Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

Thanks all,

I believe I have enough info to tell if the person bidding on the job has the know how.

While I have not used any automixers myself, I suspect a basic problem is just like gates vs expanders. I think most people create an unnatural sound by overgating. A simple 6-9 db reduction in gain on an unused mic sounds a lot more natural to me then gates opening and completely closing off mics..
 
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

Jay Barracato said:
Thanks all,

I believe I have enough info to tell if the person bidding on the job has the know how.

While I have not used any automixers myself, I suspect a basic problem is just like gates vs expanders. I think most people create an unnatural sound by overgating. A simple 6-9 db reduction in gain on an unused mic sounds a lot more natural to me then gates opening and completely closing off mics..
Click to expand...

You have probably heard the Dugan algorithm and not even noticed it. The gain sharing is very natural sounding as it always adds up to equivalent of one mic at full gain... The algorithm compares the individual channel to the sum of all channels and shares gain proportionately. Back when Altec was the only company making these (30+ years ago), it was an expensive big deal, I still don't quite understand why this isn't free in most modern digital mixers. Other than respect for Dan, but I haven't found this industry to be that big on respect when profit is involved.

JR
 
Yep I am sure I have heard it, even watched it being used, but I prefer to not express opinions about operating equipment I wasn't personally twisting the knobs on.
 
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

John Roberts said:
You have probably heard the Dugan algorithm and not even noticed it. The gain sharing is very natural sounding as it always adds up to equivalent of one mic at full gain... The algorithm compares the individual channel to the sum of all channels and shares gain proportionately. Back when Altec was the only company making these (30+ years ago), it was an expensive big deal, I still don't quite understand why this isn't free in most modern digital mixers. Other than respect for Dan, but I haven't found this industry to be that big on respect when profit is involved.

JR
Click to expand...

My understanding is the problem with getting auto mixing to work on a digital console is you can’t look at it like a simple plug in. Plug ins work on an individual channel and as you know an automixer needs to share information between channels. That is what I have been told is the hang-up. So you would probably have to use up a bus somehow to make it work.

The future isn’t that far away. Keep you eyes and ears open.
 
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

Kevin Maxwell said:
My understanding is the problem with getting auto mixing to work on a digital console is you can’t look at it like a simple plug in. Plug ins work on an individual channel and as you know an automixer needs to share information between channels. That is what I have been told is the hang-up. So you would probably have to use up a bus somehow to make it work.

The future isn’t that far away. Keep you eyes and ears open.
Click to expand...

Yes you can't make a perfect plug-in AM using just meter levels unless you burn a bus (for sum of all). In case i wasn't clear a console maker could build this into the console middle-ware without losing any functionality since the "sum of all" bus can be performed virtually, and doesn't even need to be full bandwidth/dynamic range. They don't bother because it is still an obscure feature that few people understand and even fewer ask for...

If I was making a digital console I would sure build one in. The incremental hardware cost would be zero, and this would be a valuable feature to any who understand the capability. Not my first or last (good?) idea ignored.

JR

PS: The plug in Automatic mixer works but can not discriminate between coherent and incoherent sources due to crude sum from meter data not true sum of audio inputs. Mic gain sharing must guess and will be wrong for one or the other (equal incoherent sources share gain -3dB, coherent sources dip -6dB). Not a huge deal since most sources are incoherent, but not true "Dugan" gain sharing.
 
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

I did a shoot several weeks ago with 6 wireless mics in a private home so this is still kind of fresh in my mind. I was tempted to use a Shure for a submix but dumped it just before shooting. There were a couple reasons I skipped it but one them is that there is an opinion among location sound recording people that automixing of any sort is a no-no. I didn't want to risk the client finding fault with my methodology. And I agree that the Shure's aren't a good option for broadcast type material (even in the 13 or 15db setting). I use them for recordings that are to be transcribed since the shifting ambience isn't a problem there. But for something broadcast oriented, there is a chance it will sound kind of funky.
Now, the problem with the pzms is the ambience of the room. The room you described sounds like it has no acoustic treatment and will probably have a pretty strong character in all the mics but especially those pzms. The shoot I did had quite a bit of "room" to it and I was using cardioid lavs. Bare, parallel sheetrock walls (and a shiny conference table) are just not good for a shoot that should sound mostly neutral. If the client decides to do some varying of the mix in post then they would likely have problems with the room tone changing as those pzms go up and down in level. Sometimes all the dramatic music saves the day but not always. I think closer micing is the best option for this situation and on camera, that usually means lavs.

Jay Barracato said:
Thanks all,

I believe I have enough info to tell if the person bidding on the job has the know how.

While I have not used any automixers myself, I suspect a basic problem is just like gates vs expanders. I think most people create an unnatural sound by overgating. A simple 6-9 db reduction in gain on an unused mic sounds a lot more natural to me then gates opening and completely closing off mics..
Click to expand...
 
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

If the "last mic open" feature doesn't do it for you in situations such as this and the difference in the ambient sound inherent in each mic is objectionable, perhaps a simple room mic to smooth the ambient sound and provide a constant would work. You might want to point it away from the participants to minimize picking up the voices twice, but I've had to patch ambient sound from one location shoot to another to make the audio sound the same.

Perhaps what I had to do for a "band-aid" would suffice in such a situation as this and allow the auto-mix to work better.
 
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

You know Dick, sometimes the Shure's are completely transparent and sometimes they are very obvious, even with "last mic on". It depends on a few factors. If you think about it, those units are pretty much designed for conference rooms with the Shure mics. If all the mics are the same and the gains are pretty much the same and the room noise is consistent down the conference table, they work pretty seamlessly. But if one guy has a lav on and the next guy swallows his mic (so you have it turned way down) and the next mic down is a pzm, then the ambience is going to change as each mic is added/subtracted from the mix. Of course, in this situation you can't win except turn everything up. Manual or Auto it's going to be messy.

Your room mic idea is a good one and can definitely save the day in a couple of ways. You could also go crazy and take some IR's of the room and do convolution reverb in post:)

The thing about ambient sounding audio for video is that it's often the hallmark of a budget production. I hear video guys all the time saying that the entire production is only as good as the audio. It could look awesome but if the sound is bad then the whole thing seems cheap.

ymmv.
 
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

Drew...

What is post? (wink, wink)

When I'm using auto-mix, the mics are all matched and pretty much "in the same pocket" as far as ambient sound and reflections. I suppose that's why it works for me...when it works for me. I have experienced the issues described in some live radio broadcasts when the ambient noise level is very high and the speakers are not experienced at staying on mic.
 
Last edited:
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

I saw a TV show on a financial channel (yesterday) when the panel moderator ( a woman) didn't have her mic on or turned up. She was loud enough that she was picked up by the other open mics on the other panelists. I guess the mixer didn't even bother to watch the show. :-) Or maybe there isn't a mixer person, with automix... Somebody still needs to check the final product at some point.

Production values can vary

JR
 
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

Using some high quality proper Gain Sharing Automixers works really well in this situation. The latest incarnation of John's Peavey automixer is called the Peavey Architectural Acoustics Automix Control 8, and it works REALLY well. I've installed several of the older units in places over the years and with all the connectivity options on the back panel, it is extremely versatile and highly functional.

However, there may be a better way in this day of digital consoles.

At InfoComm 2013 I was at Audinate's panel discussion regarding Dante, and it was a very nice event. I had the opportunity to chat with a fellow from Allen & Heath about some of their digital consoles that support Dante. He commented that it was possible to use Dante to insert external processing stuff into the channels on the console that was in front of him. So, to tie in with MediaMatrix products, if you had a MediaMatrix NION, you could use the gain sharing automixer and insert it across a number of channels in the Allen & Heath digital console via Dante.

This (being able to insert other things via Dante) sounds like an amazingly powerful option for any console system. Using it with a MediaMatrix NION opens you up to the option of using any combination of our algorithms including the Feedback Ferret, Gain Sharing Automixers, Kosmos, Acoustic Echo Cancellation (requires additional NIO-AEC card), and the option of building your own customized processing strip (need more input delay, more Parametric EQ, all pass filters (first and second order are available) FIR filtering, or something different?). This would be a really amazing way up the ante of what you can do. You may be able to do this with other digital mix systems, I'm not familiar enough with them all to say, but I will say it is something I had not really considered until he mentioned it and I suddenly realized the kind of power this could put into the hands of someone with the technical knowledge and artistic ability to use it.

So, I don't really intend this to be a "sales" oriented post... rather I just wanted to point out that at least with some digital mixing consoles, there are external 3rd party options available to make them far more than what they are out of the box. Like I said, this was something I had not considered until he pointed out that it could be done.
 
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

And I still think the correct price for a basic (Dugan) automixer inside a digital console should be free***... Sorry i don't mean for this to be an anti-sales post. :-)

Amusing (perhaps) story.... After I designed that first Peavey AM with DBX VCAs, input transformers, several feedback notch filters built in, variable channel priority, and more, I asked the then AA product manager how he would feel about a more basic automatic mixer, perhaps built into a mixer/amp for a fraction of the cost...? He chased me out of his cubicle and complained that he was already having trouble getting consultants to to take my design seriously because it was priced lower than they expected for that feature set. (The Peavey name on it may have had something to do with that too). :-( A little odd to hear that "not expensive enough" complaint in the fixed instal market which were in my experience pretty tight with their money. They eventually got over the price, at least the ones brave enough to check it out. Keep in mind this was some time ago, so the AM market has matured a lot since then, with more players.

JR

*** maybe send $1 each to Dan as an honorarium, while it is public domain so free to use.
 
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

drew gandy said:
You know Dick, sometimes the Shure's are completely transparent and sometimes they are very obvious, even with "last mic on". It depends on a few factors. If you think about it, those units are pretty much designed for conference rooms with the Shure mics. If all the mics are the same and the gains are pretty much the same and the room noise is consistent down the conference table, they work pretty seamlessly. But if one guy has a lav on and the next guy swallows his mic (so you have it turned way down) and the next mic down is a pzm, then the ambience is going to change as each mic is added/subtracted from the mix. Of course, in this situation you can't win except turn everything up. Manual or Auto it's going to be messy.

Your room mic idea is a good one and can definitely save the day in a couple of ways. You could also go crazy and take some IR's of the room and do convolution reverb in post:)

The thing about ambient sounding audio for video is that it's often the hallmark of a budget production. I hear video guys all the time saying that the entire production is only as good as the audio. It could look awesome but if the sound is bad then the whole thing seems cheap.

ymmv.
Click to expand...

I used to do a lot of sound for video and this was without using automixers. It always gave me a warm fuzzy feeling inside when the director called for silence and had us record room tone. I knew they cared enough to give the editor the option of layering the room noise to the final cut. Of course this wasn’t a live broadcast.
 
Re: Thought Problem: micing and mixing a panel discussion for recording

Kevin Maxwell said:
I used to do a lot of sound for video and this was without using automixers. It always gave me a warm fuzzy feeling inside when the director called for silence and had us record room tone. I knew they cared enough to give the editor the option of layering the room noise to the final cut. Of course this wasn’t a live broadcast.
Click to expand...
Didn't work for me when they put the apartment location next to the highway and close to a hospital 8O~8-O~:shock::blush:.

The director overused the words "We'll fix it in post" for the sound when shooting that full lenght movie :evil:.
 
Top Bottom