How to make overdubs sound natural?
June 24, 2010 2:30 PM Subscribe
How can overdubbed voice tracks to a film, which were recorded in a sound studio, be manipulated to sound more natural?
I recently saw an amateur film in which all of the vocal tracks were clearly overdubbed. They sounded a little too perfect, like the actors were speaking just inches away from my ear. For whatever reason, my brain wasn't tricked into believing that the people on the screen were talking, and it felt more like a talking book with accompanying visuals.
I have the impression that most film and TV are shot with boom mike operators just out of the shot, which surely must make everything more complicated. I assume that they do this to avoid the overdub sound I'm describing, and/or to avoid problems with lip-synching.
But there must be a way to make overdubs sound more natural in post-production, right? Is it something an amateur could afford, or do for herself?
I recently saw an amateur film in which all of the vocal tracks were clearly overdubbed. They sounded a little too perfect, like the actors were speaking just inches away from my ear. For whatever reason, my brain wasn't tricked into believing that the people on the screen were talking, and it felt more like a talking book with accompanying visuals.
I have the impression that most film and TV are shot with boom mike operators just out of the shot, which surely must make everything more complicated. I assume that they do this to avoid the overdub sound I'm describing, and/or to avoid problems with lip-synching.
But there must be a way to make overdubs sound more natural in post-production, right? Is it something an amateur could afford, or do for herself?
Close miked overdub vocals have no reverb -- played dry, they sound "inches away from my ear." Ordinarily, these dry recordings will be run through reverb simulators that ape the echoic properties of the visual staging in each scene. Small room: small room reverb. Church, church reverb. Etc. It takes a light touch or it sounds hammy, but adding the right reverb plus appropriate foley sound effects work, is how overdubbing is made to sound right: natural, as if it was recorded on set. You'll also need someone who is careful to match the audio track with lip motions, otherwise it feels like a bad lipsynch.
posted by seanmpuckett at 2:44 PM on June 24, 2010
posted by seanmpuckett at 2:44 PM on June 24, 2010
It's fairly easy to sloppy up audio in post by adding noise and reverb. I worked in radio when I was in school and I spent lots of off-hours time playing around in the recording booth. Our software (Adobe Audition) could make my clean voice track sound like it was in a room of any size or shape, or outdoors, with little handholding from me. It was pretty cool. I don't know what "amateurs" "can afford" but I guess a hobbyist who's really into filmmaking could get a decent rig for this. It's not so expensive as to be out of reach.
posted by The Winsome Parker Lewis at 2:58 PM on June 24, 2010
posted by The Winsome Parker Lewis at 2:58 PM on June 24, 2010
i have a bit of experience in this area; what you're describing is one of my pet peeves when watching movies or tv.
nobody is correct; it's not just about adding reverb, but using room tone to create continuity between the location audio and the ADR. Usually this is done by having the sound person record the room while on location, without any talking or other obtrusive noise. 30 seconds of room tone is usually sufficient; sections of that room tone can be cut up and looped under the ADR.
The judicious use of room tone is especially important when doing something like cartoon dubbing, where ALL the voices are recorded in fairly dry VO booths, and to create the sense of the characters being in the same place, different room tones are applied for each scene. When I was recording VO and doing sound design, I had a couple favorites - one of a low air conditioner rumble, one of a quiet hissing sound, and a few others I'd usually go to for household scenes. They provide a nice sonic glue to hold things together. When the characters were outside, there were usually quiet bird noises in the background; if they went into the city there'd be low traffic noise, some car horns, etc. Basically, if it's done well, you don't notice it at all.
ADR isn't always miked from inches away. Look for some videos online; occasionally the mics are a couple feet back, similar to what was going on with the boom mic originally. If they're close up on the mic, the capsule will actually react differently and make it harder to match the location recording.
Foley is not really part of the equation in ADR; although good foley does a lot to make a movie believable, it's also a different setup than voiceover recording.
And yes, lots of reverbs are available for amateurs. Although it's not usually the cost, it's the knowledge, if that makes sense. there's almost no additional cost to record room tone.
hope that clarifies.
posted by dubold at 3:26 PM on June 24, 2010
nobody is correct; it's not just about adding reverb, but using room tone to create continuity between the location audio and the ADR. Usually this is done by having the sound person record the room while on location, without any talking or other obtrusive noise. 30 seconds of room tone is usually sufficient; sections of that room tone can be cut up and looped under the ADR.
The judicious use of room tone is especially important when doing something like cartoon dubbing, where ALL the voices are recorded in fairly dry VO booths, and to create the sense of the characters being in the same place, different room tones are applied for each scene. When I was recording VO and doing sound design, I had a couple favorites - one of a low air conditioner rumble, one of a quiet hissing sound, and a few others I'd usually go to for household scenes. They provide a nice sonic glue to hold things together. When the characters were outside, there were usually quiet bird noises in the background; if they went into the city there'd be low traffic noise, some car horns, etc. Basically, if it's done well, you don't notice it at all.
ADR isn't always miked from inches away. Look for some videos online; occasionally the mics are a couple feet back, similar to what was going on with the boom mic originally. If they're close up on the mic, the capsule will actually react differently and make it harder to match the location recording.
Foley is not really part of the equation in ADR; although good foley does a lot to make a movie believable, it's also a different setup than voiceover recording.
And yes, lots of reverbs are available for amateurs. Although it's not usually the cost, it's the knowledge, if that makes sense. there's almost no additional cost to record room tone.
hope that clarifies.
posted by dubold at 3:26 PM on June 24, 2010
These days, people would probably be likely to use a convolving reverb effect with an impulse generated at the scene (for amateurs, possibly the clapper is usable here) to simulate the room tone of the shot.
posted by rhizome at 4:07 PM on June 24, 2010
posted by rhizome at 4:07 PM on June 24, 2010
As an aside, how hard is it to do this in a professional manner (i.e. to the point where it is unnoticeable)? I have the sense that I can notice ADR quite a bit. For example the host will be talking to a group of people and as we cut to a shot behind the speaker/wide shot/close up of the listeners I'll notice a shift in the host's speaking voice. I'm sure they do this to tighten up the text that is presented to the home audience versus what is said to the group.
So in short is this hard to do perfect or am I watching shows where people are cutting corners?
posted by mmascolino at 6:22 PM on June 24, 2010
So in short is this hard to do perfect or am I watching shows where people are cutting corners?
posted by mmascolino at 6:22 PM on June 24, 2010
mmascolino: "So in short is this hard to do perfect or am I watching shows where people are cutting corners?"
It's hard to do perfectly, but in your example you might simply be noticing the difference in the position of the boom mic in the close shot and the wide shot.
posted by jjb at 7:25 PM on June 24, 2010
It's hard to do perfectly, but in your example you might simply be noticing the difference in the position of the boom mic in the close shot and the wide shot.
posted by jjb at 7:25 PM on June 24, 2010
I'm no expert, but I want to add this example: I watch Antiques Roadshow a lot, and the "crowd" noise in the background doesn't 'break' when they cut from one thing to another. It's one continuous mumbling-masses loop through the entire episode. It's quite clearly added to make the relatively quiet on-site recording sound more like what the viewer imagines the area sounds like and cover up any audible jumps at the edit points.
posted by AzraelBrown at 7:28 PM on June 24, 2010
posted by AzraelBrown at 7:28 PM on June 24, 2010
You really have two options:
#1: Record in a natural setting. Go to an environment similar to the one being shown, so that you can get the natural space and background noises. Make sure you're not too close to the mic, so that there's some air in the vocal.
#2: Simulate recording in a natural setting. Record with an ear towards a spacious, airy vocal quality, and add in some natural sound (from an effects recording or one you've made yourself.) In extreme situations, some reverb might help, but mic positioning is more important.
If it were me, I'd just take lots of ambient sound from the place I shot the original video, and keep it on-hand, then add it in as needed after recording the voiceover in the studio. #2 above.
posted by davejay at 7:36 PM on June 24, 2010
#1: Record in a natural setting. Go to an environment similar to the one being shown, so that you can get the natural space and background noises. Make sure you're not too close to the mic, so that there's some air in the vocal.
#2: Simulate recording in a natural setting. Record with an ear towards a spacious, airy vocal quality, and add in some natural sound (from an effects recording or one you've made yourself.) In extreme situations, some reverb might help, but mic positioning is more important.
If it were me, I'd just take lots of ambient sound from the place I shot the original video, and keep it on-hand, then add it in as needed after recording the voiceover in the studio. #2 above.
posted by davejay at 7:36 PM on June 24, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
As for reverb, I don't know what's available for amateur's these days -- probably a lot -- but in a professional setup it's not merely about turning a generic "reverb" up to the appropriate amount. They'll have a whole library of reverb plugins to simulate different natural spaces.
posted by nobody at 2:42 PM on June 24, 2010