Re: Super Bowl Halftime

<0junk4me@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

iS shitty audio a part of big network production in TV land
by design these days for some reason?


Yes, and the reasons are cost and convenience. Creating a setting
that's good for sound is inconvenient for picture. Better sound would
mean you couldn't have massive reflective surfaces including glass and
tile all over the set, and the talent would have great big mics in front
of their faces. Prettiness would suffer. Cost would go up. No one but
audio geeks would notice.

If it's any consolation to you, I'm constantly fighting two battles from
my chair in the control for the evening news:

One, I'm doing my best to make sure screaming loud commercials get
pulled off the server and redubbed at decent levels. I'm also pushing
the output of my show up to where it's roughly comparable to the level
of the commercials so that you don't have to dive for your remote at the
beginning and end of every break.

Two, I'm doing everything in my power to eliminate dynamic range. TV
news is about understanding what's being said, not pretty audio. Where
intelligibility is king, soft passages are the enemy. Obviously I don't
do that when I'm mixing music or other program formats, but I do my best
to make sure no viewer ever mutters "Whaddesay?"

If you're unhappy with something, send an email to the station. If it's
something they believe is a problem, and it's something they can fix,
they just might.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)


.

Loading