Mix Translation From Theatre To Streaming

[rmccam]

Hi Everyone,

I've been asked to mix a feature documentary — really indie, small budget, of course. They will premiere at a small film festival but I'm quite sure that'll be the only time that it's shown in a theatre. After that, likely streaming services.

The post work I do is all TV. I would love to go to a dub stage to QC but there just isn't the budget. My studio is calibrated to 78 and anything that I've ever done that was shown in a theatre (again, usually just for some sort of small premiere), I always kept a keen eye on my dialogue loudness as a failsafe. I don't have any sort of curve on my monitoring.

My understanding is that, at the very least, mixes mixed flat will sound dull in a theatre, but I'm curious about how that then translates back to streaming services in a home environment? As in, if you're mixing a bit brighter for theatres, wouldn't the same mix be too bright on TV? And in that respect, if a release is principally living on streaming services, would you favour that as the environment you're mixing for? Do people mixing on dub stages test it with and without a curve applied to the monitors?

Making this even more interesting, the filmmaker is on another continent and will be doing approvals on headphones and a laptop. Haha!

Mixing has always been a moving target but I'm just curious how everyone manages mixing a release for multiple platforms. Thanks!

Ryan

[Leverson]

For me, the majority of my feature work gets film festival play, sometimes a limited theatrical release, and then ends up on streaming for the rest of its life.

What I've found that works for me is to sound edit and do a very very detailed pre-mix in my nearfield mix studio at theatrical levels (I'm not saying at 85, but whatever the slightly softer equivalent would be in a smaller room vs what your baseline is in that smaller room for TV work), take that mix to a proper theatrical dubstage to do the final finishing mix work on, and then go back to the small room again for the nearfield exports and deliverables and make sure they sound okay too after they went through the stage process.

I find that approach allows me to craft a mix that plays well in both theatrical and streaming. I most often will export out and deliver two mixes, the theatrical and the streaming. But they don't usually differ too much from one other aside from average levels and peak ceiling, as they've been crafted with both formats in mind from the get-go. When in doubt I'll err my priorities a little bit more towards streaming as that is where more people are likely to experience it. But I do always try to take it to a full theatrical dubstage at some point in the final mix, just to make sure it sounds and feels good there too if it will be destined to play in theaters at any point in its life.

I know you said dubstage is out of the question for your project, but without it you will always be estimating and guessing. Even if you just take it to a stage just for a screening playback for 2-3 hrs that'll still at least give you a good idea and won't be as budget breaking as full stage days would be.

[rmccam]

@Leverson — This is great. Thank you! I sort of figured that was the case. I'm going to make some calls to see if I can get on a dub stage, even for a quick listen through. One thing I have working for me is that it's a lot of talking heads, so very minimal dynamics.

Just a follow up question... You mentioned that, tonally, your nearfield mixes seem to translate to the dub stage... Is your nearfield monitoring chain flat or do you have some sort of EQ curve on it? For everything I've read, I can't seem to find a straight answer.

Thanks again!

Ryan

[its2loud]

Originally Posted by rmccam

@Leverson — This is great. Thank you! I sort of figured that was the case. I'm going to make some calls to see if I can get on a dub stage, even for a quick listen through. One thing I have working for me is that it's a lot of talking heads, so very minimal dynamics.

Just a follow up question... You mentioned that, tonally, your nearfield mixes seem to translate to the dub stage... Is your nearfield monitoring chain flat or do you have some sort of EQ curve on it? For everything I've read, I can't seem to find a straight answer.

Thanks again!

Ryan

Your near field monitoring should not have any x-curve on it. There is a lot of debate on this and you may find arguments going back and forth. If you have the time, here’s a very interesting article about x-curve and how/when it should be applied in the mixing/monitoring chain.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/f...ema-sound.204/

[rmccam]

Originally Posted by its2loud

Your near field monitoring should not have any x-curve on it. There is a lot of debate on this and you may find arguments going back and forth. If you have the time, here’s a very interesting article about x-curve and how/when it should be applied in the mixing/monitoring chain.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/f...ema-sound.204/

Thanks @its2loud. I actually read that awhile ago and that was the theory I was running on. As you said though, there are just so many opinions floating around it's sometimes difficult to make sense of it all. I also find that it's difficult to know what's current and relevant. You'll read something online and then realize it's from 2006. Haha!

[Leverson]

I have room correction speaker EQs on my b-chain, but as far as x-curves or things of that nature, no, my speakers are 'flat' in my nearfield room here.

This is from my own personal experiences and takeaways over the years, and rooms and setups can vary wildly, but for me the most common things I notice going from nearfield to theatrical are:

a.) loud dynamics feel much larger in bigger theatrical dubstages. If something feels a little loud in your nearfield room, it'll likely feel a lot loud on the stage. This can also include transients and spikes in dialogue. A stray loud syllable here and there you'll notice a lot more the bigger the room and the bigger the speaker than you would on small speakers or a nearfield room.

b.) to me, horn loaded theatrical speakers have a different feel in the midrange than nearfields do. One of the EQ areas I tend to tweak the most on stages is often right around that 2khz range, where there is more of a sharpness on theatrical dubstage speakers. Brass instruments, metallic sounds, aspects of the human voice, crowds cheering, I find they attack my ear unpleasantly more in that range in the theater than they do with most nearfield speakers and small room setups so that's something I try to be aware of

c.) how your bass and LFE are feeling. Bass is always a tricky thing in smaller rooms, and is tougher to get a mix room consistent and 'flat' in the lowest end than other frequencies. This is often one of the bigger surprises when people bring their nearfield mixes into theatrical spaces, the bass can often be way too much or way too little, so keep an eye on that, especially if your nearfield setup is using bass management vs a dedicated LFE. It's an easy thing to get messed up. (Low bass is often one of the things that varies the most/gets messed up the most too out in the wild of commercial multiplex theaters or art house venues unfortunately)

d.) and then lastly going the other way, I'll notice high freuquency hisses and tape noises usually more on nearfields than I do in the theater. Part of that might be the perforated screen taking off some high frequencies, part of that might be the closer proximity to the monitors in nearfield setups, but it's something I keep an eye on

But again, all of this will vary vastly from small room to small room. The more you can take your work back and forth from your room to dolby calibrated dubstages the more you'll start to notice your trends and patterns and the more you can anticipate and compensate for them in your own space.

Hope this helps!

[gives]

Originally Posted by rmccam

Hi Everyone,

I've been asked to mix a feature documentary — really indie, small budget, of course. They will premiere at a small film festival but I'm quite sure that'll be the only time that it's shown in a theatre. After that, likely streaming services.

The post work I do is all TV. I would love to go to a dub stage to QC but there just isn't the budget. My studio is calibrated to 78 and anything that I've ever done that was shown in a theatre (again, usually just for some sort of small premiere), I always kept a keen eye on my dialogue loudness as a failsafe. I don't have any sort of curve on my monitoring.

My understanding is that, at the very least, mixes mixed flat will sound dull in a theatre, but I'm curious about how that then translates back to streaming services in a home environment? As in, if you're mixing a bit brighter for theatres, wouldn't the same mix be too bright on TV? And in that respect, if a release is principally living on streaming services, would you favour that as the environment you're mixing for? Do people mixing on dub stages test it with and without a curve applied to the monitors?

Making this even more interesting, the filmmaker is on another continent and will be doing approvals on headphones and a laptop. Haha!

Mixing has always been a moving target but I'm just curious how everyone manages mixing a release for multiple platforms. Thanks!

Ryan

Bottom line as I think everyone has covered a lot here well, I would definitely make sure you have a proper room or space that can really do your mixes justice.
Sounds like you do. So, when I deliver a mix for a DCP, like I have done for Theatrical like SXSW, a feature mix for a Theatrical in Los Angeles or any streaming deliverable, I follow the guidelines. I never have mixes rejected, but I'm careful to QC everything. Especially ATMOS stuff.

ACTUALLY Leverson covers this well. I agree, it's good to take it to a proper stage. Marti Humphrey, (CAS) at https://www.thedubstage.com
can speak to this for sure and has been helpful to me and he is on the duc occasionally when he is not working too hard-:).

G

[rmccam]

@Leverson — Those observations are gold. Amazing. Thank you!

@Gives — Yeah, I totally get that. I'm very stringent about guidelines for sure... it's that theatrical translation that is a bit of a grey area.

All that said, I called a friend yesterday and pulled in a favour at one of the big stages here in Toronto. I'm going to do a spot listen in a couple weeks. It should be illuminating.

I'll report back with my own findings for the future posterity of this thread.

Thanks everyone!

Ryan

[gives]

Originally Posted by rmccam

@Leverson — Those observations are gold. Amazing. Thank you!

@Gives — Yeah, I totally get that. I'm very stringent about guidelines for sure... it's that theatrical translation that is a bit of a grey area.

All that said, I called a friend yesterday and pulled in a favour at one of the big stages here in Toronto. I'm going to do a spot listen in a couple weeks. It should be illuminating.

I'll report back with my own findings for the future posterity of this thread.

Thanks everyone!

Ryan

As far as the big stage listen, it always is illuminating for sure-:)

[rmccam]

I managed to get onto a nice stage that used JBL M2s as the LCR and was pleasantly surprised at the translation of my mix. A few things that I noticed though (most of which has already been mentioned by @Leverson):

1) Dynamics are bit different. Small differences in a small room seem more exaggerated in a big room. So that dialogue line that you're thinking might be a bit loud, likely is. For me, that generally meant 1.5dB adjustments here and there.

2) I ended up dialling back the mids a touch. It was exactly what @Leverson said. I pulled out 1-2dB at about 1.5-2kHz on a bunch of things (mainly dialogue but that's just because it's a dialogue driven doc). It would have been fine as it was — it wasn't harsh — it just was a pointed... pokey... sharp... whatever you want to call it. One person's esses needed a bit more taming.

3) I actually didn't have to adjust the relative balances between dialogue/music/FX or overall balances. My dialogue was sitting around -27/-28 LKFS (I can't remember the exact reading), and it sounded good in the room.

4) As per point #1: The changes translated fine back in my room. The dynamic changes and the EQ changes that made a big difference on the stage, didn't actually make that big of a difference in the smaller studio.

Funny enough, I'm reading Philip Newell's Recording Studio Design and he talks a lot about perceptual differences relative to room volume (as in, physical size). We tend to focus a lot on acoustic treatment and monitoring but the physics of driving a small room versus a big room play a large role in this as well.

So overall it was definitely illuminating but, thankfully, not catastrophic for me in any way. The mix probably would have been fine as it was but the adjustments definitely helped get that last little bit out of the mix.

Thanks again for your help everyone. Much appreciated!

Ryan