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

[Rikki]

$100 million usually

j/k

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

[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.

[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.

[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?

[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!

(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.

[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.

[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.

[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]

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.

[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.

[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...