Thread: Recording two actors with two a large diaphragm microphone/ recording question.

Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1 Recording two actors with two a large diaphragm microphone/ recording question. 
    Senior Member Joel Arvidsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,831
    I shoot two actors with two large diaphragm microphone. Since the microphones and actors sits with a meter or so between them on the same table you will here some microphone bleed. As long as the actors are not talking at the same time there is no worries, than I can just delete the sound from the other actors microphone track. But when they talk at the same time its not possible to kill one of the tracks.

    How would you do this tackel mic bleeds? Do you have any trix both on the shooting day and in the editing?

    What is the common approach when mixing microphones that pick up each other.
    I guess it would be better with two dynamic microphones instead since then dont pick up less enviroment. But I dont have any dynamic microphones, so that was not an option.

    Is there any good automixers for post?
    Epic #06696
    Epic-W #004069
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Hollywood, USA
    Posts
    6,277
    Quote Originally Posted by Joel Arvidsson View Post
    I shoot two actors with two large diaphragm microphone. Since the microphones and actors sits with a meter or so between them on the same table you will here some microphone bleed.
    Why not use a more directional microphone? A cardioid is probably a better idea.

    What is the common approach when mixing microphones that pick up each other.
    My answer would probably be to hire a sound editor and a re-recording mixer who only uses one channel at a time and picks whatever sounds best. I'm a believer in giving post as many options as possible, so I think a wireless lav on each person and a desk mic (or a boom) for each person would do that. Record 4 tracks, use whichever individual track sounds best.

    Is there any good automixers for post?
    Dan Dugan got the patent on an extremely sophisticated auto-mix system, and some Sound Devices recorders have it as an option when you use multiple microphones. It's an effective way to record (say) 10 people at once but not have all 10 mics come up at one time on the mix track. It basically pulls up the level on the loudest track being recorded while diminishing everything else. It's also available as an option with some Yamaha standalone mixers. But it's more a production system, not a post system. For post, you need a human being with good ears, time, and experience. For a lot of this stuff, there is no automatic way... it's just hard work and doing what it takes. You do it long enough, you get fast and good at it.
    marc wielage, csi colorist/post consultant daVinci Resolve Certified Trainer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    980
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
    Dan Dugan got the patent on an extremely sophisticated auto-mix system, and some Sound Devices recorders have it as an option when you use multiple microphones. It's an effective way to record (say) 10 people at once but not have all 10 mics come up at one time on the mix track. It basically pulls up the level on the loudest track being recorded while diminishing everything else. It's also available as an option with some Yamaha standalone mixers. But it's more a production system, not a post system. For post, you need a human being with good ears, time, and experience. For a lot of this stuff, there is no automatic way... it's just hard work and doing what it takes. You do it long enough, you get fast and good at it.

    From Sound Devices only the 788T, 633, and 688 have some form of automix. (sadly not the 664, otherwise I would consider buying one)

    Zoom also have automix in their rather good Zoom F8 and F8n recorders.
    http://IronFilm.co.nz/Sound/ (Sound Recordist based in Auckland, NZ. Happy to travel too)
    https://www.youtube.com/c/SoundSpeeding
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Hollywood, USA
    Posts
    6,277
    Quote Originally Posted by David Peterson View Post
    From Sound Devices only the 788T, 633, and 688 have some form of automix. (sadly not the 664, otherwise I would consider buying one)...
    But not the Dugan Automixer. They've had "an" automixer for a long time, but the Dugan is pretty much the best thing out there. SD worked out a deal with Mr. Dugan and you can get it on the top-of-the-line models.

    Everything I said is still true.
    marc wielage, csi colorist/post consultant daVinci Resolve Certified Trainer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,148
    I had good results by using a Rode NT2a mike switched to figure 8 pattern overhead on a fixed stand for a tight profile two-shot across an office desk with one of the actors leaning in on the desk to close the distance between. This was appropriate for the action of a belligerent teen intimidating a caseworker but may not suit your circumstance. You might have to hang some furniture blankets out of shot to dampen the reverb if the room is too acoustically live. Please heed better brains than I who reply here.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    In situations like this (i am in one now). Why not just use both the mics together, because that's kinda natural? I don't know spatially what you're trying to achieve.

    I have multiple mics on 2 people with a lot of background noise. Both boom and lav mics. In reality the mix between the booms is what i've focused on, they're opposite and the fact that we're looking at one with the boom able to be closer and then the reverse isn't so close means that the mix between them sounds okay.

    I struggle with having to manipulate other location sounds with the background noise changing. The noise was unavoidable and not something easily eq'd.

    That is a real pain.

    cheers
    Paul
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Hollywood, USA
    Posts
    6,277
    Quote Originally Posted by paulcurtis View Post
    I struggle with having to manipulate other location sounds with the background noise changing. The noise was unavoidable and not something easily eq'd. That is a real pain.
    I think what usually happens in this situation is a dialogue editor comes in and painstakingly determines which dialogue sounds best from which mic (and which track), processes each one as necessary to remove the unneeded noise, balances levels to eliminate the other actor, and then provides a reasonable set of processed & original tracks for the re-recording mixer to choose from. iZotope RX and similar tools can work wonders. In some cases, the re-recording mixer might choose to introduce some "constant" noise to the cut & cleaned-up dialogue tracks so that the background noise is steady and undistracting, but at a lower level so as not to interfere with the acting and story.

    Scripted project are different from documentaries or reality shows, and with the latter, you can get away with a greater degree of noise because the viewer understands that the situations are all "real" and uncontrollable to some degree. But it's still possible to ride levels and filter the dialogue to make it easier to understand. The Grand Tour is a good example of a top-flight documentary show where the dialogue of the main characters is always easy to understand.
    marc wielage, csi colorist/post consultant daVinci Resolve Certified Trainer
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts