Am 28.11.2018 um 18:54 schrieb cjflynn(a)digitaltesttools.com:
Indeed, it is going to be a learning process, a political process, a technical process,
then repeat repeat repeat.
Myself, I am finding more and more that because the movie has been turned down that I
can’t understand the dialog…a counter-intuitive effect of the perception problems that our
hearing systems generate when the Equal Loudness Curves are accommodated for.
Okay, you called for it...
There really are A LOT of issues concerned here. A number like 5.5 or 7 only serves as an
abstract symbol.
Just ONE of those many other issues is that modern production techniques make it possible
to create audio content with a much higher dynamic range, tailored to the preferences of
highly skilled, 'overmotivated' (and I do not even mean that in a negative way)
professional audio engineers/film sound mixers.
Until not too recently, they were limited by equipment and pre-digital/pre-LPCM standards.
Dolby A/SR/SRD was the limit, as well as analog sound recording equipment, mixing methods,
etc. Today, they have everything under their hands and facing their ears what they ever
dreamed of. Digital Sound FX can create signals with ANY imaginable spectrum, dynamics,
level. No distortion added by mics, amps, converters, tape... DC offset anyone?
From a very recent impression, I just sat through 'The Children Act' (twice).
During both presentations, I found myself adjusting it from our standard 5.5 to 6.5 during
the first half hour (I can do that from my smartphone while sitting in the auditorium,
hiding it from other patrons below my seat).
There is e.g. one shot where Emma Thompson is staring out a closed window, watching her
husband packing up and leaving with his car. The sound level of this car is
(realistically) very very low. Over a period of maybe 10s, there is no other sound at all
(except maybe for some even more subtle ambient sound), and the image shows just the car
vanishing.
At 5.5, it was below common perception threshold. Yet they bothered putting it in at that
low level. And no, this was not a mistake on their side, they wanted it like this, the mix
is excellent all over (I probably could have given it a 7 just as well). Now, there are
probably more important pieces of audio in a dramatic movie than the sound of a vanishing
car through a window. But that is the mesmerising creative level sound recordists, foley
artists, and the like are working on nowadays. These soundtracks are not limited by
technology or ambition or talent, only by the time these people are granted to finish
their work prior to release. And by an aging audience willing to accept it.
I very often do these adjustments during presentation, because I watch many of the DCPs we
show. Most of the time, I dial slightly higher than 5.5, like 5.8 or 6. There are mixes
that simply need to be leveled higher, there are some that really shine leveled higher.
Some very few (maybe one each year) need to be leveled lower than 5.5, because they yell
at the audience, and they do not contain ANY subtlety.
Yes, I do this to my personal liking, and I hope my hearing apparatus is not too far off
from our audiences. So far, few (if none) complaints.
Admittedly, we do play a lot of dubbed arthouse titles. You may know that the germans
prefer to watch/hear dubbed movies (that changes only slowly). One key aspect of dubbed
movies here is that, because so many movies are dubbed in germany since nearly a century,
our dubbing studios and dubbing actors work on a very sophisticated level (means, they
also have plenty of work for tv, cinema and streaming services). There are always good and
bad examples, but in general, dubbing is not done cheaply in germany, trust me.
Both artists and recording mixers strive to achieve the best speech/dialog
intelligibility, and the major difference to location sound is close/proximity miking and
booths.
They can later add room, reverb, reflections, EQ, whatever is needed to match the scene,
but they do all that with priority on intelligibility. If the sound recordist hears the
slightest mumbling - another take. So, I think, as far as speech intelligibility is
concerned around germany (and similar countries in that respect), slightly lower levels do
not immediately hurt that intention of dialog intelligibility (wait, I need to put that
word on a shortcut-key...done ).
BUT - it still hurts emotional vocal expression. The breathing and trembling is lost. Same
as if you would be watching the screen from the very last back row, losing facial
expression in all but close ups (if the actor is able to show such).
Switch to movies produced locally, usually with location sound, and dialog intelligibility
(hah!) suffers a lot.
You may remember that report/survey on sound recording mixers monitoring habits I linked
to on the ISDCF mailing list a while ago (I think it was also mentioned in a meeting
note). I guess many smaller budget, but probably also some higher budget films, are now
mixed on smaller, 'close to' nearfield monitors. Speech intelligibility (...) is
SOO different between a small, well controlled nearfield studio setup and a typical large
cinema auditorium. Even if they QC the mix/movie later in a decent auditorium - most of
the talent there already know all the dialog lines from hearing them over and over and
following the sheets during production. They are probably still concerned about various
aspects of the mix - but I think they will/can no longer concentrate on speech
intelligibility with priority, except maybe for some very important parts that have been
messed with too much.
Okay, I said 'ONE of those many issues', let's finish here for now...
- Carsten