(sigh)
Okay, so I've been recording directly into the DV camera (through a $200 mic and XLR into the camera)... and it sounded okay--just a bit too much hiss.
So I bought a pre-amp. Now, the pre-amp works GREAT, when I'm listening through headphones attached to the pre-amp. It boosts the mic signal while adding only minimal hiss. Exactly what I wanted.
But... when I attach that to the camera, the hiss grows at an exponential rate. I expected to be able to record at a low level and then just boost the mic signal. I expected it to be minimal hiss plus minimal hiss. Why is the hiss growing at that exponential rate?
The connections are all XLR... if anyone could help out, I'd love that.
Thanks.
The lower the sound level (with exception of peaking) will bring out the hiss. The levels are there so you can get maximum sound without clipping. Also, make sure your headphones are plugged into the last stage of audio...the camera...or else you're just listening to what's leaving the mixer.
The problem is that the lowest level of hiss is still kinda too loud.
See, when I listen through the headphones from the pre-amp, it sounds perfect. But when I listen to it through the camera--which I do for normal practice--the hiss is enormous. I've done a bunch of tests and the best results that I can get are still too hissy. This is because the Total Harmonic Distortion on the camera is very high.
I know that if I recorded to at DAT, it would be a lot better--but I can't afford that right now.
Does anybody at least know of a good Mac program to deal with hiss?
Final Cut has some pretty decent audio filters, it does take a shitload of work to get it all out, at that point you might just want to shoot with the on board mic.
I'm surprised you got your mic XLR- I have a really old die hard GL-1, it's like the ford escort of cameras, cant get it to break. I bought a 200 dollar mic that just hot shoed in, worked wonderfully.
How are you converting to XLR? Mini-jack?
Final Cut has some pretty decent audio filters, it does take a shitload of work to get it all out, at that point you might just want to shoot with the on board mic.
I'm surprised you got your mic XLR- I have a really old die hard GL-1, it's like the ford escort of cameras, cant get it to break. I bought a 200 dollar mic that just hot shoed in, worked wonderfully.
How are you converting to XLR? Mini-jack?
Nah, it's direct XLR into a GL-2 via an XLR-adaptor. The XLR-adaptor is hardwired through the hotshoe, but it sounds pretty much as if it had an onboard XLR-input.
But I get the full benefits of XLR cabling and a decent mic (the $200, or maybe it was $250, one). The mic sounds GREAT, it's just the hiss from the camera, which is there no matter what I do. So it's not the XLR-adaptor, it's not the mic, it's just the camera. I could take away all that stuff and record "silence" and it's still too much hiss.
The answer is very obviously snakes. You've got a snake somewhere in the camera. Try getting a mongoose.
You said you're on Mac. Are you using a tower or PowerBook? If you're using a laptop, what editing software have you got? If you've got Final Cut Pro 4, then record all of your sound directly onto the computer as if it were a DAT. You could do it with the tower, too, if all of the shooting was at one location. The sound'll be fine, plus you'll have saved yourself a step by already having it on your computer in a compatible file.
Snakes? Mongoose?
I am, alas, not recording into the computer. The sound... sounds okay. It's really not THAT BAD... but it could be better and I PAID for it to be better. It's good enough for now anyway. There's a little bit of hiss.
So, basically, you're not making Apocalypse Now I take it? You'll be fine. A, this problem will be more noticeable and troubling to you, as the creator, than to any spectator. B, learn from this experience for your next film.
Unless you're planning on distributing this in any way (e.g. festivals, DVD, etc.), in which case the hiss WILL distract the audience as much as the creator. I learned the hard way. There's a common belief that people will forgive a bad picture but won't forgive bad sound, and I try to keep this in mind when I'm running filter after filter over sound files, trying to clean it up the best I can without forking over the cash for Pro Tools.
Quote from: metroshaneThe answer is very obviously snakes. You've got a snake somewhere in the camera. Try getting a mongoose.
Somebody has to applaud this brilliance...
let it be me.
:lol:
well done
psssttt... avoid film festivals! :)
Quote from: mutinycopsssttt... avoid film festivals! :)
Out of curiosity, why?
I kind of feel like they're a scam. I have yet to show any of my work in a festival, and I can't say I miss it. There are plenty of other ways to make contacts and get your work seen. I have the same general opinion about film schools.
Although, I should admit, I would have no problem entering a finished feature film into a festival -- as a way to premiere it. But I'm not terribly interested in the scene, generally speaking.
Cool, thanks.
Quote from: mutinycoThere are plenty of other ways to make contacts and get your work seen.
Like?
The best advice I can give is to seriously look at your own work. What are you good at? How far do you really think you can go? Start there. Then think about which established professionals you really like and might like you. Then devote yourself full-on for 2 years trying to meet people and get your work seen. It helps to be in a large metropolitan area where you can get better access. Anything more than this advice is going to come down to you. And how quickly you can think on your feet. And how badly you want it.
Quote from: mutinycoI kind of feel like they're a scam. I have yet to show any of my work in a festival, and I can't say I miss it. There are plenty of other ways to make contacts and get your work seen. I have the same general opinion about film schools.
Although, I should admit, I would have no problem entering a finished feature film into a festival -- as a way to premiere it. But I'm not terribly interested in the scene, generally speaking.
So if not festivals, what other methods have you used to get your work seen by industry types, etc.? I myself am sitting on a recently completed short film, and set to shoot another at month's end... what do you suggest as a means of getting it/them out there?
If you have enough money to keep making short films, you should have enough to start a website. You can get 800 megs for like $100 a year. That's one suggestion. Point is: you need to create a platform for yourself. You need to develop a strategy too. I can't give you specifics, cause nobody ever gave me any. You just have to do it. And go at it like there's no tomorrow. I mean, what separates you from the other 10,000,000 wannabe's? Are you that good? Can you really stand toe to toe with your competition? Sometimes, (usually) the front door isn't the best entrance. You're going to have to figure it out. And you're going to have to sacrifice A LOT. A lot of shit and a lot of friends might get left in the dust. Trying to make it is not a pretty process. Somebody isn't going to see you and sweep you up. Doesn't work that way. Be intuitive and aggressive -- and above all ORIGINAL -- and it will come to you.
Mark Romanek offers as good an advice as anybody on his site: "start making films. the only way to really learn is to do it. if the films you make are daring, sincere, and well crafted. then they will find an audience. and, if they find an audience, someone in the business will come to you. everyone gets his or her start differently. people need to discover and follow their own unique path."
A question to Mutinyco:
Why exactly do you feel that film school is a scam?
Do you believe that no one can be taught film and only some people magically have the gift or a talent that cannot be improved, you may say that the only way to learn is to do (I am of the same school of thought) but are you taking into consideration film schools that teach by javing you make films?
That's a soft "j" on "javing"?
Um, I think film schools can give you a great sense of film history. I think film school can teach you the mechanics of filmmaking. And I think they can give you great contacts, both within the industry and in terms of peers.
Will they make you a good filmmaker, per se? That's still going to depend on you. Film school won't give you drive or talent.
I think certain schools have decent track records: NYU, for example. Even USC or UCLA. Or AFI. If you can get into any of those graduate schools you'd have to stupid not to get industry work -- not necessarily as a director, but you'll be around the elite and the industry will be watching. They all have pretty good placement abilities, too.
But to be a great filmmaker is to also be a great artist. And that CANNOT be taught. I think film schools create a certain type of ego. A very cliquey type of ego. I also think it creates a certain in-breeding, where people's ideas of what can be done with film are too steeped in what has already been done: movies about other movies, or Tarantino on Tarantino.
Another negative of film schools is that they tend to force you into specialties. AFI, for example, is extremely strict about this. If you're a director, you're a director. An editor, an editor. That works well for the industry -- and again, the word is: INDUSTRY. And that's really what film schools have become, whores to the industry. Another time and place and that might've been fine. But not today.
Today, unless you've been in a cave, we've experienced a democratization of digital. For a recent proposal, on my own, I was able to write the script, do storyboards, concept sketches, a teaser trailer (shot and cut), location photos, and also a CD demo of the theme. Film school would not have encouraged such work.
Ultimately, it comes down to the individual. For me, I didn't need it. Life was more important, growing as a person and having something to make movies about. If you compared a list of those who didn't: Everybody from the first 60 years of filmmaking, then Stanley Kubrick, Steven Spielberg, Quentin Tarantino, Paul Thomas Anderson, Sofia Coppola, Robert Altman, Federico Fellini, David Fincher -- to those who did: Francis Ford Coppola, Martin Scorsese, David Lynch, Terrence Malick, Joel Coen, Spike Lee, George Lucas, Darren Aronofsky...it's comparable.
It depends on the individual. If you have IT, it won't matter.
I think you have a lot of great points, and I, for the most part, whole heartedly agree. I'd be very interested in seeing your work. As Nietzche would say you are certainly a "lion". Keep up the struggle for real art.
Thanks.
also...you possess a tremendous amount of faith- there is a huge level of belief that there is justice out there. I see movies like Glitter and Snow Dogs and cry afterwards thinking of the millions of dollars that went to utter waste and how even though I design films that dont rely upon wasted money like that, I could create revolutionary work if given the chance. In your system of belief it would make sense that if I truly could create such astounding work than others would see that potential and open the gates. what's your answer to films like Gigli et al. ?
Hehe...I didn't think Gigli was THAT bad. I think it was kind of misunderstood. Don't really feel like getting into it right now.
Here's the link to a website I used to run http://movienavigator.org
The site is kind of a ghost at this point. I ran it with a friend. I did the interviews, essays and all of the photography and artwork. He did the reviews.
I agree with most of that...however school is more than just the education. Significant social skills are developed in that environment...and let's face it, motivation and structure are helpful to most of us.
While there is no substitute for hands on experience, film school can be a great thing.
Quote from: mutinycoYou said you're on Mac. Are you using a tower or PowerBook? If you're using a laptop, what editing software have you got? If you've got Final Cut Pro 4, then record all of your sound directly onto the computer as if it were a DAT. You could do it with the tower, too, if all of the shooting was at one location. The sound'll be fine, plus you'll have saved yourself a step by already having it on your computer in a compatible file.
I had a little AT-AR55 (not an xlr mic) and connected it straight to my PowerBook, and the sound would not record any higher than a certain level (a little over half of the volume that it's capable of). My dad said it had to do with ohms, etc, which I don't quite understand. So if I have a mic (xlr with a wider range, etc) hooked up to a mixer/preamp, then hook that up straight to the laptop, do you think I would be able to get a better result? Because with teh AR55, I could put my mouth to the mic and yell, and it would peak out at just over halfway up the volume meter. I'm just asking because i haven't received my new mic yet, though I plan on trying it out soon. I also have a minidisc recorder if it's better that way. I dont' know.
If you're using a decent sound program you shouldn't have any problems. I did a short about 1 1/2 years ago (yikes!) and we used my roommate's G4 tower with his Pro Tools to record the dialogue and sound. No problems. It should work fine. Just make sure your equipment is all set correctly.
Well the only thing is that I'm not recording straight into the computer. I'm recording onto the DV camera, and then transfering to the computer. I don't have a laptop.
Don't worry about it. That's still what most people do. Just start thinking ahead. Think about what you'd like to get your hands on in the future.
I got my mic last night and tried it out on Peak 4 on my G4, and it worked perfect!
How do you people deal with sound in post-production when you're making a DV short and not using professional facilities?
What programs do you use, to clean up tracks, to mix etc etc?
Do you fire up FCP or Premiere (or whatever) and simply set your sound levels etc etc right there?
I find someone with professional facilities and beg them to do it for me for free. :wink:
Actually, I only did that on my last project. Before then, I'd use various software programs that my friends had...sound forge, cuebase, etc. I'd burn an audio file of the entire project and take it to their house and work on it there. We'd get it to sound okay, but never perfect.
Sound is SUCH a bitch. I'm planning on buying a copy of ProTools before my next project, so that I can start doing things myself, but even after you've paid the 1000 dollars for the program, so much of what you'd want to do is in the plug-ins, many of which cost more than the program. When I got that professional sound mixer to work for me, he used 30,000 dollars worth of plug ins to get my sound perfected, cleaned and sweetened.
Money, money, money. Sigh.
I *obtained* a copy of BIAS Peak, and that program uses SoundSoap, which makes it really easy to take out hiss and unwanted ambience. I just need to experiment more to know what everything does, and how I can use it to my advantage.
Here at school we have Cool Edit Pro, which is okay, but I don't dig it too much.
Yeah, my composer uses Pro Tools, which just by knowing him is lucky for me. He knows all the various plug-ins and mastering programs to a degree that's exhausting for me to watch.