William Nuttall
A friend whose daughter wants to pursue a ops. career in Broadcast asked me to explain a couple of points from a BBC ACADEMY web page on Sound Recording with a single camera set up as per News gathering. This is from the page in question:-
| The basics |
| Radio mics and a good quality top mic are usually the basic kit for a self shooting director. Top mics are directional – i.e. they pick up sound coming from one direction only. Having a good quality top mic can be a lifesaver if a radio mic fails, or if you have several people to film in one group. |
She could not understand what a TOP MIC was? Nor could I, then the penny dropped. The dear lady who wrote the article for the BBC ACADEMY, Helen Hutchinson, was referring to the MIC on TOP of the camera!
The second penny then dropped; Helen Hutchinson was a journo who I used to work with at Border TV who left to become a lecturer at Cumbria College of Art in Carlisle. Since working at the College of Art she seems to have become a specialist for the BBC Academy on Sound Recording, Period Drama, Social Media and the Law, Scriptwriting etc. etc. Such a vast array of Talent in one person!!!
I advised my friends daughter that she should try a little harder at Uni. and become a Member of either The Law Society or the British Medical Association as they were the only two Trade Unions worth bothering with!
The Lunatics are in charge of the Asylum.
Terry Meadowcroft
I am so sorry that the BBC Academy is teaching such rot to these rich men’s’ daughters. Any sound recordist worth even the smallest pinch of salt would never, never use the ‘top mic.’ for anything, not even for a backup. Useless – and for recording a group of people around a table, some of whom, as illustrated in the ‘Academy’ video, have their back to the camera! What?
If this is the best the BBC can do, well, it is best that the Government disband it!
Any broadcasting organisation that shows an important press conference TO THE WORLD without so much as a mic to pick up the questions baffles me. I saw one such press conference which was televised, to the World, shown with a question, which must have been at least 15 seconds long, almost totally inaudible (and I really mean that – and I listen with very high quality sound equipment) – making a nonsense of showing it at all.
The BBC is b**gered. They make news broadcasts into light entertainment, use too much music and ‘splendid’ graphics, and lose the whole point of news broadcasting being a serious subject. And why? search me.
The technical abilities required of their ‘operatives’, as demonstrated by the standards of their so-called ‘Academy’ are below the lowest end of home sound recording standards – they can even – and regularly do – get the studio sound on news broadcasts wrong. Badly placed personals, very often in the never, never area close to the vocal chords when the female news reader is wearing a high neckline, are as regular as clockwork, and the incidences of terribly muffled personals concealed deep in side a scarf or Berghaus jacket can be seen any day, sometimes for the whole of a programme.
Fact is that any Broadcasting organisation NEEDS someone, at all stages of the production of a programme, to look after the sound, and visual, quality, working as a team. These people, like you and I and many others who learned their trade before the 1980s, were required by the BBC and others to know what they were doing to produce not just intelligible sound, but excellent sound.
Mrs. Thatcher set off the downward spiral to get rid of money wasters like Sound Recordists – and now, Cameramen – and left the future of our industry solely in the hands of money handlers many and varied, which is why the technical expertise has now wasted away to leave us with the lousy standards of sound and vision that we now put up with on our radios and tellies.
Thank goodness I am retired!
Nicholas Moore
I couldn’t agree more about reduced standards and knowledge within the BBC Academy, I am glad I left in the 1990s.
Unfortunately the remarks about the lunatics are now outdated. My niece is a Doctor and Registrar (still considered a junior doctor) and she thinks the Lunatics are in now charge of the NHS. My partner’s boy has LLB, LLM, LPC and MA (business) and isn’t allowed to practice law until he has completed two years as a trainee with a participating law firm (actually a good process), training is virtually impossible to find in the current climate, yet some large law firms use overseas subcontracting lawyers, whom only require the equivalent of LLB and LPC and don’t have to have done the two years as a trainee, because they are cheaper. So maybe the Lunatics are now running the legal profession.
Nick Ware
I share the horror at the poor sound quality of national News programmes, etc., plus of course, drama.
I was highly amused a couple of days ago when, on the early evening BBC1 News, Sophie Raworth sounded as if there were several winter duvets between her and me, despite the fact that I could see that her mic was well positioned and plainly on view. Then she linked to Tim Peake in the ISS and he sounded ten times better with crisp HF etc. – from outer space!
Dave Plowman
It’s something I’ve been banging on about for ages, and never really had an explanation.
-
Are the monitoring speakers in use these days so bright that these personals sound ok to the mixer?
-
Are some of the mics simply worn out (electrets do have a life)
-
Is there EQ fitted to the mixing desks in use these days?
If so, is the sound mixing person forbidden to alter it?
“Newsnight” is as much of an offender as some news broadcasts.
Philip Tyler
Are the monitoring speakers in use these days so bright that these personals sound ok to the mixer?
Probably more to do with the mixer not knowing what is good or bad sound.
Are some of the mics simply worn out (electrets do have a life)
Or they are positioned inappropriately which causes them to sound crap.
Is there EQ fitted to the mixing desks in use these days?
Ah there is EQ but you first need to assign that fader to the control panel, then you can adjust the EQ. Oh, we’ve moved onto the next item…!
Dave Plowman
No memory on the desk? I’d have thought what sounded good on the presenter yesterday would be a good starting point for today – rather than ‘flat’.
Nick Ware
It’s actually quicker to EQ a channel on a digital desk than on an analogue one. All you do is press ‘select’ above the channel fader, then all the EQ knobs or touch settings are always in the same place. No running your fingers up rows of knobs to locate what you want, only to find that due to parallax, or your glasses on crooked, you’ve tweaked the wrong channel! I daresay the news desks are never powered down, but even if they were, they will always boot up as you last left them. Personal scene settings to recall mixer’s preferences and individual presenter EQ settings should be a doddle.
My suspicion is that there may be an automated audio-follow-video setup with nobody listening, let alone controlling at the sound desk. Maybe wrong, just a guess, because that’s what it sounds like.
Dave Plowman
As regards EQing a mic, I don’t see how costs come into it, if the equipment to do it exists. And I don’t quite understand how they’d find someone to operate it who doesn’t know what a voice should sound like.
It’s very odd. Just once in a while “Newsnight” ends up in stereo, with the mics panned. So they must have more than one person doing the operating, with at least some choice?
Alasdair Lawrance
Reading this BBC Academy stuff and the links it contains explains how we’ve got to the state we’re in now. My favourite amongst many is if you decide to use a boom (I think they mean fish-pole), “… Find somebody to operate it…”! Nothing about asking to a DoP re shadows for example, anyone will do.
Geoff Fletcher
Sadly, at the BBC and also many other organisations, standards don’t matter now – only the bottom line, as the grey faced moneymen rule. (The famous “cost of everything and the value of nothing” quote sums it all up.) Even more sadly, the general public increasingly think that what we are hearing/seeing now is the norm, having never experienced the way it used to be. Feature film seems to be, generally speaking, the only place to see properly framed shots and to hear decent sound. I know I go on a bit about Sky, but they do provide a chink of light. Having worked for NEP-Visions for many years on Sky Sports, particularly Sky Football, they do seem to have someone at base across sound/vision output judging by the number of times there were queries from Osterly to the Sky PM onsite it there were problems with crackles, nano drop outs, the mix, picture quality etc. My impression as a Unit Manager and one-time cameraman was and is that Sky still believe in some element of quality control.
Dave Buckley, Keith Wicks
Richard Madeley on page 17 of the Daily Mail Weekend magazine 5th March 2016 has written a column on the subject of poor sound quality. His subheading reads…… “Are you listening, broadcasters? TV sound quality seems to be getting worse, says the presenter.”
It’s online at:
http://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail-weekend-magazine/20160305/281762743344656
John Howell
The thing that riled me in the article was the assertion that “standards imposed by SoundDepartments have slipped”. Really? I didn’t “impose”‘ standards, enough Television has been performed over the years for recognised ‘good practice’ to have been established, I recommended ways of getting good results. The opportunities to apply these standards have been whittled away by time and financial pressures, and inexperience in the production team. I am assuming the inexperience doesn’t extend to the Sound Department.
Dave Plowman
I’m a huge fan of “Happy Valley”, but have to agree about poor sound. And the reason is as always, extremely simple and was touched on in the article, even although he didn’t understand why.
It’s personal mics buried under thick clothing, and little or no attempt made to EQ them afterwards to try and recover the ‘presence’ frequencies needed for clarity. Or if too bad for that, to post sync the dialogue.
Another thing is that electret mics – i.e. most personals – age quite badly and loose the top end of their response.
“Newsnight” is one of the worst offenders. I’ve sometimes heard better sound quality through a brick wall. And before someone goes on about old ears, the same presenters on R4 sound entirely normal. Through exactly the same speakers. The sound from my TV doesn’t need ‘improving’. It already goes through broadcast quality speakers (when that meant something). It’s what goes into it that needs sorting. (Usually ok in the cinema – although I don’t see everything. But if you can’t hear things at the silly levels they use, there really is a problem. I find it unpleasantly loud – far louder than natural speech. And cinemas – when I go on OAP day – are quiet places).
What I really can’t understand is how the sound recordist on location -or sound mixer in the studio – puts up with it? Surely they must know what a human voice sounds like?
Barry Bonner
It’s up to the sound recordist/supervisor to tell the director when the sound is not acceptable and persuade them to retake. I did many dramas and always told the production when the actors were not delivering decent levels or intelligibility. If I was ignored, I would point this out later at the dub! In my era when doing dramas we did all the sound, in the studio, on location, and the dub on dramas, but there’s now a different person at all stages of the production who may not have the clout/skill that we had. I do remember Harold Pinter saying to me once that he was glad I’d asked for a retake…fame at last!
Terry Meadowcroft
I think the big problem now is that continuously tightening financial constraints mean that time is always ridiculously tight in drama shoots. This, combined with the sheer impossibility of achieving anything near realistic sound from personal mics., which are deemed the tool of choice because of multiple camera shoots in a hurry, makes it incredibly difficult to get it right, and I suppose stressed Directors are unhappy to retake scenes (“…we’ll sort it out in post…”).
So, stress due to financial constraints, and the imperfection of personal mics. as a tool, are in my opinion the two reasons for mumbleton, and there ain’t no cure for either of these two things.
Dave Plowman
At one time, when there were things like planning meetings, attended by those who’d actually have to do the job, you might have managed to liaise with costume department to get provision made for personal mics.
Ian Hillson
There’s an article on sound and mumbling actors in the “Culture” magazine of the “Sunday Times” 6th |March 2106- worth a read: one of the reasons for “Happy Valley” (for example) mumbling is that the writer can hear the lines, having written them, and it’s up to the producer to pull up the director and artistes if the lines become inaudible – trouble is, the producer is also the writer on “Happy Valley”.
Alasdair Lawrance
I have a great admiration for Sally Wainwright, and I particularly enjoyed “Last Tango in Halifax”, so many good things in it.
I also know that in the old days of hot metal type-setting, you never, EVER, did your own proof-reading, and I suspect that’s a significant part of the problem – Sally has written it, and is too familiar with the words, as well as being in charge of the shooting, dubbing, re-recording etc, so obviously she hears the dialogue fine, and I suspect wonders what all the fuss is about. Someone, i.e. a viewer coming to it with just one pass while trying to concentrate on the drama has no chance.
Dave Plowman
But it’s rare for a producer or writer to be on set during ‘filming’. The director will usually be on cans but more interested in pictures. So it’s most usually the script supervisor and sound recordist to say if they can’t understand what was said. And not while following a script, either.
It’s usually fairly obvious when actors are mumbling. But so often the actual speech quality is poor when they very obviously are not. It’s more the combination of a mumbling actor and poor sound quality that makes things so much worse.
The trouble may be with mics all fed to a multi-track these days, the attitude that anything can be sorted in post prevails. Remove the responsibility from the sound recordist to produce a well balanced track complete himself, as it’s far better to do it in post, and they can cease to care as much as once they did, even more so if they have no contact with post.
Other thing I’d ask is how come there is usually a boom op credit when it’s patently obvious all the dialogue comes from personal mics?
Geoff Fletcher
Camera boom op?
Mike Giles
There are lots of examples of personal mics muffled by clothing during reports and even in the studio, more appropriate eq is often to be desired.
Pat Heigham
I wish to be heard about hiding personal mics on dramas. Effing difficult:
-
They cannot be seen in vision – unlike News studio.
-
Costumes present difficulties – rattling jewellery etc. or fabrics that are unfriendly to rustle – like silk!
-
Just bl**dy difficult to hide.
Here’s a story re: “Alien”:
Eventually, we were forced into radioing all speaking parts and the costumes were useful in that the jackets of the fatigues had ‘pen’ loops, ideal for fitting Sony ECM50’s with double-sided tape – no smaller mics were then around (Trams/Cos/DPA etc came later). Ideally, the headset comms should have been practical!
I used to watch carefully on rehearsal, to which shoulder Yaphet Kotto slung his firearm and mounted his mike on the other side. Whereupon, he would invariably shift the sling to his opposite shoulder, lying right across the mike!
Peter Coombes
At the last show I attended at Washington’s prestigious Wolf Trap theatre, I discovered that the cast had microphones taped to the top of their heads. Is this technique used in the UK?
Mike Giles
I often found the hair a good place to hide a personal ~ surprisingly good pick up. Hats could then be a problem, of course and barbers’ shops were definitely not to be desired!
John Howell
Another big advantage is there is no tendency to go ‘off mic’ with head turns.
Mike Jordan
That idea can have disastrous consequences however.
A couple of years a go my old school put on “Les Miserables.” The “brought-in” sound suppliers thought mics in hairlines would be a good idea with the sort of costumes in use.
However there was one black kid in the show so they provided a pink mic with the pink cable going over the centre of his head (no parting) and heading off down his uncovered black back.
He must have been so embarrassed!
Dave Buckley
I read an article about the positioning of personal mics used in musicals. The article covered the use at hairline level and the then Beyer range were considered the best for using in this position.
However, it was found that the mics only lasted six months due to sweat etc.!
Roger Long
The RSC preferred position is behind the ear and then eq’d to reduce 400 Hz. The DPA 4060 will survive dunking in a cup of water as will an ECM88, they soon dry out. Cables need good dressing especially for semi nude scenes.
Dave Mundy
Sorry, don’t do semis! I had my fill with the ‘Toppers’ quick change tent in TC1 (beautifully lit by Monty Moncrief)!
Pat Heigham
I understand that the DPA mic is good, as the small holes in the access grill are such that the surface tension of moisture prevents the ingress.
On another front – re: mic positioning – why is it that on a formal lectern the two mics (possibly for back-up) are put together at the front? When I operated for this sort of set-up, I used two C451s with the short extension tubes, either side of the lectern. Both faded up, the reason being that in this configuration, the turning of the head would always be on mike, as when they came off one, the other mic picked up more, keeping the capture consistent in level. In the event of total failure of one, then the other would capture enough to make it sensible, (except from a turn away!)
And now back to broadcast sound quality …
Peter Neill
Another problem is the conversion from 5.1 surround to mere stereo. I’m convinced that when my Freeview box does the conversion it loses some of the centre information. I’m aware of this with some music programmes, and I think it’s a contributory factor in hearing dialogue over music/fx.
Pat Heigham
I should like to put in a word for the senior sound practitioners on “Jamaica Inn”. When the ordure hit the cooling system, the Council of The Association of Motion Picture Sound were mightily concerned, as it was our members’ reputation at stake.
Both the Production Sound Mixer and the Re-recording (Dubbing) Mixer are highly experienced in their fields, and the Re-Recording Mixer had just won a BAFTA for his previous work, in the same week that JI was transmitted!
Investigation revealed that the actor indulging in ‘mumblespeak’, although having been told numerous times, would not modify his delivery, and point blank refused to do any post-sync. In every case during shooting, the Director(s) know the dialogue and have the script in front of them – also wear a headset with an audio feed. But, if the Mixer’s advice is ignored……
Problems arise with today’s drama shoots being shot multicamera, but not with matching size frames – no, it’s one wide, one close, completely screwing the use of conventional booming. The fall-back position is therefore being forced into personal radio mics, which may or may not be satisfactorily fitted for best capture. (Sound Perspective? Wot’s that!!).
From the stories I hear, it seems that today’s productions are not filmed in the tried and tested way that they used to be.
There is a system that has been thought up to cover the boom pole in green cloth, and paint it out of the wide shots: http://www.greensleeve.london/ : but it is probably only intended to be used on CGI set-ups.
It’s a moot point as to whether it’s cheaper to do this in post rather than spending a bit extra time in shooting separate wide and close angles. Most old-style directors did not hold a wide longer than necessary, before moving in for MCU, CU, and BCU etc. So is it that today’s directors do not have a clue?
Dave Plowman
On “Jamaica Inn” there were examples where we went from V/O obviously recorded in a studio to location sound of the same actor – and the difference was staggering. From perfectly clear to near impossible to understand.
One of my points to those who reckon that personal mics are always perfection is to compare the actual speech quality on radio and TV of the same actor or presenter. Plenty of examples with presenters. And you can use pretty well the same chain for this – FreeView.
Now with drama, you have the added complication of layers of clothing over the mic, but even without, the difference is often chalk and cheese.
Now I obviously understand the reasons why personal mics are the norm on drama these days. But I can’t understand why all the various spokesmen never mention this as being at least part of the problem, if they are such as to remove all of the HF from speech.
Terry Meadowcroft
Who are these people who always reckon Personal mics are Perfection?
The mics are always in the wrong place to hear voices naturally, wherever you put them, and in my humble opinion they are mainly to blame for the TV sound problems today.
Dave Plowman
Sadly, there are plenty. A producer who wants that ‘American’ sound. I came across a couple of VT editors who did too. In much the same way as some just love a ‘filmic’ effect on electronic pictures, while others hate it. And, of course, those who are just certain they save time effort andproblems. To other areas. Sound doesn’t matter until the complaints roll in.
What I really can’t understand is why few seem to bother EQing them for best results. I’ve never ever heard a personal that was best ‘flat’. It was the first example of EQ I ever saw at the BBC. An Audio Baton to try and make a BK6 sound half decent. Nothing has changed since then.
I’m also surprised how often I see the mics very high up. I always found that they sounded at their best as low as practical. But of course I wasn’t fighting the noise of all those modern lights and servo operated cameras.
Other thing was just how much individual voices varied on personals. Some could be made to sound quite close to that from a boom – some not.
Nick Ware
Ah yes, the Audio Baton, but do you also remember the KM54 equaliser, designed to roll-off that wonderful, beautiful crisp HF so that it sounded dull, like a well-worn 4038? Trust no-one!
John Howell
Worn at chest level, personal mics ‘hear’ sound from the performer’s mouth and from their chest. The two never mix perfectly and the results don’t respond well to EQ, probably because it’s a phase error rather than a need for simple frequency correction.
Alasdair Lawrance
How ’straight’ are radio mic Tx and Rx these days – any funny compression/expansion thingies going on?
Keith Wicks
I’ve attached one page of the SENNHEISER EW100G2 Wireless Microphone manual. I don’t know how well this system works, but I’d guess it’s normally not to blame.
(Click on the picture below to see larger version:
use your Browser’s BACK button to return to this page)
Chris Woolf
All analogue radio mics – and that is the vast majority in actual use – have companders. None are perfect but few cause many serious problems on speech. They differ slightly between makes, with specific attack and decay times, and compression/expansion ratios of ~2:1.
On music they can be caught out, and excessive LF can sometimes trip them up.
Digital wireless can usually do without the companders, but may have to use some (slightly) lossy compression in the data stream. They also, invariably, have some latency.
The phase error between chest and mouth paths on personal mics is constant, and therefore manifested as a frequency response error, and colouration (in the sense that the contribution from each will vary with frequency). Personals never sound “natural” and only sometimes sound “good”.
John Howell, Brian Curtis
Another attempt at improving a lavalier microphone was the AKG D109. The lanyard was attached to a small collar which, when raised above the top of the mic formed a resonant cavity which accentuated the ‘presence’ frequencies.
It was regularly used on Nationwide/24 Hours programmes in the late 1960s and into the 1970s. I well remember working on an “episode” of Nationwide where Joe Bugner was the studio guest and had to do some boxing moves – therefore was stood up in the “open area” at the end of Studio E (LG) – I was not able to put the mic on him (he was over six foot – I’m 5’6″) without him nearly bending double so I could put the mic round his neck!
John Howell
I have a little used BK6 and it was a pretty good mic, but oh! the hours we spent paging the cables for the likes of Peter West and Paddy Feeny.
Terry Meadowcroft
The Sennheiser MD214 of which I own a few, one in absolutely pristine condition, from around 1970, was tailored to filter out chest resonances. I attach the spec sheet which makes interesting reading (I hope!) It’s interesting also that in those days there was, by microphone manufacturers, a deep interest in considering the circumstances in which they were to be used, and applying appropriate body shape and equalisation to the mics.
(Click on the picture below to see larger version:
use your Browser’s BACK button to return to this page)
You can see the full spec here:
Click on Download PDF to see the PDF in an alternative viewer: this allows you to print or save the complete PDF document, and often makes the document easier to read.
To return to this page, use your browser’s Go Back One Page button.
Pat Heigham
I played with a Sennheiser 125, for an underwater pick-up. I stretched a cling film across the rim of the ridge across the accept area, and bound the whole lot in Blutac.
The first attempt flooded the mic, and we dried it out in the sun.
Second attempt worked well. It sounded good in open air, as the air trapped between thin film of the cling film ‘diaphragm’ and the actual one, acted as a piston and transmitted the sound accurately. (Most of what we picked up was the underwater Arri cam!)
Terry Meadowcroft
Would that be an Arri ST inside its underwater housing? Reminds me of the time when, as an 18-month spell as Film Equipment Officer at YTV (I had to get my foot in the door somehow!) a cameraman called Mostafa Hammuri (once met never forgotten!) came to me to order an Arri ST with underwater housing to film an underwater explosion to clear the sand from a wreck. I warned him it would flatten the camera but he said “no, no, I have esked hexperts and it is OK”. The following day I received an ST with the remains of the underwater housing a very tight fit around the outside of the camera!! Oh how that particular bubble imploded!
Back to sound though, I have several MKH125s, I love them!
The mics I buried inside their own little chambers inside 4 of those heavy, small, amazingly bouncy balls to record underwater were cos-11s, and were an amazing success. I mounted them on the ends of a cross made from two aluminium tubes, each tube being about 5 – 6 times the length of a human head is wide because sound travels about 5 or 6 times quicker in water, the idea being to record under the surface of Lake Tanganyika during film sequences of water snakes which was going out in surround on Animal Planet. The 4.0 surround ‘atmospheres were great fun! I made a recording, to test it, of the Cameraman Des Seal swimming in circles, in diving gear, around the rig. Worked! I was delighted!
Idea was, as the balls had around the same specific gravity as water, the sound waves passing through the incompressible water would completely ignore the ball and reach the little chamber surrounding the mics unattenuated. Needless to say they, unlike the 125s, were hugely attenuated in air, though I was amazed when I turned the gain right up, the f response was reasonably flat! Recording gunshots, explosions, perhaps? No, think not!
Brian Curtis
On the theme of Lavalier mics, though I worked mainly on drama crews with Jim Atkinson and Frank Wilkins, I do remember doing on show which I think was LE (or maybe had an orchestra as in “Tales of Hoffman”) where the SS used AKG 109s on the violins (around the neck of each violinist) because they particularly picked up the “chest resonance” of the violin player!
Pat Heigham
SS Dickie Chamberlain used lavalier mics on the ‘six’ strings the programme was allowed for on “Top of the Pops” to try and emulate the recording studio disc. Mixed together with a ton of echo – sounded pretty good! Don’t think it was for chest resonance.
On some shows, you now see violin mics mounted on the instrument.
Dave Mundy
It was certainly Dickie’s idea to put BK6Bs round the fiddle player’s necks, excellent separation was achieved from the rest of Johnny Pearson’s lot. We also used to wrap them in ‘sorbo-rubber’ and ‘screw’ them into the ‘f’-hole of double-basses, assuring the player that no harm would come to his beloved (and expensive!) instrument!
Dave Plowman
Yes. It was always a problem even hearing fiddles above a ‘rock’ rhythm section. In a recording studio, they’d have been in a soundproof room. So getting any mic as close as possible allowed you to at least hear them – even if it didn’t end up as a classical violin sound.
The BK6 in the bass also had the advantage of rolling off the low frequencies. So ideal for small TV speakers.
John Howell
I suppose the most ‘tailored’ mic of all was the ‘lip ribbon’ (later to become the Coles 4104), despite their bizarre looks they could produce a remarkably clean sound, and legendary rejection of ambient noise. Not much good for drama though (except for Daleks).
Dave Plowman
Didn’t we marvel when the ECM 50 arrived? How could anything so small be that good? And being able to clip it on, rather than round the neck!
Pat Heigham
There was the ‘Dimbleby’ filter that was inserted to Richard’s BK6B circuit to lessen the chest resonance effect. (1960s Panorama from Studio G LG.)
Peter Neill
One Saturday evening, on “Dee Time”, I was carefully placing a BK6B around Spike MIlligan’s neck. He looked up at me and asked solemnly: “Does your mother know you’re doing this?”
And the Audio Baton – Does anyone remember the DMT protector?
Dave Mundy
DMT protector – I certainly remember the story of how he got a ‘belt’ from an faulty Audio-Baton! It didn’t protect him from his waterbed falling through the ceiling in his Richmond flat though! Whoops, luckily he wasn’t operational in it at the time!
Dave Plowman
If I recall correctly, it was an auxiliary power output – HT DC and heater volts – which DMT touched. (By the way, that is just the name I gave it. But it may just have been an external test point. No way of telling without the handbook.)
Not sure if that one was broken in some way, or they were all like it. The socket was of the same sort of design you found on some batteries for portable valve radios.
Tony Crake, Dave Mundy, Nick Ware
Audio Baton?
(Click on the picture below to see larger version:
use your Browser’s BACK button to return to this page)
Certainly looks like a posh version of what we had in TVC!
Audio Baton: I cannot find an Aux. DC and Heater plug/socket.
They were manufactured by Blonder Tongue… refers to the owners of the firm in the USA: Mr Isaac S. Blonder. and Mr Ben Hapgood Tongue!
Often loaded into the “Sound Trolley” but never used !
I seem to recall that the Beeb ones were made by Audio and Design (Recording) in Reading. Under licence maybe, or vice-versa.
John Howell (Hibou)
A load of ECC81 valves in circuits resembling ‘Wah Wah’ units for guitar effects. When TC8 was refurbished with BBC Type D equipment, a similar device called an Astronic was built into the sound desk. I think it was made by Associated Electronic Engineers Ltd, not to be confused with AEI. It gave ±14 dBs at nine frequencies.
Dave Plowman
Yes – just early graphic equalisers. You can buy pretty sophisticated ones these days from the likes of Behringer for not a lot.
Keith Wicks
http://www.bentongue.com/bht/bht.html has brief details of various Blonder-Tongue products, and gives the US patent number of the Audio Baton as 2,983,876.
A search for US patent 2,983,876 lead to the pdf file of this patent. It has circuit descriptions and component values, and includes diagrams of the basic valve and transistor versions of Tongue’s Electronic Tuned Circuit.
Tony Crake
They seem to be rather Retro Cult Items in the USA… Some weird group released a weird track of the same name, “Blonder Tongue”.. no doubt the BBC ones we are talking about did not have all those fancy coloured panels on…(and may have had the Aux socket on) if it was built over here? Blonder himself died early 2015 aged 90.
And now back to broadcast sound quality …
Nick Ware
The other problem not so far mentioned is that when mumbling there’s hardly any lip movement. Great for editors because they don’t have to worry too much about lipsync, but not great if, like me, you tend to lipread.
I don’t mind admitting that because all my working life I have listened on headphones (probably too loud because I’m listening for quality and background noises, etc.) to a mic less than six inches away from peoples’ gobs, my brain has come to expect that degree of presence all the time. Thus, in pubs, noisy restaurants, etc., I struggle sometimes to hear normal conversation. And I know I’m not going deaf because I passed a recent hearing test rather better than I expected to.
There was a scene in a recent episode of “Happy Valley” where two of the leading actresses were mumbling to each other in a two shot, and most of the time, not only could you not hear what they were saying, but you couldn’t even be sure which one was speaking.
Tony Crake
Perhaps we all ought to use subtitles… I watched the whole series of “The Bridge” Good Stuff ! After 20 minutes of subtitles you read them automatically and don’t even notice them… one of the quirky things about “Nordic” language is they often lapse into little bits of English anyway!
Dave Plowman
I only did location stuff late on in my career. I had been only really studios before.
This was the start of “The Bill”, where the Thames OBs hadn’t nearly enough staff to cover a twice weekly location drama – and didn’t want the idea of it being a base, with no travelling time to and from it etc. And basically a single camera rather than small scanner.
So, since that drama would reduce the amount made in the studios, studio staff did it all: and started with a clean sheet. Probably similar to doing ‘the lot’ on “Eastenders”.
And it was soon clear that the sound recordist and script supervisor between them had to be responsible for making sure the dialogue could be understood at first hearing, as the director was usually more concerned with other things. Because if you didn’t you’d have to answer later. And not only to the ‘suits’ but likely to your mate who was dubbing it.
Brian Curtis
I think as a “location sound person” this is one of the most telling points:
“…Moore said it was often down to a “unique set of circumstances” when there were problems with sound, and said producers had gone back into the edit suite following complaints about the first episode of “Happy Valley” to solve the issue…”
Going back to the edit suite (“fixing in post”) is not really the answer! Getting the sound “right, tight and clean” on set is much more preferable and it takes directors with real understanding that there may be “unique sets of circumstances” which will need careful consideration “on set” and allow properly trained location sound crews to time on set deal with them!
Now can you spot the flaws in all of that? Clues: directors with understanding, properly trained sound crews, time on set!
Dave Plowman
You don’t really have a sound crew on that sort of location drama – more like the recordist and a boom op/assistant.
I can’t really imagine an untrained person being employed as a recordist on this sort of programme – and he is the one who is listening to the mics. Or perhaps not always – since so much is sent direct to multi-track these days. So ‘it can be sorted in post’.
However, not many recordists are going to tell a director who loves a performance that the dialogue is mumbled and unclear. Other than as an aside to be ignored.
The actual audio quality of a mic buried beneath clothing is a different matter. It’s how it’s done these days, and that battle is lost.
When I first started doing location drama recording (late on in my career), we all went to the rushes at the end of the day. Director and producer present. Of course no multi tracks then, so a mixed dialogue track. I’d have been mortified if the results were as bad as I hear often these days – and that was before it was edited and dubbed.
John Hays
Concerning mumbled diction, I am fed up with people pussy footing around and avoiding the true reason –the sound supervisor not saying at the time that the dialogue is inaudible. It’s his responsibility to speak to the production team. If you want to hear clear speech in many locations listen to what John Howell and myself produced on location in Bristol doing “House of Elliot”.
John Howell (Hibou)
Booms (fishing rods) were used, and I was always dismayed by the poor quality when ‘persuaded’ that radio mics were the only solution.
Things were sometimes so bad that we had to use booms with radio mic receiver aerials on the ends!
Dave Plowman
Same here. Since these were often walking talking wide shots, I’d try and wild track it on the boom too. If the shot is so wide you can’t get a boom in, perfect lip sync may not be a problem. Helps if you’re doing your own dub too.
John Howell
Have you forgotten “The Walk In The Damp Forest” ?
One sadness was that I couldn’t use the wild track of the Stanley steam car because no-one would have known it was a car without seeing it !
Dave Plowman
But at the end of the day, only the director can authorise a retake for inaudible dialogue. And given most sound recordists are freelance these days, they’d have to be very brave to take things further. And even if there was a better take for sound, ‘we’ have no control of which ones makes it through the edit.
A decent mic in a decent position will always capture clearer sound than a personal buried below clothing. And that’s before the different style of ‘acting’ so popular these days.
Geoff Fletcher
How it was ….
Anglia TV’s “Menace Unseen” in January 1988 – location film shoot at newly converted flat in a former shoe factory in Norwich – Dave Smith recording some wildtrack atmos at tea break.
(Click on the picture below to see larger version:
use your Browser’s BACK button to return to this page)
We were three floors up above a quiet back street with just the odd passing car and/or pedestrian, plus occasional pigeon noises off and the sigh of the wind.
Click on Download PDF to see the PDF in an alternative viewer: this allows you to print or save the complete PDF document, and often makes the document easier to read.
To return to this page, use your browser’s Go Back One Page button.
