# Movie score mixing - lower levels these days?



## passenger57 (Mar 26, 2013)

Is it just me or is the action music in movies these days either lower in the mix or more fx driven? Reason I'm asking, I just scored an action movie - sounded awesome in my studio. But I just heard the movie mix and my score is just barely audible in key areas. Mostly explosions and sounds fx in the forefront. Now the movie feels boring. 
Now check out this crappy video someone made of Predator on tv. (only thing I can find as an example) 
The orchestra is full up and kicking butt. If this same movie was made today with the same score, do you think the music would be mixed this loud?? I personally love it. 
Maybe I should A/B it with the Predators movie to find out. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yR6AF1ctDs8


----------



## mverta (Mar 26, 2013)

Here's what happens/what's happened:

Surviving the Mix


And, by the way, here's how a good mixer handles an action scene:

Mix Example with Video


_Mike


----------



## passenger57 (Mar 26, 2013)

Mike your a total lifesaver, I sent that video straight to the mixer!
Thank you!! :D


----------



## musophrenic (Mar 26, 2013)

That's an extremely helpful podcast, Mike (as I've found all of your podcasts to be). Thank you for sharing these potent pieces of knowledge/advice.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 26, 2013)

I'd be interested to hear your mixer's response, Passenger. I think Mike's video is an excellent example of the kind of scoring and mixing I personally prefer. But don't forget that there are other styles, and then there's the issue that you're effectively telling a professional that they don't know how to do their job. Which may be true.... but it's tricky stuff.

How To Train Your Dragon has an agonizingly conservative mix. It's such a terrific score, and it's totally swamped in places. One of my pet hates is an fff orchestra playing quietly - a horribly unnatural and unsatisfying effect. At the other end of the scale are Christopher Nolan's films, which have music which is almost overwhelming at times - even in the more subdued passages. I think it works, but it's a bold and unusual design choice that doesn't suit all movies. A real favourite mix of mine is Hot Fuzz, which does an incredible job of hitting you between the ears for both sound design and score. Everything has impact. There's a lot of craft gone into that by everyone - music editors, sound effects editors, mixers and composer.

I think its a good idea when the composer does a lot of the work for the mixer. Pull right back for dialogue etc - not on faders, but in velocity. It's a much smoother and more natural effect. Williams talks about how he's always mindful of the other elements in the mix when he scores, even when the effects aren't in the temp. So when the Millennium Falcon takes off from Mos Eisley, Williams stays out of the way of Ben Burtt's fantastic ROAR of the engines by simply hitting two high notes on the French Horns. Effects and music in perfect tandem.


----------



## mverta (Mar 26, 2013)

I agree that the conversation could go south, easily. A practiced delivery could probably pull it off, but I personally attempt to bridge all that before the fact.

However, I disagree with you that music balance is a function of "style." 


People don't go to sound effects concerts; they don't drive around listening to sound effects; they don't have sound effects on their iTunes playlist. Music is where the heart is.

When it comes to movies, it began as Silent Film, but they were never actually silent: there was always a guy playing organ or piano in the room. With the presence of the music, the movie had heart, drama, and power - without the need for dialog or sound effects - and the experience was so powerful that it vaulted the medium into what is still one of our most prevalent forms of entertainment more than 100 years later.

As a sound designer myself, I am aware that sound design can be powerful, and emotional - indeed, sometimes the_ absence_ of music is what's compelling. But that is not sound design's primary job. Sound design's job is to make it real; to put you there. It's job is to sell as reality the unreality you see before you. Music's job is to make you care once you're there.

A film can survive without dialog or sound design - as it did 100 years ago - but it cannot have heart or drama without the music. As a dramatic medium, music's role is of greater importance. This is part of why the composer gets a single card credit at the top of the film, and the sound designer does not. 

A good mixer is careful to preserve this priority at all times. The ideal, as you point out, is a dance between both elements, so that each is allowed to shine when appropriate. But this careful balance, as Burtt achieved with the original SW mix, or as Rydstrom regularly achieved, is actually quite rare. More often the case, it's that the mixer fails in his job to protect the music's essential impact on the film.

My podcast both acknowledges this fact, and also aims to explain it; not demonize it. I know from experience that most of the time the buried music isn't done so intentionally; nonetheless, it's to the picture's detriment. The best way to avoid this tiresome conflict is to be working with the sound designer from day one, and to have vetted the director for his/her sensibility towards using music in the film. Spielberg, as we know, is an extremely musical man, and Lucas, too, recognizes the contribution. This is why music is so perfectly balanced in their films' mixes. Scorsese is another director who allows music to say that which no amount of sound design could hope to, even though he uses source music most of the time.

The "style" of failing to honor the priority order of sound field elements is, in reality, a bad mix. That's where I come down, anyway.... 

_Mike


----------



## dgburns (Mar 26, 2013)

and this is why we have less viola :mrgreen:


----------



## dgburns (Mar 26, 2013)

.....and before anyone jumps down my throat,I mean to say that we need to be mindfull of the middle,as dialog will always be favoured to anything that fights in the same area for attention.

that and times and tastes change,for better or worse.


----------



## mverta (Mar 26, 2013)

Again, dialog, as we know, is optional. Cue Binary Sunset from Star Wars, which saves about a page of expositional talking. If you're going to have the flesh puppets speak, yeah, they take center stage. But, like so many things in the creative industries, where you euphemistically say tastes are changing, we know it's really more naked emperors parading around.

_Mike


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 26, 2013)

I'm sure we'd agree on good / bad movie mixes in general Mike, but actually I think it's perfectly possible to have great drama with no music. The China Syndrome, The Blair Witch Project, No Country For Old Men (to all intents and purposes) all spring to mind, and these films were all best served with no score imo. No lack of drama in those. Also I think sound design is quite frequently far more than "making it real". To pick Hot Fuzz again, the design is massively OTT on purpose, which might well be annoying to some people I guess but I love every absurd decibel of it.

(Oh, and pedant point - Burtt didn't actually mix Star Wars, he was "special dialogue and sound effects".)

I rail against the mix in How To Train Your Dragon. I care so much about the score and the whole movie, it pains me to hear it so thrown away. I'd probably go as far as to say its a "bad mix".... but there again I'm sure others might disagree....


----------



## dgburns (Mar 26, 2013)

mverta @ Tue Mar 26 said:


> Again, dialog, as we know, is optional. Cue Binary Sunset from Star Wars, which saves about a page of expositional talking. If you're going to have the flesh puppets speak, yeah, they take center stage. But, like so many things in the creative industries, where you euphemistically say tastes are changing, we know it's really more naked emperors parading around.
> 
> _Mike



pure genius o-[][]-o 

dude,go write something,yur on a hot roll! =o 

flesh puppets,man I gotta remember that one!


----------



## dgburns (Mar 26, 2013)

of course it would be nice if you'd quote from something other then SW every once in a while /\~O 

jus kiddin' of course...


----------



## mverta (Mar 26, 2013)

Guy, we're dangerously close to a semantic non-discussion here. Yes, if you filmed a puppy being kicked in the face, you wouldn't need a score to make it dramatically effective.


And actually, while there were a number of re-recording mixers on Star Wars because of the flurry at the end, Burtt was serving as the quarterback, along with Lucas, wrangling the balances. At least, that's how he explained it to me.


_Mike

P.S. That goofy little film will always be first in my mind and my heart


----------



## RiffWraith (Mar 26, 2013)

*NO KICKING PUPPIES!!!*


----------



## Dan Mott (Mar 26, 2013)

"if you filmed a puppy being kicked in the face"

saddest scene ever. :(


----------



## mverta (Mar 26, 2013)

Yeah, that's pretty dark. But I think you see my point... hell, you don't even NEED picture for that one to hit home. 

_Mike


----------



## passenger57 (Mar 26, 2013)

> I'd be interested to hear your mixer's response, Passenger.


It backfired. The mixer said he didn't agree with all of it and got mad at me because I also sent it to the producers/director. He thought I was over stepping my place telling him how to do his job. Guess I should have just sent it to him only, but I thought everyone could benefit from it and would be inspired. 
I think it's a great video. In just 48 seconds it demonstrates what I've been telling sound guys for years.


----------



## Hannes_F (Mar 27, 2013)

Dialogue and Sound Fx represent what happens outside, music represents what is going on inside. In the end filmmakers will decide what is more important to them in a given scene.

Proactively going out of the way of the dialogue should lessen the temptation to lower the volume of the whole music track.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 27, 2013)

passenger57 @ Wed Mar 27 said:


> > I'd be interested to hear your mixer's response, Passenger.
> 
> 
> It backfired. The mixer said he didn't agree with all of it and got mad at me because I also sent it to the producers/director. He thought I was over stepping my place telling him how to do his job. Guess I should have just sent it to him only, but I thought everyone could benefit from it and would be inspired.
> I think it's a great video. In just 48 seconds it demonstrates what I've been telling sound guys for years.



Ouch.... I can't say I'm too surprised though. It's a very delicate area. It's very easy to be perceived as being protectionist over "our bit", fairly or otherwise. Perhaps, from their perspective, analogous to letting the guitarist mix the record  

I don't think it IS like that. Mike's points are highly valid - follow those rules and I think you're on the way to ending up with an impactful, immersive experience.

Mike, as to your poor puppy's faces, I don't really buy that in terms of this argument. How is watching the slow burn of The China Syndrome analogous to watching a poodle being kicked in the face for two hours?! I think you're missing an important point - an aesthetic decision to drop music CAN positively work for a particular movie. I'd argue to the death about the power of music and what a difference it can make, but the power of its absolute absence can, in the right hands, work to a certain film's advantage. Michael Haneke is a filmmaker who is able to do this, where the spell would be broken in a film like Hidden by a score. Blair Witch might be an unusual case, but the film would have been not just hurt, but totally wrecked by any score whatsoever imo.

One other thing relevant to this - music revealing the inner. This is an interesting description, subtly different from the criticism sometimes levelled at Williams that he tells the audience "how to feel". If there's pounding percusssion over a chase scene, presumably that can be interpreted in two different ways - either it reflects the pulse of the protagonists / antagonists in their hair raising chase, or it's meant to do the same thing to members of the audience - "wow folks, isn't this exciting".

It's a delicate balance. Take a hypothetical party scene where everyone is having a good time, all except for one person who is sad. The director has so many choices open to him / her on how to portray this. One textbook example would be to have the camera slowly dolly into the face of the person looking unhappy, and at the same time the party music fades away into the distance (via reverb probably) and a single sordino strings note comes in with some sparse intervals on the piano. Assuming the actor dosn't stuff it up, bingo - mission accomplished, no-one in the audience will be in any doubt about the motives of the character due to a harmony of acting, camera, sound design and composer.

But of course that's pretty on-the-nose. The composer might do it more subtly. But I'd defend the right of a filmmaker to do things with far more restraint. Maybe just a small glance from a really gifted actor would be enough. There would be a 100 ways of shooting and post-producing that scene, and a score wouldn't feature in all of them.

Sorry, appear to have drifted off topic again... where were we? Basically the whole area is a minefield. Mike's advice in an earlier post is good - work with the sound designer from day one. But those channels of communication are not always open, or if they are open they might just not be interested in hearing your thoughts on how they do their job. Actually your relationship with the director will probably be your best defence I'd have thought - they will be the ones in the dub, not you (typically), and they are literally calling the shots. If they buy into the power of your music for any given moment... and maybe some subtle conversations as you two work together might reinforce this... then that's your best play.


----------



## dgburns (Mar 27, 2013)

passenger57 @ Wed Mar 27 said:


> > I'd be interested to hear your mixer's response, Passenger.
> 
> 
> It backfired. The mixer said he didn't agree with all of it and got mad at me because I also sent it to the producers/director. He thought I was over stepping my place telling him how to do his job. Guess I should have just sent it to him only, but I thought everyone could benefit from it and would be inspired.
> I think it's a great video. In just 48 seconds it demonstrates what I've been telling sound guys for years.



first off,listen to Guy.

and...on a more serious note,you probably did yourself more of a disservice.Take it from me,and i've got well over 500 plus epi's of tv and some film under the belt-Mike Verta makes great points,but....

once you do "your thing",it goes on to others,and for better or worse,it comes out sounding watered down no matter what.It'll always sound at it's best leaving your studio.The best way to deal with this is to become a cheerleader and smile a lot.Otherwise,you do yourself the most damage.Director boy will scratch his head wondering why you were such a pain in the ass questioning his mix,and looks for a new composer next time around.
you can't,and frankly shouldn't go there.i can't tell you how many times I've ground my teeth listening to a mix of my music that I did not care for.

anyway,my humble two cents again.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 27, 2013)

I have gone to lots of my picture mixes. I am very conservative about saying, "I think the music could be a little more prominent here"but I do say it.

I go knowing that I will leave frustrated because many directors are now in love with sound FX.


----------



## nickhmusic (Mar 27, 2013)

I always thought that the movies of Speilberg/Williams were overall some of the best mixes I've heard - films from Raiders up to Saving Private Ryan. 

Excellent blend of dialogue, fx, music - always playing to the emotion of the scene.


----------



## Jimbo 88 (Mar 27, 2013)

Always, always always.....

Be friends with the mixer. Buy him lunch before the project starts and get to know him.

So much easier to tell him what you want in a mix and he'll be talking you up to other producers/directors........


----------



## Jimbo 88 (Mar 27, 2013)

Always, always always.....

Be friends with the mixer. Buy him lunch before the project starts and get to know him.

So much easier to tell him what you want in a mix and he'll be talking you up to other producers/directors........


----------



## mverta (Mar 27, 2013)

Yep...not surprised it went south. As I mentioned in the podcast, such conversations are best had early on, with the direct people involved, and from the perspective of respect and deference - even if that's a tad disingenuous. As others have echoed, being agreeable and fun to work with is key.

My video was for your educational purposes only, and as well-intentioned as you were, you've learned an important lesson about creative people: most are primarily interested in having their ego stroked; not in getting better at what they do. 

A wise artist keeps his ego out of the equation and mines all feedback and criticism for something useful. In the same situation, had I been the one you gave the video to, I would have watched it, thanked you, thought about it, and then decided later if there was something to it. The stuff about your suggestion being disrespectful - it wasn't intended to be, it was _perceived_ to be. That doesn't make it any less perilous, but remember that their reaction isn't actually a given, nor wise, it's just how most people react, and also what determines the level of craft they'll attain. 

If and when you find the sort of producers, directors, mixers, etc., who take that sort of gesture of yours and get excited about it; enjoy the idea that they might learn something, or even as a basis for an interesting discussion about approaches, without feeling threatened and having to beat their chests, you've found rare and precious people, and you should hold on to them tight!


_Mike


----------



## passenger57 (Mar 27, 2013)

The mixer and I are cool now. He apologized for getting upset. He was just worried the producers would see the video and say 'see it's easy'
The whole production team is just on edge for this show because the director has been extremely demanding and has been sending hundreds of tiny nick picky notes about everything. 
I don't have a big ego about things, I just want a proper, well thought out mix.
I did have a conversation with the mixer on earlier shows about making our efforts more of a collaboration. I let him give me feedback about my mixes, cues, if something is not working. I always go out of my way to be complimentary if I feel he did a good job. He is a cool guy, I just didn't think it through when I sent the video to everyone in the production team.
Basically having a great mixer is like this: The composer is like a race car designer. After you build the car you need the best guy in the drivers seat to win the race. 

Still though, I love the video!


----------



## jamessizemore (Mar 27, 2013)

Walter Murch has an interesting article on this topic as well, "Dense Clarity, Clear Density", which includes some cool videos of mixing Apocalypse Now. Link below:

http://transom.org/?page_id=7006

I worked with scoring mixer Peter Cobbin on The Hobbit, and I noticed his music mixes were very present and loud in the left and right surround speakers, in an attempt to compete with the heavy sound effects, many of which were localized to the front speakers.


----------



## jamessizemore (Mar 27, 2013)

Walter Murch has an interesting article on this topic as well, "Dense Clarity, Clear Density", which includes some cool videos of mixing Apocalypse Now. Link below:

http://transom.org/?page_id=7006

I worked with scoring mixer Peter Cobbin on The Hobbit, and I noticed his music mixes were very present and loud in the left and right surround speakers, in an attempt to compete with the heavy sound effects, many of which were localized to the front speakers.


----------



## jaeroe (Mar 27, 2013)

The dub/mix is always though. Especially if you haven't worked with the mixer or filmmakers before you can easily end up playing 2nd fiddle to leaves and the third layer of sleeve rustle. I used to be on edge about it and sometimes even get a little aggressive when everything ends up so low. We put so much work into what we do! I see know it just comes with the territory, but there are some things that i find work better than others. ultimately, You have to make your case and then make your peace with what happens. There's always the soundtrack release.... (Or hopefully).

These days what I do is this -

Mixer - talk tech and geek out with the mixer. Share stories, whatever. Don't brown nose, but let the mixer know you're a cool person, fun and worthy of respect. Find some common ground - maybe your both fans of the same sports team or something.

Director - in the mix, i pretty much only talk to the director, maybe a producer if they are in on a conversation with the director. I actually don't really talk to the mixer, at least nor at first. I just sit fairly close by, but make my case to the director and let him decide and tell people what to do. I pretty much always make my case in terms of drama, story telling, or something music can do that sound can't like bringing back a theme, reference an earlier part of the film or something no on screen. Tires, engines, loud rain or wind, crazy metal sounds - once a scene is going that stuff is usually not where the drama is. We already see it. The contour and story telling are in the music (if we've done our job right). Even a conversation can get a lift with well contoured score.

If i convince the director, then the director is giving the order to turn my shit up. at that point i find you can talk to the mixer about technical stuff but don't be bossy. that's a chance to also further geek out with the mixer and make it a team effort (but know what the f¥#k you're talking about). If you can't convince the director, it's his/her show....

I find you have to be careful about when you chime in, too. Do it too often and they'll tune you out. Pick your battles. You can plant the seed with the director well before the mix about certain scenes and music playing out. If it's a cue the director is really diggin', mention something like "yeah, this will be great to have playing out in the mix" while he/she is all excited about it and there is no mixer or sound person to chime in. Makes the discussion in the mix much faster or not even necessary.

But, what's really helpful - make them a fan of your music. Director, producers, and mixer. If you can make the mixer a fan of the score the fight gets a lot easier. Good music, good mixes, with good control for the mixer to make things sit well, it makes his job easier to make the film sound good and have an effective mix. If you've worked with a mixer before, making the person a fan gets easier to do - if you're good to work with and write good music and deliver mixes and materials that are easy to work with. I also give the mixer the soundtrack when done. Most really appreciate it.

Sometimes we have to work with douchebags or sometimes things will just be a tough situation (director is disorganized telling sound and music to cover the same stuff, but in completing ways, or the old "agh... We'll just figure it out in the mix). Choose when to fight and let things go. I find it's better to go after a cause you stand a decent chance of winning, otherwise, after a while it becomes "oh, man... Here comes the whiny composer again telling us to turn up his concerto for film score orchestra"


----------



## mathis (Mar 28, 2013)

Hannes_F @ Wed Mar 27 said:


> Dialogue and Sound Fx represent what happens outside, music represents what is going on inside.



Generalizations like that are really dangerous, because the specific case will always tell something different. Look at David Lynch films and tell me if the sound effects don't represent what's happening inside.

Sound FX and Mixing are arts like music is. The beautiful thing with film is that every film (at least every good film) will question all those rules you ever heard of.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 28, 2013)

mathis @ Thu Mar 28 said:


> Hannes_F @ Wed Mar 27 said:
> 
> 
> > Dialogue and Sound Fx represent what happens outside, music represents what is going on inside.
> ...



+1. Sound design can definitely represent the inner. It's a real challenge on some films to know who is responsible for what... music and sound design overlap. I know Hans has mentioned this in the past, would love to hear more on that.


----------



## Hannes_F (Mar 28, 2013)

Of course there are exceptions to the rule - especially if sound fx are done _musically_.


----------



## rpaillot (Mar 28, 2013)

To me Gladiator is one of the worst in term of mixing between SFX and music I ever heard...
I'm really sad because its one of my favorite score ! (I first heard it during a music lesson while being in Junior high scool..cool teacher !)

One of my favorite track (the battle) is completely buried under the catapult SFX and explosions. While another of my favorite (am i not merciful ) is buried under the crowd shouts... Terrible :cry:


----------



## mathis (Mar 28, 2013)

Hannes_F @ Thu Mar 28 said:


> Of course there are exceptions to the rule - especially if sound fx are done _musically_.



even that doesn't hold as a general rule, sorry. (although it fits with my Lynch example)


----------



## Hannes_F (Mar 28, 2013)

mathis @ Thu Mar 28 said:


> Hannes_F @ Thu Mar 28 said:
> 
> 
> > Of course there are exceptions to the rule - especially if sound fx are done _musically_.
> ...



Of course not. Life (and films as part of life) is much too complex in order to be pressed in static rules. And that is why we will find exceptions to anything.

It is like saying that the N part of a compass needle points to the north pole. If we watch closely enough this is hardly ever true at all.

However sometimes it is helpful to recognize a general tendency.


----------



## jaeroe (Mar 28, 2013)

makes me wonder also about the the prevalence of Pro Tools and the the ease of running high tracks counts now. people seem to be making less decisions pre-mix. i've done mixes where the sound editors/designers leave a ton of options all up at the same time, play it for the director, have way too much crap going on, and then constantly suggest turning the music down or off completely because they couldn't figure out how to find good pockets for particular sounds and get rid of unnecessary/clashing stuff. years ago, much more had to be decided in pre-mix. i also see a greater tendency to over-foley. not always, but i'm seeing more than in the past.


----------



## mverta (Mar 28, 2013)

This has gotten silly, semantic, and overly complicated.


----------



## passenger57 (Mar 28, 2013)

Mike - perhaps. This is one of those topics a person could get a PhD in and study for 50 years. I do very much appreciate your video and blog podcast, one of the most helpful things I've had anyone do for me (and everyone) on this forum.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 28, 2013)

mverta @ Thu Mar 28 said:


> This has gotten silly, semantic, and overly complicated.



Au contraire - I think it's been a great thread (albeit one that has broadened out from the OP). It's great to be reminded that there's a lot more out there than the mainstream - and actually it's not really very marginal at all these days. Haneke got best director and picture noms at this years Oscars with Amour let's not forget. I guess lots of folks here work on indie pictures and more esoteric stuff.

But the discussion on mainstream methods is incredibly useful too. Right back to the title of the thread.... I don't know if it is a trend, I think it's always been variable. I saw a bit of True Lies on TV a while ago and was struck by how quiet the music was in that mix - other filmmakers like Spielberg were doing things differently at the same time (which I much prefer). Essentially all this is directorial choice, and always has been. But it's worth making the point again that the composer can make this easier or harder - Williams scores with the effects in mind from the word go. I suspect not all composers do this.


----------



## mverta (Mar 28, 2013)

Read it again. One would think from the flow that the myriad variables, exceptions, and approaches make reliable, common practice and valuation impossible to define. Ain't true. In 25 years, with more than 1000 mixes under my belt, I've had my music buried exactly twice; both times I wasn't there. Music is not the only sonic medium capable of power; it is merely the undisputed world heavyweight champion. Check that; GOOD music is. Half the shit today is best buried under explosions.


----------



## mathis (Mar 29, 2013)

well, anyway. Still the question remains *why* music is nowadays less preferred than sound effects. At least in those genre movies we obviously talk about.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 29, 2013)

But Mathis - I'm not at all sure that, overall, they are getting quieter. True Lies was quiet, Jurassic Park loud. How To Train Your Dragon quiet, Inception loud. Picking individual examples is kinda meaningless I guess... any evidence of an actual overall trend?


----------



## Rctec (Mar 29, 2013)

Random Thoughts and Ramblings at 4.00 in the morning:

Just came from an extensive meeting with the sound designers on the movie we are working on. We've all agreed on sharing the work, matching tempos to music on mechanical, rhythmic sounds, etc... They are cutting to our click track.

Played them an idea. Blew a big speaker. Director liked where this is heading. (I'm not making this up...)

...Finished "MOS" a month back. Chris Jenkins, the mixer, asked if he could listen to the score in my room, sitting in my chair where I write, so he could get a true picture of my intention and sound before he started dubbing the film. His idea. Great Dub!
Actually, nearly the first thing that happened on that project was hearing a sound design element that was so great and gorgeous, we asked if we could 'borrow' it and include it in the music....

Richard King and I are forever trading sounds on the Chris Nolan movies.

Lee Smith, Chris' picture editor comes from music and sound editing.

The editor on one of my current projects went to the Royal Academy. He knows a thing or two about the power of music...

Editors run the dub.

Gore Verbinski knows his lenses, his mics and his amps. His dubbing philosophy is really simple: If you stop tapping your foot, or can't follow the tune - you're doing it wrong. Lower something.

I don't go to the dub anymore. The director knows what he is doing. My music editors have a lot of authority and knowledge. They know how to run things on the stage.

I only care about the movie.

Since we've usually been through a few screenings with my music temped in (the score as a synth demo, not music from other movies as temp), we pretty much know what works emotionally by the time we get to the final mix.

We try to have meetings about music with the sound designers present.

...It's all about the story. It's all about the style of the film. It's all about the sensibilities of the director.

Mike is very, very right when he talks about the time it takes to play with the effects, and then it becomes the shiny new toy on the dub stage. But I find that I'm working more and more with filmmakers who can hang on to their original sonic vision and resist the temptation of all those new toys. Believe in the movie.

We've started to do away with the idea of a final dub. We start building elements for a final dub the day they start cutting, or me writing. Both the last two Dark Knights had the first reels finaled at least 6 month before the movie came out.

You have to be a fairly good recording engineer, or work with one. The sound effect guys know how to make something punchy and big. You need to be able to have tracks that can stand up to the scrutiny of a massive speaker system in a big room. 

Make your score essential to the emotional arc of the movie. But maybe give way to the viceral impact of great sound design.

It's all noise, it's all music, it's trying to create a logical sonic world that is cohesive and singular for that project. And yes, it's really irritating if that gets destroyed by a timid approach to the mix.

Comedies are a thankless task for a composer...the rhythm of the dialogue is always going to win, and you might as well forget about the surrounds. They just distract from the specificity of the scene. Comedies are little contained math problems for me. Or, to put it another way...I'm no Henry Mancini. Elegant, witty, genius.

But action movies...Crank the surrounds! Be immersive with the music. Same goes for Terry Malick pictures  But don't make the audience want to turn it's head away from the screen. Use a solid center channel. Otherwise the music will pull too much to the sides on a big screen.

Always write with surround in mind. Who cares about stereo? Orchestrate for a 360 degree landscape. Never rely on the subwoofer (I don't even have one). If it doesnt hit you in the chest on just your main speakers, you're doing it wrong. (And it gets really messy with Imax). And if you really cant resist and can't help yourself - at least resist putting pitched stuff into the sub. Do you know what the crossover point in the speaker system in your local cinema is?

The more kinetic the action (and therefore the sound effects) get, the more you need a long tune, with long notes. 

Contain your dynamics. Write a mezzo forte/ forte action piece with really commited players. All that triple fff stuff virtually guarantees that they are going to pull it back on the stage if it sounds harsh. If it's any good, they'll instinctively bring the sound effects down a bit (the "Joker" thing is really quiet. It makes you want to lean forward a bit, as an audience...then, of course, I clobber them.)

The more "Orchestral" and reverb-y you get, the more you become part of the wallpaper. It might be really pretty wallpaper, though.
Conversly, "Sherlock" was a really tough dub. All those solo instruments are like having another actor in the scene, it doesn't matter how much you turn them down.

But, bottom line...the only thing worth fighting for is making a great movie. Sometimes you, the composer, have to say "...bin the music. The sound design is much more appropriate." 

Oh, I forgot...this video explains EVERYTHING you ever need to know about filmscoring: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvaszet0-WA

-Hz-


----------



## woodsdenis (Mar 29, 2013)

Peep show, brilliant. 

Great post HZ, interesting what you say about Sherlock and solo instruments. I had the opportunity of working with Elmer Bernstein many years ago. Mid 80's, pre Protools. Music mixes were done in surround onto DA88. 

Anyway, he always had solo instruments for the the movie mix way down when dialogue was present. maybe -5/6db from the CD stereo mix. Sounded weird on its own, but in context was perfect. If left at normal level, an oboe for example is right in the dialogue frequency spectrum. If mixed correctly behind dialogue, all the rest of the orchestra would be lost.

If I had written a fantastic romantic orchestral oboe piece for a scene, my first reaction is to feature it! Not always the right thing to do in the context of film music with so many competing elements.


----------



## Inductance (Mar 29, 2013)

Rctec @ Fri Mar 29 said:


> ...Finished "MOS" a month back.



Excellent! As a comic book geek and film score nerd, I am really looking forward to this. Specifically, I'm looking forward to this new musical interpretation of the Superman character. 

Great post. I really enjoy reading these "in the trenches" accounts.


----------



## mathis (Mar 29, 2013)

Rctec @ Fri Mar 29 said:


> But, bottom line...the only thing worth fighting for is making a great movie. Sometimes you, the composer, have to say "...bin the music. The sound design is much more appropriate."



Chapau. Brilliant post, Hans, from beginning to end. 

(I loved the idea of giving the click tracks to the sound designers.)


----------



## dgburns (Mar 29, 2013)

I really need to compliment rtec on his post,cause it's really answering the fundamental issue at the heart of the initial question.

I was going to answer Mike's last post,but felt I had nothing more to add.

I feel this is one of those times someone else has put into words such things as I would have liked to write,should have written,but simply did not.

well done (and I'm having one of those kick myself moments)


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 29, 2013)

The only thing I can say to Hans' post is that he is working with a much higher caliber of directors, sound design guys, and picture mixers than most of us get to. It is easier to swallow your music getting buried under those circumstances.


----------



## mathis (Mar 29, 2013)

Jay, I don't think that's the point of Hans post. In every sentence he makes clear that it's all about communication. Getting everybody involved and being transparent with ones own work. And that's surely not dependent on budget size...

In my own sound design days I was always looking for good communication to the composer. I can say that there are only arguments or even fights on the dubbing stage about music vs. fx if the composer was secretive.


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 29, 2013)

What a good read from Hans!


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 29, 2013)

mathis @ Fri Mar 29 said:


> Jay, I don't think that's the point of Hans post. In every sentence he makes clear that it's all about communication. Getting everybody involved and being transparent with ones own work. And that's surely not dependent on budget size...



I agree it was a terrific post from Hans - lapped up every word. But I also think Jay has a point. In my humble workaday UK TV experience, it's quite rare for there to be any contact at all between composer and dubbing mixer beyond sending the files, still less for a composer to attend a dub. That's not to say it wouldn't be a good idea, mind.

Also as a side issue, while the higher profile stuff is 5.1, most day-to-day stuff is still boring old stereo.


----------



## Rctec (Mar 29, 2013)

Dear Guy, I remember my days working for the BBC. And getting told I'd never work for them again. They where right, just not quite in the way they meant it...Or the dodgy game show tune that all you Brits seem to never let me forget (had a journalist only today asking me about it). The one other reason I mentioned the 5.1 thing is that I really regret not having done things at the most future proof way back then. I'd love to remix "Lionking", for example, as a proper 5.1 soundtrack. I think surround in one way or the other will become a more standard music format in the future, and I don't want to not have the ability to do a proper rerelease.
For me, part of this conversation is just the simple fact that the music has to go through so many generations and distractions before it ends up in a theatre or tv, and that - to safeguard yourself against an indifferent sound - you have to preserve as much bandwidth, both in the performance and the recording as possible. Music is fragile. A single decibel makes a huge difference, sometimes to a profound shift in how a scene feels. Should you not be able to enforce with the director the "Mike Verta Law" (he's so right!) of getting rid of all the background atmosphere tracks that, without fail, shroud your music in a veil of mush, you'll have to at least give yourself a chance by slightly overdoing and hyping your music. We don't do concert music. The reason I do hybrid scores is partly to do with giving the music a chance to survive the sonic onslaught of the enviroments of the modern world. Plus, I actually enjoy the racket I get to make with all those synth (may god forgive me for my synth ). None of us will ever be in John Williams' position where the decade long partnership with Steven S. means that Steven will already be planning his soundscape with all those years of experience with John's music in his subconcience.

I attract different directors and different types of movies. I fail at television, unless its a project where the director is fully in charge, not a committee of producers.

But I disagree with Jay that I have access to a more high caliber of directors, sound designers and mixers. I think there are amazingly talented and original thinkers in any part of this industry. It's not about the budget or the size or the medium. Ultimately, it's not even about getting the job, but about attracting and forming lasting working relationships with brilliant filmmakers that push the envelope and challenge you into writing great music...And just think how many of those came from tv. There used to be this stupid , misguided snobbery about tv in Hollywood that I never got. If you do film, you cant do tv and vice versa. 
Well, as far as I can tell, most of the great story writing is happening in television. But while television seems to be a longform medium for developing character arches, it seems to do the opposite for composers, who have to always rush to get the next episode done. Film composers usually get to have a little time to think. Ridley used to direct live television for the BBC. He's got great war-stories about those days. But all those funny stories about disasters and mishaps are actually about him learning how to get better at doing what he loves, how to get his vision as intact and un-compromised from his mind up onto a screen in front of an audience. And yes, some of these stories feature dodgy sound and music 

Best,

-Hz-


----------



## mverta (Mar 30, 2013)

Hans -

I'm glad you mentioned the sound-design-y aspects of your stuff, because I've noticed on absolutely tons of occasions that I couldn't be sure whether the scene contribution was coming from you or the sound editors. 9 out of 10 times, I'm pretty sure it's part of the score, which makes sense both creatively, and to carve out that bigger chunk of the landscape for everything else you're doing. You sly devil, you.

I also noticed somebody poking at Nolan's perhaps-too-music-heavy mixes, but to me, he's the new Spielberg in terms of respect for the music, in a refreshing way. Your work shapes the film right from the edit; like music does for T.Schoonmaker's Scorcese's stuff, so it's inextricable from the final product, perfectly apt, and forwardly present right from the start. Composing Nirvana.




_Mike


----------



## Rctec (Mar 30, 2013)

Ah, Mike, the not so secret bridge between Richard King's sound design and the music is Mel Wesson. We invented a new title for him: Ambient Music design. I've known Mel since we where kids. He really was going to be a painter - and that's how he thinks of sound. You should have seen Ridley and him using Metasynth on "Hannibal" ...two painters painting with sound. They came up with this great sound/image. Ridley wanted to use it as the poster for the movie. Than the computer crashed and they hadn't saved....oh well. We still had fun. That was after all, the best romantic comedy I ever worked on.
But seriously, Mel is the surrealistic bridge of darkness between the music and the sound design.
He's part of our music team, even though he strays over to the other side some times.
I now try to write stuff for Chris to have on his iPod while he's writing the script. He hears the music that loud when he conceives the scenes. So I suppose in a way that's not that dissimilar to how Steven has John's sound in his mind when he shoots...
We all try to make it a cohesive emotional experience. There are no sides to take other than the movie's. Chris - just like Terry Malick - will always try to look for a way to substitute music for dialogue. They are interested in what lies at the center of things. Music exposes the heart of the thing and - as Ridley once said to me - is the wings of the film.


----------



## bryla (Mar 30, 2013)

Rctec @ Sat Mar 30 said:


> The one other reason I mentioned the 5.1 thing is that I really regret not having done things at the most future proof way back then. I'd love to remix "Lionking", for example, as a proper 5.1 soundtrack. I think surround in one way or the other will become a more standard music format in the future, and I don't want to not have the ability to do a proper rerelease.


Yet we still enjoy great music in mono on our home stereo setups, because it still is great enjoyable music.


----------



## mverta (Mar 30, 2013)

Rctec @ Sat Mar 30 said:


> Music exposes the heart of the thing and - as Ridley once said to me - is the wings of the film.



There it is! The elegant summation I couldn't quite summon.


_Mike


----------



## Rctec (Mar 30, 2013)

Bryla, best drumsound: "Let there be drums", Sandy Nelson, because I love the performance. Yes, but if you asked him, would he have liked the option of re-mastering in 5.1 20 years after he recorded it? This is an apples and oranges argument. The musician is great, giving a monster performance. but the recording? He had no choice. You do. But go ahead - do your next score in mono. It's a bit like deciding to stick a tattoo on your privates with your first girlfriend's name on when you are a teenager...One is forever. No choice. Or very painful...
But I could be wrong...


----------



## mathis (Mar 30, 2013)

mverta @ Thu Mar 28 said:


> This has gotten silly, semantic, and overly complicated.



You were right, guilty as charged. I love where this thread went to and feel bad about me playing devil's advocate...


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 30, 2013)

I vote it thread of the month, in all its glory.

Hans, I'm very lucky in one regard - I sometimes get to be sound designer, dubbing mixer and composer on the same project. When I'm not doing theme tunes beds etc (and don't begrudge Going For Gold - it gives us minnows hope!) I'm probably scoring comedies. Sound, music, dialogue - it's all storytelling, and it that's what I'm passionate about. Using music to make a gag work is incredibly satisfying (Alf Clausen is a hero of mine). Usually the turnaround is super-quick, usually there's little time to think, but I'm lucky enough to work with some great producers, and the autonomy is a rare luxury. Being able to essentially decide where score leads, where sound design leads etc is terrific.


----------



## ryans (Mar 30, 2013)

Rctec @ Sat Mar 30 said:


> but the recording? He had no choice. You do. But go ahead - do your next score in mono



Kind of off topic but one of my favourite soundtracks is Traffic where everything was mono except the music. Whenever the music came in it had an incredible impact!

I believe Alan Meyerson was involved there, could be wrong...

Ryan


----------



## givemenoughrope (Mar 30, 2013)

Hans (or anyone),

is recording at @ 96k just as important to you for future-proofing? just curious. The guy down the hall from me has mixed the last few Reznor/Ross scores and he always works @48k. I guess upsamplling isn't such a no-no after all...?


----------



## Dietz (Mar 30, 2013)

givemenoughrope @ Sat Mar 30 said:


> Hans (or anyone),
> 
> is recording at @ 96k just as important to you for future-proofing? just curious. The guy down the hall from me has mixed the last few Reznor/Ross scores and he always works @48k. I guess upsamplling isn't such a no-no after all...?



I'm just anyone (not Hans) , but I've completed a mix or two during the last 25 years, and I can tell you from the bottom of my heart that if it doesn't sound good @ 48 kHz, it won't sound any better @ 96.

o=< 

... that said, it doesn't hurt to use the best resolution you can afford from the very beginning.

Surround (opposed to plain stereo) is a very different story, though. Going back to 2.0 from 5.1 is worse than switching from stereo to mono. In the latter case you're just looking through a smaller window, in the former it's like leaving the room.

Best,

/Dietz


.


----------



## Rctec (Mar 30, 2013)

I'm agreeing with Dietz. But we are finding that bit depth makes a big difference.


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 30, 2013)

So you always record in 96kHz now, Hans?


----------



## mathis (Mar 30, 2013)

Rctec @ Sat Mar 30 said:


> The reason I do hybrid scores is partly to do with giving the music a chance to survive the sonic onslaught of the enviroments of the modern world.



I have to think a lot about this sentence today. Would you think the same way also as a concert composer? I mean: do you think this is a general thing or specific to the film world?

There seem to be 2 choices, regardless which genre: Either one competes against the loudness wars of our environment or one side-steps to an alternative, like extremely silent music.
I find myself following the competing path, although there isn't actually any need to. I mean, last year I had an "grand" opera, so I was in full sonic control of all elements inside that closed opera house. But my subconsiousness obviously feels the need to compete against the omnipresent sonic onslaught, so it ended up as a pretty massive accumulation of sound, far away from those transparent and detailed modern chamber music operas.

I guess what I want to ask is: do you feel you have a choice? Or do you feel pushed (by whatever) to create and work like that?
This is an invitation to a more philosophical discussion. And I have to say: I certainly feel pushed.


----------



## Rctec (Mar 30, 2013)

Dear Gunther, I work and record at 48k, but we always run another backup system at 96k. We archive both.

Mathis, I have so many thoughts about that, but I haven't the time to answer right now.
Weirdly, I have to go and write a big action piece about the loud intrusion of machines and progress into the silent landscape of the pre-industrial age...


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 30, 2013)

Rctec @ Sat Mar 30 said:


> Dear Gunther, I work and record at 48k, but we always run another backup system at 96k. We archive both.



For my understanding/knowledge it makes sence to record at 96kHz-32bit float if u record many many tracks what have to be mixed together later and, much more important..., if you record instruments/things with a big dynamic range...?


----------



## Dietz (Mar 30, 2013)

@ Gunther: 32 bit FP is actually 24 bit mantissa with an 8 bit exponent, so the signal-inherent dynamics won't benefit themselves (... mind you - there are no true 32-bit A/D converters anyway). But it's indeed easier to sum many signals in the 32 bit FP domain due to the (more or less) infinite headroom of the signal path, and for actual DSP processing it's mandatory.

-> http://diwaves.com/tmp/sample_bits.htm


... uhm ... it seems as this gets a bit off-topic now. 8-)


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 30, 2013)

Dietz @ Sat Mar 30 said:


> @ Gunther: 32 bit FP is actually 24 bit mantissa with an 8 bit exponent, so the signal-inherent dynamics won't benefit themselves (... mind you - there are no true 32-bit A/D converters anyway). But it's indeed easier to sum many signals in the 32 bit FP domain due to the (more or less) infinite headroom of the signal path, and for actual DSP processing it's mandatory.
> 
> -> http://diwaves.com/tmp/sample_bits.htm
> 
> ...



Oh no, I think it is not off-topic now. It is a lively discussion, and I like that! 

Yeah, in the very past I read a statement from Charly Steinberg who suggested to do all recordings in 32bit float. I do this for many years now. But what about 96k?


----------



## Dietz (Mar 30, 2013)

We are _recording_ (and replaying) audio in 24 bit resolution nowadays - but it makes sense to _process_ audio data in 32 bit FP (and to store it in that format, therefore).


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 30, 2013)

Dietz @ Sat Mar 30 said:


> We are _recording_ (and replaying) audio in 24 bit resolution nowadays - but it makes sense to _process_ audio data in 32 bit FP (and to store it in that format, therefore).



Off topic now: How good was this recording equipment, compared to all our bits and bytes now....? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 5wUQ#t=68s


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 31, 2013)

Dietz @ Sat Mar 30 said:


> We are _recording_ (and replaying) audio in 24 bit resolution nowadays - but it makes sense to _process_ audio data in 32 bit FP (and to store it in that format, therefore).



Today, like Hans also Bob Katz said: "Personally these days I'd rather record to 2496 with the best converters...." .


----------



## AlexRuger (Apr 7, 2013)

Rctec @ Fri Mar 29 said:


> We don't do concert music.
> 
> -Hz-



Gentlemen, I think we've found the new vi-control.net motto.


----------



## Oliver_Codd (Apr 9, 2013)

Peep Show!! I think you should consider changing your name to "Super Hans"


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 11, 2013)

This might be slightly OT, but didn't want to hog a whole new thread with it.

Right now I'm working on a series of sketches for a kids show. I was originally down to just score them, but the producer asked me if I'd dub them as well. Fantastic!

Before I got the mini dubbing task, I submitted a scored version for approval. I got several notes back, asking for various changes, especially more "comedy" type music. In many cases, I'd planned for sound effects to lead these gags not music (I'm an Alf Clausen fan - by and large in comedy, I score for the drama rather than have "funny" music, while sound effects can be funny themselves). I dubbed the episode today and put in all the sound effects I'd described, and said "have a listen to this version - if you'd rather these sections were music as per the original notes, then of course I'll put them in", and sent for approval. Back came the reply - sounds perfect.

I feel INCREDIBLY lucky to be able to tracklay, score and mix stuff. When I watch a cut, in my mind I know which will lead which section, it's so important to get that right for comedy especially. As in this case, sometimes I fight for LESS music. I just rely on my instincts to do what's best overall to make the story / gags work. If I was just the composer on this, I'd have done the notes, sent it in and - imo - the final product wouldn't have worked as well (well I would say this, wouldn't I). I can well imagine the music being pulled back unnaturally at times in the final mix.

Anyone else out there who does both jobs and really grateful for it?


----------



## germancomponist (Apr 11, 2013)

Guy Rowland @ Thu Apr 11 said:


> Anyone else out there who does both jobs and really grateful for it?



I produce many radio-spots. Here I do it all: I get an idea, write the text, cast the voice-over and all needed other voices, write the music, use sfx where I want it to use a.s.o. . It makes a lot of fun!


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 11, 2013)

germancomponist @ Thu Apr 11 said:


> Guy Rowland @ Thu Apr 11 said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone else out there who does both jobs and really grateful for it?
> ...



Fantastic!


----------



## Jonas.Ingebretsen (Apr 20, 2013)

Rctec @ Fri Mar 29 said:


> Played them an idea. Blew a big speaker. Director liked where this is heading. (I'm not making this up...)
> -Hz-



Hahaha. I spilled my drink all over my keyboard.


----------



## Andrew Souter (Apr 20, 2013)

I watched Oblivion yesterday in IMAX. Seemed to me that the music (score by M83) was mixed very loudly actually. Many parts actually felt like a music video to me. In an epic way. Not criticizing--I thought it worked well.

Anyone else see it? Agree? Disagree?


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 21, 2013)

I'm seeing Oblivion this week...

Just got Jurassic Park on TV now. Still a fantastic film, even cut for telly. How was it ever a PG?!! Anyway, one more observation on the fantastic sound / music balance - the legendary first T-Rex attack scene... no music at all. I think that really does give the scene so much power, what a smart move. It's such a great score, and it's all the more effective for not being wall-to-wall. That was one inspired spotting session.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 24, 2013)

Andrew Souter @ Sat Apr 20 said:


> I watched Oblivion yesterday in IMAX. Seemed to me that the music (score by M83) was mixed very loudly actually. Many parts actually felt like a music video to me. In an epic way. Not criticizing--I thought it worked well.
> 
> Anyone else see it? Agree? Disagree?



Just seen it. Quite liked the film, even though an awful lot of it seemed to make no sense. The score was quite fitting, as that didn't make much sense either - it just felt like an arp rumbling through everything for 2 hours with the occasional bit of bombast. I found myself wishing I had a copy of the film with no music just to have a go, have a totally different take on it. I'd have gone for less is more, I think there was an arthouse film there struggling to get out. Which is probably why I'm where I am and M83 are now where they are.

But you're right, it was mixed at a healthy level, you couldn't really miss it for sure.


----------



## jeffc (Apr 24, 2013)

re: Oblivion

The soundtrack album sounds great, but is definitely not super-loud, super squashed, or super bright - which is a good thing. It sounds great. But this probably shows you that you shouldn't squash and hyper limit all of your music, as it will sound smaller at the dub. If it's got dynamics, it can actually be mixed louder in the film dub and come across louder.

J


----------

