I know we have been here before but not only do people hate the mumbling on some dramas and films mixed up with background music or sound effects, but recently you might for example find an old episode of Last of the Summer Wine, and set your volume then find the adverts and often the next show, say Jonathan Creek, is over loud.
I have obviously not done detailed investigations on Drama or other channels, but it seems to me that some programs have a wide dynamic range that deafen at one extreme but are weak at other times, whereas adverts are compressed to be near peak all the time, a bit like Radio 1!. Last of the summer wine is in the middle somewhere.
I notice in audio editors that you get terms like normalise or normalise peak etc, and wondered if there is any easy way to create an output that sounds the same when confronted by such disparate extremes.
Brian
I know we have been here before but not only do people hate the mumbling on >some dramas and films mixed up with background music or sound effects, but >recently you might for example find an old episode of Last of the Summer >Wine, and set your volume then find the adverts and often the next show, say >Jonathan Creek, is over loud.
I have obviously not done detailed investigations on Drama or other
channels, but it seems to me that some programs have a wide dynamic range >that deafen at one extreme but are weak at other times, whereas adverts are >compressed to be near peak all the time, a bit like Radio 1!. Last of the >summer wine is in the middle somewhere.
I notice in audio editors that you get terms like normalise or normalise
peak etc, and wondered if there is any easy way to create an output that >sounds the same when confronted by such disparate extremes.
Brian
I realise it's not an option available to you, but I'm often glad of
the fact that most programmes on the streaming services as well as
broadcast have optional subtitles. I find myself using them a bit more lately, for what I can divide into three clear reasons-
1. Actors mumbling or speaking too fast.
2. Dialogue badly recorded, i.e. muffled, too reverberant, or swamped
by background sounds.
3. Dynamic range of the final mix much too high for living rooms, so
that a volume setting low enough to keep music and effects below
annoyance results in the dialogue being too quiet to hear properly.
I know it's not just me. My hearing may not be what it once was, but I practically never need to switch the subtitles on for old movies, or
TV programmes made in the 60s or 70s provided a videotape copy
survives. It's almost entirely recently produced material that needs
them. There's probably a conclusion to be derived from that.
Rod.
On Tue, 11 Jan 2022 16:12:23 -0000, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
I know we have been here before but not only do people hate the mumbling
on
some dramas and films mixed up with background music or sound effects, but >>recently you might for example find an old episode of Last of the Summer >>Wine, and set your volume then find the adverts and often the next show, >>say
Jonathan Creek, is over loud.
I have obviously not done detailed investigations on Drama or other >>channels, but it seems to me that some programs have a wide dynamic range >>that deafen at one extreme but are weak at other times, whereas adverts
are
compressed to be near peak all the time, a bit like Radio 1!. Last of the >>summer wine is in the middle somewhere.
I notice in audio editors that you get terms like normalise or normalise >>peak etc, and wondered if there is any easy way to create an output that >>sounds the same when confronted by such disparate extremes.
Brian
A lot of televisions have two speakers and draw on the left/right front >information.
If the dialogue is coded to the centre channel and the left/right front
used for the atmospheric sound that is what you'll hear on a basic two >speaker tv. Often there is a bit of dialogue on these two side channels
- but it is equally often muffled by the sound effects.
The breakthrough for us was to push the sound through our AV kit and
feed a small cube speaker, located at the bottom of the tv, with the
info from the centre channel.
Yes I agree. Yes subtitles is a bit pointless for me. I have a limiter here, and although that can help the eternal pumping of the volume is very fatiguing to actually listen to.
I also noted the other day that some US shows of the real crime variety can suffer from the drowning out of the narrator. These aware not audio described. they are narrated over the old footage or re enactments going on at the same time. I did wonder if the programs were originally produced in multi channel and the compromises used by the sterofication were
contributing to the issue of inaudibility generally. Anyone out there listening to the surround mixes of common mumble ridden shows?
It often gets worse if there is true AD too of cours.
Brian
I realise it's not an option available to you, but I'm often glad of
the fact that most programmes on the streaming services as well as
broadcast have optional subtitles. I find myself using them a bit more >lately, for what I can divide into three clear reasons-
1. Actors mumbling or speaking too fast.
2. Dialogue badly recorded, i.e. muffled, too reverberant, or swamped
by background sounds.
3. Dynamic range of the final mix much too high for living rooms, so
that a volume setting low enough to keep music and effects below
annoyance results in the dialogue being too quiet to hear properly.
I know it's not just me. My hearing may not be what it once was, but I >practically never need to switch the subtitles on for old movies, or TV >programmes made in the 60s or 70s provided a videotape copy survives.
It's almost entirely recently produced material that needs them.
There's probably a conclusion to be derived from that.
On many programs such as the news this is not necessary. But films and tv drama often need that centre speaker. The reason why the programme
directors don't hear the problem is because almost all the time they are previewing their output in viewing theatres with surround sound audio.
When this problem came to light around ten or so years ago the programme makers were instructed to watch their programmes on crude tvs so they
heard the problem. Now nobody bothers and simply blames it on mumbling actors.
A lot of the problem is that sound effects continue at normal volume when there is dialogue, rather than using the effects to set the scene and then dipping the level of them a bit so the dialogue is intelligible.
A similar thing I have noticed is that when there is a singer with a
piano accompaniment there is a tendency to have the piano nicely audible during the introduction, and then not adjusting it when the singing
starts. The result is that I can hear the singing but the piano is too
loud and it is almost impossible to hear the words of the song.
Jim
On 12/01/2022 13:27, Indy Jess John wrote:
A similar thing I have noticed is that when there is a singer with a
piano accompaniment there is a tendency to have the piano nicely audible during the introduction, and then not adjusting it when the singing
starts. The result is that I can hear the singing but the piano is too loud and it is almost impossible to hear the words of the song.
Jim
That's the job of the pianist, Jim.
Not the audio engineer.
Odd how so many accompanists these days look at the piano and not the soloist. How is the soloist going to indicate when they want to speed up
or slow down?
"Tony Gamble" <tonygamble@compuserve.com> wrote in message news:j47lm8FoechU1@mid.individual.net...films and tv
On many programs such as the news this is not necessary. But
programmedrama often need that centre speaker. The reason why the
they aredirectors don't hear the problem is because almost all the time
audio.previewing their output in viewing theatres with surround sound
programmeWhen this problem came to light around ten or so years ago the
theymakers were instructed to watch their programmes on crude tvs so
mumblingheard the problem. Now nobody bothers and simply blames it on
actors.
It would seem to be blindingly obvious that a competent sound mixershould
mix the dialogue so it is equally intelligible on mono, stereo and5.1
devices. Also, preview it at normal listening volume, not at the"volume
turned up to 11" setting that you get in cinemas to give reallypunchy,
deafening sound effects.
A lot of the problem is that sound effects continue at normalvolume when
there is dialogue, rather than using the effects to set the sceneand then
dipping the level of them a bit so the dialogue is intelligible.
But by far the biggest problem of dialogue audibility, particularlywith
younger actors, is enunciation. Even with no other backgroundsound, and
with a microphone placed optimally, some actors mumble and swallowthe
beginnings and endings of words (*). I'm not advocating JohnGielgud-style
over-enunciation for projecting to the back of a theatre in aShakespeare
play. Just reasonably clear intonation - with whatever accent isneeded - so
there are actually a few consonants thrown in among the nasalvowels.
If there's a separate mic for the piano, it's the audio engineer to get the balance right. Been there, done that, but I didn't buy the T-shirt.
Perhaps they are looking at the music. Anyhow, orchestral musicians can not only look at the music, but also the conductor.
On 12/01/2022 13:27, Indy Jess John wrote:
A similar thing I have noticed is that when there is a singer with a
piano accompaniment there is a tendency to have the piano nicely audible
during the introduction, and then not adjusting it when the singing
starts. The result is that I can hear the singing but the piano is too
loud and it is almost impossible to hear the words of the song.
Jim
That's the job of the pianist, Jim.
Not the audio engineer.
In message <nuertghce4bcvp9slob881vvorejh28k63@4ax.com>, Roderick
Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> writes
I realise it's not an option available to you, but I'm often glad
of the fact that most programmes on the streaming services as well
as broadcast have optional subtitles. I find myself using them a
bit more lately, for what I can divide into three clear reasons-
1. Actors mumbling or speaking too fast.
2. Dialogue badly recorded, i.e. muffled, too reverberant, or
swamped by background sounds.
3. Dynamic range of the final mix much too high for living rooms,
so that a volume setting low enough to keep music and effects below annoyance results in the dialogue being too quiet to hear properly.
I know it's not just me. My hearing may not be what it once was,
but I practically never need to switch the subtitles on for old
movies, or TV programmes made in the 60s or 70s provided a
videotape copy survives. It's almost entirely recently produced
material that needs them. There's probably a conclusion to be
derived from that.
I endorse all of that. One program for which I've resorted to
subtitles is "Doctor Who", where the background music seems often to
be foreground music and Jodie Whittaker mumbles. (In contrast Mandip
Gill, as one of the Doctor's companions, speaks beautifully clearly.)
John Hall wrote:
I endorse all of that. One program for which I've resorted to
subtitles is "Doctor Who", where the background music seems often to
be foreground music and Jodie Whittaker mumbles. (In contrast Mandip
Gill, as one of the Doctor's companions, speaks beautifully clearly.)
Pity subtitles are not available on catch up. Why?
John Hall wrote:
In message <nuertghce4bcvp9slob881vvorejh28k63@4ax.com>, Roderick
Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> writes
I realise it's not an option available to you, but I'm often glad
of the fact that most programmes on the streaming services as well
as broadcast have optional subtitles. I find myself using them a
bit more lately, for what I can divide into three clear reasons-
1. Actors mumbling or speaking too fast.
2. Dialogue badly recorded, i.e. muffled, too reverberant, or
swamped by background sounds.
3. Dynamic range of the final mix much too high for living rooms,
so that a volume setting low enough to keep music and effects below
annoyance results in the dialogue being too quiet to hear properly.
I know it's not just me. My hearing may not be what it once was,
but I practically never need to switch the subtitles on for old
movies, or TV programmes made in the 60s or 70s provided a
videotape copy survives. It's almost entirely recently produced
material that needs them. There's probably a conclusion to be
derived from that.
I endorse all of that. One program for which I've resorted to
subtitles is "Doctor Who", where the background music seems often to
be foreground music and Jodie Whittaker mumbles. (In contrast Mandip
Gill, as one of the Doctor's companions, speaks beautifully clearly.)
Pity subtitles are not available on catch up. Why?
I know we have been here before but not only do people hate the
mumbling on some dramas and films mixed up with background music or
sound effects, but recently you might for example find an old episode
of Last of the Summer Wine, and set your volume then find the adverts
and often the next show, say Jonathan Creek, is over loud.
I have obviously not done detailed investigations on Drama or other
channels, but it seems to me that some programs have a wide dynamic
range that deafen at one extreme but are weak at other times, whereas
adverts are compressed to be near peak all the time, a bit like Radio
1!. Last of the summer wine is in the middle somewhere.
I notice in audio editors that you get terms like normalise or
normalise peak etc, and wondered if there is any easy way to create an
output that sounds the same when confronted by such disparate
extremes.
Brian
[top posting for Brian]
I remember being disappointed when multi-channel audio was being
introduced that it was only stereo+n. It was a missed opportunity to
have separate channels for dialogue, music, laugh track, etc. that the
end user could pick and choose from.
"Brian Gaff (Sofa)" <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> writes:
I know we have been here before but not only do people hate the
mumbling on some dramas and films mixed up with background music or
sound effects, but recently you might for example find an old episode
of Last of the Summer Wine, and set your volume then find the adverts
and often the next show, say Jonathan Creek, is over loud.
I have obviously not done detailed investigations on Drama or other
channels, but it seems to me that some programs have a wide dynamic
range that deafen at one extreme but are weak at other times, whereas
adverts are compressed to be near peak all the time, a bit like Radio
1!. Last of the summer wine is in the middle somewhere.
I notice in audio editors that you get terms like normalise or
normalise peak etc, and wondered if there is any easy way to create an
output that sounds the same when confronted by such disparate
extremes.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 88:38:47 |
| Calls: | 6,658 |
| Files: | 12,203 |
| Messages: | 5,333,956 |