I've got a technical question about We're Alive - What recording equipment?

[wh33t]

Hey Forums,

I'm just curious what kind of electronics is used to pull off a project like WA? I've checked out 10+ radio dramas and none of them see to sound as crisp and clear as WA so I figured that's either a trick of the voice acting on WA or the equipment used or a combination of both. I imagine it's probably some really expensive microphones, and some expensive software coupled with a high tech recording studio?

[Kc]

Hey Forums,

I'm just curious what kind of electronics is used to pull off a project like WA? I've checked out 10+ radio dramas and none of them see to sound as crisp and clear as WA so I figured that's either a trick of the voice acting on WA or the equipment used or a combination of both. I imagine it's probably some really expensive microphones, and some expensive software coupled with a high tech recording studio?

Yeah, I'll be honest, that part of things has to do with REALLY nice expensive mics and recording equipment. We record everyone on separate tracks in Pro Tools HD and our sound effects library and foley matches similar quality. The only time the quality is low, is when we make it low; IE radios and such. This is what we use generally for our actors:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/649607-REG/Audio_Technica_BP4073_BP4073_Lightweight_Shotgun_M icrophone.html

Some audio recorders say that more "broadcast mics" are better for their vocal range, but I prefer shotguns because the frequency response and sound quality is like that of any feature film. These are the kinds of ones used on set. We also record in a large open recording studio/stage. That's HUGE because if you record in a dead booth then your voices will become trapped in a box as well and won't be able to have the sort of frequency expanse of a larger more open area. Sometimes that can be problematic, but the larger the space is usually better. And, the studio being sound-proof is a huge thing. A lot of other productions have to spend a LOT of time fixing the audio quality, whereas we don't even have to fade the end of someone's take. It's usually so clear and quiet that you don't have to focus on those things.

Now we don't buy our stuff, it's mostly rented and the university that I work at allows me to use the stage and equipment partially because I help manage the stage. I push the technology to the limits so if there's any technical problem I can discover it during production. It's a win/win for everyone.

So, yeah, we come at this with a studio mentality in terms of the audio production side of things, and the technology assists in that. If I were to say what one thing helps, I would say the mics.

[nikvoodoo]

Ewwww........B&H.......the competition.........gross...... :p

[wh33t]

Yeah, I'll be honest, that part of things has to do with REALLY nice expensive mics and recording equipment. We record everyone on separate tracks in Pro Tools HD and our sound effects library and foley matches similar quality. The only time the quality is low, is when we make it low; IE radios and such. This is what we use generally for our actors:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/649607-REG/Audio_Technica_BP4073_BP4073_Lightweight_Shotgun_M icrophone.html

Some audio recorders say that more "broadcast mics" are better for their vocal range, but I prefer shotguns because the frequency response and sound quality is like that of any feature film. These are the kinds of ones used on set. We also record in a large open recording studio/stage. That's HUGE because if you record in a dead booth then your voices will become trapped in a box as well and won't be able to have the sort of frequency expanse of a larger more open area. Sometimes that can be problematic, but the larger the space is usually better. And, the studio being sound-proof is a huge thing. A lot of other productions have to spend a LOT of time fixing the audio quality, whereas we don't even have to fade the end of someone's take. It's usually so clear and quiet that you don't have to focus on those things.

Now we don't buy our stuff, it's mostly rented and the university that I work at allows me to use the stage and equipment partially because I help manage the stage. I push the technology to the limits so if there's any technical problem I can discover it during production. It's a win/win for everyone.

So, yeah, we come at this with a studio mentality in terms of the audio production side of things, and the technology assists in that. If I were to say what one thing helps, I would say the mics.

Thank you so much for sharing that KC! I totally understand and recognize the audio quality similar to a "feature length film". That's exactly what I had been equating We're Alive with the whole time but I couldn't really understand it. I'm not sure any other Radio Drama makers out there would be interested but if I were in the genre and industry I would definitely attend a "how-to-technica for the radio drama genre" conference put on by you and your team. It's clear to pretty much everyone that you've got all the magical ingredients to really take this genre to new and unexplored places.

Like you mentioned most in the industry prefer the broadcast mics, so what lead you to discover using the shotgun mics and the large rooms over the traditional style of doing things? Is We're Alive the only production currently using these techniques and attributes?

[Deacon_Tyler]

There's so much nuance with the sound effects that I truly believe that this, along with the incredibly crisp audio accounts for a good portion of WA's appeal. It's interesting to learn the mechanics behind creating WA and I would love to see more behind the scenes footage of how the various sound effects are created. When the characters are outside, it actually sounds like they're outside and when their inside, the acoustics change just slightly (or it could just be my imagination). How is that accomplished?

[wh33t]

There's so much nuance with the sound effects that I truly believe that this, along with the incredibly crisp audio accounts for a good portion of WA's appeal. It's interesting to learn the mechanics behind creating WA and I would love to see more behind the scenes footage of how the various sound effects are created. When the characters are outside, it actually sounds like they're outside and when their inside, the acoustics change just slightly (or it could just be my imagination). How is that accomplished?

Lol, that like perfectly explains how I feel about it as well. Somehow the environments are so god damn real.

[Kc]

Ewwww........B&H.......the competition.........gross...... :p
Not my fault it's the first to come up on google. Copy+Paste


Thank you so much for sharing that KC! I totally understand and recognize the audio quality similar to a "feature length film". That's exactly what I had been equating We're Alive with the whole time but I couldn't really understand it. I'm not sure any other Radio Drama makers out there would be interested but if I were in the genre and industry I would definitely attend a "how-to-technica for the radio drama genre" conference put on by you and your team. It's clear to pretty much everyone that you've got all the magical ingredients to really take this genre to new and unexplored places.

Like you mentioned most in the industry prefer the broadcast mics, so what lead you to discover using the shotgun mics and the large rooms over the traditional style of doing things? Is We're Alive the only production currently using these techniques and attributes?

In fact I did put out an article a while back to other productions. http://audiodramatalk.com/showthread.php?t=8183&highlight=waylandprod -- I've been in contact with several other audio productions and some I talk to all the time, but there's hints that we're being shunned by a lot of people in that community because of, what we can only assume, our successes and accomplishments. Some people were receptive of my suggestions, some were not, I just kept doing my own thing.

That being said, Julie (From 19 Nocturne), and Fred (From RDR) are some of our great supporters in that community. Speaking of Fred one of the techniques he uses for recording is that he goes to the locations with the actors to record. Some of the benefits of that is he can allow the actors to foley themselves and have a certain quality of room tones that you won't get in a recording studio.

So that's a different style. I still prefer our method of studio recording because there is more control over everything. I can vary the degree of quality in the scene. For instance, in the scene where Victor and Saul are at Ground Zero, I recorded the scene with the masks on and the masks off. When they are doing the interchange back and forth especially I wanted to make sure that I got the exact interchange of breaths and had them perform the swap back and forth. However, for most of the final product I used their version without the mask, and then added the mask in later. Can anyone tell the difference? My guess is no, but you never know. The BIG thing about any scene where you potentially destroy the audio is that you preserve what is being said. If you go too far in the "realism"; then you might make the scene harder to understand, etc...


How was that achieved? By placing a speaker behind the mask and replaying all the audio and re-recording it. THEN, you can mix the two quality of recordings to perfectly achieve the desired effect and not destroying it enough to where you can't understand any more. If there's a line hard to understand, you can then tweak it individually. That's one of my rules: (Might be a general audio/resolution rule) You can never get higher quality than what's recorded at the mic. In this case, if I recorded the entire scene with them with masks, I could never get that fidelity level back. There are three scenes (that I can think of) I've had to deploy this technique. 1. Pegs and Michael in the water (Recorded in the water and out) 2. Saul and Victor in the masks and 3. Victor in the Water tank. For that scene I had him record near metal objects and interact with a bucket of water. I'll be making a blog entry on the site with some of this behind the scenes stuff soon.

I'm not sure who, if anyone uses these techniques, but I think they can make all the difference in having a scene that's believable.


There's so much nuance with the sound effects that I truly believe that this, along with the incredibly crisp audio accounts for a good portion of WA's appeal. It's interesting to learn the mechanics behind creating WA and I would love to see more behind the scenes footage of how the various sound effects are created. When the characters are outside, it actually sounds like they're outside and when their inside, the acoustics change just slightly (or it could just be my imagination). How is that accomplished?

That's all ambiance and room tones. We have hundreds of files that are varying levels of ambiance. The great thing about just recording the voices in such a quiet way is that you can put them in any environment, provided the voices interact with that environment. For instance if you put your characters in a wind storm and they don't perform like they are being impeded by wind then the voices will "Float" above the scene instead of in it.


-------------------

All this writing has inspired me to write a bit more into a blog about some of the production elements behind the scenes and some of the sound theories. I'll publish that on the main site; including the responses to questions here. Does anyone have any more technical questions that I might add on?

[Kc]

And that's exactly what I did: http://www.zombiepodcast.com/blog/were-alive-sound-behind-the-scenes-vocal-recording-contains-spoilers-up-to-chapter-32/

[wh33t]

And that's exactly what I did: http://www.zombiepodcast.com/blog/were-alive-sound-behind-the-scenes-vocal-recording-contains-spoilers-up-to-chapter-32/

Tremendous KC! I'm humbled that you are willing to share some of the technical secrets of your success. I would love to understand in greater detail this "vocal floating" you speak of. I understand quite clearly how the voices can float about the scene and environment and when this occurs the story loses it's ability to be believable, but is there a specific formula that you use to ensure the voices float with in the scene instead of above? Do you have a Quality Assurance crew of people that listen to the scenes before they are published and finalized to confirm that the scenes are real? I would imagine that you as the director might have troubles believing the reality of the recordings after listening to them recorded live, and then played back over and over again.