Kubrick on sound

[Actor]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
With the modern equipment that's available today in the form of microphones, radio transmitters and so forth, it should be possible to get a usable soundtrack almost anywhere. In the scene where the tramp recognizes Alex who is standing looking at the Thames, next to the Albert Bridge, there was so much traffic noise on the location that you had to shout in order to be heard, but we were able to get such a quiet soundtrack that it was necessary to add street noise in the final mix to make it realistic. We used a microphone the size of a paper clip, and it was secured with black tape on the tramp's scarf. In several shots you can see the microphone, but you don't know what you are looking at.

Stanley Kubrick, interview with Philip Strick and Penelope Houston, Sight and Sound, 1972.
</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
This statement by Kubrick is of interest here because of threads that touch on camera noise. I assume Kubrick used some sort of contact microphone. Does anyone know where these can be obtained, their cost and/or what exactly to ask for?

[c_77]

Robert Altman did this too. I know he did this for a fact on MAsh and on McCabe & Mrs. Miller. He used clip on mics on all his actors so you could hear everyones little conversations at once! His movies usually have so many people in the frame with so many people talking that it often makes things undecipherable. He felt that it was more realistic. I think he had a recorder planted on every actor or maybe a transmitter I forget. I have the M.A.S.H. DVD so I can double-check. McCabe & Mrs. Miller was thought to be flawed cause of this. When the studio execs screened it they said, "What the hell is wrong with the sound!!".

Clip on mics are very available. There should be some around from Shure, Audio-Technica, etc.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ December 08, 2002 10:21 PM: Message edited by: c_77 ]</font>

[tfunch24]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by c_77:
McCabe & Mrs. Miller was thought to be flawed cause of this...</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

One of the reasons people utilize to attack Michael Cimino's Heaven's Gate is because some of the conversations are almost inaudible due to excessive background noise. The conversation between Kris Kristofferson and Richard Masur in the trainyard in the beginning of the film is probably the best example; you can barely make out what they're saying. If you don't have the DVD (which has subtitles), you're probably not going to be able to decipher the dialogue.

From what I've read, the background noise was added in post because Cimino thought it would be more realistic. Maybe he was ripping off Altman?

Tom

[Actor]

From what Kubrick said in the interview I think he was using something more than just a clip-on mike. He makes a point about the traffic noise and the fact that "you had to shout in order to be heard". A clip-on would be nearer to the actor than a boom mike and would let you get a better level but I can't see it cancelling the noise. That's why I speculate that he was using something which would only record sound from what it was in contact with (i.e., the actor's throat) while being insensitive to sound from the atmosphere. Is there any such animal?

[lightfeat]

Kubrick had and used large quantities of cash money to fulfil his movie making desires. The typical tool used for eliminating sound other than that of an actor (extradiegetic sound) is by the use of a very long shotgun mic, such as a Senheisser 416 or 816. These work a treat. Button mics, and tie clip mics pic up all kinds of stuff. With our cameras being on the whole noisier than Kubricks, I would suggest that a shotgun is the essential mic for Super8 film-making. It is the source of about 80% of film and tv sound. Source: www.filmsound.org (good wbsite)

Hope this is helpful,
Lucas

[Actor]

It's very helpful. Thanks. And that is a cool site.

I've wondered about shotgun mikes as a solution to camera noise. Have you used them?

The mikes you list cost $650 at Visual Products. While that is a big "ouch" to my pocketbook it's still doable.

Exactly how tight is the pattern for these mikes? If I set up a two shot with actors about three feet (one metre) apart can I record both of them with one mike or will I need two mikes and a mixer.

[Actor]

You are right about Kubrick and money. He made his first feature for $40,000. In todays money that's equal to $400,000. I understand he got it from an uncle. Rich family!!

[lightfeat]

Check out the following site for a comparison of some cheaper microphones all of which would yield superb results. Any of them are fine but for totally eliminating camera noise, I recommend the Audio Technica 815 or other long shotgun, which needs to be moved between actors for a twoshot as it is so directional. These mics are much cheaper, and probably as good as what Kubrick spent a fortune on in the 60's and 70's:

http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage...tgun_mics.html

Lucas (web is becoming an avoidance technique) Lightfeat

[seekaee]

If you can, take a look at some of his early shorts he did like "Day or the Fight" and "the Flying Padre". He shot those entirely on his own with an old 35mm Elmo.

As to his first feature ?fear and desire?, it might of cost $40 K to finish, But it still looked like a low budget operation to me from the looks of the crew picture.

http://www.indelibleinc.com/kubrick/...esire/Fear.jpg

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ December 12, 2002 06:55 PM: Message edited by: seekaee ]</font>

[Scotness]

The thing with camera sound is it's not so much your microphone but the environment you are recording in - shot gun mics are very directional which is great - but if you are in a room the camera sound will bounce all over the place and come off the wall in front of you straight into your mic - I used a shotgun mic on In My Imaage with a poorly muffled camera and got heaps of canmera sound indoors and sometimes none at all outdoors - the mic is important - but getting a baarney for the camera is more important I think - also throwing sound deadening rugs over walls etc too I think would be a good help

Scot M