Mixing 5.1 for Discovery

[irwinmfletcher]

hey gang,
Straight from Discovery's Global Tech Specs

"Audio Track Assignment and Mix Guidelines: For 5.1 surround sound mixes all narration elements should be confined to the center channel to allow for easy removal for language customization. Spoken language elements such as interviews and voiceover should be limited to the front left and right channels. Only music and effects should be present on the left and right rear surround channels. This allows the 5.1 English full mix to serve a triple purpose of a 5.1 mix minus narration (when center track is removed), and a 5.1 Music and Effects mix when the center, front left and front right channels are removed. While this places some restrictions on track bleed in the 5.1 mix, it allows DCI to limit the audio deliverables to twelve channels for international surround sound delivery."

So what they are saying is that they would rather have their deliverables in a nice 12 channel package than have a properly mixed 5.1 program with all of the dialog anchored in the center channel where it belongs.

Is this just flat out wrong or is it me?
I am open to critics telling me I am wrong.
Just wondering how you all felt.
-----Fletch

[EarHole]

Isn't that what splits are for?

[wheresmyfroggy]

Isn't that what splits are for?

That isn't the splits, it's the specs for the broadcast mix

Irwin- There have been many threads on this hotly debated topic, the outcome of which have been, They say jump and we say how high.

[JKD99]

Fletch, I agree with you completely.
It's really great that the entire mix is compromised so that deliverables can be easily created (and what nice-sounding deliverables they'll be!). What's really stupid is that they've decided that they don't even want to deal with a seperate narration channel; that's apparently too much information. So, the 5.1 mix basically becomes a Quad mix with a sub, and all the center-channel dialog and FX get smeared across the front. Niiiiiice.

Wait a minute, what's that bit about the M&E????

Quote: "and a 5.1 Music and Effects mix when the center, front left and front right channels are removed"

Wow, I bet those foreign mixes sound AMAZING!!!!! I don't know what genius came up with THAT little gem, "Oh, we can save money if we add the surrounds from the Domestic mix onto our mix" OK, so take out the LCR? I don't know how everybody else mixes, but I know that I sure wouldn't call MY surrounds by themselves a mix........

I'm assuming they're asking for Dia/MX/FX/Narr stems as well, why are they trying to make the poor 5.1 Domestic mix do triple-duty?

Unbelievable.

[CD Productions]

Have you ever seen those t-shirts that say, "Theater is life, film is art, television is furniture." Think of it as a paycheck, and it doesn't hurt as much.

[bigbadhenchman]

Well, call me crazy, but I don't see where the problem lies.
We always mix our documentaries with all VO and interviews in the center.

Whats wrong with that?

Documentaries and series work is all about the deliverables.
There's such a pile of different outputs to make, I make sure that everything I mix for TV keeps the foreign deliverable in mind.

This may sound strange, but it's quite easy to mix TV shows, have them sound good, and make the job of cretaing splits and M+E's quite easy. Even though it's not my hjob to make the M+E.

[medmondson]

>>So what they are saying is that they would rather have their deliverables in a nice 12 channel package than have a properly mixed 5.1 program with all of the dialog anchored in the center channel where it belongs.<<

Hello-

We at Discovery are faced with decisions that are not always easy. We must consider the needs of many people- our networks and vendors- and come up with ways of satisfying those needs as closely as possible.

Consider, for a moment, what it would be like if we were treat 5.1+2 mixing as a free-for-all; i.e. allow vendors to assign any audio element to any track. The deliverable spec would look something like this:

Surround Full Mix: 6 tracks
Narration and translation stem: 5 tracks
On-camera dialogue stem: 5 tracks
Effects and foley stem: 6 tracks
Music stem: 6 tracks
Mix minus: 6 tracks

These 34 tracks would, of course, be required to be at undipped program level. Factor in the rate of incoherence to the spec with "simple" 8-track Stereo stem deliverables: approximately 88% of our incoming material exhibits some degree of misleveling (delivering dipped/hot/low stems with differeing compression and EQ, for example) or incorrect/mixed track assignment. Factor in that over 60% of our programs deliver within 7 days of air. Factor in the fact that over half of the programs received must be re-delivered ready for language customization; where our overseas client networks' budget restrictions prohibit any remixing whatsoever, hence all outgoing content must be packaged with a minimal track count. Factor in the metering, monitoring, and operator requrements of QC'ing a 34 track deliverable, which by rough math, works out to about 7-8 hours of Audio QC per program. Factor in that we process approx. 180 programs a week at our Silver Spring Production Center, and you start to get a view of the whole picture: when faced with decisions that weigh aesthetic preference against practicality, we must, as in this example, favor practicality.

I agree that a very strong and valid argument can be made for bleeding Center channel information to the L/R field to widen the sweet spot. This is not just aesthetic preference, but verifiably increases the listenability of a multichannel audio mix. It must be realized, however, that this single change alone would increase the complexity of deliverables logarithmically.

Factor in, also, the reaction of Audio Post houses and Mixers such as yourself, if asked to create the above deliverables for every Discovery program you create. The amount of metering, i/o, DSP and time required to pull all of this off taxes the imagination.

Combined with the unfortunate reality that the perfectly-prepared 8 track stereo stem master is the exception, not the rule, it is hard to think that a 34-track deliverable would ever be embraced by our vendors as an acceptable requirement, in the name of preserving panning preferences. It is even more unrealistic to think that a 34 track deliverable would regularly be delivered correctly. I'm quite sure that if such a deliverable were required, I would be responding on this board to implications of making impossible demands on our vendors and forcing them to spend days creating layback after layback. Imagine the uproar if a single audio change were requested to a show delivered in such a way.

I am the first to agree that restricting Narration to the Center channel, and Dialogue to L/R, along with prohibiting reverb on the narration does not sound as nice as a "proper" (no holds barred) surround mix. Weighed against the realities, however, it becomes clear why it is not just preferable, but mandatory, that our Surround track assignment be specified in a way that is at least within budgetary and technical reason for the average Audio Post facility to deliver.

Discovery, or any large network for that matter, is an easy target for such criticisms. There rarely is a human face attached to a network's technical specs. It is easy to draw conclusions of ineptitude or lack of understanding when viewing the situation from the perspective of a single person creating a single mix for one airing; with a field as diverse as Audio, it's hard to think of one spec that literally suits every program. However this is precisely what my colleagues and I set out to do each day. I welcome any positive criticism or suggestions on how we may accomplish the goal of meeting the many needs of our networks and vendors in a way that better suits you.

I am happy to answer anyone's questions regarding our Audio deliverables and specs offline. I am not always able to read these boards but please feel free to contact me at [email protected] should you desire.

Thanks for the opportunity to discuss this,

Mark Edmondson
Manager, Audio Services
Discovery Production Center
Silver Spring, MD

[jimlongo]

Well, call me crazy, but I don't see where the problem lies.
We always mix our documentaries with all VO and interviews in the center.

Whats wrong with that?

Nothing I guess, except that won't work for Discovery. The interviews cannot be in the C channel.

[bigbadhenchman]

Nothing I guess, except that won't work for Discovery. The interviews cannot be in the C channel.

I've always mixed them that way, and never had a show rejected.
But then, we supply a full 5.1 M+E as well.

I aklso only mix the music in stereo.

So, as far as deliverables for 5.1, this might be a suggestion:
VO - 1 track
Interviews 1-Track
Dialogue - 1 Track
Stereo Music 2 tracks.
SFX 5.1
Mix 5.1
Mix Minus .1

Now that is only 17 tracks and still gives all the flexibility needed for any deliverable needed.

Really though, you could lose the mix minus because the other tracks combined give you the mix minus.
Especially since Discovery wants un-dipped M+E's.

Any post house not being able to mix together the 11 tracks need to do the final foreign version should consider a different line of work.

Just an Idea.

I personnally think spreading the Dialogue/Interviews into a pahntom center by putting them in the L/R channels is not a great idea, and a bit distracting when watching in 5.1

[bigbadhenchman]

These 34 tracks would, of course, be required to be at undipped program level. Factor in the rate of incoherence to the spec with "simple" 8-track Stereo stem deliverables: approximately 88% of our incoming material exhibits some degree of misleveling (delivering dipped/hot/low stems with differeing compression and EQ, for example) or incorrect/mixed track assignment.

Well, what can be expected when you see the Audio budgets for Documentaries these days.
More and more of this stuff is being mixed in Avid suites and by inexperienced engineers. Simply because it's simply becoming not worth it for proper posthouses to take this work on anymore.

The requirements are getting higher, and people are wanting full 5.1 edits and mixes for much less than they used to do stereo shows for.

So, unless companies like Discovery really put the onus on the producers to deliver technically better product, meaning spend proper money on the sound, it will keep getting worse and worse.

Simply adjusting deliverables to allow for dealing with badly mixed tracks, is a bad move IMHO. As I said before, putting dialogue in the L/R speakers is a very bad move.

I've seen people giving quotes for full audio post for an hour-long doc for $3500,-

You know the old sayign. You pay peanuts....