Reading Notes for 27 September 2007

Things I Think About the Reading for Today’s Class…

Sound Advice: The Natural Approach

Natural sound was actually one of the earliest sound recording I did. When I was getting my bachelor’s degree, my work-study job was as recording engineer for the music department, a job that had me record lots of recitals and plenty of audition tapes. The theater department asked me to record background sound for a play set in a clock-maker’s shop. One night, I took the big Studer-Revox reel-to-reel tape recorder to a local mall and set up microphones in, of all things, a clock shop. I then recorded two hours of ticking and tocking. I didn’t sit there with headphones on for two hours (a decision that would come back to haunt me). The ticking was to be a constant background sound for the entire play. During dress rehearsal, I was running sound for the production, and fed the tape recorder through the main board. About 35 minutes into the play, the actors, director, crew, and most of all the sound guy were all startled when the recorded sound of approximately 25 cuckoo clock alarms and 15 separate (and slightly differently-pitched) renditions of “The Westminster Chimes” went off. I spent some serious time with a razor blade and splicing block right after dress rehearsal.

During the production’s run, the ticking clocks added a great deal to the “feel” of the play. Sounds from the real world will do that, you just have to be careful to listen for the unexpected. When I hear National Geographic’s podcasts, especially things like Traveler Magazine’s Walks of a Lifetime or National Geographic World Talk, the natural sounds seem at least as important as the narrator when putting me into the location of the recording.

Natural Sound Stories: A How-to Guide

These tips (especially the tips on how to elicit longer, more interesting responses) are good. I would offer one challenge: Making observations the interview subject can react to is fine, but once in a while you have to ask a question, especially if the format will leave your voice on the tape. I’ve heard interviews in which the interviewer never asks a question, and it just comes across as odd.

I also have an observation on “Get the Sound” section. In three discussion points, the writer mentions two types of microphone and two separate recorders. There’s a reason that most audio engineers talk about the “microphone closet” — they realize that different microphones have different uses and produce different sound quality. The real trick for most of us is figuring out which 1 – 2 microphones will do 98% of our recording jobs, and how to use one recorder to do it all.

The Transom Mic Shootout Part 2: Handheld Mics

Here were my notes as I listened:
Mic A — Sounds like a nice dynamic mic. Good, flat quality
Mic B — A condense mic with good bass pickup.
C — Another bass boost
D — A really tight sound, but some pickup indicating an omnidirectional pattern
E — Very nice, broad sound
F — Tight, little room noise
G — Open, airy sound
H — Too thin and bright for vocals at this distance

I have a mic like G, and one similar to B. I tend to use G for hand-held interviews, because it makes people sound good. B is more accurate, but harder to control if we’re not sitting down, with mic stands between us.

As for the lav versus shotgun, the only time I’ve seen a shotgun used for hand-held voice has been in some game shows — for the host. I love lavalier mics, and am looking forward to the day when I can afford a couple of good wireless condenser lavs.

The Art of Listening

Very cool stuff — this actually reminds me a bit of a feature they once had a Disney’s MGM Studios — you went into a theater, sat down, and they turned out the lights. The “show” was all sound. The depth of the sound is superb, here — it’s obvious that some very real care went into making the recordings. I can imagine these as part of “sound-seeing” podcasts.

Studying a Koala Mystery in Eastern Australia

There’s an interesting spatial thing going on in the first part of this — the birds and the speaker sound like they’re in an impossible spatial relationship to one another. In the second section, when they’re moving, the sound paints a much clearer picture. I like the way the radio is used, both for the researcher’s voice and during the tracking phase. It’s an interesting point: our recordings in class have been mono, but these recordings are very highly-engineered stereo–the aural soundstage is nicely established and manipulated to let you “feel” the speakers move through your head (if you’re wearing headphones).

I would love to know how this piece was engineered. I’m not trying to imply that I think anything unethical was done, but different sections have obviously been produced with stereo in mind, and I suspect some channel-to-channel mixing took place. I’d also love to know which equipment was given to the researchers to use for their recording. Fascinating, well-done audio documentary.