Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

199,030 users have contributed to 43,150 threads and 258,878 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 6 new thread(s), 14 new post(s) and 61 new user(s).

  1. Home
  2. Orchestration & Composition
  3. Your Music
  4. Orchestrating with open space for dialog
  • A
    A

    "I think it really lies in the orchestration if the music is fighting against the dialog or actually leaving so much space that the dialog is easily comprehensable AND the music can be mixed louder."

    Another applied technique is that the music has the same loudness but is  reduced in level with ducking as soon the dialog is on, this via automation or with an the use of side chain compression.

    .
  • M
    M
    last edited
    last edited

    @Angelo Clematide said:

    Another applied technique is that the music has the same loudness but is  reduced in level with ducking as soon the dialog is on, this via automation or with an the use of side chain compression.

     

     

    Which is of course the worst solution of all possible... 
  • W
    W

    And this is EXACTLY what I meant by an ARTISTIC as opposed to TECHNICAL solution.

    This pisses me off.   It is an idiotic solution.  Is Angelo Clematide joking?  A compressor? An instant suppression of level?  that would sound great, yeah right Angelo.  [:(] 

    For your information and education Angelo, watch the end of Vertigo. You know that one?  The Hitchcock film?  You tried to educate me, insultingly, in a previous thread about all the things I don't know, but perhaps you are not aware of that film.  In fact I would assume you are not, as the stupidity of your suggestion suggests it.  It contains a profound artistic solution for this problem so far beyond the moronic technical solution you suggest -  which is suitable mainly for low-grade documentary film production or TV commercials - that basically they are not fit for comparison. 
  • PaulP
    VSL Team
    PaulP

    Gentlemen, please!!

    There will always be different opinions....

    Thanks,

    Paul 

    Paul Kopf Head of Product Marketing, Social Media and Support
  • A
    A
    last edited
    last edited

    @Another User said:

    You know one director who never used music during dialogue? Hitchcock. He knew that music is expression, and dialogue is expression and having the two of them competing is bad.

    I wasted 5 minutes to check if there is no music behind the dialog in Hitchcock's movies, and after the third time where music was behind the dialog in the movie Vertigo, I stopped looking any further.

    The last movie I saw who has a similar approach as Hitchcock to associative loudness was "Under Suspicion" by Simon Moore.
  • W
    W

    I already responded to that point, though you missed it. However, I am not interested in discussing anything with you.  I don't engage in conversation with people who insult me with total arrogance and hostility as you did.

  • M
    M
    last edited
    last edited

    @Angelo Clematide said:

    Maybe so, but never the less the most applied technique today, and not only in tv production. You may watch from time to time a new release, not only the classics from the fifties. All of the ten international releases of the the last four weeks apply level reduction when dialog starts, not always, but very often.

    But this EXACTLY why I come up with this question. That this mixing technique is spreading so wildly I consider a serious disease. It is a result of week spotting and composition but also a result of week orchestration.

    I know from my mixing experience that there is music which flows around the dialog like a satin glove and music which fights against it. Of course it is first a matter of composition but also of orchestration. And I want to tackle the orchestration aspect since it is less obvious than the compositional one.
  • J
    J
    last edited
    last edited

    @mathis said:

    But this EXACTLY why I come up with this question. That this mixing technique is spreading so wildly I consider a serious disease. It is a result of week spotting and composition but also a result of week orchestration.

    I know from my mixing experience that there is music which flows around the dialog like a satin glove and music which fights against it. Of course it is first a matter of composition but also of orchestration. And I want to tackle the orchestration aspect since it is less obvious than the compositional one.

    As you mention here, though, it really is first about the composition. If a cue is stomping on the dialog all the orchestration finesse in the world isn't going to fix it. No matter what the orchestrator does, it will be ducked at the dub session.
  • M
    M

    As I mentioned this a question which assumes that the composition is right. This question starts after that.
  • C
    C

    I believe the issue is the composition AND the orchestration.  To me, the two are inseperable when you are dealing with a soundtrack (dialogue, SFX, room tone).  The logic is that sonically, you're dealing with a (more) crowded canvas as compared to just music by itself.  For example, an outdoor scene in a thunderstorm will require slightly exaggerated orchestration as well as a more simplified overall sound (composition) to allow for the elements to be mixed together with maximum volume and clarity.

    I have had great success using these two guidelines:

    1.  Treat the dialogue as "melody."  Not melody in a literal sense, but from a textural/arranging standpoint.  Counterpoint can work behind vox but slower is better.  Watch range when orchestrating as to not crowd the vocal register.

    2.  Finding the holes for thematic or high contour material (mentioned somewhere above) a la J.W. musically validates the lower profile underscore.

    The result is a natural dynamic that eliminates the need for aggressive ducking, etc.

    Clark
  • W
    W

    "As I mentioned this a question which assumes that the composition is right. This question starts after that."  - Mathis

    If the composition is right then YOU DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE.

    Again, check out Vertigo. Last scene.

    All technicalities pale in comparison to that kind of composition.  Art can absolutely destroy all of the techniques that anyone can create.
  • A
    A
    last edited
    last edited

    @William said:

    "As I mentioned this a question which assumes that the composition is right. This question starts after that."  - Mathis

    That is ridiculous.

    If the composition is right then YOU DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE.

    Again, check out Vertigo. Last scene.

    All of your technicalities pale in comparison to THAT kind of composition.  Art can absolutely DESTROY all of the techniques that little burrowing worms like Angelo Clematide ever create.

    No further comment.

    .
  • W
    W

    I rewrote the post to be more polite.  Never mind.

  • W
    W

    Besides, I don't think you are a little burrowing worm at all, Angelo.

    I think you're a big fat one.

      

    Just a joke!  Don't your fingers ever get carried away on a keyboard???  Besides, being a trained surrealist it is my duty to allow subconscious mentation equal representation with that of the conscious mind. It is a duty, in fact, that I take very seriously. And since you inspire extreme subconsciousness in me, it is inevitable that disturbing mental contents will find their way into conversation. So really, it has nothing to do with me or you at all. It is the Id. Fortunately there is no Krell brain boost or force field operating or everyone would be in big trouble.
  • L
    L

    I´ve become interested in this theory about soft and hard profiles when composing background music. Take a look at this site:

    http://www.soundofmusic.se/products/educationsamples.htm

    And here is a narrated audio drama I´m producing (swedish text, sorry!) that you are welcome to comment:

    http://hem.bredband.net/b807883/jstromgren_audiodramaclip.mp3

    English translation of the narrator here:

    http://vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7654

    /Johnny
  • D
    D
    There's too many great films with music going under dialogue for it to be considered an inherently bad idea. The change from guys like Herrmann and North (watch Sparticus if you want to see a happy marriage of m+d) is really that of style. North would get pretty melodic and active under and around dialogue and Herrmann well....would just be Herrmann. I think Herrmann's approach is more modern and easily translated into today's stylistic leanings. I once read that Goldsmith loved doing certain things under dialogue. Basically you try and avoid stepping on it rhythmically, sonically and any other way that directly competes with it or masks it. Of course music has been mixed down during dialogue too many times to count but as with the composers above, left completely alone.
  • M
    M
    last edited
    last edited

    @dpcon said:

    Basically you try and avoid stepping on it [...] sonically [...] that directly [...] masks it.
     

    Any idea where Goldsmith wrote about it? 
  • M
    M
    last edited
    last edited

    @lee said:

    I´ve become interested in this theory about soft and hard profiles when composing background music. Take a look at this site:

    http://www.soundofmusic.se/products/educationsamples.htm

     

    There is a lot to agree with here, that's for sure, and it's an interesting idea to divide sounds into hard and soft profile. I'll think over it for a while, thanks.

  • D
    D
    I can't remember mathis but it had to do with the use of strings. I think someone else was essentially criticizing Goldsmith for this thinking and quoting him how he loved to have strings (perhaps high?) going with dialogue. I don't remember the specifics but there are sure a lot of examples of music and dialogue to reference. In my post I started a new paragraph of my own approach writing "Basically you try and avoid stepping....etc. It ended up following the Goldsmith remark so please don't be mislead who said what. Of course people confuse me and Jerry all the time. ; )
  • M
    M

     I thought you are Jerry?