The Audio Edit
- Article 1 of 1
- Televisual Factual handbook, June 2004
Don't be tempted to cut corners in your audio edit to save money: time spent in dubbing later could cost much more
Of all the areas of post-production, audio is probably the area most producers know the least about it. This is usually no fault of their own. Most start their careers as researchers and researchers rarely get to see the inside of a dubbing studio. Further up the ladder, assistant producers fare little better, since most production teams break up and join other projects before they have a chance to see the post-production through. But although this relative inexperience with audio may cause some to cast it to the back of their minds, with a little preparation, many problems that can occur in post-production can be avoided.
The first thing to remember is that audio shouldn’t, as is typically the case, be left till last in both budgeting and timing considerations – something that can typically happen in both production and post-production. Since many producers and directors think visually, many are often simply relieved to have got the pictures and will set aside little time to capture audio during a shoot.
Yet, even on a mute shoot such as is typically used in wildlife documentaries where it may be impossible to record the sound at the same time as the rest of the footage, capturing as much audio as possible and as well as possible is paramount. Being able to intersperse actual sound with Foleys, effects and music can often eliminate the feeling of unreality generated by a purely studio-generated track; it can also provide guidance to dubbing mixers as to the kind of track they’re trying to generate, rather than force them to start from scratch.
For programmes with regular sound-and-picture shoots, recording additional audio can provide useful atmospheres and background noise to set the scene, particularly on cut-aways and other shots that would otherwise have needed pure voice-over or music.
For the cash and time-conscious, audio is often one of the areas eyed up for savings; often, the first part of the post-production chain to suffer is the prep time before dubbing. Yet, this is usually a false saving. Unless an editor has huge amount of time, he or she will probably lay up only a few tracks in the Avid, and these will probably not be full track lays, only audio and video synchronisations ultimately little better than home movies. To make them broadcastable, they will need atmospheres, effects and music added later. If this is done during the dubbing stage, it might cost £180 an hour in a London dubbing studio, whereas it will cost about roughly £60 an hour during the prep stage. Cutting out prep time usually results in the same amount or more being spent during dubbing instead, and it often has a poor effect on dubbing mixers and editors, who instead of providing “creative sparkle”, end up spending much of their energy cleaning up the sound and creating a serviceable track.
Similarly, deciding what music will be needed before going into the dubbing studio can avoid cost overruns that infuriate production managers. Ensuring that music is cleared for all the territories and formats that the project will be sold into means that time spent in an expensive studio listening to mood music CDs for suitable alternatives can be eliminated. A programme that contains archive footage might probably need music selected as well if there is no commentary, since much archive footage is mute. That will often require research to find something that is suitable for the period, something very time consuming and potentially expensive if done at the wrong time.
Discussion with the sound post-production team at an early stage is important. The production team can determine exactly how much audio they will need to capture and how much time the audio team will need to work on the project: they won’t be able to lay down tracks and mix sound on an hour-long project in only half a day, for instance. And if they’re involved early enough, it’s less likely that the time given to the dub will be squeezed by the rest of the process. The audio team will also know technical details that can speed up prep time, such as the formats their studios will take, which again, cuts down on time spent in studio. If an hour-long commentary has been recorded at a different studio, it is possible the studio will be using the same software as the dubbing editor and mixer. If it is, it may only take them seven minutes or so to load the commentary into their system if it is given to them in that software’s format. However, if they are given a DAT tape, while it is highly likely they will at least be able to use it, it will take them an hour to load it and then half an hour to clean it up. Moreover, output from one piece of software isn’t necessarily compatible with a rival audio program, so it might not even be possible for them to use the commentary if it’s provided in the wrong format.
The audio team will also know what video formats they can accept for playback in their studios (not everyone can take DigiBeta yet, for instance) so they can match pictures and sound.
If the programme is intended for markets other than the UK, there is one final consideration. While Britain is still largely unaffected by it, Germany and the high-def enabled US are likely to require a Dolby 5.1 mix of the audio – something also likely to be necessary for prestige DVD releases. Mixers will need to need to know in advance this additional requirement, if they are to be able to make the adjustments necessary for a stereo mix suitable for 5.1 as well as the large number of viewers who may only have mono televisions – a separate mix may even be necessary in some cases.
Good audio can make an average programme better and make a good programme great. With a little bit of extra preparation, it should be within any production team’s grasp.
With thanks to Ernest Marsh of Warwick Sound and Martyn Harries of BBC Resources.