20
As you are aiming to mix to an average of -23LUFS across the whole programme, in a live environment you will need the ability to start and stop the measurement period manually. The same might also be true in a post environment if you make use of a lot of real-time processing in outboard effects equipment. But for those choosing to mix purely in the box, faster than real-time analysis becomes a possibility. This avoids the need for a time consuming pass through of the entire programme merely to gauge the effect on the overall average loudness from remixing a short section.
Another useful addition to your toolkit will be loudness normalisation software. Whilst the purists will argue that you should go back and remix the problem section that is taking you out of spec, if you’re just a few LU out of the allowed tolerance, pressure on time and budget will usually necessitate a quick fix. Normalisation software will apply just the right amount of gain or attenuation across the whole programme to hit -23LUFS without affecting the balance of the mix.
The audio section of the new version 4 DPP spec has grown to several pages longer than it was in the previous document. It now contains copious advice for the positioning of dialogue in a surround sound mix and how a 5.1 mix should be folded down to stereo. This is the only area where the DPP broadcasters have not achieved total consensus and each broadcaster will preface the generic DPP specification with their own individual requirements. These vary because of creative preferences and constraints from contracts already in place.
“
Most of the DPP broadcasters are asking for dialogue which is diverged across the front three speakers in a 5.1 mix. They argue that this is to aid the intelligibility of the dialogue particularly when folded down to stereo. Some broadcasters have agreed that a traditional centre-only dialogue positioning is acceptable if that is what is required by co-production partners and there is insufficient budget for two mixes.
Intelligibility is definitely high on the broadcasters’ agendas. BBC DG Tony Hall was recently quoted complaining about “mumbling actors”. The DPP specification demands that “Dialogue must be acquired and mixed so that it is clear and easy to understand”. Note the acknowledgment here that the damage is not just done by unsympathetic high levels of background music laid on in the dub, but also that poor recording on location is a problem.
At a recent DPP forum, the participants noted that the availability of cheaper tapeless HD cameras had actually increased picture quality, but at the same time audio quality had decreased because of multi- skilling. Poor technique in the choice and positioning of microphones is leading to unacceptable levels of embedded background noise competing with the dialogue captured on location. This will also undoubtedly make achieving your loudness targets more difficult. The need for training is obvious.
The DPP’s new loudness criteria is a hot topic because we have a large freelance base and we need to ensure that everyone is working from the same hymn sheet. We have a wider template that caters for most, but our specifications will be written to factor in the DPP requirement. This announcement has given us the opportunity to address it and set a deadline for compliance. Richard Chipperfield - IMG Media Head of Post Production and Encoding
”
The level of agreement that the DPP broadcasters have achieved over technical standards is remarkable in such a short space of time and all this has been done in consultation with other interested parties such as UK Screen. Like all delivery documents, the success of the new DPP spec will now rely on a consistent and fair
interpretation by the broadcasters’ QS assessors, particularly where it deals with subjective areas such as intelligibility. For anyone involved in audio for TV broadcast, the dual challenges loudness and the phasing in of file delivery of programmes will make for interesting times in 2013/14.
hhb.co.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36