# Dialogue intelligibility vs. music in today’s movies



## WindcryMusic (Apr 21, 2019)

I just finished watching “Interstellar” again in my home theatre, which is a pretty good quality (Denon amp, Definitive Technology speakers) surround sound system, albeit with a phantom center channel (because I don’t have a place where a physical center channel speaker could have been set up). And as with so many of the most recent movies, and in particular those with soundtracks done by the amazing Hans Zimmer and other composers hailing from his “school”, the music of “Interstellar” sounds jaw-dropping and enormous … but I very regularly have to back up the video and turn on closed captions to understand the dialogue over that huge, heart-pounding music. This is something I don’t find myself needing to do with older movies, e.g., those from before 2005 or so. It seems to me that the dialogue was more intelligible in movies from back then.

Now, due to health problems, I haven’t been able to go to an actual movie theatre to see a film in many years. So here’s what I am wondering: is it really that today’s soundtracks, and in particular the Zimmer-esque variety thereof, are being mixed in such a way as to walk a finer line when it comes to the intelligibility of the dialogue, to the extent where it becomes problematic for people like myself whose hearing has suffered for various reasons? Or is it that films are now being mixed to be more dependent than older films were upon the existence of a dedicated front center speaker for the dialogue to come out of, and that the “phantom center” of a 4 speaker system can’t reproduce that channel with the same level of clarity? Or could it be something else that I haven’t thought of?

Basically I’m wondering if other people, those who do still go to theaters to see films as well as those with home theater setups, are also noticing a decrease in the intelligibility of dialogue in newer movies like “Interstellar”, or if it is just my ears and/or my surround system’s lack of a physical center channel speaker? (Like I said, my surround system produces much more understandable dialogue with older movies, so I am disinclined to assume it is a general problem with the phantom center channel approach.)

I’m thinking about this as I begin to plan my next project, because I’ve often struggled with maintaining the balance between dialogue and soundtrack in projects where I do all of the mixing of music, dialogue and effects, and I’m trying to gain a better understanding of what I am hearing in these type of film soundtracks in order to inform my own efforts. Thanks in advance for your thoughts, observations, musings or whatever!


----------



## BenG (Apr 22, 2019)

Can't comment on the issue directly, but this may actually not be a mixing issue. 

After some thought, I felt this may be due in part to the actual orchestration of the music and how it conflicts with the dialogue. Basically, if both the score/dialogue are taking up the same part of the frequency spectrum you're going to run into problems with clarity and things overlapping.


----------



## MartinH. (Apr 22, 2019)

I've had huge problems with understanding dialog in movies and shows for many years. Back when I watched stuff with a media player I ran it through a quite aggressively set normalization plugin that compressed the dynamics so that voice was louder in comparison to the "loud epic moments". And if the audio was 5.1, I had the center channel boosted. I do suspect that in the 5.1 to 2.0 stereo mixdown stage many productions also set the volume for the center speaker too low.
Now that I mainly watch over netflix and can't normalize the sound, I basically have to watch everything with subtitles. 

I have a feeling they intend us to have the volume much higher than I'm comfortable listening to (or making my neighbors listen to).

I'm not a native English speaker and always wondered how much of a factor that is. Do people who grew up in English speaking countries have the same trouble with this?


----------



## WindcryMusic (Apr 22, 2019)

BenG said:


> Can't comment on the issue directly, but this may actually not be a mixing issue.
> 
> After some thought, I felt this may be due in part to the actual orchestration of the music and how it conflicts with the dialogue. Basically, if both the score/dialogue are taking up the same part of the frequency spectrum you're going to run into problems with clarity and things overlapping.



I absolutely agree that this is an important consideration when writing underscore. I've watched many of Mike Verta's videos, and he is very insistent about the importance of this. I haven't been as good as I should be about applying this to my own scores (particularly since I have had to write large parts of them prior to the dialogue being recorded), but I am still trying. 

However, I'm not sure that I'm ready to assume that the persons doing the scoring of the biggest films of the last decade aren't already aware of this issue and handling it as best as they can.

Hmm ... you know, I wonder if the problem I described above (about needing to write much of the score without the benefit of the recorded dialogue) is similar to something that the big film composers are running into as well? I know that the idea of composing to a locked picture is all but dead and buried (sadly). For my most recent projects I've actually had the benefit of a locked picture in terms of visuals, but the dialogue is largely voiceover and usually comes in pretty late in the process. Until then I have to just work from the script.


----------



## WindcryMusic (Apr 22, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> I've had huge problems with understanding dialog in movies and shows for many years. Back when I watched stuff with a media player I ran it through a quite aggressively set normalization plugin that compressed the dynamics so that voice was louder in comparison to the "loud epic moments". And if the audio was 5.1, I had the center channel boosted. I do suspect that in the 5.1 to 2.0 stereo mixdown stage many productions also set the volume for the center speaker too low.
> Now that I mainly watch over netflix and can't normalize the sound, I basically have to watch everything with subtitles.
> 
> I have a feeling they intend us to have the volume much higher than I'm comfortable listening to (or making my neighbors listen to).
> ...



I'm a native English speaker and have some similar issues, so take from that what you will. You are right that there is usually a big difference between the overall level of dialogue-heavy scenes and that of the climactic musical and/or environmental moments in films, a much greater difference than one hears in television for example, and I believe you're correct that it is because film audio is calibrated for a theater environment where the loud moments can be VERY loud. But that's been the case for as long as I can remember, much longer than what I am talking about in the starting post, which is that the dialogue seems to be masked by the big music moments more often in recent films.

I have the advantage of having brick walls and no close neighbors, so I can crank up my surround sound system as much as I want when watching a film, even in the middle of the night. Alas, turning it up doesn't help me when it is the film's music that is seemingly making it impossible for me to decipher much of the dialogue.

I haven't looked to see if there is an option in my Denon amp to adjust the relative volume of the phantom center channel! I should take a look for that, thanks. Still, the question remains ... is this more of an issue with the mixes of recent movies (as is my perception), and if so, for what reason?


----------



## JohnG (Apr 22, 2019)

Interstellar, evening the theatres, had an unusual balance of score and dialogue. I saw it at the Directors Guild of America theatre on Sunset and even there -- at a directors' palace -- you couldn't hear all the dialogue.

I assume the director liked it that way?

On a parallel track, I sang yesterday in a pretty big Easter service with brass and organ. It felt that the volume of the instruments, including of course the organ, seriously diminished the intelligibility of the text in the hymns and anthems. But it was clear that the congregation couldn't have cared less. They obviously loved the experience.

So maybe it's sort of like that, in a very tangential, oblique way? The experience of the movie doesn't necessarily depend on one's hearing every last syllable?


----------



## WindcryMusic (Apr 22, 2019)

JohnG said:


> Interstellar, evening the theatres, had an unusual balance of score and dialogue. I saw it at the Directors Guild of America theatre on Sunset and even there -- at a directors' palace -- you couldn't hear all the dialogue.
> 
> I assume the director liked it that way?
> 
> ...



I agree that is a possibility, and the one I was sort of suggesting when I said they might be "walking a finer line" with regards to that balance. It is very interesting and useful to know that the same issue was noticeable on that particular movie even in a great theater environment.

If this is indeed a deliberate mixing choice that is being made as of late, it's certainly not the answer I expected. I mostly expected answers saying "you need a real center channel speaker".


----------



## jbuhler (Apr 22, 2019)

My understanding is that films used to be remixed for DVDs, even the 5.1 mix, boosting dialogue compared to the theatrical release and designed for dialogue intelligibility when played back with two channel stereo (on DVDs without a special 2 channel mix). My impression is that this is not so common any more—that the DVD 5.1 mix is now closer to the theatrical mix—perhaps because the presumption is that home systems now have a dedicated center speaker. Adding a center speaker to your set up will almost certainly improve dialogue intelligibility. 

I haven't studied this. I'm only going from my impressions, so I might be completely off-base. I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has real knowledge.


----------



## JohnG (Apr 22, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> films used to be remixed for DVDs, even the 5.1 mix, boosting dialogue compared to the theatrical release



That part definitely is true. I wonder if there's a new "streaming standard," since hardly anyone buys DVDs anymore?

I would be surprised if they still take the time / trouble for a DVD-only mix, unless it's also for streaming. Except for rare / can't stream movies (old art films or foreign,) the only DVDs I get anymore are from Netflix etc. around Emmy time, sent out as promos for voting for them.


----------



## jbuhler (Apr 22, 2019)

JohnG said:


> That part definitely is true. I wonder if there's a new "streaming standard," since hardly anyone buys DVDs anymore?
> 
> I would be surprised if they still take the time / trouble for a DVD-only mix, unless it's also for streaming. Except for rare / can't stream movies (old art films or foreign,) the only DVDs I get anymore are from Netflix etc. around Emmy time, sent out as promos for voting for them.


By DVD, I mean DVD/BluRay. (I also have a personal library of about 2000 discs last I counted several years ago, so I am one of those people who still buys DVDs—mostly because DVDs are the easiest way to get digital files to use in the classroom.) Do streams use the same audio compression as discs? What about downloaded digital files? Do all the streaming services use the same audio compression? Are they applying their own compression? I don't know the answer to that, though I think the answer is likely yes for the last one. 

Once upon a time broadcast had a different mix than did DVDs, DVDs were different from the theatrical mix, and the mix for airplanes was different still. Or at least that's what some articles I read about ten years ago said. I remember two channel mixes on DVDs along with the 5.1 but I don't recall seeing a two channel mix for some time now. Given that theatrical mixes today often use more than 5.1, they have to be remixed to 5.1 for discs, broadcast, and for streaming, unless they are streaming other formats.


----------



## Scott Moran (Apr 22, 2019)

Here's an interesting article with Christopher Nolan commenting on the dialogue levels in Interstellar. 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/christopher-nolan-breaks-silence-interstellar-749465


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Apr 22, 2019)

I have a take from the other side, the quiet side.

For my job as a publicist, I watched Jim Jarmusch's PATERSON in the room where he mixed it. I wasn't there when Jim was mixing, but work was still in progress, and the post producer and sound people were there. In that amazing room, it had one of the best sound designs I had ever heard. You could practically hear a fly flapping his wings outside the main character's house. The entire meaning of the film was wrapped around making the audience hear the world in this hyper-intense way that the main character, a poet played by Adam Driver, heard it. That was central to what Jim told me the film was all about. I watched it twice, and heard much, much more the second time.

As I was talking about it so much, my wife and my friends wanted to see it when it came out. We went to a very good theatre in New York with good sound. Still, I would say that the soundtrack had about 60% of what I heard in the mixing room. It was still a good movie, but a lot of what really mattered was gone. 

I'm just conjecturing, but it's possible that a loud movie sounds one way sitting in the sweet spot in a magnificent mixing room, and very different when it gets out into the real world--even to great movie theatres and first-rate home theatres. And also mixes are approved by directors who have heard the dialogue hundreds of times. They understand it perfectly regardless of whether most people can. 

And I do believe that understanding dialogue through music and effects is impacted by the quality of your hearing. It's similar to being able to pick out a conversation in a loud restaurant, one of the things that has gotten harder for me to do as years have passed. 

The same thing happens with cinematography. When TV shows like THE WALKING DEAD and GAME OF THRONES are timed by the cinematographers in screening rooms, they push the contrasts envelope, and characters slip into very dark areas. And I'm sure they are still visible on the screen in that room where they're doing the timing. And when it goes out I'm sure it looks great for people who have an Ultra 4K TV. But for people with normal HD in a lit room that's maybe not set up right, they oftentimes can't see what's going on.


----------



## Fredeke (Apr 22, 2019)

BenG said:


> Can't comment on the issue directly, but this may actually not be a mixing issue.
> 
> After some thought, I felt this may be due in part to the actual orchestration of the music and how it conflicts with the dialogue. Basically, if both the score/dialogue are taking up the same part of the frequency spectrum you're going to run into problems with clarity and things overlapping.


Isn't that why we use EQ ? E.g. dip the music around 2KHz to make room for the dialog's clarity.


----------



## José Herring (Apr 22, 2019)

Interstellar was particularly problematic in that regard. I read somewhere that it was a creative choice. I don't know. I saw it in the theater. Thought it sounded wonderful. Dialog in that movie was of little importance at least to me anyway. On the flip side with the same team, Dunkirk was the exact opposite. That film was driven by the story visuals and editing first then dialog with pretty minimal music even in action scenes. 

I try to put my attention on how HZ even with minimal resources, even sometimes as little as a pencil tapping or a watch ticking, can make anything sound huge.


----------



## WindcryMusic (Apr 22, 2019)

Scott Moran said:


> Here's an interesting article with Christopher Nolan commenting on the dialogue levels in Interstellar.
> 
> https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/christopher-nolan-breaks-silence-interstellar-749465



Great stuff, thanks! So I now understand there have been other such comments about this particular film ... I didn't know that. For me, I have found the same sort of perplexing under-mixing of dialogue to be present to various degrees in other recent films - the Nolan-directed Batman films come to mind, and perhaps this is indicative of it being more of a directorial decision after all. Perhaps Interstellar is just the most extreme example thereof.


----------



## Saxer (Apr 22, 2019)

Maybe it's also a matter of age. I could follow dialogues in noisy environment better when I was under 50. And that's a while ago...


----------



## WindcryMusic (Apr 22, 2019)

Fredeke said:


> Isn't that why we use EQ ? E.g. dip the music around 2KHz to make room for the dialog's clarity.



While I suppose that helps, I suspect it would be generally regarded as a crude, sledgehammer solution to what would be better addressed via proper orchestration of underscore to leave room for the dialogue. Especially since different actors have different frequency ranges in their voice ... you wouldn't clear out the same frequency range for James Earl Jones as you would for Fran Drescher. (Although the latter actor's voice can pretty much clear out any space without soundtrack help, I suspect.)


----------



## BenG (Apr 22, 2019)

Fredeke said:


> Isn't that why we use EQ ? E.g. dip the music around 2KHz to make room for the dialog's clarity.


 
I mean yes, but as a general rule you should have to carve out anything with properly written music. Same goes for orchestration where to have two conflicting lines in the same register/sonic space. 

Not saying that that is what's going on here, but I've definitely noticed this coming up more frequently.


----------



## Fredeke (Apr 22, 2019)

BenG said:


> I mean yes, but as a general rule you should have to carve out anything with properly written music. Same goes for orchestration where to have two conflicting lines in the same register/sonic space.
> 
> Not saying that that is what's going on here, but I've definitely noticed this coming up more frequently.


I don't have mixed a film since I was a student, but I suppose I would rely on both good compo _and_ appropriate EQs .


----------



## JohnG (Apr 22, 2019)

BenG said:


> I mean yes, but as a general rule you should have to carve out anything with properly written music. Same goes for orchestration where to have two conflicting lines in the same register/sonic space.
> 
> Not saying that that is what's going on here, but I've definitely noticed this coming up more frequently.



Maybe, Ben, but then again directors are clearly moving music around and using music editors to extend scores and stems into scenes for which the music wasn't originally written. So in other words it isn't necessarily a composer problem.

As a broad matter, I used to obsess about "clearing for dialogue" when i wrote for movies. I almost totally ignore it now; except for extremes, they work around the music just fine.

Still don't want to write a lot of low score against an explosion, however -- that is actually more of an issue than dialogue!


----------



## BenG (Apr 22, 2019)

JohnG said:


> Maybe, Ben, but then again directors are clearly moving music around and using music editors to extend scores and stems into scenes for which the music wasn't originally written. So in other words it isn't necessarily a composer problem.
> 
> As a broad matter, I used to obsess about "clearing for dialogue" when i wrote for movies. I almost totally ignore it now; except for extremes, they work around the music just fine.
> 
> Still don't want to write a lot of low score against an explosion, however -- that is actually more of an issue than dialogue!



Good point, John! I guess this is the nature of editing in the 'digital world' where the ability to quickly move around cuts, audio, etc. has never been easier.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 22, 2019)

It's a problem. AFAIK to this day by far the highest volume of complaints the BBC gets about any issue - technical or editorial - is with regard music levels in particular against dialogue. Others have spoken here about the effect of directors getting used to perfect loud mixing theaters, and how little that relates to even domestic cinemas let alone watching on Netflix on Whatever. And yes - as I've gotten older I definitely notice the difference that each year's relentless if slow hearing degradation brings. And there's a lot of older people out there.

IMO the issue on Interstellar was indefensibly indulgent. I actually laughed out loud at a sound mix, and I've never done that before or since, it was ridiculous. I have seen specific scenes deliberately mixed with dialogue low in other movies that worked - The Social Network and Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me both spring to mind, just for specific scenes. Both of those were clear directorial choices where the obscuring of dialogue was intended. I didn't feel that justification in Interstellar, I think they collectively lost the plot. Literally.

Important to note. I routinely see films in the cinema with exemplary sound mixes - plenty of impact, dynamic range, subtlety, artistry and yet I hear every word perfectly clearly. Healthy dialogue isn't the death of art. Its a skill, and I appreciate it when I hear it. One other note - actors take their share of the blame, along with the directors who let them get away with it. Even in a talky film like Greta Gerwig's Lady Bird I really struggled with one character in particular, just because of diction. Putting on the subtitles is one helluva buzzkill for a movie watching experience.

In short - blame the directors first, sound mixers second.


----------



## YaniDee (Apr 22, 2019)

WindcryMusic said:


> I haven’t been able to go to an actual movie theatre to see a film in many years


You haven't missed anything..


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 22, 2019)

Hans wrote about this, especially the one scene with loud organ drowning out the dialog. His position was that the music had to be that loud.

I personally didn't agree, but my opinion was only based on having seen it once in a theater, while he saw it over and over.

It was definitely a conscious choice.


----------



## JEPA (Apr 22, 2019)

excuse me, but i think if you put a speaker for your unused "phantom center" channel it could improve the dialog understanding. So far I understand in a surround mix the center channel would carry almost all dialogs...


----------



## storyteller (Apr 22, 2019)

The score was incredible. The movie was great. The dialogue was well written and performed extremely well. But I 100% agree that it is a difficult movie to hear intelligibly. In fact, it is the reason why I've only re-watched it a couple of times. I hate playing the volume game during a movie.

That said, I've noticed this trend with a number of movies. I've been wandering if it is a product of "derivative mixing." E.g. When a person mixes to a reference track, then their track becomes the new gold standard, the next engineer must mix to that track... and so on. Eventually the chain of mixes reflects an evolution of mixing clarity. For example, Dave Pensado has recently said he is putting in a lot more 500hz these days than he used to. Pop/Rock mixes I know. That isn't film. But the same principle applies. Even he didn't know why. But that is what our ears have collectively shifted toward.

To me these days, top ends are brighter, lows are boomier, but mids are MUDDIER than before. It probably has something to do with wounds remaining from the loudness wars, but either way I think films have suffered greatly over the last 3 to 4 years.

Another theory I've had is the muddiness is due to the increased reliance of lavaliers on actors vs the use of boom mics. It sounds like a lot of directors are opting for the use of the lav mic underneath clothing rather than going back with ADR. Dunno though. Just a theory.


----------



## WindcryMusic (Apr 22, 2019)

JEPA said:


> excuse me, but i think if you put a speaker for your unused "phantom center" channel it could improve the dialog understanding. So far I understand in a surround mix the center channel would carry almost all dialogs...



Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but "phantom center" doesn't mean the channel information is "unused". The information from that channel is instead distributed to both of the other front speakers (L/R).

Anyway, I have three observations about that. One is that, as I said in earlier posts, I don't have the same problem with hearing the dialog in movies from before the last decade or so, using the same surround setup. Two is that, as I also alluded to earlier, there is no place in my home theater setup for a center speaker to live; based upon the size of the center units that I evaluated at the time of purchase, it would have had to either block the bottom several inches of my television screen or else would have had to sit directly in front of the opening in my fireplace, and neither of those was a palatable option to me. Three is that, in investigating surround systems, I have found that a lot of people actually prefer the sound of a "phantom center" system over a dedicated center channel speaker in a home system.

Or ... maybe you are just pulling my leg, since I'd said this was the response I had expected to get the most of. If so ... good one. 

Judging from this thread as a whole, along with that Nolan article that was linked, I've been surprised to see how many people have had complaints with the dialogue/music balance in "Interstellar" specifically, even in theaters.


----------



## JohnG (Apr 22, 2019)

IDK if it would fit but, in reading your reply, wondered if you could use one of those thin "band" speakers for a centre. Maybe they sound awful or are impractical for you, but it's a thought.


----------



## NoamL (Apr 22, 2019)

I agree it's probably because of mixing in pristine environments while most theaters are not really even good, much less great, setups. Then again from a certain perspective, why not? people like Nolan and Zimmer consider themselves to be artists and believe people will be returning to enjoy their work years or decades from now. Why not make their best possible work, the way they want, instead of conforming their work to what's logistically & technologically possible today. I really couldn't enjoy _Dunkirk _but that was AMC's fault not Christopher Nolan's.

Mix of music vs dialogue is another issue entirely... musical starts, stops and levels should never, EVER steal attention from the other elements in the film without a solid artistic reason.


----------



## WindcryMusic (Apr 22, 2019)

JohnG said:


> IDK if it would fit but, in reading your reply, wondered if you could use one of those thin "band" speakers for a centre. Maybe they sound awful or are impractical for you, but it's a thought.



If you are talking about soundbars, there isn't enough room for one of those on the ledge where my television sits unless it is no more than 3" deep and 2" high, and I don't think I've ever seen one that is that small.

Also, yes, I do think they sound awful.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 22, 2019)

WindcryMusic said:


> If you are talking about soundbars, there isn't enough room for one of those on the ledge where my television sits unless it is no more than 3" deep and 2" high, and I don't think I've ever seen one that is that small.
> 
> Also, yes, I do think they sound awful.



Actually, I'm very happy with our Vizio soundbar (3.0, i.e. two speakers + a center one). It's great.

And no, it's not an audiophile system, but then either is my car radio. I have my studio for serious listening.


----------



## WindcryMusic (Apr 22, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Actually, I'm very happy with our Vizio soundbar (3.0, i.e. two speakers + a center one). It's great.
> 
> And no, it's not an audiophile system, but then either is my car radio. I have my studio for serious listening.



Cool, I’m glad you’re happy with it. I’ve heard a Visio soundbar and I’m afraid didn’t care for it myself.

But maybe this is the difference - I also use my home theater as a “2nd check” listening environment for my mixes, especially since my studio’s Equator D8 nearfields don’t tell me much below around 80Hz, and my studio space is far from ideal. Well, maybe it is a “3rd check” after headphones, but still, I want it to give me an idea of what I’m getting out of my mixes over a reasonably good home stereo system.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 22, 2019)

WindcryMusic said:


> I want it to give me an idea of what I’m getting out of my mixes over a reasonably good home stereo system.



That's not what I use it for. I have big and little speakers in my studio for that.

As I said, it's like listening on a car radio - I listen past the quality of the speakers.


----------



## JohnG (Apr 22, 2019)

NoamL said:


> most theaters are not really even good, much less great, setups.



Not only that, but the tolerance limits for "Dolby Certified" or "DTS" are so elastic that they can certify their heads off and you still may not hear what you're supposed to in the surrounds.


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 22, 2019)

So if you listen to the mix in your home via streaming or DVD/blue ray its called Near field mix and it involves grabbing the stems form the theatrical and doing a remix with the speakers much closer and smaller than in a big theatre. and the spl is about 65 spl vs 80 in theatres. This mix is sometimes not performed by the same re reocrding mixer. and producers and directors might not be involved. its a studio distribution thing. Normally they follow whats on the theatrical experience and its something that has been going on since the 5.1 releases in dvd. 
This doesnt mean thats the reason why the levels are off in the diaogue side. just to inform about that side of the biz that not many know. 
In the theatre if you listen to dialogue at low levels you would still hear it pretty well. those speakers push a ton of air. but i do remember the same issue with inception. i couldnt understand the asian character with the accent and niether a lot of leonardo decaprios words. 
i do remember some tv shows that use a similar technique and i think its a creative thing for a specific reason. to make it sound cool. odd? yes... but if you have very clear dialogue like we have always been listening in movies, i think a lot of lines... like those in interstellar and inception might sound too cheesy. keep i mind that ive heard those two movies in different languages and when i hear the translation on a very nice dubbed dialogue it totally sounds cheesy AF... dream inside a dream!? c'mon! father inside the duaghter books?! c'mon! so i think its a way of selling the storyline with sounds. for tv shows, i think sons of anarchy was one show which it was hard to listen to what they said since it had a very think, compressed mid range sound. since i worked on all those shows and movies and plenty more, its something i found interesting and could compare the dialogue solo track vs music and effects. but it could also be that the loudness standards have made it so that mixers have to find other clever ways to deal with pushing levels so it grabs peoples attention and not have huge dynamic ranges. i think blade runner was one of them where the music was just insanely loud... but it helped the storyline not be so long. suddenly those huge synth swells grabbed peoples attention so much that you kind of forgot the slow pace of a nicley weaved production. but i dont work on those on a sound stage directly in post so its just a random opinion. from al we know it might be hans... the only composer ever to actually get a composer wishes and tell them to turn up the music and they do it


----------



## rrichard63 (Apr 22, 2019)

This earlier discussion of speech intelligibility might be of some interest here:

https://vi-control.net/community/th...uge-dynamic-range-in-tv-shows-nowadays.69387/


----------



## bill5 (Apr 23, 2019)

Yes, I think this is a huge problem that these fools making the movies for some reason are clueless about. Even sometimes when there isn't significant background music. At first I thought it was me but I've heard similar from others, sometimes while watching the movie...we look at each other and go "what the #### did he say?" and have to rewind. Very annoying.


----------



## rrichard63 (Apr 23, 2019)

This situation has several dimensions and I think they interact with each other in ways that we may not be aware of while watching a movie and listening to its sound track. These include

Changes over time in how actors are trained and directed.
Changes over time in how dialog is recorded and/or overdubbed.
Changes over time in how soundtracks are mixed and mastered.
Changes over time in soundtrack formats -- from mono to stereo to surround to ambisonic to whatever comes next.
Changes over time in the extent to which, and manner in which, soundtracks are remastered for alternative distribution channels -- DVD, streaming, etc.
I think it's understandable that some surround soundtracks (mostly older ones) are reasonably intelligible on a playback system lacking a center channel speaker, while other (mostly recent) soundtracks are not. I completely understand the OP's situation, where there's nowhere to put a center channel speaker. (My living room has even worse problems -- we turn on subtitles for everything.) But it wouldn't surprise me to learn that a center speaker, if it were possible, would make a meaningful difference even though some other films sound great without one.

And it wouldn't surprise me to find that I can't disentangle the effects of all of the factors shaping the intelligibility of a given soundtrack in a given playback environment. But this discussion, and others like it, help a lot. Thanks, everyone!


----------



## kitekrazy (Apr 23, 2019)

rrichard63 said:


> This earlier discussion of speech intelligibility might be of some interest here:
> 
> https://vi-control.net/community/th...uge-dynamic-range-in-tv-shows-nowadays.69387/



AMC shows are terrible. I often use CC to figure out what they are saying.


----------



## kitekrazy (Apr 23, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Actually, I'm very happy with our Vizio soundbar (3.0, i.e. two speakers + a center one). It's great.
> 
> And no, it's not an audiophile system, but then either is my car radio. I have my studio for serious listening.



I'm still using analog. I have an old JVC receiver (RCA in/outs), an old Radio Shack sub package, (satellites were made by Infinity ad still sound great), Infinity center channel. Seems no reason to move up to the digital world with HDMI. PC games are great on this. 
With younger generations the audiophile is dead. They listen on portable devices. At one time electronic stores like Best Buy and the defunct Circuit City had rooms dedicated to speakers. The choice of stereo receivers is much smaller.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 23, 2019)

kitekrazy said:


> I'm still using analog. I have an old JVC receiver (RCA in/outs), an old Radio Shack sub package, (satellites were made by Infinity ad still sound great), Infinity center channel. Seems no reason to move up to the digital world with HDMI. PC games are great on this.
> With younger generations the audiophile is dead. They listen on portable devices. At one time electronic stores like Best Buy and the defunct Circuit City had rooms dedicated to speakers. The choice of stereo receivers is much smaller.



The point isn't HDMI or digital, it's that we can use the satellite remote to control the Vizio soundbar and Vizio TV together. And the soundbar mounts nicely under the TV in our bedroom.

It sounds just fine - loud enough to hear, some nice 80-100Hz boost for impact, wide enough stereo... Sometimes I even put on the music-only DirecTV channels, and it's fine for that too. I like it.

I wouldn't like it in my studio, and I wouldn't sit down and listen to music in detail on it.


----------



## JT (Apr 23, 2019)

I haven't read all the posts in this thread, but add me to the list of people who can't hear dialog anymore. But watch an old Hitchcock film or East of Eden or anything from 50-60 years ago and you can hear everything.


----------



## mscp (Apr 23, 2019)

Contemporary movies suffer from lack of engineers who truly understand simple things like gain staging, ducking with look-ahead settings, etc...or maybe they’re just there to ruin the experience - on purpose.

Sarcasm aside... 

I don’t have a home theatre because I find somewhat pointless these days. I often find myself watching movies in good old stereo (2.0) because the mixing often suits better. 

If the cost wasn’t so high, I’d really enjoy having an option like “5.1 home” - audio for home theatres where the mixing is exclusively done for that kind of environment sort of thing.


----------



## Fredeke (Apr 23, 2019)

bill5 said:


> Yes, I think this is a huge problem that these fools making the movies for some reason are clueless about. Even sometimes when there isn't significant background music. At first I thought it was me but I've heard similar from others, sometimes while watching the movie...we look at each other and go "what the #### did he say?" and have to rewind. Very annoying.


Can't be worse than French movies of the early 90s... Apparently it was fashionable for actors to mumble and whisper, and most was still recorded through one simple boom mic.
Also, in the EU we don't cut dialogs like in the US: we used to build the mix up from room tone, which can make the matter worse. It's got better over the years though.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Apr 23, 2019)

It's not just films either - I've noticed that many shows (Netflix for example) are now also stupidly noisy. I think the sound design is an even greater offender than the music. It pisses me off. Oh, and the stupid low end. Apparently noise and absurd low end are the current idea of "exciting".


----------



## mscp (Apr 24, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> It's not just films either - I've noticed that many shows (Netflix for example) are now also stupidly noisy. I think the sound design is an even greater offender than the music. It pisses me off. Oh, and the stupid low end. Apparently noise and absurd low end are the current idea of "exciting".



Netflix should provide more alt. sound options (different mixes)


----------



## WindcryMusic (Apr 24, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> It's not just films either - I've noticed that many shows (Netflix for example) are now also stupidly noisy. I think the sound design is an even greater offender than the music. It pisses me off. Oh, and the stupid low end. Apparently noise and absurd low end are the current idea of "exciting".



While I don't have Netflix, I think the overbearing low end you speak of even shows up in many soundtrack albums now. As much as I enjoy Hans' music, I can't bring myself to use any of it as A/B reference tracks because the low end is often so dominant. Instead I find myself going back to soundtracks from a couple of decades back, or else purely classical recordings (my go-to orchestral reference tracks right now are from the Michael Tilson Thomas/SF Orchestra recordings of Mahler symphonies).


----------



## YaniDee (Apr 24, 2019)

And meanwhile the "droney cinematic underscore" libraries keep coming out..


----------



## bill5 (Apr 24, 2019)

kitekrazy said:


> AMC shows are terrible. I often use CC to figure out what they are saying.


Cable in general sucks. I dumped it years ago.


----------



## Fredeke (Apr 24, 2019)

bill5 said:


> Cable in general sucks. I dumped it years ago.


In general, TV uses awful dynamic compression on all their programs (sometimes multiband, often not) with fast attack and very slow release.
It may have had some justification in the analog days, but now it is just bad taste.
That's why I never watch movies or series on TV. I don't even own a TV. It makes my ears bleed.



Phil81 said:


> Netflix should provide more alt. sound options (different mixes)


If there are different mixes, yes. But the idea of different mixes feels weird... Can you picture ourselves releasing different mixes of a music album - like one for headphones, one the living room, one for the car, and one for laptop and phone speakers? (Ok, sometimes singles are especially mastered for radio, and end up sounding worse than the album when listened to without the radio compression wizardry)


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 25, 2019)

Fredeke said:


> In general, TV uses awful dynamic compression on all their programs (sometimes multiband, often not) with fast attack and very slow release.
> It may have had some justification in the analog days, but now it is just bad taste.
> That's why I never watch movies or series on TV. I don't even own a TV. It makes my ears bleed.



Wow, is that really true in the US? Not true in the UK at least.


----------



## Fredeke (Apr 25, 2019)

Guy Rowland said:


> Wow, is that really true in the US? Not true in the UK at least.


I'm from Belgium, but almost everything I've ever heard on TV, or that was recorded from the TV (even in English, though I don't know from which country) was like this. And paradoxically, the problem is worse and/or more widespread with HDTV. Streaming services, on the other hand, sound more like a DVD (or the theater - I'm not sure I can tell the difference).

I remember that in the analog days, the BBC was a leader in sound quality. Maybe it is still so now - I wouldn't know.


----------



## bill5 (Apr 28, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> It's not just films either - I've noticed that many shows (Netflix for example) are now also stupidly noisy. I think the sound design is an even greater offender than the music. It pisses me off. Oh, and the stupid low end. Apparently noise and absurd low end are the current idea of "exciting".


They're just taking their cue from a lot of popular stuff on the radio today (rap being the obvious one) and live performances, where the bass and drums ARE ALWAYS WAY TOO FREAKING LOUD. I rarely go to concerts anymore because of this.


----------



## bill5 (Apr 28, 2019)

Fredeke said:


> In general, TV uses awful dynamic compression on all their programs (sometimes multiband, often not) with fast attack and very slow release.
> It may have had some justification in the analog days, but now it is just bad taste.
> That's why I never watch movies or series on TV. I don't even own a TV. It makes my ears bleed.


I wasn't just talking about the sounds, but agreed.


----------



## Rctec (Apr 28, 2019)

WindcryMusic said:


> I just finished watching “Interstellar” again in my home theatre, which is a pretty good quality (Denon amp, Definitive Technology speakers) surround sound system, albeit with a phantom center channel (because I don’t have a place where a physical center channel speaker could have been set up). And as with so many of the most recent movies, and in particular those with soundtracks done by the amazing Hans Zimmer and other composers hailing from his “school”, the music of “Interstellar” sounds jaw-dropping and enormous … but I very regularly have to back up the video and turn on closed captions to understand the dialogue over that huge, heart-pounding music. This is something I don’t find myself needing to do with older movies, e.g., those from before 2005 or so. It seems to me that the dialogue was more intelligible in movies from back then.
> 
> Now, due to health problems, I haven’t been able to go to an actual movie theatre to see a film in many years. So here’s what I am wondering: is it really that today’s soundtracks, and in particular the Zimmer-esque variety thereof, are being mixed in such a way as to walk a finer line when it comes to the intelligibility of the dialogue, to the extent where it becomes problematic for people like myself whose hearing has suffered for various reasons? Or is it that films are now being mixed to be more dependent than older films were upon the existence of a dedicated front center speaker for the dialogue to come out of, and that the “phantom center” of a 4 speaker system can’t reproduce that channel with the same level of clarity? Or could it be something else that I haven’t thought of?
> 
> ...



In both “Interstellar” and “ The Dark Knight” it was a very deliberate choice of Chris’. Remember that he’s not just the director, but has written the script and therefore the dialogue and felt that - if we gave the information somewhere else in the picture or if there where better, more ‘musical’ ways to convey the emotional experience rather than make things strictly an exposition scene, he’d go for the music every time. 
Technically speaking, with the technology we have these days, with the amazing talent in mix-engineers we have - everything is possible...


----------



## Fredeke (Apr 28, 2019)

bill5 said:


> I wasn't just talking about the sounds, but agreed.


That's why shops advertise their TV sets with 0% interest
(ok, that pun may work better in french...)


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 28, 2019)

Rctec said:


> In both “Interstellar” and “ The Dark Knight” it was a very deliberate choice of Chris’. Remember that he’s not just the director, but has written the script and therefore the dialogue and felt that - if we gave the information somewhere else in the picture or if there where better, more ‘musical’ ways to convey the emotional experience rather than make things strictly an exposition scene, he’d go for the music every time.



The problem for me certainly in the case of Interstellar is that it misses a crucial part not so much of exposition but of human psychology. If the audience member is immersed in the scene, they hang on every word. And if they miss one, they are much more likely to go “hold on, what?!” rather than get swept away by the music.

David Lynch pulled it off in Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me, and David Fincher in the Social Network in two specific scenes, both set in clubs where the music playing in those environments drowned out the dialogue, or partly obscured it. This worked for me, especially in Twin Peaks where there was an obvious physical logic, additionally a more artistic one. Another way it could also work is in missing lines in a noisy car chase or next to an erupting volcano, in these cases you probably have a good idea of what’s being said anyway. (“Come on let’s go” / “Let’s get the hell outta here” etc)

But when dialogue fights - and loses - against Underscore (Overscore?) which is an artificial construct of the movie not a representation of how things sound in real life. the unfortunate side effect is to actually take the audience out of a film completely rather than immerse them. Essentially it’s breaking the fourth wall, making the audience think about mixing desks, not space travel. “What? Huh? Go back, I missed something. Why is this music so damn loud anyway?”


----------



## WindcryMusic (Apr 29, 2019)

Rctec said:


> In both “Interstellar” and “ The Dark Knight” it was a very deliberate choice of Chris’. Remember that he’s not just the director, but has written the script and therefore the dialogue and felt that - if we gave the information somewhere else in the picture or if there where better, more ‘musical’ ways to convey the emotional experience rather than make things strictly an exposition scene, he’d go for the music every time.
> Technically speaking, with the technology we have these days, with the amazing talent in mix-engineers we have - everything is possible...



Thanks much for the insight! There's no questioning the effectiveness of the scenes with that music out in front. Like Guy said, personally I do find myself getting sidetracked by the "what did she say" aspect in such scenes, which for me steals a little bit of the emotional thrust thereof. But knowing that it was a deliberate balance choice rather than some defect in my listening environment is very helpful, since I have to rely upon that same listening environment to judge the balance of my own efforts.

It sounds like Mr. Nolan is a "composer's director", if he feels the music is important enough to allow it to be front and center at times even when it is competing with dialogue. But perhaps that's only the case when he has a particularly powerful soundtrack at his disposal. I think I won't be as inclined to make the same balance decision when it is my own music that has to carry the story.


----------



## bill5 (Apr 30, 2019)

Fredeke said:


> That's why shops advertise their TV sets with 0% interest
> (ok, that pun may work better in french...)


So it's like a Jerry Lewis thing?


----------

