Features

P-Cap, MoCap , and All That Jazz / Part 1

by Jim Tanenbaum, CAS

As sound people, we live in (according to the old Chinese curse) interesting times. Our technology is advancing at an exponential rate … with a very large exponent. The analog Nagra ¼-inch reel-to-reel tape recorder was used on almost all of the world’s movies for more than thirty years. Then DAT (Digital Audio Tape) cassette recorders (though more than one brand) held sway for another ten. Hard-drive recorders (I beta-tested a Deva I) led the race for five years, then DVD optical-disc recorders (albeit still with an internal HDD) for only three. Sony’s magnetic minidisk unit never made significant inroads in production recording. Now we’re using flash-memory cards, and I’m surprised they’ve held on for more than a year, but the original choice of CF cards seems to be giving way to SD ones (except for Zaxcom). Next year?

But it is not only the technology that is changing—so is the product. Made-for-Internet drama or documentary shows aren’t that much different from their predecessors, but reality shows certainly are a new breed: dozens of radio-mic’d people running around, in and out of multiple cameras’ view, and in and out of multiple Production Mixers’ receiver range. Fortunately, we have Zaxcom transmitters with onboard recorders. Still, things aren’t that different.

But “capture” shoots are. Almost entirely different from anything that has gone before. And capture for Computer-Generated Image (CGI) characters (sometimes called “virtual characters”) is different than capture for live-action shoots. Also, Motion Capture (MoCap) is different from Motion Control (MoCon), though these two techniques are sometimes used together, along with Motion Tracking (MoTrac). And then there is Performance-Capture (P-Cap). They will be described in this order: CGI MoCap, P-Cap, live-action MoCap, MoCon, and MoTrac. Following that, working conditions and esthetics for all types will be discussed.

So now, for those of you who have yet to work on a capture job, here is a primer (pronounced “prim-er”; not “pry-mer”). The rest will be on-the-job training.

CGI MoCap

For starters, the capture stage is called a “volume”—because it is—a three-dimensional volume where the position and movement of the actors (often called “performers”) and their props are tracked and recorded as so many bits. Many, many bits—often terabytes of bits. You can expect to record many gigabytes of audio per day.

The stage containing the volume has an array of video cameras, often a hundred or more, lining the walls and ceiling, every one interconnected with a massive computer. Each camera has a light source next to, or surrounding, its lens, which special reflective markers on the actors will reflect back to that particular camera only. This is known as a “passive” system, because the markers do not emit any light of their own. The camera lights may be regular incandescents or LEDs, with white, red, or infrared output. More about that later.

The cameras are mounted either directly on the walls and ceiling, or on a latticework of metal columns and trusses. WARNING: It is vitally important not to touch these cameras or their supporting structure. If you do, you must immediately notify the capture techs so that they can check to see if the volume needs to be recalibrated.

The actors/performers wear black stretch leotards studded with reflective dots. The material is retro-reflective, which means it reflects almost all the light back in the direction it came from, in most cases utilizing tiny glass spheres. Scotchlite™ is a typical example, used on license plates, street pavement stripes, and clothing. For use with the capture suits, the reflective material is in the form of pea-sized spheres, mounted on short stalks to increase their visibility from a wider angle. The other end of the stalk terminates in a small disc of Velcro™ hooks, so it can be attached anywhere on the capture suit’s fabric.

As an aid in editing, the capture suit usually has a label indicating the character’s name. Hands and/or feet may be color-coded to distinguish left from right.

The markers in the image above are glowing because a flash was used when the picture was taken. The camera was very far away, and the stage lighting completely washed out the light from the strobe on the people and objects, but the markers reflected most of the flash back to the camera lens.

Capture cameras mounted on more rigid
columns, but still subject to displacement if hit. [Formerly Giant Studios, now Digital Domain’s Playa Vista, California, stages]

If MoCap is to be used on the actors’ faces, smaller, BB-sized reflective spheres are glued directly to the skin, sometimes in the hundreds. When too many have fallen off, work stops until they can be replaced, a process that takes some time because they must be precisely positioned.

Props and certain parts of any sets or set dressing (particularly those that move, like doors), also get reflective markers. Unlike “real” movies, props and set dressing do not have to look like their CGI counterparts, only have certain dimensions matching. They are often thrown together from apple boxes, grip stands, and “found” objects, and may be noisy.

Here is a description of the mechanics of MoCap.

The floor of the volume is marked off in a grid pattern, with each cell about five feet square. This array serves two purposes: 1, it allows the “virtual world” in the computer to be precisely aligned with the real world; and 2, it allows for the accurate positioning of actors, props, sets, and floor contour modules.

The capture process is not like conventional imaging—there are no camera angles or frame sizes. The position and motion of every “markered” element is simultaneously recorded in three-dimensional space. Once the Director is satisfied with the actors’ performances in a scene, the capturing of the scene is finished. Later on, the Director can render the scene from any, and as many, POVs and “focal lengths” as he or she wishes.

But for this to be possible, every actor must be visible to (most of) the capture cameras at all times. This means that there must not be any large opaque surfaces or objects to block the cameras’ view. If there need to be physical items in the volume for the actors to interact with, they must be “transparent.” But glass or plastic sheets can’t be used, because refraction will distort the positions of markers behind them as seen by the cameras. Instead, surfaces are usually made out of wire mesh or screening, e.g., a house will have thin metal tubing outlining the doors and windows (to properly position the actors), with wire mesh walls (so the actors don’t accidently walk through them). In the virtual world, seen from a POV at some distance from the house, the walls will be solid and opaque, but as the POV is moved closer, at some point it will pass through the “wall” and now everything in the room is visible. Tree trunks can be cylinders of chicken-wire fencing, with strands of hanging moss simulated by dangling strings.

Props need only to be the same size and overall shape, and weight, to keep the actions of the actors handling them correct. They will have a number of reflected markers distributed over their surface. Live animals, if not the actual living version, are made as life-size dolls with articulated limbs and appropriate markers, and puppeted by human operators. This gives the actor something “living” to interact with.

Since the motions and positions are captured in three dimensions, if the ground or floor in the virtual world is not flat and/or level like the volume’s stage floor, the bottom of the volume must be contoured to match it. This is done by positioning platform modules on the grid squares to adjust the surface accordingly. (More about this later.)

It is necessary to precisely align the real world of the capture volume with the CGI virtual world in the computer; otherwise, parts of the CGI character’s bodies may become imbedded in “solid” surfaces. The first step in this process involves a “gnomon” (pointer) that exists in both the real and virtual worlds.

As an aid in editing, the capture suit usually has a label indicating the character’s name. Hands and/or feet may be color-coded to distinguish left from right. The gnomon has three arms at right angles to each other, tipped with reflective markers to allow the MoCap system to create its CGI doppelganger in the virtual world. To align the real table with its “twin” in the virtual world, the gnomon is placed at one of the real table’s corners, and then the table is moved in the volume until the virtual gnomon is exactly positioned on the corresponding corner of the CGI table. This is usually the simplest method. Another possibility is to go into the virtual world and mouse-drag the CGI table until it lines up with the virtual gnomon. The entire virtual world could also be dragged to position the table, but this might throw other objects out of alignment. Global position shifts like that are limited to adjusting the virtual ground with the volume floor after the contour modules are in place.

Real-world alignment gnomon and “transparent” table with wire-mesh surfaces. (Photo: ‘AVATAR’ ©2009 Twentieth Century Fox. All rights reserved)

Multiple conventional HD video cameras are used in the volume for “reference.” These cameras cover the scene in wide shots and close-ups on each character. This allows the Director to judge an actor’s performance before the data is rendered into the animated character. A secondary function is to sort out body parts when the MoCap system gets confused and an arm sprouts out of a CGI character’s head. Looking at the reference shot, the Editor can figure out to whom it belongs, and mouse-drag it back into its proper place. In most stages, the cameras are hard-wired into the system so they have house-sync TC and do not normally require TC slating. They may use DV cassettes and/or send the video directly into the system.

Until a few years ago, it was not possible to see the CGI characters in real time, but now Autodesk Motion Builder™ software allows real-time rendering, albeit in limited resolution. Warning: The flatpanel monitors on the stage have cooling fans that may need to be muffled or baffled. Video projectors’ fans are even louder.

Lighting in the volume is very uniform, soft and non-source, to ensure that the reference cameras always have a well-illuminated image. In addition, having no point-source lights ensures that there will be few, if any, specular (spot-like) reflections that might confuse the MoCap system’s cameras.

To capture motion effectively, the system must measure the marker positions at least twice as fast as the temporal resolution required. For 24-frame applications, this means a minimum 48 Hz rate. Currently, much higher rates are used, 120 Hz to 240 Hz. If “motion blur” is desired, it can be created in Post.

P-Cap

Motion Capture was developed first, and initially captured only the gross motions of the actor’s body. The facial features were animated later, by human operators who used mouse clicks and drags. Then, smaller, BB-sized reflective balls were glued to the faces, in an attempt to capture some of the expressions there. Unfortunately, this process couldn’t capture the movement of the eyes, or the tongue, or any skin wrinkles that formed. And since the “life” of a character is in the face, these early CGI creations failed the “Uncanny Valley” test.

It turns out that human beings evolved a built-in warning system to detect people that weren’t quite “right.” Back in the “cave people” days, subtle clues in a person’s appearance or actions were an indication of a disease or mental impairment that could be dangerous to your continued good health or even your very existence.

Multiple hard-wired HD reference cameras (although these have DV cassettes as well). (Photo: ‘AVATAR’ ©2009 Twentieth Century Fox. All rights reserved)

A graph of the “realism” of a character versus its acceptability starts at the lower left with obvious cartoon figures and slowly rises as the point moves to the right with increasing realism. But before the character’s image reaches a peak at the right edge, where photographic images of actual human beings fall, it turns sharply downward into the valley, and only climbs out as the character becomes “photo-realistic.” Even an image of a real human corpse (possible disease transmission) is in the valley, as would be that of a super-realistic zombie.

When you watch a Mickey Mouse cartoon, you know the character isn’t “real,” so its completely “inhuman” appearance is not a problem. Likewise, when you watch a live-action movie, the characters are real, so again there are no warning bells going off in your brain.

Current computer-animated cartoons like Despicable Me or Mars Needs Moms don’t have a problem because their “human” characters are so obviously caricatures. The trouble began when CGI characters developed to the point of being “almost” human, and started the descent into the uncanny valley. The 2001 video-game-based movie Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within was the first attempt at a “photo-realistic” CGI feature movie using MoCap. Although an amazing piece of work for its time, it didn’t succeed visually or at the box office. But it didn’t quite fall over the precipice into the uncanny valley, either. The characters’ faces all had that “stretchy rubber” look when they moved, the motion of their eyes and mouths weren’t close enough to human, and most of their exposed body parts (except for hair, which was quite good) were rigid and doll-like, moving only at the joints. It still was “only” video game animation, and back then, nobody expected that to be real.

The stylized 2004 feature The Polar Express had an intentionally non-realistic, stylized look to its settings and characters, but since the MoCap process was used, their now, much more realistic motions caused a slight uneasiness among some viewers.

It wasn’t until Beowulf (2007), that the CGI capabilities increased to the “almost photo-realistic” level and a larger portion of the audience was disturbed by their being in the uncanny valley, albeit subliminally. It was mainly that the characters’ eyes were mostly “dead,” moving only on cue to look at another character, and never exhibiting the minor random movements that real, living eyes make continuously. The interior details of their mouths were also deficient.

Interestingly, the same capture volume that was used for The Polar Express and Beowulf was also used for Avatar (2009), but only after James Cameron spent a great deal of time and money to upgrade the system. Avatar successfully crossed the uncanny valley because the facial-capture cameras worn by the actors allowed for the recording and reproducing of accurate eye and mouth movements, and the formation and elimination of skin wrinkles. “Edge-detection” software made this possible. Thus was born the “Performance Capture” version of MoCap.

P-Cap volumes have the same soft, non-directional lighting as MoCap, plus additional lights mounted next to the facial capture cameras to make sure the face is never shadowed. Avatar used a single CCD-chip mounted on a strut directly in front of the performer’s face, and many systems still use this configuration. To avoid having the distraction of an object continuously in the actor’s line of sight, by the time AChristmas Carol went into production in 2009, four cameras were used, mounted at the sides of the face, and their images were rectified and stitched together in the computer.

At the beginning of the production of Avatar, Cameron used a live microwave feed from the face camera to “paint” the actor’s human eyes and mouth onto the CGI Na’vi’s face as an aid to judging performance. But after a while, this proved not to be that useful and was discontinued.

Face-Only P-Cap

For certain action scenes, the actors cannot safely wear a camera head rig. For these situations, only the body markers are used, and conventional MoCap is employed. Sound is recorded with a boom mike or wireless mike with a body-mounted lavalier, but will (normally) serve only as cue-track. Afterward, P-Cap techniques will be used to capture the face and dialog. If the director does not automatically ask for it, I recommend that you suggest he or she have the actors attempt to reproduce their body motions from the MoCap sessions as accurately as possible, because this will induce a form of realistic stress to their voices. These setups should be mic’d in the same manner as the rest of the project.

Alternate Techniques for Face-Only P-Cap

The capture infrastructure is continuously evolving, and several new technologies are emerging. Unfortunately, because of NDAs (Non-Disclosure Agreements), I cannot describe the projects I worked on in any detail. The information here comes from public sources such as Cinefex magazine and Wikipedia.org.

Real-time LIDAR (LIght Detection And Ranging) scanning is used to measure the shape and position of the performer’s head, down to sub-millimeter resolution. (This technique is also used to capture GCI data from large motionless objects like buildings, statues, vehicles, etc.)

Real-time multiple-camera, multiple-angle views are used to compute 3-D data from the different 2-D images of the performer’s face.

For both of these, you must usually keep the mike, the boom, and their shadows out of the working volume.

Live-Action MoCap

Live-action scenes, often shot against green- or blue-screen backings, need to have dramatic, sourced lighting. There are also many shiny wardrobe items and props, some of which even emit light themselves, and all these would confuse the passive MoCap system. Exterior scenes shot in direct sunlight can completely wash out the reflected capture-camera lights. For all these reasons, the reflective marker passive system cannot be used. Instead, “active” markers are used. These are larger, ½- to 1-inch cubes, with an LED array on each visible side. The markers emit a pattern of light pulses, either red or infrared, to uniquely identify each individual marker. Externally mounted markers that are visible in a shot can be eliminated with “wire-removal” software in Post. Infrared markers may sometimes be concealed under clothing to avoid this extra step, along with its attendant time and cost.

MoCon

Motion Control was developed long before any capture processes. A camera was mounted on a movable multi-axis platform that ran on tracks, and had sensors to record its motion, position, and lens settings. The initial shot was made by a human operator, then the subsequent ones could be made by playing back the recorded data and using it to control servo motors that moved the camera in a duplicate of whatever dolly, pan, tilt, zoom, focus, etc., moves were made the first time. This allowed “in-camera” compositing of multiple scene elements without the need for optical film work in Post, with the attendant problems of generation loss, color shifts, etc. A typical use would be to shoot a night scene of model buildings with illuminated windows using a large outdoor model city street. To get uniform illumination, the tracking shot past the buildings is shot in daylight, with the camera stopped down to reduce the exposure. This would require impossibly intense (and hot) lights to illuminate the windows brightly enough to read in direct sunlight. Instead, a second, matching, pass is made at night with the lens opened up, so that low-wattage bulbs will provide the proper exposure. The original Star Wars movies used this method extensively. While this system is still in use, it is now possible to use markers to track camera position, particularly with handheld cameras.

MoTrac

Motion Control requires a large amount of expensive equipment, but now that computers have become so much more powerful, digital manipulation can accomplish some, but not all, of the tasks formally done with MoCon. And of course, many that were impossible with MoCon. And sometimes MoTrac can be used instead of needing MoCap to record camera positions and moves.

MoTrac has two main applications. First, green- and blue-screen work where there will be camera moves that must be coordinated with an added background plate. To do this, an ordinary non-MoCon camera is used, and visible “fiduciary” marks are made on the screen as a reference for how the plate image must be shifted to have the proper parallax for the moving camera. Usually, the mark is simply an “X” made with pieces of contrasting color tape. Enough marks are placed on the screen to ensure that some of them will always be in frame. The computer tracks the motion of these Xs and then adjusts the position of the background plate to match.

Second, smaller marks, often ¼-inch red dots, are stuck on real objects that will have CGI extensions added on to them. The moving ampsuits used in Avatar existed in the real word only as torsos on MoCon bases. The CGI arms, legs, and clear chestpiece were attached later in the virtual world. If you are planting/hiding microphones, be careful not to tape over or otherwise occlude any of these marks.

While not commonly used at present, it is possible to put fiduciary marks on a mike boom as an aid in removing it Post. And the recent Les Miserables used them to help remove the exposed lavaliers that were mounted outside the wardrobe.

MoTrac MoCap

This hybrid has limited capabilities, but is often used for liveaction shoots on real locations or sets, with CGI characters that are human-shaped and slightly larger than the human performers. No reflective or active markers are used because the scenes often involve action and stunts, and the markers could injure the wearer or be damaged or torn off. Typical examples are the Iron Man suits and the humanoid droids in Elysium.

This method does not capture 3-D position information directly, and is used to simply “overlay” the CGI image on top of the capture performer’s on a frame-by-frame basis. Perspective distortion of the shape and size of the marker squares can be analyzed by the software to properly rotate and light the virtual character.

The actors wear grey capture suits with cloth “marker bands,” consisting of strips ranging from ½ to 2 inches in width having alternating white-and-black squares with a small circle of the opposite color in the center. The bands are fastened around the portions of the actor’s body that are to be captured: head, torso, arms, and/or legs. Only gross body movements are captured with this system; not details such as fingers or facial features.

If wireless mikes are used, there is no face-cam mounting strut available to mount the microphone, but neither it nor the transmitter has to be hidden. Like a regular shot, boom shadows have to be kept off anything visible in frame, except for the capture suit. (The shadow will not be dark enough to be mistaken for black makings.)

Editor’s note: Jim Tanenbaum’s explanation of P-Cap and MoCap practices will continue in the next issue of the Quarterly with specific guidance for sound technicians working these projects.

Text and pictures (except Avatar set pictures) © 2014 by James Tanenbaum, all rights reserved.

My Wild Ride

by Coleman Metts, CAS
All images courtesy of Coleman Metts

My friend and colleague, Scott Harbor, who was having a scheduling conflict, referred me to the movie Ride. He thought, “Coleman surfs and stand-up paddleboards, so he’ll be great for it.” When the Producers initially contacted me, they said, “We are keeping it simple, but we want the actors, Helen Hunt and Luke Wilson, to talk to each other as they’re going out through the waves and catching the waves.” Well, I thought, perhaps the new wireless microphone transmitters from Lectrosonics might work. I told them it would be an experiment, but I felt pretty good about being able to pull it off.

My initial plan was to cut holes in the wet suits and have the microphones exposed but removed with computers in Post. The Producers responded they could not afford to do that for every shot. After considering a range of alternative options, we eventually agreed to cut small holes in the wet suits and attach the microphones behind each hole with tape. We then began an exhaustive process of trial and error in an attempt to mount the microphones. We could not find any tape that would effectively work in saltwater! Eventually, we settled on using Velcro to mount the microphones. However, it was not long before we learned that the Lectrosonics waterproof transmitters are not saltwater proof!

Lectrosonics was very cooperative about minimizing the L&D expenses, but the wireless transmitter failures forced my crew to capture all the sound sequences, both on the ocean and in the surf zone, with an old-fashioned overhead boom microphone. On the water, I used a Sennheiser 60. We got basically traditional coverage, so we were very lucky in that respect, and the microphone worked perfectly. I used the Lectrosonics plug-on transmitters to get the sound from the boom microphone back to me. My recorder for the movie was the Zaxcom Fusion. Working in this environment is incredibly hard on every piece of equipment. I am still finding sand in various places among my sound gear, months later.

We did not make any technological leaps on this movie; it was just persistence, and positive attitude, that solved our problems.

The initial schedule showed us on and off the water a lot, so I had a small ENG-type package built for the ocean, and my main rig I left built for filming on the land. Even at sea, I managed to send an IFB feed to video village and, particularly to Helen Hunt, who was directing as well as acting. I also supplied signal to the Script Supervisor and the Video Playback Operator, fellow 695 member Anthony Desanto.

We did not have a lot of prep for this project, so we had to improvise and figure it out as we went along. A nice benefit of the show was that I was able to bike to work every day for three weeks. Also, I got to wear my sandals at work every day for about a month.

So began my two weeks out on the water. I was placed in everything from zodiac-type boats to the back of wave runners. I eventually spent much of my time on a large stand-up paddleboard as no motorized craft were allowed in the designated surf zone which, in the Marina Del Rey/Venice area, extends from the beach out three hundred yards.

My Boom Operators, Johnny Evans and Jim Castro, also operated from large stand-up paddleboards for significant portions of their time on location. When not on a stand-up paddleboard, the Boom Operators were standing directly in the surf zone. Doing so, however, required the use of Watermen/Stuntmen who would position themselves directly behind my crew and grip them tightly to prevent them from being knocked over by the oncoming waves. My Utility, Ace Williams, did a phenomenal job in these trying conditions. Oftentimes, I was texting Ace what resources I needed sent out on the next supply boat.

It was not long before I realized that working on the water is very different from playing on the water. Being out on various watercraft all day was pretty fatiguing. Communication was limited. In the beginning, we also had a failure in the transfer process when the facility transferred all the tracks for dailies. That added some stress at the start of the show. Eventually, we got it all sorted out—just about the time when we moved off the ocean and started filming on dry land.

What did I learn from this project? Well, I guess I learned that when they say it’s going to be simple, it’s not. And I learned that you need more than one plan to deal with any eventuality plus enough resources for almost any scenario.

The process of filming on the beach, on the water and on multiple locations throughout Venice made Ride the hardest show I’ve done by far. But the amazing people I worked with made it a memorable and positive experience. The Director of Photography and his crew, the Key Grip and his team and our Stunt Coordinator and the Waterman were outstanding. They solved amazingly hard challenges every day. They all displayed the best positive attitude and everything seemed easy for them. After eighteen years in the business, I’ve learned not to take these things for granted. Ride restored my enthusiasm for making movies; it was a bright spot in my career.

Jim Webb: A Profile

by David Waelder

“ He was the most perfect Sound Mixer I ever worked with.”
–Chris McLaughlin

“ I would say that Jim was the father of multi-track. I really would.”
–Harrison “Duke” Marsh

“ He seemed to field a lot of curveballs very elegantly.”
–Robert Schaper

“ He was a great educational source to learn from.”
–James Eric

“ Jim Webb is a crusty old pirate of a man who has a heart bigger than words can describe.”
–Mark Ulano, CAS

James E. Webb Jr. is justifiably renowned for his work developing multi-track recording on a series of films for Robert Altman. He captured the dialog from multiple cast members and interlocking story lines on such iconic films as Nashville, Buffalo Bill and the Indians, 3 Women, and A Wedding. He pioneered the multi-track process.

The scenes were so complex, so intricate and so audacious that Altman himself parodied the style in The Player.

And yet, this was really just the beginning of Jim Webb’s career.

He studied film in college, first at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, and later at USC in the Department of Cinema. In 1962, he was drafted into the Army and, after training in radio and as a radio teletype operator (RTTY), served in Germany at an Army Aviation Repair Company that occupied the old Luftwaffe hangars on the military side of Stuttgart’s main airport.

Discharged in 1964, he worked for about a year at USC and then took a job, first at KTLA and then at the CBS station KNXT. The stations had contracts with IATSE and he got his IA card at that time.

ROCK & ROLL

Work in feature films was the goal but opportunities were scarce for recent film school graduates and new members of the union with limited contacts and seniority. Seeking to create their own work opportunities, he formed an independent production company with Pierre Adidge, a friend from Northwestern, and Bob Abel.

The newly formed production company did music specials for PBS and also documentary concert features. The Joe Cocker film, Mad Dogs & Englishmen, was the first feature, followed by Soul to Soul (as a consultant) and Elvis on Tour. These projects taxed his technical skills to keep everything in sync and sensibly organized. He was well aware that Woodstock required a full year of work to get everything synced and worked strenuously to avoid a calamity of that sort. He insisted on shooting regular slates and on assigning one track on the eight-track recorder to a sync pulse. His commitment to good protocol was not always adhered to but his efforts were at least partially successful and the films were all released in a timely manner.

ROBERT ALTMAN AND MULTI-TRACK

His Army training and experience with radio mikes and multi-track music recording on concert films gave him a good foundation in skills needed to implement a production style that Robert Altman was developing. Traditionally, films had treated their subject matter as if they were stage plays seen with a camera. Close-ups and tracking shots provide changing perspective but the action unfolded as a linear narrative. Altman saw the world as a messy place where events didn’t always proceed in an orderly way. Sometimes everyone would speak at once. Sometimes, with multiple participants, it wouldn’t be clear who was driving the action until the event was over. He wanted to bring some of that messy uncertainty to his film projects.

Altman used a loose and improvisational style in films like MASH but encountered difficulties with sound for McCabe & Mrs. Miller. Without precise cues to know when each character might speak, it was difficult for the Sound Mixer to deliver a suitable track, especially when action was staged in authentic locations with hard floors and other acoustically difficult features. Having multiple microphones, and assigning the outputs to isolated tracks, was the obvious solution. Altman brought in Jack Cashin to design a system of multi-track recording that might be used on location. Most of the equipment then available was designed for use in a studio and it required some ingenuity to adapt it for location use. But assembling the hardware is only part of the equation; someone must operate it effectively and this presented challenges to the Production Mixer.

The system Cashin developed used a Stevens one-inch, eight-track recorder. With one track assigned to a sync signal, seven tracks were available for discrete audio. No multi-track mixing panels that could work off DC were available at that time so 2 eight-input, four-output consoles were linked to supply the needed signal feed. The whole business ran off a 12-volt motorcycle battery with a converter circuit to provide the higher voltage needed by the recorder.

Paul Lohmann, Altman’s Director of Photography, recommended Jim Webb for the multi-track skills he had demonstrated on the concert films. And that was the beginning of collaboration among Robert Altman, Jack Cashin and Jim Webb on a series of films.

Jim Webb:

They had everything together but they didn’t have any idea about how to use it. And I said, “Well, the only thing that makes any sense is to put radio mikes on everybody.” You can’t have open mikes because if you add those back in the pre-dub, the background is going to be astronomical—you won’t be able to tell anything. You have to do a lot of close mic’ing to make this work. So my contribution was radio mikes.

The first picture made with this multi-track technique was California Split. It was a fortuitous choice because it made good use of improvisational technique but was less ambitious in that application than subsequent projects. It provided an opportunity to shake out the system.

By the time we got to Nashville, we pulled out all the stops and went blasting our way through it. We shot that film in eight weeks at a dead run.

Putting radio mikes on each performer and assigning them to discrete tracks was an obvious approach but there were also limitations. Post work required an additional two weeks to deal with all the different tracks. There was also an inherent lack of audio perspective. Jim Webb explains it best himself:

There’s no perspective. We ran into that immediately on Nashville. There’s this scene that opens the movie which is where they’re all in a recording studio and I went about putting radios on everybody, even the ones behind the recording glass. And I went over to Altman and I said, “Are you sure we’re doing this right? We’re throwing perspective just completely out the window.” And he said, “Yes, yes, of course we are.” I went back to putting radios on. About twenty minutes later, he comes over and says, “Are we doing this right?”

A little late to change the action now. And it worked out. I would have people come up to me and say, “That was the most realistic sound I’ve ever heard.” Well, there was nothing real about it. You’re not hearing people shooting through a double-plate glass and hearing all the conversation inside there, as well as what’s going on outside.

But it was primarily designed for overlapping dialog and improv and things of that nature where you never knew what anybody was going to say.

And you can’t possibly listen to it all because it’s just a Tower of Babel. So once I previewed all the radios and made sure they were working, you were just watching the meters.

Capturing the dialog with individual radio microphones was a complex undertaking that required all of Jim Webb’s skill but it accomplished what Robert Altman needed to fulfill his vision for the film. According to the Supervising Sound Editor, only two lines weren’t recorded in the original production track. One was a failed radio on Henry Gibson and the other one was an added line of Allen Garfield’s back as he was walking away from us. That was it; the rest was all stuff that we did.

THE ULTRASTEREO MIXER

Very little was available in the way of a portable mixing panel at the time Jim Webb was working the multi-track pictures with Robert Altman. The specialty mixing panels that Jack Cashin adapted for those pictures had liabilities that make them cumbersome for use on most pictures. He and Jack Cashin set to work to address this need with a capable mixer.

In the late to mid-fifties, [Perfectone] had a little threepot black mixer that was very popular in the studios; it was a little rotary pot thing and everybody used it. And it was around a lot. And then they updated their little portable mixer with a straight line. And they had six in and one out—it was still a mono mixer. And I liked the straight-line faders because you could handle them a lot easier than trying to wrangle three rotary, four, five rotary pots. So I said to Jack [Cashin], “Can we modify this and make it two track?” And we looked it over and said, no, it’s going to be simpler to make our own version of this. And he designed it and I built it. I built a dozen of them, maybe 12 to 14 of them. Sold them all.

ALL THE PRESIDENT’S MEN AND A RETURN TO BOOMING

Right after Nashville, Jim Webb was hired to do All the President’s Men, largely because his multi-track skills were applicable to situations where actors might have to interact with video monitors playing in the newsroom. He was also particularly skilled at recording telephone conversations and there were many of those in the script. Although he had his own working prop phones, the Special Effects Department supplied the multi-line key phones used in All the President’s Men. Webb provided a phone tap to record the phoneline conversations on a separate track from the on-camera dialog. He would supply an audio feed to actors brought in just for their off-screen dialog. Because everyone heard everyone else, either through the phones or via a specially provided feed from the mixing panel, overlaps were possible and could be recorded naturally. It was expensive because of the need to bring in actors who didn’t appear on screen but freedom from the pace-killing process of having lines read by a script supervisor allowed the filming to fly and yielded more natural performances.

When we rehearsed it, it went like lightening. And when we got through, Bob [Redford] said, Holy cow! … He was shocked at how fast it went and that’s how we did the scene.

It’s not often that the Mixer gets a chance to dabble in how the scene plays.

All the President’s Men was more tightly scripted and allowed a more normal recording technique than the Altman pictures. It came at a good time:

I remember going into an interview one time and I said, “I’ve done this Altman this and that.” And the guy looks at me and says, “OK. What else have you done besides that?” And I didn’t have anything so I was thinking to myself, it’s better to work around; it’s better to do different formats and utilize them when you need them.

Chris McLaughlin was his Boom Operator on the film but the newsroom scenes presented particular challenges. The Washington Post set was gigantic, consuming two linked stages, and lit naturalistically from overhead fluorescent lights. Fortunately, due to the heat they generated, the ballasts for all those lights were mounted in a shed outside the stage so there wasn’t a serious problem with hum. Director of Photography Gordon Willis favored up-angle shots that showed all the lights in the ceiling. When Jim Webb asked if it would be OK to boom, Willis held out his hand, casting multiple soft shadows and said, “I don’t care what you do as long as you don’t make any shadows on my set.” “That was the end of that conversation,” says Webb. Chris did manage to boom the picture using primarily a Sennheiser MKH 815 from below, flitting in and out of the performer’s legs.

According to Chris McLaughlin, Webb entrusted the microphone selection to his Boom Operators. But the big Sennheiser was clearly a favorite. He describes using one on The Long Riders. The Keach brothers were fitted with wireless mikes when Jim Webb learned that they intended to ride into the Chattahoochee River at the conclusion of the dialog. Concerned about immersing the radio packs in the river, Webb resolved to boom the scene. Chris McLaughlin thought that he could capture the dialog with a Sennheiser 815 off a 10-foot ladder. He turned the mike back for maximum rejection of the sound of the river and they accomplished the shot. At the end, the Keach brothers did ride into the river and Webb didn’t lose any mikes. “So I have a lot of respect for the 815,” he said, “it got me through a lot of tough places.”

It’s key to an understanding of technique that there was no agenda, no rules about how each scene needed to be recorded. Jim Webb approached each project with an eye to achieving the Director’s vision and capturing the elements needed for the picture as a whole. Duke Marsh says: “I think with Jim it was, if I’m [Post] mixing this thing, or I’m going to do the Post work on it, what do I want to hear?”

And Jim himself says, “You just gotta do what you gotta do, you know. And I never worried, pretty much at all, about what people thought about what I was doing. If I saw a way to do it and it felt right, that’s what I was going to do.”

Each project presented its own set of challenges to test his skills and preparation.Noises Off presented a particularly complex situation. Originally a stage play, it concerns an acting company rehearsing and presenting a play on an elaborate set. Come opening night, everything goes awry, cues are missed, props misplaced, and the comic errors pile one atop the other. The two-story set mirrored the set that would be on stage. To accommodate the perspective of the Stage Manager, a key character, the entire set was built ten feet above the sound studio floor, complicating any work from the stage. Peter Bogdanovich, the Director, intended to shoot the entire film using a Louma crane that had the ability to swoop in on individual performers, further complicating efforts to capture the audio with a boom microphone. Moreover, the script took the actors up and down stairs and through doors at a frenetic pace.

The actors hoped to avoid using radio mikes, in part because there was often little costume to conceal them. But they needn’t have worried as the pace and frequent costume changes made that an inconvenient choice.

The original plan was to distribute plant microphones throughout the set and go from mike to mike as the action required. After a rehearsal, Webb said, “Guys, I don’t know.”

McLaughlin thought he could capture the dialog using Fisher booms and had a plan for how to accomplish it. They would use two of the big Fisher booms and, to get them high enough to work the elevated set, they would replace the regular bases with purpose-built scaffolds and mount the booms to the top rails of the scaffolding. Wheels fitted to the scaffolding allowed moving the booms into position as needed.

Jim Webb was open to the idea and brought in Fisher booms with 29-foot arms fitted with Neumann KMH 82i microphones. Randy Johnson joined Chris to operate the second Fisher and Duke Marsh was brought in to work from the greenbeds with a fishpole to catch anything that fell between them. After hearing a rehearsal, Jim Webb said, “This is the way to go. Pull those plants.” They did use a few of the plants to pick up dialog occurring well upstage, under the set overhangs where the booms couldn’t penetrate, but using the big Fisher booms simplified the plan considerably. The plan still demanded considerable mixing skill to blend the two main booms, the fishpole operated by Duke and the occasional plant mike, but there was logic to the operation and the team successfully recorded all the dialog.

Other films presented challenges of their own. The Bette Midler films, The Rose and For the Boys, each presented playback challenges because of the large audiences or the complex shots envisioned by Mark Rydell, the Director. Webb worked with Re-recording Mixer Robert Schaper on For the Boys to build modern elements into period microphones so they might accomplish live-records at the highest quality levels. Robert Schaper recalls:

We ended up stealing vocals off of those mikes in the playback situations. One of Bette’s songs to her husband, when she is reunited with her husband, had a very silky, lovely, studio playback [of] “I’m Going to Love You Come Rain or Come Shine.” And she had a very silky rendition of that. [But] it didn’t match her acting performance at all because she was crying, overwhelmed with seeing her husband that she hadn’t seen in months and she was very worried about it and everything else. And we had planted … a Shure 55 with a rebuilt Shure capsule in it. Even with playback coming at her, the isolation was good enough on her actual live vocal—and she always actually sings all of her lip syncs. And she performed the heck out of the song … I ended up compiling all of that and using her live vocal—rather than the pre-record … from the plant that we had out there … and it turned out to be a really great acting performance.

CREW RELATIONS

“ He left a lot of it to the boom man. He walked on and said the boom man was the money-man, the boom man, he believed, controlled the set. ”
–Duke Marsh

“ He put great trust and faith in his Boom Operator. It was a collaborative effort. ”
–Chris McLaughlin

Over the course of a career, every Sound Mixer works with many Boom Operators, Utility Technicians, and Playback Operators. All who worked with Jim Webb praise his skills, his concentration, his commitment both to the project and his crew. A few brief stories from Duke Marsh illustrate:

[From Beaches] I would go and grab the snakes at wrap and he comes up behind me with gloves on and he said, “No, I do that.” “But I’m the cable guy; that’s a cable.” And, instantly we were buddies. And he’d go, “But, Duke, you gotta understand, those snakes are for me so I can work off the truck.” And in my whole career with him, in the rain, in the mud, in the snow, he’d always come off that truck. And there were days when I would say, “But you’re the Mixer.” “Well, you got other stuff to do. Go do that, come back, give me a hand.” That was Jim. He would always back his crew.

And then, in 2001 when he was receiving the CAS Lifetime Achievement Award:

I get a phone call and Jim says, “I want you to come. You’ll be at my table.” Well, he invited Doug Vaughn and Chris McLaughlin. [He delivered a speech accepting the award] then he says, “Those three guys at that table are responsible for a lot of this in my career. If it wasn’t for the boom man, putting that mike in the right spot, I wouldn’t be here.” And he had us stand up and we got an ovation. And I’m thinking, how many mixers pay attention to the guy that’s out front?

AWARDS AND ACHIEVEMENTS

In addition to the CAS Award, Jim Webb won the Academy Award for All the President’s Men in 1977 and the BAFTA Award for Nashville in 1976. He received one other Oscar nomination and three additional BAFTA nominations.

Nashville and All the President’s Men are each featured in both the Criterion Collection and the Smithsonian List. While Robert Altman and Alan Pakula, respectively, are recognized for their vision, Jim Webb shares in the accomplishment through his skill and inventiveness in facilitating that vision.

It’s also instructive to note the Producers and Directors he’s worked with multiple times. The list of three or more film collaborators includes Robert Altman, Francis Ford Coppola, Garry Marshall, Walter Hill, Bette Midler, and Paul Mazursky. Mark Rydell is one of several directors who employed him twice.

For each of these directors, Jim Webb contributed a sense of the role of sound as part of the whole and adjusted his technique to meet the needs of each particular project and the vision of that particular filmmaker. In talking with him, it is apparent that he has taken great pleasure in the process.

Jim Webb: “Good production sound has production value! Don’t give up. Be consistent and do the best you can.”

Mic’ing the Instruments

In the course of interviewing for this profile, Jim Webb shared many great stories that didn’t fit neatly into the narrative. This is one of the stories rescued from the trim bin.

In California Split, it started there and at the end of the scene there was going to be—and I found out this about two minutes before we were going to shoot it— there was a piano with tacked hammers in the bar and there was a lady that would play the piano and sing. Elliott Gould was going to be sitting there and they were going to talk a bit while she was playing the piano—and eventually they were going to sing “Bye Bye Blackbird.”

And I said, oh my God, it would be nice to know about this a little bit earlier. So I ran back and the only things I had around in those days were the old ECM-50s which were some of the first electrets from Sony. And I had a bunch of those. So I ran over to the piano, raised the lid and put one taped to the cross bar pointed down and the other one pointed up to the top end. I connected cables from the mixing panel, closed the lid, put a radio on each performer, ran back, turned the equalization all the way up – all I had – and prayed. So I laid down four tracks and it worked pretty well. In fact, they couldn’t duplicate it.

The scene didn’t really make the film but the song is in there, at the end, over the credits.

Anyway, they discovered that I could do that. So, in the smaller scenes in Nashville, where there were just the two gals singing in a place and the piano and whatever, I would do that mike, if it was an old upright, I would stick a couple of mikes in there … and as long as I hadn’t filled up the eight tracks, I could do that.

Well, they decided that I had so much dialog going on that I couldn’t cover all the music too; I just didn’t have enough tracks. So, they hired a guy named Johnny Rosen to come in and they had a sixteen-track truck and they hired him to do the Opryland stuff and all that. And their mixer, I think his name was Gene Eichelberger, was shadowing me just to see what I was doing. And he saw me doing this lavalier routine and I’m thinking to myself, I can’t tell anybody in Nashville that I’m using lavaliers to mike instruments because they’re going to laugh me out of town. Next thing I know when I get to Opryland, Eichelberger is over borrowing every ECM-50 I’ve got and he’s taping them to fiddles and everything in the orchestra he can find. So, I thought, well, OK, that’s how we’re going to do this. And that’s how it all kinda went down.

Interview Contributors

These colleagues of Jim Webb assisted in the preparation of this profile by making themselves available for interviews:

Crew Chamberlain was Webb’s Boom Operator on several films including The Milagro Beanfield War, Legal Eagles, and Down and Out in Beverly Hills.

James Eric knew Jim Webb from his days working the microphone bench at Location Sound. Later, he served as Utility Sound on Out to Sea.

Robert Janiger is a Sound Mixer and friend who collaborated on further development of the Ultrastereo mixer.

Harrison “Duke” Marsh worked with Jim Webb on seventeen films including Pretty Woman, For the Boys and Noises Off. He worked variously as Playback Operator, Utility Sound and Boom Operator.

Chris McLaughlin boomed twenty-one films for Jim Webb starting with California Split and continuing through Noises Off. Among others, he did Nashville, 3 Women, The Rose, The Long Riders, and Hammett.

Robert Schaper was Supervising Music Engineer on For the Boys.

Mark Ulano is an award-winning Sound Mixer who considers Jim Webb a mentor.

The Cable Connection: Part 4
CHECKING YOUR RECORDING CHANNEL FOR CROSSTALK PROBLEMS

by Jim Tanenbaum CAS

When you have finished configuring your sound cart, begin checking for problems. You will have to repeat the tests several times, monitoring from your recorder, backup recorder (if used), and mix panel. When you have finished with this first round of testing, check all your sends: Comtek, feed to video assist, etc., for crosstalk in them.

You will need a battery-operated tone generator, with 100 Hz, 1 KHz, and 10 KHz sine wave frequencies, both mike and line-level outputs, and adapter cables to allow you to connect to whatever type of audio input connectors (XLR, TA, etc.) your equipment uses. “Dummy” loads to terminate open cables or inputs are also helpful in tracking down the more refractory cases, but you may not need them. I made male and female XLR connectors with metal-film resistors (low internal noise) soldered between Pins 2 and 3: dynamic mike = 150 Ω, condenser mike = 2 KΩ in series with a 100 mfd NP tantalum capacitor, line = 600 Ω, and hi-Z = 20 KΩ. All the shells are connected to Pin 1.

Without getting too deeply into electronic theory, capacitive crosstalk is characterized by an increased proportion of higher frequencies— it sounds tinny, like a really old-fashioned telephone. This type of crosstalk increases as the distance between the two wires decreases. Furthermore, it requires only a source voltage, not current (e.g., the headphone feed in a duplex cable when the boom op’s phones are not plugged in). The type of insulating material separating the two wires doesn’t make too much of a difference.

Inductive crosstalk is the inverse of capacitive in that low frequencies couple more easily than high ones, but here the surrounding material makes a difference: ferrous material couples a magnetic field much more effectively than air for low frequencies. However, you will not encounter this situation often because there is seldom any iron or steel involved. Inductive crosstalk requires current to be flowing in the source circuit, so in the example above, if the crosstalk increases when the boom op’s phones are plugged in, you now have a contribution from inductive coupling. (Or not—the current drawn by the headphones will increase the IR drop, so there will be less voltage to capacitively couple.) In addition to an increased level, you may notice a greater proportion of lower mid-range frequencies.  

(Or not—it depends on how tightly the two wires are twisted, and how evenly.)

Follow the procedure below to check your gear for crosstalk or interference pickup:

1. To begin, be sure all equipment is switched off.

2. Disconnect all cables from the mixer’s channel inputs. Turn on the mixer and push all the faders to full open. Turn the headphone volume all the way down, in case there is a routing problem and the full-level tone goes directly to them. Plug your headsets into the mixer’s jack and slowly turn the volume all the way up. You should not hear anything except a faint hiss. Turn down the volume (to avoid any transient pops) and switch on all the other cart-mounted equipment, one unit at a time. Raise the headset volume to listen as each new unit is powered up. If the hiss or any other sound is noticeably louder, investigate the reason.

3. Make sure the headphone volume is down. Set the tone generator to 1 KHz at mike level, and plug it in to the mixer’s Channel 1. Adjust the channel fader and trimmer to give a 0 dB (full scale) reading on the mixer’s meter. Solo all the other channels and listen for crosstalk, turning the headphone volume up to listen and then down again for each channel. You will hear a certain amount of crosstalk, perhaps -55 dB to -70 dB down. It should be the same on all the other channels, or slightly louder on the adjacent Channel 2. Repeat this procedure with the generator set to 10 KHz. The crosstalk level may be somewhat higher. Then repeat with the generator at 100 Hz. The crosstalk should be noticeably lower. Now move the tone generator to Channel 2. Listen for crosstalk on all the other channels. Continue to move the tone generator through all the remaining channels. Finally, pull all the faders down and listen for any tone bleed-through. This sequence of tests establishes the baseline crosstalk level for all the following tests.

4. Repeat these mixer crosstalk tests with line-level inputs. Be sure to use the separate line input connectors if provided, instead of simply padding down the mike inputs. You may notice slightly more crosstalk because of the increased voltage entering the mixer’s internal wiring, especially the faders-closed test. This is normal, if the increase is not excessive.

5. NOTE: The above tests are extra-sensitive because the inputs are open-circuited. When a mike or other device is connected, the residual noise floor will be lower. You could check this by connecting the appropriate dummy load, but at this stage it is probably not necessary.

6. Connect the radio mike receiver outputs to the mixer inputs. As a general practice, use the receiver’s line-level outputs and the mixer’s line inputs. Depending on the type of radio mikes you have, they may produce more hiss or other noises when the transmitters are off. Turn on the transmitters (without a mike plugged in) to ensure that all the receivers mute/squelch properly. After you have checked for noise in every receiver, move the transmitters around your cart to see if their RF gets in anywhere. When finished with this test, switch off all the transmitters and disconnect the receivers.

7. Make sure your mixer is connected to the recorder in whatever arrangement you use (e.g., mix to Ch 1, ISOs to Ch 2, Ch 3, Ch 4…). Turn the recorder’s headphone volume all the way down, then move your headphones to the recorder. Use the mixer to send a 0 dB tone to the recorder’s Channel 1, and then listen to all the other recorder channels for crosstalk. Turn the headphone volume up slowly each time. Next, connect the tone generator to the mixer input that will send a tone to the recorder’s Channel 2 and listen for crosstalk on the other recorder channels. Finally, check all the other recorder channels in the same manner.

8. If you use a backup recorder, perform the same tests on it.

 9. Check all the external feeds, starting with the Comtek (or whatever wireless monitors you use). Use closed-cup headphones to reduce bleed-in of outside sounds. Be sure the Comtek receiver’s volume control is all the way off. Start with all the faders down on the mixer. IMPORTANT: You will need to calibrate the Comtek receiver’s output level to match the mixer’s. Temporarily reduce the tone generator’s output to -30 dB, and open the corresponding channel fader to give -30 dB on the meter. Slowly raise the mixer’s headphone volume to maximum, raising or lowering the tone generator’s output level to give you a comfortable SPL (Sound Pressure Level) in the headphones when the volume is full up. Now alternate plugging in your phones from the mixer to the Comtek receiver, adjusting the receiver’s volume control until the tone levels match. At this point, the control should be near maximum. If you can’t get the tone as loud with the control all the way up, you will have to make a mental note of how much lower it sounds, and judge the test results accordingly. If you reach the same loudness with the control well below maximum, especially if it is below the point where it is usually set, there may be a problem with the level of the signal going in to the Comtek transmitter—check it. It is also possible that the sensitivity and/or impedance of your headphone is markedly different from the lightweight phones you use with the Comtek—compare them.

10. If you have found no crosstalk or interference problems, give thanks to Murphy and take a break. But if you do have trouble, keep your headphones on and check the following:

11. Is the trouble in only one device? (e.g., in the recorder’s headphone monitor but not the mixer’s?) Unplug the audio, video, and timecode cables from it one at a time. If the problem persists, power it from another source. (e.g., if you have a common 12-volt supply on your cart, unplug the equipment and run it from a separate battery.)

12. Can you tell from the sound what kind of crosstalk or interference you have? (e.g., if the problem is TC bleed from recording  TC on one audio channel of the recorder, have you used an external pad to drop it 20 dB or 30 dB?) If you can identify the culprit, start with that piece of equipment.

13. If you have an AC hum/buzz problem and are not running anything from AC, make sure it’s not sneaking in somehow. Are you using an AC-powered worklight whose metal parts are touching your cart? Have you left a cart battery charger connected? Have a plugged-in electric drill on a lower shelf? If you unplugged a feed from video assist, is the metal shell of the plug still touching something metal on your cart?

14. If you are running on AC, is everything plugged in to the same outlet? A surge-protected outlet strip is a good start. Is there continuity for the third (grounding) pin all the way to the power source, including any extension cords? Is the third pin receptacle in the wall outlet properly grounded? (Using an AC voltmeter, measure the voltage from it to a known ground. Cold-water pipes are good, unless plastic water pipes are involved.)

15. If nothing specific is indicated, perform a general check.

16. Are all interconnecting cables firmly seated? If they are twistlock types, are they secure?

17. Wiggle each end of each cable at the juncture with the plug to see if that affects the problem. Cables usually fail at the strain relief, and the shield often fails first.

18. Loosen the cable clamps and separate all the cables in the bundle.

19. Isolate the power source of each piece of equipment in turn. Run it from a separate battery or AC supply.

20. Make a ground jumper from a length of 10-12 gauge stranded hookup wire, and connect one end to a solid ground point on your cart. Touch the other end to every connector shell, equipment housing, metal portion of the cart, etc.

21. It may help to make a sketch of your setup and look for unexpected current paths. Remember that any current flow will produce a voltage “drop” that, in fact, raises the voltage at the far end with respect to “ground,” and this voltage will look for any way possible to get there.

SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: SAFETY FIRST, LAST, AND IN BETWEEN

If you connect AC power to your cart, there are several precautions you can take.

1. Only connect to 3-prong grounding-type outlets, and check them beforehand with a plug-in 3-lamp tester to make sure they are wired correctly and properly grounded. NOTE: These simple testers are quick and easy to use, and will unambiguously indicate the presence of a connection to the safety ground socket. What it cannot distinguish is whether the connection is properly to the ground wire or incorrectly to the neutral. While either will provide the necessary safety shunt in the event of a powerline short to a 3-wire “grounded” equipment housing, the wiring reversal can cause massive AC ground loop problems.

WARNING: 2-wire power cords have “polarized” plugs, with one blade (the neutral) slightly wider than the other (the hot phase). Modern receptacles, whether 2- or 3-prong, have one slot wider to match, but older 2-prong outlets have both slots narrow. Some individuals have been known to file, saw, or cut down polarized plugs so they will fit these older outlets, and either way in the newer ones. Applying the hot phase to the neutral side of any device is never a good idea, even if the housing is plastic and/or “double-insulated.”

ANOTHER WARNING: If you absolutely must use a 3-to-2 adapter, be sure the grounding lug or pigtail lead is connected to the screw between the two outlets, and then check with the tester, because in some locations the receptacle mounting box is not grounded. Be very afraid if this is the case—run a 3-wire extension cord to a known good (tested) outlet.

2. Use only 3-wire extension cords, and check them at the far end with the tester. WARNING: On a non-union show I was given an extension cord by the electric department. It had a 3-prong plug and receptacle, but failed the test. I opened the plug to see if the ground wire was disconnected, and found to my horror that the electricians had made all their “3-wire” extension cords with 2-wire cable because it was cheaper and lighter.

3. You can buy a plug-in G.F.I. (Ground Fault Interrupter, also G.F.C.I.), and this is particularly important if you are working outdoors or on a damp concrete floor. In addition to providing overcurrent protection like an ordinary circuit breaker, it senses any current differences between the current going out on the hot wire and returning on the neutral. If there is more than a 5 mA difference (such as current flowing through your body to ground instead of the neutral wire), the unit shuts off the power. 5 mA will give you a nasty shock, but (hopefully) not induce ventricular fibrillation in your heart. WARNING: G.F.I. receptacles haveTEST and RESET buttons. Test them every time before use. IMPORTANT: Some G.F.I. units will trip if there is an interruption in the AC power supplied to them, so they cannot be used on the camera truck for overnight battery charging if the truck will not be plugged in until it is driven somewhere or if the AC supply to the truck is disconnected when it is moved during the night. (NOTE: This is also true of some “automatic” battery chargers.)

4. You can buy an AC power 1:1 isolation transformer in various sizes, from 100 W to 1 KW or more. If you need to run on AC during the day, and are working in damp or exterior locations, this will isolate the power sent to your cart completely from ground, so in the event of a leakage problem, what would have been a fatal shock will be only a tingle. You can feel a tingle from less than one-thousandth of an amp (< 1 mA). WARNING: “Tingles” of any sort are a warning sign that must not be ignored. Locate the problem and fix it before you or someone else is electrocuted.

ANOTHER WARNING: Stepdown “transformers” used to lower foreign 220 V AC power to 110 V are often not true transformers with separate primary and secondary windings, but rather autotransformers with a single, center-tapped winding. While these units will halve the voltage, they do not provide any isolation, and the full 220 V may appear in the event of an internal short, including to the case. Many of them do not provide proper grounding through the third pin as well. With the unit disconnected from both AC power and 110 V equipment, use an ohmmeter to check for continuity between any of the output terminals and any of the input terminals. If there is none, you have a true transformer and not an autotransformer. Also check that there is continuity between the input and output ground terminals.

5. Always plug all your AC power cords into a single outlet (or both outlets of one duplex receptacle), unless the total current draw would overload the circuit. Most sound gear (except for things like playback amps) requires very little current, so using cube taps is acceptable. (I have extension cords that terminate in duplex outlet boxes, providing six heavy-duty 3-prong receptacles.) There are two reasons for this practice: 1, all the safety grounds will interconnect at just one point, avoiding power source ground loops from different ground potentials; and 2, in the U.S., consumer 110-V power is usually distributed as 3-wire 2-phase 220-volts. While the 2-phase wires are 110 volts with respect to the common neutral wire, there is twice that voltage between them. A typical building’s internal wiring has half the branch circuits supplied by one phase and half from the other. If you happen to power some of your gear from one branch and the rest of it from another branch fed by the opposite phase, their hot 110-V power conductors will have a 220-V difference. This increases: the chance of fireworks if there is an error in your cart’s internal AC power wiring; the potential severity of a shock from leakage between two pieces of equipment, particularly with those having 2-wire power cords; and amount of AC hum and buzz that can be induced in audio circuits.

6. When using AC outlets provided by the electric department, especially when supplied from a generator, there is another potential danger. The outlets boxes are connected with runs of 4-0 heavy cables that use color-coded pin connectors. In the event that there is a mis-wiring, 220 volts (or 208 V for 3-phase) can appear on the “110-V” outlets. Even if the cables are connected correctly, if the neutral wire becomes disconnected anywhere between the load and the generator, all the loads connected to one phase will be connected in series with all the loads connected to the other phase, with the result that the full voltage will be applied to the combination. Unless both total phase loads happen to be exactly equal (unlikely), the greater load group will get less than 110 volts and the smaller load group more than 110 volts. Sometimes a lot more.

If you use external batteries to power your equipment, there are different precautions to take.

1. WARNING: Batteries, even small ones like alkaline AA cells, can produce surprisingly large short-circuit currents. A shorted battery can get hot enough to melt plastic, and may rupture and spray corrosive chemicals all over. Short-circuit currents (often over 100 A) can heat wiring to incandescence and start fires. SLA (Sealed Lead- Acid) batteries are especially dangerous. If you don’t want your cart to disintegrate in a shower of sparks like things do in the movies (think Star Trek, where they never invented fuses or circuit breakers … or seat belts either), you need to fuse each battery directly at its terminals. Auto parts stores sell in-line fuse holders that are ideal for this purpose. A 20 Amp mini-blade fuse is a good choice for a small battery (30 Amp-Hours or less). If you use a larger battery, get a fuse that is rated for 2-3 times the maximum current draw of all your equipment.

2. WARNING: Unlike AC current, which passes through zero twice every cycle, DC current is much harder to interrupt. If you wire up your own cart (or have someone else do so), be sure to use fuses or circuit breakers specifically rated for DC. (Typical 5 Amp 3AG/AGC glass fuses are rated 110 VAC but only 32 VDC, so check your selections carefully.) Automotive fuses are all designed for at least 12 VDC. They should still function properly at 15 VDC or 18 VDC, but 48 VDC may be too much for them. Many years ago, when stages and theaters still had wall outlets with 110 V DC, a mixer (not me) mistakenly plugged his cart into one. The current continued to arc through all the blown AC fuses and melted down much of his equipment before the smoking power cord was yanked from the wall.

3. The “hot” center contact of many coaxial low-voltage DC power connectors is flush with the end of the plug, and can short out to grounded metal surfaces if the plug brushes against them. I have installed in-line fuse holders in each of these power cords, with readily accessible 5 A fuses (rated less than the 20 A main fuses so only that particular branch fuse will blow).

4. Many fuses have a “time” rating as well as a current one. Fast (usually marked “F”) fuses provide the maximum protection, but may blow unnecessarily with loads that draw a larger initial current. Motors and incandescent lamps are prime offenders. Delay or Slo- Blo (marked “T” for time-delay) fuses can carry current in access of their rating for a short time and should be used for these applications. Unfortunately, modern microelectronics can be damaged by current pulses too brief to be stopped by conventional fuses. Tiny Micro- and Pico-Fuses, which look somewhat like 1/8-watt resistors, are usually soldered directly to the circuit board because they are designed to limit the spread of damage rather than prevent it. If you happen to have a piece of equipment that uses these, and they do occasionally blow without any other damage, you can avoid unsoldering them and soldering in replacements by installing two single-lead sockets on the circuit board and then simply plugging in the fuse’s wire leads.

5. Another new fuse type is the “thermal fuse.” These fuses will open above their rated current like a regular fuse, but they will also open if their temperature exceeds a certain value. They are designed to protect components such as motors, which can get too hot if they are overloaded for long periods. Some thermal fuses are one-shot, and must be replaced if they blow. This is difficult because not only are they are soldered in, but they have to be located next to the motor’s windings where they can sense the temperature. Twelvevolt air compressors (used to inflate sound cart tires) are a good example. If you have to replace one of these fuses, you can get an equivalent unit that is self-resetting, and it will automatically restore the connection after it cools down.

CODA

In closing, let me warn you that the goat’s blood trick that works so well with radio mikes is useless for ground loop problems. You need blood from a cute little puppy or kitten.

Text and pictures ©2013 by James Tanenbaum. All rights reserved.  

by David Waelder

After 150 years, the negatives that Timothy O’Sullivan exposed for Mathew Brady at Gettysburg still yield prints. Many of the glass plates were recklessly discarded after the war, but those that survived still hold images and the pictures have become part of our cultural legacy.

There is no format for digital storage that can match that performance, no gold standard for archiving audio information. Reel-to-reel magnetic tape is generally considered fairly stable but it is vulnerable to emulsion shedding and delaminating after only 10 years. With careful storage, tape will usually have a life expectancy of at least 30 years and is often playable after more than 50 years.

Experience with digital files on magnetic or flash media is still so brief that any advice must be flagged with an asterisk. Hard drives all fail eventually but a RAID storage on multiple drives seems to be reasonably dependable. Flash media is very promising as there are no moving parts, no spinning disc and floating head that might collide, no lubricant to dry out and no layers that might lead to the delamination that is a vulnerability of optical discs.

Until someone devises a universally accepted archival format, we will have to be satisfied with pretty good performance. And, by any reasonable standard, long-term storage is the responsibility of the producer, not technicians who may be hired on a day-playing basis. Still, when turning in the day’s work, one wants to be sure that its important content will be more permanent than a drawing on an Etch A Sketch.

​SanDisk first developed the Compact Flash (CF) in 1994. It originally used the Intel NOR flash memory design but later changed over to Toshiba’s NAND memory management protocol. The Toshiba protocol incorporates a “memory leveling” operation to evenly distribute writing among the sectors for even wear.

Flash memory is comprised of two elements: the matrix of memory cells and a separate controller circuit that manages the flow of data. Manufacturing irregularities may produce bad sectors in the memory cells but the controller circuit is programmed to identify and map those sectors and remove them from active use. This provision to permit some compromised cells makes it possible to economically manufacture a reliable product. Since manufacturers are all getting their memory wafers from the same few sources, the design and construction of the controller circuits is the primary distinction between a cheapo and a premium memory card.

In practice, the CF cards have proven to be remarkably resilient, surviving accidental trips through the washing machine, exposure to magnetic fields and extreme environmental conditions. Even the standard cards operate in temperatures ranging from freezing to more than 120ºF and the range for safe storage is even wider.

There are some known issues that can cause memory loss. Most of these are related to errors in writing protocol, like removing the device before properly closing down. Flash memory can also be damaged by static discharge and by writing with a failing power source such as a discharged battery. Although they seem to shrug off airport X-ray machines, the cards are vulnerable to the more powerful scanners used by the post office and should not be mailed unless contained in a shielded pouch.

When a memory card loses data without any identifiable cause, like a static discharge, it is almost always a failure in the controller circuit rather than a failure in the memory cells themselves. This is an important distinction as it means that the data is really still on the card and available for recovery. Sometimes recovery can be accomplished with software programs but, with a cataclysmic controller failure, it may be necessary to send the card to a specialty company that has the equipment to bypass the bad controller and access the data matrix directly. This may not be cheap or convenient but it’s an argument in favor of flash memory storage that it is almost always possible to restore the original files.

Estimates of archival storage capabilities run the gamut from cards that lost data almost immediately to cards that have been stable for many years. General consensus is that cards that accept formatting without incident are likely to be reliable for many years. The market is infested with counterfeit cards and this may explain some of the premature failures. For use as an archival master, it is especially important that cards be purchased from a reliable source. Location Sound, Trew Audio and The Audio Department all take pains to get their flash media from reliable suppliers. Favored brands are Delkin Devices, Transcend and SanDisk.

Nikon and Canon continue to use Compact Flash as the primary storage medium in their high-end cameras and Leica uses it in their new medium format camera. This is significant because photography has been one of the primary applications for Compact Flash; continued use in professional and semi-pro equipment assures that the format will be viable for the foreseeable future.

For very long-term storage, magnetic media in RAID arrays with regular data transfers is preferred to any flash media. SanDisk does offer a Memory Vault they claim to be suitable for storage “up to a century” but the product is too recent to have any track record and, in any event, is not configured for direct connection to recorders. For very long-term storage, users will have to encode their data onto wet-plate collodion emulsions on glass.

CF Cards As Masters

by Thomas Brandau

While I’d like to thank Scott Smith, CAS for starting the conversation about digital asset management, I’d like to revisit that oft-heard saying that “In Hollywood we don’t plan, we just do it, then spend whatever time necessary to fix the problem, then declare ourselves expert at something else.”

Recently, the post supervisor on a network series came down to the set with a list of WAV files to ask if we could get him copies from three episodes ago. They were handed in and went through the dailies process so, if they had been missing on the day, we would have heard about it long before. No reason was given for the request, but I have to assume “something happened to them.” They were either on my 788T or on the other unit’s record machine. No problem really, we just needed to know who shot these files and on what day of the episode. Of course, the timecard question came front and center, that being: when was I to look for these files, at wrap or lunch? And, of course, there was the problem.

In another situation, a feature film this time, the picture had been locked and, as sound editorial was conforming the sound, several days’ work had gone missing from the drives. Again, picture editorial had received the files, dailies discs had been struck and distributed, but at the last stage, now a problem. It’s simply amazing how quickly and how hot it got. “Where are your backups, how did this happen?” etc. The incident went up the chain to studio management in a day.

 In this case it turns out that the DIT guy had the whole show on his drives and, as he hadn’t worked since the shoot, he hadn’t formatted and erased the sound or picture files. They were recovered and it only remains to troubleshoot how and at what point these files disappeared from both a primary and backup drive.

Lesson learned: Compact Flash (CF) cards are relatively cheap. In the old days, we’d turn in four or so 1/4-inch master tapes each workday, easily $300 a week. Why are we reformatting this media? The current workflow is for sound to give the Compact Flash cards to the DIT guy or gal (or to whoever is downloading the picture files) to be included with the picture files on the same shuttle drive going to post. The original files remain on those CF cards and on the internal drive on my record machine.

Again, why would you erase the “master cards”? With good file management, sound will fill four or five 16GB CF cards every week. Or two 32GB cards, assuming you fill those cards and make daily files for editorial to track. Personally, I like 16GB cards. If one is lost or destroyed, there’s less on it, and then there’s the time required to format and load 32GB cards. You can argue however that 32GB cards are a bit more cost-effective and you’d be right.

Which brings us to the subject of the speed and quality of the media itself. Of course, you want the best quality and a reliable product, goes without saying, but it’s also true that a machine running all eight tracks will only need 133X or 166X cards. This comes directly from Sound Devices. Poly WAV files are just not that large or complicated to require faster write speeds. With every reformat you are asking the card to overwrite the data. I know of no one taking the time to lo-level format, so when you “erase” the card you are simply telling the directory to overwrite the sectors. This is where the digital errors come in to play.

There is so much talk about digital permanence that I contacted some manufacturers directly. It’s interesting that the story is the same wherever you go. Flash and SSD memory “wafers,” as they are called, are pretty much like LCD screens: identical, all coming from the same factory. It’s the build and the video amplifiers that make the difference between television brands and the same is true with memory.

The controller on the card or drive determines accuracy and permanence. SanDisk and Delkin make their own controllers, and Transcend, Kingston and others outsource theirs. Also, there are “industrial” and “consumer” controllers. A German company, Hyperstone, makes bulletproof industrial controllers for single-layer Compact Flash cards. These are used in all the mil spec and medical applications where failure or loss of data is not an option. Single layer, write once, cards are about $300 for 16GB. We are all using MLC, multi-layer media, but that doesn’t mean we can’t treat our cards like SLC media.

So, I’m arguing for good-quality cards, written once and held as a master library, for what, $150 a week at retail?

It’s also astounding to me that what is essentially the camera negative, as a common QuickTime file, is being copied drive to drive without any real thought of longevity and security. With a 7200rpm G Drive, it’s not if, but when that media will fail. And just think of the rental Avid workstations or the DIT guy with your camera “negative” and sound masters in his garage after the shoot.

A subject for another day, but how can the studios and producers allow this?

Part 1: The Challenge

by Simon Hayes AMPS

“The only way I feel we can make this movie is to record all of the singing live”

Tom Hooper, the director, dropped that bombshell on me in our very first meeting and those are the words that would intrude on every waking thought for the next 12 months.

I have always worked very hard to capture original performances and never rely on ADR; I believe that performances captured on a movie set are rarely bettered in the isolation of a vocal booth, without the presence of other cast members, and months after the movie has wrapped. By then, the actors may be shooting another movie and be immersed in completely different characters, accents and mindsets. Of course, if a director feels he can find a better performance in ADR, it is a very useful tool, but it is such a shame when the cast and director think they have all really nailed a performance on the set, to re-record because of poor sound quality.

I had previously recorded musicals where small elements of live production sound were incorporated into the musical numbers. The last and best known of these was Mamma Mia!, starring Meryl Streep. Many musical numbers were lip-synced in the conventional fashion to a pre-recorded track prepared months earlier in a music studio. But there was a particular number that Meryl specifically asked to sing live. The action required her to climb a steep wall and she felt that the tracks prepared in the studio would not permit her to match her expressions with the action.

We kept a pre-recorded music and vocal track on standby but instead of playing the vocal and music out of a high-power amplified playback rig, we fitted her with an “earwig” and played her the music minus the vocal. This is a tiny, wireless, in-the-ear speaker that, once fitted, is difficult to see unless you are looking directly into the ear. Originally designed as hearing aids, they have been adopted by security professionals and other industries that require sending audio discreetly to personnel.

The recording we made on Mamma Mia! was successful. This experience gave me confidence that, although risky in comparison to going the pre-recorded playback route, recording live singing on set is achievable. It gives a vocal performance that more closely matches the on-screen visual performance.

So, in that first meeting when Tom asked me if I thought it was possible to shoot the whole of Les Misérables live, without hesitation I answered, “Yes.” As Tom and I spoke, he told me of earlier experiences in his career that had resulted in him gaining a respect for production sound and a dislike of committing performances to ADR.

We began to formulate a plan to serve as a rudimentary workflow for the film. He said to me that he knew there had been major technical advances in recent years, not just in the equipment we use to capture sound in films, but in every sector of the movie industry and within the wider electronics industry. His next comment really shaped my own opinion and confidence in how seriously he was committed to recording the film live when he said, “I want you to use every single piece of modern technology available to us to record the performances on the set live with high-enough quality that will ensure we won’t need to return to an ADR studio to re-record performances because of poor sound quality.” This was the backing I needed to realize his vision and take on a unique project that had never been attempted before.

Let me take a moment to qualify that last comment: In the early ’30s before modern production and post-production techniques, singing was recorded live on movie sets. This was before the idea to pre-record vocals and lip sync to playback had been conceived, and before the ability to ADR performances in post-production existed. These very issues become the subject of the famous movie, Singin’ in the Rain.

However, to my knowledge, none of those movies had attempted a workflow that allowed the actors to set the tempo, with the timing of their acting taking precedence over the musical orchestrations. This was Tom’s revolutionary idea. Having agreed with him that it was possible to record vocals with high-enough quality on the set to use in the finished film, he then began to explain to me the next piece of his unique plan.

He asked me about other live recordings I had done using a prerecorded track for the talent to sing to. “What would have to happen if an actor wanted to take a moment to reflect on something within their vocal performance?” My reply was that it was possible to take tiny moments but only within the strict confines of the pre-recorded music track being played to them in their earwigs. Tom went on to ask, “What if they want to take a longer break, a larger pause?” I replied it would be impossible because the vocal would become out of sync with the music. Tom said to me that was exactly what he wanted to avoid. It was his vision that actors would be able to reflect on emotive moments or take time to complete actions without being worried about falling behind the music. They would set the tempo and the orchestration would happen in post-production. The orchestra would play to the actors’ performance and the acting would drive the music, not the other way round.

At this point, I knew he was asking me to take part in a venture with huge risk, something that had never, to my knowledge, been attempted before. As Tom waited for my reaction, I thought carefully. He asked me if I was prepared to try this and I asked if there would be any pre-recorded music at all. He said no. He wanted the actors to be followed by an electric keyboard played on-set, with the pianist reacting to the actors’ performance rather than setting tempo in the customary fashion.

I responded that I had the technology that would allow the actors to hear the piano in a hidden earwig so that microphones could pick up a clean vocal recording. If the music department and picture editor could support Tom’s vision to orchestrate afterward, I certainly had the ability to successfully bring this methodology to the movie set.

Tom then told me about his collaboration with Gerard McCann, his supervising music editor. Gerard had also worked with him on The King’s Speech and shared his conviction that allowing the acting to set the tempo of the music was a valid approach. He asked me to meet with Gerard as soon as possible so we might immediately begin collaborating on developing a methodology to achieve these ends. We had now been talking about two hours continuously and this was our initial meeting!

Discussing the technical challenges of recording the singing live, Tom told me he would need to cover the action with multiple cameras. If the cast made a perfect take, he would want to have it well covered with wides, mids and tights all at the same time. Being able to preserve a “perfect” take was only part of his vision for the film; he also wanted to allow his actors to freely overlap their lines. That technique can greatly enhance performance authenticity and vibrancy but it presents difficulties for the editor who must find a place to make cuts. It also necessitates that all speaking and singing roles must be recorded on-mike at all times, whether on-camera or not. If the sound mixer has both actors (on screen and off screen) covered, it is possible with a skilled picture editor and dialog editor, to preserve the on-set performances by carefully weaving in and out of the speeches, cutting on syllables and tiny pauses. Utilizing both multiple microphones and multiple cameras, it is possible to exercise control over the material. Adding to the complexity, Tom intended to extend this flexibility to interactions between the principals and the chorus. He and his DP, Danny Cohen, planned to use as many cameras as needed to ensure that every good performance would be captured sufficiently so that re-takes for coverage would not always be needed. This was his plan for filming Les Misérables.

I agreed wholeheartedly that this was the best way to bring the immediacy of a continuous theatrical performance to the film audience as I began to formulate the plan of how I might accomplish the task.

We discussed why boom mikes are traditionally the preferred method for capturing movie dialog and why radio mikes are generally treated as a secondary method. I explained to Tom that Production Sound Mixers usually favored boom mikes because radio mikes historically had three huge issues compromising their reliability. The first was range. It is only in recent years that radio mikes presented enough range to be able to be used on movies without indiscriminate splats, pops and hiss. The development of the Lectrosonics digital hybrid system has been a great step forward, yielding not only far greater range but also a significant improvement in sound quality generally. Results are practically indistinguishable from a cabled system. So, issue number one was covered and range was no longer a problem.

The second issue was that lavalier microphones have always been compromised by their tiny size. Their sound quality has always been a long way behind what was considered “studio quality” in the music industry. Performance on a set has been inferior to what can be accomplished with a well-placed boom microphone.

Calling again on my experiences on Mamma Mia!, I knew that there was now a better answer. I tested many mikes for that film and found that the difference between the various lavs on the market was just a matter of audio taste. There wasn’t one product that could really be called “better,” just many products each with their own audio voice. Some on my crew would prefer one and some another. During discussions about the small live element limitations of lavaliers, I met with Benny Andersson from pop group Abba and his longtime engineer, Bernard Lohr. They told me that when they first took Mamma Mia! onto the stage, they were presented with lavaliers for the first time, and coming from a music industry background, had no experience with them. They also tested products from many different companies and were consistently disappointed. Then they asked DPA (a Danish company whose studio products had already impressed them) if they could test the company’s range of lavaliers. Benny and Bernard both told me that DPA lavaliers were the closest tonal match to the mikes they used in the music recording studio and that the Mamma Mia! stage musical had benefited greatly from their sound quality.

To confirm the wisdom of this choice for the vocals in Les Misérables, I set up a test with the DPA 4071 against the three strongest alternate candidates and invited my crew to participate. This time, everyone was in immediate agreement that the DPA 4071 was the winner. It seemed to sound less closed, chesty and constricted than the other lavs and exhibited an openness previously heard only on good-quality condenser mikes used on a boom. It was a really transparent mike that, unlike the others, didn’t add its own “voice” to the recordings.

The other problem I had experienced with lavs was their inability to cope with high SPLs. When you most needed them on scenes that were challenging to boom, like fight sequences or exterior action sequences where the talent was likely to be shouting or screaming, they would often distort due to their capsule being tiny and ‘hitting its end stop.’

I was impressed that the DPA could handle amazingly high SPLs. Toward the end of the test, members of my crew were screaming into it while it was rigged on the chest, trying to get it to crack off and distort but it remained smooth. Yet when the vocal was brought down to the quietest whisper, an almost ‘breathed’ dialog, it was sensitive enough to capture the change in level instantly and without coloration.

Upon research I found out that DPA had designed the lavs not just with vocals in mind, but that they had created a tiny mike that could be used in music recordings when an instrument needed to be closely yet discreetly mic’d. This gave me enormous confidence in my decision to use them for live singing on Les Misérables.

So I knew that I had a good microphone candidate to address the issue of recording the singing with clarity and accuracy.

The third issue with radio mikes did not have such an easy answer. It is the primary reason that, even with huge advances in radio and microphone technology, most Production Sound Mixers still prefer to capture dialog with boom mikes and rely upon radios only when a boom cannot be effectively deployed. Lavaliers must be hidden underneath costumes. Whether the clothing will “sound good” or cause rustle over the dialog is often a gamble because the visual choice of costume generally takes priority over radio mike placement. If an actor is wearing a nice cotton T-shirt, it is possible to get really great sound quality but, if the costume designer needs to have the actor in a silk shirt, the dialog may be unusable. The “plug-ins” now available to dialog editors and re-recording mixers have become amazingly advanced and many background noises can now be effectively cleaned up but severe clothing rustle remains notoriously difficult and removal efforts will often remove some frequencies of the voice as well. On normal dialog a small amount of cleaning up of the voice may be acceptable but the artifacts of a ‘cleanup’ are much more noticeable with singing.

I decided to take up Tom on his challenge to use every advance in modern technology to enable us to record the best quality vocals possible.

I explained to him that the booms would have to be a secondary way of capturing the vocals due to the multi-camera cinematography. Sure, the booms would work fantastically on some shots but we could not completely rely on them. For radio mikes and lavaliers to be our primary method of recording voices, we needed a plan to effectively eliminate clothing rustle. My proposal to Tom was that we place the mikes on the outside! To his credit, he continued to listen to me although my suggestion completely broke with film industry tradition.

I intended to take advantage of advances in CGI to allow greater freedom in microphone placement. I proposed working closely with the costume department and obtaining swatches of matching fabric that might be used to cover the microphone mount. A small cut in the exterior of the costume would permit mounting the mike on the outside and a camouflaging piece of matching fabric would make it inconspicuous. Since the mikes would be attached using DPA’s recommended mount, and since no fabric would touch the grill, the application should be noise- free. Although the mike would be clearly visible to the human eye, on a wide shot and on a moving costume, it would be very difficult to see, and on a tight shot it would actually be beneath the bottom of the camera’s frame line. For the medium shots we would rely upon advances in VFX technology to paint out the mikes. Tom was immediately 100% receptive to this idea, commenting that the VFX department could spot the mikes that needed removal once picture editing was complete. At that moment I knew that not only had we formulated a unique plan, eschewing many ageold film industry traditions, but also that the plan placed an importance on production sound that I had previously only dreamed of.

At this point, Tom and I had been talking for three hours and he told me he had another appointment. I expected the meeting to end when he told me that Hugh Jackman was rehearsing with the Music Director, Stephen Brooker, Cameron MacIntosh’s longtime collaborator, and I was honored when he asked me to come and meet them both.

As I walked into the studio, Hugh was in mid-song and I was struck with the huge dynamic range of his voice and what an accomplished singer he was. At the end of the song, Tom introduced me to both Hugh and Stephen and explained I was the sound mixer who was going to record the musical live. Hugh looked at me warmly and told me how impressed he was that I had taken the challenge. I couldn’t have met two more welcoming individuals who would turn into friends and collaborators in the coming months.

Over the next few days, I began the task of technically planning what I would need to facilitate Tom’s vision.

I began to think deeply about the project and my previous experiences working on musicals. Since the singing was pre-recorded and the singing was generally lip-synced, the tempo had been set months in advance of the actors coming on set. Tom had explained to me that he felt live singing held an energy and truth that miming could never fully replace and he believed he could detect a falseness that disconnected the audience from the performance.

I considered this. His thinking about mimed singing closely paralleled my thinking about ADR in general. A few lines in an action scene might pass unnoticed but longer passages can be ruined by the need for dialog replacement. I began to think about normal musicals where a singing number might run for three minutes followed by dialog scenes and then by another musical number. The singing would be mimed to playback and the conjoining dialog scenes recorded live in the usual manner. I believe that the audience senses miming immediately but they are conditioned to accept it by other musicals and by MTV experiences. They can subconsciously accept the theatricality for a short while as part of the willing suspension of disbelief. Just as the acceptance is becoming ragged, the musical number ends and the audience again experiences live recording and forgets the distrust building during the mimed number and the cycle starts again. We accept this pattern of connect and disconnect because recording live singing is so difficult and time-consuming. To ask an audience to connect with a lip-synced mimed performance for more than 2½ hours would, I think, run counter to their instincts.

This led me to another subject I considered while planning Les Misérables: why do audiences not connect with ADR and miming?

In my opinion, we, as human beings, have incredibly sensitive instincts that stem from our beginnings and are deeply rooted in our genetics. When connecting with other human beings, we are predisposed to process and evaluate the subtlest facial expressions, changes in voice, mannerisms and body language. Why do we do this? To try and work out whether the person we are talking to is honest, whether he is worthy of our trust. This is an instinctive part of survival and taps into out most basic reactive quality: fight-or-flight. We do this subconsciously most of the time, only noticing a problem in our conscious mind if our subconscious has flagged an alarm from our continuous evaluation.

The more I thought about this, the more obvious it was that the cinema performances that engage us are the ones that our subconscious accepts as true. A truly great performance is one that keeps the audience in the moment and doesn’t allow any subconscious alarm bells to ring, bringing us back to reality and creating distrust in the performance.

Tom Hooper’s vision of a completely sung through Les Misérables would not, in my opinion, have kept an audience captivated for long if it been lip-synced from start to finish; there would have been an eventual disconnect for even the most ardent of fans. After all, who would go to see a stage play that was mimed?

Before commencing technical preparations, I met with the producers to explain my plans. I am fortunate to have an excellent working relationship with Working Title Films, having recorded several films for the company, and I’ve worked with producers Eric Fellner, Tim Bevan, Debra Haywood and production executive Sarah Jane Wright many times. I explained that to make the project possible I would need a much larger crew than usual. I always use two boom operators on my projects so I may record off-camera lines, giving the editors more options and reducing the need for ADR. So they were familiar with my preference for a larger crew but this project had even larger needs than usual. I intended to use two boom operators with mono booms to capture the individual singing lines and also a 3rd boom fitted with an MS stereo mike for the chorus and group ensembles. Members of the chorus would be individually radio mic’d but this track would add width and texture to the recording. I had also worked out that on most days we would be running as many as 20 radio mikes and 75 ear pieces so I would need two sound assistants just dedicated to rigging radio mikes and wrangling earwigs—a huge task in itself. To really be able to guarantee sufficiently quiet backgrounds for Tom to use the live on-set vocals, we needed a member of the sound team whose sole responsibility would be generally spotting background noise issues as they arose and dealing with them professionally and swiftly.

The need to have all the participants mic’d-up for rehearsals was a further complication. In a normal shoot, the cast can sometimes do early ‘block through’ rehearsals without being mic’d to save time and then be rigged just before final rehearsals. Our plan for Les Misérables called for the lead singers to take their own pace and a piano accompanist would follow them and provide a tempo for the chorus and other singers. Since the pianist was to be off-set to keep the piano clear of the recording, it was essential that he hear the performers through their mikes and that his piano track be fed to earwigs worn by all the actors. This meant it was imperative all the actors were fully rigged before the first rehearsal. This was nothing new to me and my team having just finished Ridley Scott’s Prometheus, where all the actors had to be mic’d inside their space helmets and fitted with earwigs so they could communicate with each other inside the soundproofed glass helmets. Of course, it took a while for the rest of the crew to realize it wasn’t possible to call a rehearsal unless the sound team had completed rigging the actors.

Debra and Sarah-Jane agreed that if Tom wanted to shoot the musical live, the sound team had to be employed in larger numbers than a regular movie. They understood that usual crewing levels in the sound department could cause schedule issues while shooting due to the far greater workload.

At this point, I could put together my dream team: a seven-man sound crew.

Arthur Turner and Robin Johnson, my boom operators, have been working with me since 1997. We’ve done more than 40 movies together and work as a tight team. We each know our roles and can work out complex issues quickly and efficiently with minimal discussion. For this project, Arthur and Robin held the titles of Key 1st Assistant Sound and 1st Assistant Sound, respectively. Since the project was unique, and their roles and responsibilities were so much more than pure boom operating, we thought it right to use titles more in-line with our colleagues in the camera department.

Joining Arthur and Robin would be Paul Schwartz, who has often worked with us as a 2nd Unit Boom Operator. He would be operating boom number three, the stereo boom and also help coordinate the production sound equipment and interface with the music department’s Pro Tools rig. His title was Sound and Music Maintenance.

James Gibb would be our 2nd Assistant Sound and would serve as chief radio mike and earpiece technician. He has worked with us on about 12 movies and is very capable. We brought in Andrew Rowe, another collaborator from 2nd unit work on other pictures, to assist James with radio mikes and earpieces. He would also be responsible for talkback systems and monitoring.

Duncan Craig was brought aboard as Sound Trainee. He has worked three films with us so we were privileged to have someone so experienced in that role. His responsibilities were carpeting the actors’ feet, soundproofing anything noisy and generally helping with anything sound-related.

So, we had a seven-man sound team in place—a bigger main unit crew than I had ever worked with before. They were all handpicked from the best technicians I know and all excellent choices not just for their individual skills but also for their experience working together as a team. As events would prove, this large crew was absolutely necessary for the job required.

Editor’s note: In Part 2, Simon Hayes will tell us about the implementation of these plans.