# Are sound effects getting too loud?



## Guy Bacos (May 8, 2010)

I saw Iron Man 2 today and I was looking forward to hearing John Debney's soundtrack, but more often than none it was in the shadow of the sound effects, although it was still excellent but felt short changed, and I'm seeing this more and more, any slight possibility of a cool sound effect from an armor. a piece of metal, gun shots, explosions etc and this is amplified like crazy. I admit the effect is cool, but the music is hardly audible anymore. Where is this going?

Any thoughts on this?


----------



## bryla (May 8, 2010)

I hope it's not heading for the direction where we can't hear dialog because of SFX.


----------



## MacQ (May 8, 2010)

Yes, definitely. It's an unfortunate trend, and is masking the whole point of having music in the first place, which is to telegraph the emotion of the scene to the audience. That said, Iron Man 2 probably doesn't have a lot of poignant moments, so I don't know. I think the only people that care about this trend are people who make the music (us).

I think it's a result of the technology advancing in the sound design arena as well ... now you can have 50 elements layered to perfection for that bone-crushing sound effect you always wanted! But yeah ... I'm not sure if it's the film mixers at fault or the producers/directors of said films.

~Stu


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 8, 2010)

Not just emotion, but in action movies, I think it's become rare these days when we'll hear that big brass sound, it's masked by the sound effects, and to not compete with the effects they must put it even further back. I was following John Debney's road in the last few months with the London Symphony Orchestra, to the premiere, so I was quite hyped about it, and then when I saw the movie it's like: "Where is it?"

But there were moments where the music was on top, and to me was much more effective and memorable than the sound effects.


----------



## David Story (May 8, 2010)

You fall in love with a song, not a car by.

Hollywood does all to excess, now it's computer effects. Audio and visual off the hook.
Except Hurt Locker won the most Oscars. Story and acting rock.

I liked Iron Man 2, it's a good comic inspired film. But the audible music was mostly rock guitar. The project I'm scoring now is basically the same mix. 

Audiences will go to movies for the music, but it's tricky to do. It takes stars, established, or making new ones.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 8, 2010)

David Story @ Sat May 08 said:


> But the audible music was mostly rock guitar.



Yep!


----------



## P.T. (May 8, 2010)

Just keep saying lowest common denominator to yourself until it sinks in.

I don't even go to movies anymore.


----------



## lux (May 9, 2010)

...you guys watch movies listening to the soundtrack?


----------



## Hannes_F (May 9, 2010)

Iron Man 2? I sat through it with fingers in my ears, so did my wife. Not because of the music or the dialogue but because all of that kling klang boom crash boing. I guess somebody wanted to do us something good and pushed the fader a little upwards in the theatre we were.

BTW the soundtrack was basically an AC/DC best of, no? Not that I would have heard much of it, most times buried under crashing metal and bullets, so I guess you are right, Guy.

Kudos to Robert Downey Jr. that looks kind of burned up but is expressive. Thinking of it, as Sherlock Holmes he was even cooler.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 9, 2010)

lux @ Sun May 09 said:


> ...you guys watch movies listening to the soundtrack?



Ironman 1 is one of my all time favorite action movie, so I went purely for the film. But since John Debney had been pasting each update of his score of Ironman 2 on the wall of FB, it got my attention and curiosity. I had to give some attention to the soundtrack however I would quickly get caught up with the plot.

It was far from being as exciting as Ironman 1, more action ok, but very predictable despite some new interesting ideas to get revenge by the villain played brilliantly by Mickey Rourk and Robert Downey Junior again excellent!


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 9, 2010)

Hannes_F @ Sun May 09 said:


> BTW the soundtrack was basically an AC/DC best of, no?



I don't know, I did notice sections of AC/DC, but this is my point, was it worth it to record Debney's score with the London Symphony Orchestra? Would you have have guessed it even?


----------



## Hannes_F (May 9, 2010)

Guy Bacos @ Sun May 09 said:


> Hannes_F @ Sun May 09 said:
> 
> 
> > BTW the soundtrack was basically an AC/DC best of, no?
> ...



Well even if the recording should have been 100,000 USD this would still have been less than 1 promille (1/1000) of the production costs. Why taking any risk if you can have the best of the best so cheap (compared to the rest)?


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 9, 2010)

Well I can understand that Hannes, but what I want to stress here is the overall picture, how the sound effects are crushing potential good music with great composers and great orchestras.


----------



## requiem_aeternam7 (May 9, 2010)

Guybacos: Not only is it heading in exactly this direction but sound effects and the overall volume of the movies in general is increasing to an insane degree. I get bad tinnitus like I was at a rock concert when I go to a modern movie. Avatar almost made me deaf. It's really causing me to reconsider watching movies in theatres at all anymore


----------



## Hannes_F (May 9, 2010)

Well Guy, I think that on the long view good music with great composers and great orchestras ... will have their home in concert and on CDs ... and any place where it is about the music itself. 

They have had a guest performance in the film business (and appreciated that of course because the money that is circulating there) but more and more the guest is guided to the door. There is no rule carved in stone that film makers must use them. And actually I think it was more a coincidence of history that it happened for a while at all btw.

I mean, come on, how likely is it that wherever the film hero goes, a 90 piece orchestra and 40 choir singers are hiding behind the bushes? This is a cultural reminescense to the opera and it is done 'because it works'. Still. Maybe futural generations will think that film music of the 20th century was scary, who knows. Once film makers find something else that works even better (like sound effects for example) they don't hesitate a fraction of a second to use that.


----------



## requiem_aeternam7 (May 9, 2010)

[quote:9a3b6fdc81="Hannes_F @ Sun May 09, 2010 8:1òÀ3   Ð®²À3   Ð®³À3   Ð®´À3   Ð®µÀ3   Ð®¶À3   Ð®·À3   Ð®¸À3   Ð®¹À3   Ð®ºÀ3   Ð®»À3   Ð®¼À3   Ð®½À3   Ð®¾À3   Ð®¿À3   Ð®ÀÀ3   Ð®ÁÀ3   Ð®ÂÀ3   Ð®ÃÀ3   Ð®ÄÀ3   Ð®ÅÀ3   Ð®ÆÀ3   Ð®ÇÀ3   Ð®ÈÀ3   Ð®ÉÀ3   Ð®ÊÀ3   Ð®ËÀ3   Ð®ÌÀ3   Ð®ÍÀ3   Ð®ÎÀ3   Ð®ÏÀ4   Ð®ÐÀ4   Ð®ÑÀ4   Ð®ÒÀ4   Ð®ÓÀ4   Ð®ÔÀ4   Ð®ÕÀ4   Ð®ÖÀ4   Ð®×À4   Ð®ØÀ4   Ð®ÙÀ4   Ð®ÚÀ4   Ð®ÛÀ4   Ð®ÜÀ4   Ð®ÝÀ4   Ð®ÞÀ4   Ð®ßÀ4   Ð®àÀ4   Ð®áÀ4   Ð®âÀ4   Ð®ãÀ4   Ð®äÀ4   Ð®åÀ4   Ð®æÀ4   Ð®çÀ4   Ð®èÀ4   Ð®éÀ4   Ð®êÀ4   Ð®ëÀ4   Ð®ìÀ4   Ð®íÀ4   Ð®îÀ4   Ð®ïÀ4   Ð®ðÀ4   Ð®ñÀ4   Ð®òÀ4   Ð®óÀ4   Ð®ôÀ4   Ð®õÀ4   Ð®öÀ4   Ð®÷À4   Ð®øÀ4   Ð®ùÀ4   Ð®úÀ4   Ð®ûÀ4   Ð®üÀ4   Ð®ýÀ4   Ð®þÀ4   Ð®ÿÀ4   Ð¯ À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯	À4   Ð¯
À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯ À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯À4   Ð¯À4   Ð


----------



## lux (May 9, 2010)

i have an impression and maybe i'm wrong.

I actually think that some of the issues come from directors. Most of recent blockbusters tend to choose directors on the fly, they rarely have a director footprint and mostly they are produced with kinda prontuary for modern bestselling movie. 

When exceptions happen and directors with personality are involved often soundtrack benefits as well. Raimi being a good example, but not only.

Also, a few directors reach to get good working fantasy or sci-fi movies with unconventional scores. Danny Boyle being another example. 

When directors act (or is just called to act) like just a movie manager probably everything in that movie takes a cliched root. Like the orange oriented photography, boring score, poor or just decent acting, terrible dialogues and so on.

I mean, i have the impression that we sometimes blame composers while theyre just part of a plastic wrapped crap. Its not like the magic of scoring a greatly talented director and his magic vision. Whatever movie genre is involved.

There and just there it drives me mad when i hear a poor soundtrack on a kicking ass movie. 

This is just my impression


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 9, 2010)

Naval, I don't know what the hec you are talking about, I didn't even go near the area you are talking about, I thought my point was quite clear. Perhaps you should read it again.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 9, 2010)

I think we have to go back to the 70s and 80 and some 90s, to recall hearing an orchestra in an action movie and enjoying it, in a movie, mainly with John Williams at the top of course.


----------



## Narval (May 9, 2010)

midphase @ Sun May 09 said:


> "Hollywood does all to excess, now it's computer effects. Audio and visual off the hook.
> Except Hurt Locker won the most Oscars. Story and acting rock."
> 
> Yeah, but money rules. Hurt Locker was lacking in ticket sales.
> ...


The voice of reason.

And the article was good, thanks for sharing it! Something I especially liked:


> "It's coo-coo time, and everyone is tearing his hair out. Many are already bald, and pretending to have shaved their heads. One buyer—an independent financier—told me he has a sign in his office that says "No D"—short for "No Dramas." All he wants is comedies and thrillers for kids. _Fatal Attraction—For Kids. Body Heat—For Kids._ Fresh. Thanks."


Also, this, replace "a script" with "music" in the following -


> _"A script will not sell because:
> 1. It makes you cry.
> 2. It is wonderfully well written.
> 3. It is about something important or meaningful.
> 4. It is intelligent or otherwise hindered by nuance."_


----------



## lux (May 9, 2010)

Guy Bacos @ Sun May 09 said:


> I think we have to go back to the 70s and 80 and some 90s, to recall hearing an orchestra and enjoying it, in a movie, mainly with John Williams at the top of course.



naw, Don Davis, David Arnold, James horner, Elliot Goldenthal, Danny Elfman and many other composers made very nice things starting from the late 90's

I think its time to stop mentioning john williams every three posts


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 9, 2010)

Lux, I'm not talking about Disney/Pixar movies or in that genre, I'm talking about action movies. At least that's my opinion from what I hear at the movies.

John Williams is an excellent reference!


----------



## lux (May 9, 2010)

I suspect none of composers i mentioned had much to do with disney/pixar.

Scores like JPIII, Sphere or a beautiful mind arent a product of the eighties.

John williams is no more a reference. Mentioning him every while is becoming just a senile attitude for all of us. I can tell as i made it many times. 

Time to pass over. Golden age is dead. Bye.

I'm just sorry promising composers (like Don Davis) didnt work as much as expected.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 9, 2010)

This conversation is getting ridiculous and out of context. I'm tempted to say some are looking for a rebel without a cause. If you like these sound effects WAY UP, and the music taking a back seat, then enjoy it! I certainly don't and THIS is what this thread is about! So don't start nit picking every little thing I say and derail from the main issue here.


----------



## lux (May 9, 2010)

yes, i recall you like pre-formatted (by you) threads and replies. no worries, done, got stuff to do.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 9, 2010)

lux @ Sun May 09 said:


> yes, i recall you like pre-formatted (by you) threads and replies. no worries, done, got stuff to do.



Brilliant!


I'd still be interested in comments regarding recent action movies and their sound effects and where this is heading.


----------



## requiem_aeternam7 (May 9, 2010)

Guy Bacos @ Sun May 09 said:


> lux @ Sun May 09 said:
> 
> 
> > yes, i recall you like pre-formatted (by you) threads and replies. no worries, done, got stuff to do.
> ...



Guy don't pay attention to those trolls. Don't know why it's always the same aggravators that come in trolling with no points to make of their own but only to nitpick the posts of others.


----------



## Narval (May 9, 2010)

Guy Bacos @ Sun May 09 said:


> Naval, I don't know what the hec you are talking about, I didn't even go near the area you are talking about, I thought my point was quite clear. Perhaps you should read it again.


I understand your position very well, I just don't think it to be very tenable, for the reasons I described. And I think you have at least a glimpse of what I'm talking about, but don't have arguments against it, others than: you don't like it. Which I think it is the most reasonable argument you have against the sfx/music ratio.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 9, 2010)

Naval, you are trying to make a logic that to me is not a justification for what I object to. As if because of the technical explanations I, the viewer, am suppose to say, "Ok, I am enjoying this". I don't give a shit about everything that comes before the final projection, and it's not my problem, I'm saying it's not of good taste, nor do I find it as effective as hearing more the orchestra and less the sound effects.


----------



## Narval (May 9, 2010)

Guy Bacos @ Sun May 09 said:


> I'm saying it's not of good taste, nor do I find it as effective as hearing more the orchestra and less the sound effects.


Well, your taste is not their taste. Your taste is good, their taste is bad. How unfortunate it's their film and not yours.  

To directly answer your question: Are sound effects getting too loud? No, sfx are not getting too loud in comparison to music. Why? - because the film is not there to showcase music. Sfx are part of the onscreen action, while music is not. A film maker can even do away with music completely. That would probably make sfx unbearably loud, would it?


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 9, 2010)

Narval @ Sun May 09 said:


> To directly answer your question: Are sound effects getting too loud? No, sfx are not getting too loud in comparison to music. A film is not there to showcase music. Sfx are part of the onscreen action, while music is not. A film maker can even do away with music completely. That would probably make sfx unbearably loud, would it?



That really doesn't make much sense Naval! Who cares what is officially part of a film and what isn't. Stop being so technical.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 9, 2010)

It's a good thing John Williams was mainly active in the 70s and 80s with some great action movies he was part of, cause today his music would of be in the shadow of the sound effects.


----------



## lux (May 9, 2010)

requiem_aeternam7 @ Sun May 09 said:


> Guy Bacos @ Sun May 09 said:
> 
> 
> > lux @ Sun May 09 said:
> ...



are you referring to me as a troll? seriously?


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 10, 2010)

Well of course it has to do with my opinion only, but that's what I'm expressing here. Did I ever say I came here on behalf of the universe and a petition with a million signatures? However, I am the viewer, and I can see I'm not the only one thinking this way, and I believe strong enough that this is something important. And I can also see you are the only one here saying that the sound effects is just perfect how they are now, so I wouldn't insist on that too much. Narval, you should also respect someone's opinion, it is not because the industry functions a certain way that means they are right you know, there are commercial reasons for this as well and if people never step up and say, this is a bit too much now, the world would go nuts! I have to believe what I think is right, somehow you are trying to diminish my opinion with excuses I don't buy.

So in conclusion, we have to agree to disagree.


----------



## Narval (May 10, 2010)

Guy Bacos @ Mon May 10 said:


> you are the only one here saying that the sound effects is just perfect how they are now, so I wouldn't insist on that too much. Narval, you should also respect someone's opinion


Oh get off your high horses, will you? Respecting someone's opinion means in the first place to not twist it. I didn't twist your opinion, and I never suggested that you're not entitled to it. I just presented the reasons why I don't think your opinion is very tenable. Is that more than you can take? Well, sorry, but judging upon your insidious ways to intentionally twist others' meanings, I think you don't deserve to be given reasons that you apparently can't handle.

Now, did I really say or imply that "sfx are just perfect as they are now"? I'm calling that a gross and intentional misinterpretation of what I was saying. Why do you put words in my mouth? Because you can? Because you think it makes your position more tenable? My point was quite clear: it is the film makers' call, and not yours, to decide upon the sfx/music loudness ratio, and suggesting you know better would require a bit more substantiation than "I don't like it" and "it's not in good taste."

Other than that, I have clearly acknowledged that you don't always like the sfx/music loudness ratio in certain films. And I did it without twisting your meanings or putting words in your mouth. Asking to please just do me the same favor, would that be too much for you? I hope not. Thx


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 10, 2010)

Narval @ Sun May 09 said:


> Are sound effects getting too loud? No, sfx are not getting too loud in comparison to music. Why? - because the film is not there to showcase music. Sfx are part of the onscreen action, while music is not. A film maker can even do away with music completely. That would probably make sfx unbearably loud, would it?



Just to quote you from earlier, and I couldn't disagree more, especially about the the part you say the sfx is part of the onscreen action while the music isn't. Technically true, but that statement is so false in the reality of cinema. In fact, music has always accompanied films even during the silent era. It is an integral part of the action. It's not because the orchestra wasn't on the set during the shooting that it makes it not part of the onscreen action.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 10, 2010)

Narval @ Mon May 10 said:


> Fact #1 - Sfx are part of the onscreen action.
> Example: A doors visually slams, accompanied by corresponding sfx - part of the onscreen action. You know, audiences assume that, even in the onscreen world, air vibrations translate to sounds. They expect them those sfx be always there, and that even in some impossible situations like spaceships in outer space whooshing when they pass by.



Bull!

That's not the issue, once again. Of course the sounds that are part of the scene are essential. I'm not talking about that. A door slamming is hardly what I call a sound effect, that is a natural sound, but when you get to the point that the sound of someone loading his riffle could be practically heard in the next theatre, this is a highly exaggerated effect. Why? Because it's cooler this way. But when you gain something on one end you often loose on another, and when you add up all the little sounds they take ALL the space of the audio track. This was not the case in the past, which allowed music to be heard. When I was watching Ironman 2, the scenes where I could hear the music well during the action scenes I thought were refreshing and more effective. I could tell you that the vol of these effects were really at the limit of people threshold, if people had a remote I could guarantee you they would of all put the volume down. I don't know if you could understand this, the problem is not the sound effects, it's how they have become out of hand these days.


----------



## Narval (May 10, 2010)

Guy Bacos @ Mon May 10 said:


> Bull!
> 
> That's not the issue, once again.


Nice talking to you.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 10, 2010)

Did you at least read my post, or you stopped at Bull?


----------



## germancomponist (May 10, 2010)

I see your point, Guy, and I agree 100%!

A "big" sound seems to be more important for many "modern composers" than a good composition. 

And sound effects seem to be more important for many "modern film-makers"..... .

What comes next?


----------



## Narval (May 10, 2010)

Guy Bacos @ Mon May 10 said:


> Did you at least read my post, or you stopped at Bull?


You're making really nice personal assumptions. On and on. And your conversation is most enlightening - very well articulated and soundly supported points. Really really nice talking to you. To answer your kind question, rest assured, I read everything you write with utmost attention.

Alright, since you insist, maybe you could substantiate a bit on what did you mean by "Bull!" Maybe, you meant bullshit? If so, could you point a bit clearer, what exactly is bullshit in the paragraph you have decided to address?

And before you bury the issue and dismiss it as suddenly unimportant, do you now understand why music can't be part of the onscreen action?


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 10, 2010)

Don't sometimes people say bull instead of bullshit? But I'm not going to say bullshit on this forum. But I guess I just did!

Anyway, I think my post was very clear why I didn't agree with your statement.


----------



## Narval (May 10, 2010)

No, not at all, you have provided no reasons to back your claims. You're blowing smoke instead, to avoid the difficulties. And you're continuously defensive and attacking.

You know what, I don't think you want to discuss points in order to learn, you just want to vent feelings and to be agreed with. Not much into either of them.

'bye


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 10, 2010)

Narval @ Mon May 10 said:


> No, not at all, you have provided no reasons to back your claims. You're blowing smoke instead, to avoid the difficulties. And you're continuously defensive and attacking.
> 
> You know what, I don't think you want to discuss points in order to learn, you just want to vent feelings and to be agreed with. Not much into either of them.
> 
> 'bye



Fine, I'm happy to say goodbye!


----------



## _taylor (May 10, 2010)

Get a room. :roll:


----------



## choc0thrax (May 10, 2010)

Sound effects suck, music rules. I think the moral of the story is don't go see crap films like Iron Man 2. 8)


----------



## Hannes_F (May 10, 2010)

My impression is that the conflict in this thread seems to be about something else in reality.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 10, 2010)

choc0thrax @ Mon May 10 said:


> Sound effects suck, music rules. I think the moral of the story is don't go see crap films like Iron Man 2. 8)



It's far from being as good or original as the first, but I wouldn't say it's crap, well the intensity of the sound effects part, perhaps.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 10, 2010)

Guy Bacos @ Mon May 10 said:


> choc0thrax @ Mon May 10 said:
> 
> 
> > Sound effects suck, music rules. I think the moral of the story is don't go see crap films like Iron Man 2. 8)
> ...



I didn't like the original film so I guess that's why I'm not too psyched about this one.


I think for tonight you and Narval should kiss and make up considering Montreal just won. I just walked home from downtown and people are going pretty nuts.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 10, 2010)

Can't say enough for the Montreal Canadians, wow!

I don't know about the kissing part choco, maybe next time I should fight with a girl. :D

Hey, I didn't even take this as a fight, I just have passion in me when I believe in something.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 10, 2010)

You never know, maybe Narval is a girl. Although Narval's avatar looks pretty phallic to me...


----------



## Narval (May 10, 2010)

Go Habs!=o (insert some loud sfx and some even LOUDER music for Guy Bacos) o=<


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 10, 2010)

Narval @ Mon May 10 said:


> Go Habs!=o (insert some loud sfx and some even LOUDER music for Guy Bacos) o=<



I'll make a deal with you Narval, you keep the SFX and I'll go with the music, and we'll both cheer for the Habs. Me with music and you with really loud gun shots.


----------



## Nathan Allen Pinard (May 10, 2010)

Imo, it really depends on the mixing engineer. Some engineers automate the soundtrack with the overall dynamic level of sound. Usually it's these guys that make the movie sound amazing. Some engineers however, just don't cut the mustard.

For instance, watch "Behind Enemy Lines". There's a scene during a dogfight where the jet is hit by shrapnel from a SAM. The plane literally tears apart and explodes from the back. The score gets cranked up with the choir pushing through the overall SFX that were going during that scene. Before that there is no music for about 5+ minutes, so it's VERY effective.


----------



## Guy Bacos (May 11, 2010)

That's right. Ideally is a good balance between the music and the SFX, unfortunately there is a strong trend these days with epic SFX.


----------

