousands of pounds of audio equipment just so that they can provide a 'Guide Vocal'?

OK, i'm being harsh, maybe the really loud action blockbusters will be heavily ADR'd, not much call for capturing subtle acting skills on the set of Armageddon is there, but Hollywood as a whole would be way more biased towards on field audio.

[Frank]

I'm no expert, but it seems more likely to me that 95% of Hollywood films have some looping, rather than that 95% of all Hollywood dialogue is looped.

[kaidomac]

However, I wish people would seriously look into how EASY and affordable it is to do your own "looping" in your own home. I'm glad this thread started to possibly shed some light on it for people who didn't realize it. I'll add another post later with specifics on "home looping".

Spill the beans, man - I'm taking notes! The first time I ever saw ADR in modern cinema was actually in an episode of the TV show "Monk" where a celebrity character was re-recording his vocals in the studio for a commercial. I thought that was baloney, but once you see what Melodyne and other software can do, it's totally believable. I'm all ears, so please share what you know! :hv20-smilie84:

[kaidomac]

Wow, check out this ADR clip from King Kong:

YouTube - Sound Design for King Kong (Post/production) 3 of 7

That's gotta drive the actors & recordering engineers NUTS! :hv20-smilie45:

[dwmonroe]

Thanks for that KONG clip... an excellent example of looping or ADR in Hollywood post production.

I have been doing ADR for years, and the IDEAL setup is a PC dedicated to audio recording with a top-notch sound card, sound booth and pro mics. I personally use NUENDO, many use pro-tools. HOWEVER, extremely good results can be done with an average PC or laptop.

HERE'S WHAT YOU NEED:
1) a small mixer http://pro-audio.musiciansfriend.com/product/Behringer-Xenyx-502-Mixer?sku=631262
2) a mic (XLR) http://pro-audio.musiciansfriend.com/product/Nady-SP1-Microphone-and-Stand-Package?sku=277031
3) headphones
4) multi-track recording software... the BEST part is you may already have it and not know it! Sony VEGAS, Adobe Premiere... PERFECT.
5) a quiet room

THE PROCEDURE:
I am going to use SONY VEGAS PRO 8 for this example, however most video editing software is also capable using similar methods.

1) connect your mic to your mixer, put your levels at about half, and connect the output of your mixer into your PC's LINE-IN. (some pc's have RCA in and others use MINI-IN) ... either should work fine.
2) put on your headphones, turn OFF your speakers (eliminates feedback)
3) go to any video project in Vegas
4) from the toolbar: INSERT / AUDIO TRACK
5) open the VEGAS mixer to make sure your mic is sending a decent signal.
6) Hit the red recording button and PRACTICE matching your voice to the on-set audio track.

Once the tracks are recorded, you now have 100% control over the audio... pan, EQ, effects, volume, etc.

Do the same procedure for additional actors in the scene.
MUTE the original camera audio track to see how you did. Play with adding sound effects, wind, rain, street noise, footsteps (CHEAP sound effects cd's are everywhere).

Use the volume sliders to adjust the volume of each track exactly the way you want it. MUTE the camera audio track and RENDER.

Keep in mind this is the most BASIC tutorial. Do some research online as well.
YouTube has excellent videos on the subject.

EXAMPLE: last year I produced a CHILDREN'S movie using 100% green screen and 100% ADR (looping). Here's a webcast on the looping procedure if you're interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e0UrXWK1gg

That's really about it. However you WILL FIND that practicing and mastering this technique will REALLY improve the audio on your movies.

HAVE FUN...

[Halsu]

6) Hit the red recording button and PRACTICE matching your voice to the on-set audio track.

While ADR is used pretty rarely here in Finland, if compared to Hollywood, it's not too uncommon - i've done it many times.

It helps to do this one sentence at a time, instead of i.e. trying to get a whole scene at once. I usually have two copies of Vegas (or other audio software) open at the same time - one is recording, the other is used to play back the sentence that will be overdubbed.

I'll play back the sentence, the talent will try to re-act it, i'll play it back again etc. I guess the term looping comes from playing back / recording the same sentence over and over.

The recording doesn't need to be exactly timed, it can be slightly tweaked in the timeline, simply by looking at the audio waveform, comparing it to original and then and moving stuff around. You can often make edits with single syllable precision, especially if you make the edit in the short pause before consonants. Oh, BTW, consonants are the most important when syncing - if you get the B's, F's, M's, P's etc. synced up properly the vowels can be a little off and no-one will notice.

When you play back the original and overdubbed sound together, ideally they should sound more or less like a single recording that has a chorus effect added. If you get there, the sync is good enough...

***

As far as on-location sound goes, in addition to boom mics, it's nowadays very common practice to have a wireless lavalier for each actor, hidden in clothes, hair or whatnot. This provides a dry, close proximity sound that's often desirable. The tracks will be recorded separately on a multitrack audio recorder, and a mono mixdown is sent to camera for reference.

[marshallarts]

I just wrote this long and sorta rude rant because this looping ADR thing is annoying. But looks like the original argument subsided so I shouldn't waste more of our time.

All I'm going to say is:

Yeah... Looping.. ADR... Folly even.. What's the big deal. This is really simple basic stuff. It totally exists but NO WAY is this something they generally expect people to do in entirety unless for some reason the film depended on it. Any one of use that makes a film would at some point realize, "Geez.. Maybe we should rerecord that line", for a variety of reasons after it's been shot. To discuss it is sorta pretentious unless we just mention it because someone has a question.

As for how to do it? Some technical know how is appreciated to those curious. But it's really something anyone would figure out. If someone is curious maybe they should start a ADR thread. But it's offtopic and uninteresting and isn't really a big deal.

[dwmonroe]

Yeah... Looping.. ADR... Folly even.. What's the big deal. This is really simple basic stuff. It totally exists but NO WAY is this something they generally expect people to do in entirety unless for some reason the film depended on it. Any one of use that makes a film would at some point realize, "Geez.. Maybe we should rerecord that line", for a variety of reasons after it's been shot. To discuss it is sorta pretentious unless we just mention it because someone has a question.

As for how to do it? Some technical know how is appreciated to those curious. But it's really something anyone would figure out. If someone is curious maybe they should start a ADR thread. But it's offtopic and uninteresting and isn't really a big deal.

Odd comment since this tread is titled "How do they record audio in feature films?" ... this IS how they do it in feature films.

Regardless... it is UN-fortunate that more independent filmmakers don't use this technique. Everyone is SO concerned with "image / video resolution" that they ignore the other half of the movie experience.

At any rate, I'm glad this subject was brought to light... I'm sure some minds were opened.

[fishops]

I'm just posting to back up dwmonroe here. I came into the world of film from the sound side, I was a studio engineer first. I got a couple jobs doing foley and ADR recording for a couple of 50-100K indies and over a couple years started to get more and more involved in making films.

Anyway, even low budget, professional indie films are at least 75% rerecorded if they have a chance in hell of placing in festivals. I know it sounds bizarre and hard to believe, but unless you are doing everything on a soundstage, production sound is almost always useless.

The stuff we tend to keep is room tone, ambience, outdoor dialogue if somehow the stars align and we can get a clean pull from it, and occasionally some incidental foley but that's very very rare. Nothing else. Anything you hear in a closeup, footsteps, dialogue, clothing movement, birds, dishwashers, crowds, cats, dogs, cars, planes, clicks, whistles and pops. Everything is replaced. Foley is a truly bizarre art form.

99.99% of all dialogue you hear in theaters is ADR. I promise this to you. I swear it on my mother's toenails. I am seriously not kidding.

When a distributor buys a film, it assumes that it will have to do two things: Pay for a sound remix including getting the actors back for missing ADR, and pay for a film transfer. Almost nobody can afford a release quality sound mix on their own, it is the very first thing that gets done when a movie is picked up for distribution.

I'm starting to wax rhapsodic here, if anyone has any specific questions related to mix, foley, that sort of thing I can probably answer them but my info might be a few years old since I haven't been in the studio for a long time.

[mrgreed202]

I remember seeing on rottentomatoes.com that Quantum Of Solace was recording all live dialogue sound. I'm sure they added sound effects, but i think they kept all dialogue sound.

[1]

99.99% of all dialogue you hear in theaters is ADR. I promise this to you. I swear it on my mother's toenails.

It might be time to cut your mother's toenails!! :hv20-smilie24:
Another ridiculous statement.

Really, can we try and stick halfway to factual stuff here?

This thread goes from stating that sound effects are all added afterward (which is mostly true); to 99.99% of ALL dialogue being ADR (which is ludicrous).
I do agree that almost EVERY Hollywood movie has some ADR, and that is close to 100% of them. There's so much dialogue that there's always some that is crappy, and has to be replaced.
But those two things are totally different.

Getting absurd! :hv20-smilie49:


Here's some limited reading with some examples of percentages:
http://filmsound.org/QA/ADR-Discussion.htm

I'm reasonable comfortable believing Randy Thom (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0858378/) on this subject.

[C8X]

I think fishops's first few lines qualifies his point of view at least - indie films that couldn't afford to get the sound right the first time. Maybe it is true that this category has a much higher percentage of ADR. Anyway, i found the whole subject pretty interesting.

[spideralex90]

Tuning in a bit late here, but as far as i know most of the audio is rerecorded later because on set audio and such is pretty much unusable because of the crews footsteps and directors giving actors direction mid shooting. or in the case of the dark knight, the camera itself is incredibly loud so you have no choice. Audio is dubbed after wards. Actors are usually pretty good at recreating their own voice.

[1]

Oy vey, oy vey...

[crortega9]

The stuff we tend to keep is room tone, ambience, outdoor dialogue if somehow the stars align and we can get a clean pull from it, and occasionally some incidental foley but that's very very rare.

Hey fishops, what do you mean by this? How would you keep the room tone and ambience?

I agree with the whole ADR process but what's the point of having really expensive mic's on set if the sound is only going to be used for reference?

A perfect example of the definite need for ADR is in " The Shining." If you watch the making of The Shining, you can see some scenes where Stanley Kubrick is yelling out directions to the little boy during the taping of a scene. Also on some outdoor shots, there are cranes and all sorts of loud equipment around which would make it impossible to use the audio. However, there are other scenes indoors with Jack Nicholson where you can see the use of shotgun mic's and lavalier mic's. So again why the trouble if only for reference? My guess is they do this so that they are able to keep the on location sound if its good enough since the acting, especially in a movie like that, is very intense.

A good example of some low budget ADR is El Mariachi. The DVD has by far the best commentary I have ever seen and an awesome extra "10 minute film school" feature where Robert Rodriguez explains how the entire movie was shot silent. He then re-recorded all of the sounds and dialogue on location with a radioshack mic and recorder!

On that note, does anyone know of any other films with such great commentary and insight as El Mariachi? You can almost make a movie after watching the 10 minute film school on there lol.

[Westcroft]

On that note, does anyone know of any other films with such great commentary and insight as El Mariachi? You can almost make a movie after watching the 10 minute film school on there lol.

Try any Robert Rodriguez DVD, I personally love the stuff on Once Upon a Time in Mexico... "inside troublemaker studios" inspired me to create my home studio where I have a similar scoring set-up as his (except PC based).

And if you're up for it, after "10 minute film school", watch "10 minute cooking school" and make some Sin City Breakfast Tacos or Puerco Pibil. :)

[fishops]

The simple answer:
MOST audio on feature films is recorded using shotgun mic[s] with some wind protection on a boom pole. That will cover 90% or so.
Alternatives to the shotgun are hypercardioid condensers if the shotgun records too much reverberation.

For the remaining 10% they might hide mics in plants, in the actors' hair, or anywhere else.

Mal, as much as you are trying to backpedal here you have to admit you don't know what you're talking about in this thread. You can rant all you want about people overstating the fact, but this is what you posted on page 1 and it's just plain wrong.

Almost all the sound in almost all feature films is replaced. We can argue about percentages but I don't think anyone keeps statistics on this sort of thing so it's pointless. I speak from experience, as does dwmonroe, and anyone in the film industry will tell you the same thing.

It's just plain physically unlikely to get quality audio on set. There are too many things out of your control. Sure, there are times when it works and directors who do it that way, but it's the exception not the rule.


Hey fishops, what do you mean by this? How would you keep the room tone eand ambience?

Usually the recordist on set will roll tape for a few minutes of "silence", creating room tone that we can then loop in post and lay under the dialogue and foley tracks. Nothing works without this tone, it's essential for realism. Without it, the whole mix just sounds like sound effects strung together in a vacuum.


I agree with the whole ADR process but what's the point of having really expensive mic's on set if the sound is only going to be used for reference?

Because whatever does work saves money and time in the expensive recording studio. Production audio needs to be clear for reference as well, on-set sound cues are often helpful for the editor.


However, there are other scenes indoors with Jack Nicholson where you can see the use of shotgun mic's and lavalier mic's. So again why the trouble if only for reference? My guess is they do this so that they are able to keep the on location sound if its good enough since the acting, especially in a movie like that, is very intense.

It's always better to get on-set dialogue if you CAN. It's just usually not possible.


A good example of some low budget ADR is El Mariachi. The DVD has by far the best commentary I have ever seen and an awesome extra "10 minute film school" feature where Robert Rodriguez explains how the entire movie was shot silent. He then re-recorded all of the sounds and dialogue on location with a radioshack mic and recorder!

This is actually a great way to work, especially in the digital age now that we have instant playback on set. I know a couple of people who set up quick little sound booths on set, and do the looping the same day, sometimes right after the take. They say it helps capture the feel of the take and I'm inclined to believe that.

[CWildenradt]

This ADR stuff makes a lot of sense actually. Coming from an audio production background and having over 10 years experience in recording studios, I find it VERY hard to believe that any big budget production could achieve even near the quality of sound that they do with field recording techniques.

As for using elaborate audio setups during filming for reference purposes only, I can believe that too. This is a technique used in recording studios for cutting records too. Recording a full band performance knowing that many of the initial tracks will be ditched is common practice. To an outsider, pro audio techniques can seem extremely unusual and nonsensical, but there's definitely a method to the madness. I see no reason why it would be different for film.

[Halsu]

I know a couple of people who set up quick little sound booths on set

BTW, a car interior is usually a great place to record stuff on the road (couldn't resist the pun - naturally a parking lot is usually wiser choice than a road ;-)

Cars are usually pretty well isolated from exterior noise, full of soft, echo damping stuff, have no straight surfaces to cause unwanted reflections... overall, a great recording booth.

[Ian-T]

Sorry, yes... I was only referring to Hollywood movies. Most non-Hollywood movies do not, in fact, use this method.

Being a sound guy myself I can tell that it's not just one microphone for all those actors in a film. It would be too thin sounding and inconsistent. This is definitely what separates an indie sound from a Hollywood sound.

When you just change the audio levels between folks in post (from one mic) you will hear the difference. It will sound like...well...you raised the volume. And that does not work all the time.

[Dana Love]

This is a neat thread, and a very cool look at the effort needed to bump production value up. Do all ADR studios have problems with pants noise?

[ircswh]

95% of all movie dialogue is RE-RECORDED in a studio during port production. They use the mics on-set simply to have a guide track for the RE-RECORDING later.

95% of percentages are made up on the spot!LOL this board is toooo funny.

this is not true. ADR with actors is just to pick up flubbed/changed/incoherent lines. PERIOD and it is DEPENDENT on how many lines that need to be changed.

Unless youre referring to Language conversion-Sub.

[Dr. Benway]

$100 million usually...


True, and that is the answer to many question about why people feck around with their HV's; oh to have a budget! It's pretty motivating knowing that you have a juicy budget to play with. Among other things it means you can employ talented creative people.

[Gymnut808]

http://www.filmsound.org/QA/ADR-Discussion.htm

Bear in mind this was from 1999 and I imagine things have changed between now and then.

[Dr. Benway]

...what do you mean by this? How would you keep the room tone and ambience?

Remember your local library and their possible collection of the BBC SoundEffects CD collection. This contains a sizeable collection of ambient field recording; cities, countryside, water, industry, machines, hospitals, all available to layer into your projects to give them depth. It's lovely and depressingly devious when people comment on how lovely the birdsong in the background is.

http://www.sound-ideas.com/bbc.html

[Ian-T]

That article made sense. Especially Randy Thom's response in regards to action movies. Apocalypse Now was 80% ADR and that movie was 30 years ago. It all boils down to the "type" of movie being filmed. You got to admit though....most Blockbuster hit movies now-a-days are high action thrillers...where I would imagine there would be the same 80% ADR throughout. Think about it.

Thanks for the article Gymnut808.

[marshallarts]

Odd comment since this tread is titled "How do they record audio in feature films?" ... this IS how they do it in feature films.

I guess I was a little harsh in my statement, although I still feel the thread was more about what mics are used since the opening question was, "I've been searchn the net and I can't find how or what equipment (mics etc) they use in feature films? I just want to get an idea to what length and cost they go to." I wouldn't consider this was a question on post recording techniques, if barely field recording techniques.

But Fishops..... your statement that 99.9% is rerecorded is very misleading and inaccurate. Are you talking about animated films? And to say indie films use that technique because they don't have the money is also a contradiction.. If I were to make an low-budget feature only to rerecord all the sound I wouldn't pay for a sound guy in the first place! I'm not arguing it doesn't happen, nor am I saying some films don't rerecord a majority if they have the money and wish to make it better. It's just that. It depends on the film and how much money they have and if they need to do it. I wouldn't give a percentage because it's dependent on the film and there's no standard. To make generalizations as if this is the real professional way to do things is wrong and misleading.

The use of ADR is a tool but that's it. This discussion is like saying they rerender or alter 99% of the image in films. Of course they to do some extent. But it's specific to the film. It's really not a discussion any more than saying sometimes they serve Mexican food to the crew.... 24% of the time!

There's been some great other info given in this discussion though (however it would be more appropriate in a separate thread on the topic). I'm only nitpicking what you said because giving a percentage like that is incorrect. And it's these incorrect statements that make forums like these full of so much misinformation.

[fishops]

But Fishops..... your statement that 99.9% is rerecorded is very misleading and inaccurate. Are you talking about animated films?

I exaggerated. Sorry. Sarcasm + internet = confusion. MOST sound is rerecorded. I couldn't give you a percentage but I would bet the farm it's way over 50%.


And to say indie films use that technique because they don't have the money is also a contradiction.. If I were to make an low-budget feature only to rerecord all the sound I wouldn't pay for a sound guy in the first place!

I never said that. Indie films usually rely MORE on production sound, since they know that if their film gets picked up by a distributor they will get a sound mix. They still, however, need a good enough mix to get picked up in the first place and so most indies spend a decent amount of coin on looping.


The use of ADR is a tool but that's it. This discussion is like saying they rerender or alter 99% of the image in films. Of course they to do some extent. But it's specific to the film. It's really not a discussion any more than saying sometimes they serve Mexican food to the crew.... 24% of the time!

I agree, but some people in this thread seem to just plain refuse to believe that most films rerecord the majority of their sound, despite myself and others in this thread with actual industry experience claiming the contrary. The percentage thing was silly, sorry if I mislead anyone, but I'll say again: Most films rerecord Most of their sound.

[Ian-T]

LOL...I was going to reubutal and say...all films record..all their sound...but...that wouldn't help....stupid joke...:hv20-smilie81:

But if you really want to get technical......

[1]

Thanks for the article Gymnut808.

Oh, yeah, thank HIM, when I linked to the same article earlier! :hv20-smilie81:

fishops, looks like we just disagree here, no worries.
You can stick to your 99.99% or not; as you now seem to play it down.
Oh, and I still stick to my original comment, which you so prominently quoted: that comment was in regards to how the dialogue/sound was recorded, not whether it was replaced later with ADR or not.

The fact is, just about ALL movies do some ADR.
The percentages go from a tiny few words & lines, all the way up to 100%.

There's LOT of action movies, I agree Ian-T, and sadly much of the ADR is actually even semi-noticeable.

There's plenty of other movies around though, and many still use ADR as a last resort to make up for misspoken words and bad audio only when it's necessary.

It's all over the place, and some in this thread seem to think that every movie is 100% ADR, which is absurd.

Wait, how many times are we now repeating ourselves?

Time to close this one down I think...

[1]

...refuse to believe that most films rerecord the majority of their sound...

You need to be more precise in the verbiage you use, my friend.
Maybe it's my engineering background, maybe it's my OCD, but unless you use correct terminology, there will be arguments based on what you write:

You now use the word SOUND in the above quote, when that was never in dispute. My argument was that DIALOGUE was not all ADR. Sound effects and
ambiance/ambient sounds are ALWAYS added.


Time to close, and I have the last word: cool! :hv20-smilie77:

"It's good to be King!", Mel Brooks