Dialogue Editing

176 IMAGE, DEPTH, AND PERSPECTIVE
Split off the regions you want to separate from the rest of the scene. You’ll
manipulate these separated regions later, in the premix. A tiny bit more
volume here, a little less there, wetter, sharper, duller. 2 If you want to push a
shot further back toward the screen, split it off so that the mixer can change
the EQ to darken the sound, reduce the level a bit to make it less prominent,
or create a little reverb. 3 Even a tiny amount of trickery will create distance
between foreground dialogue and a manipulated background element, and
the process can be used to imply physical, emotional, or social separation.
Depth and the Mixer
Ultimately, most of the depth in a scene comes from the countless tiny fader
moves that the mixer executes while predubbing. “Microdynamic control,”
you might say. The fi nesse of the mixing process pulls one shot from the
screen and pushes another back, so plan the tracks so that you and the mixer
can take advantage of your editing fantasies. Prepare tracks that seduce the
mixer into playing with depth.
If, on the other hand, you don’t dissect your tracks enough to let them talk
to you, or if you merely “process” your tracks in a workstation rather than
giving them the time they need in a proper dialogue premix, you probably
won’t achieve the separation and depth you’re seeking. If you limit and compress
as a substitute for manual fader moves, you clog the air within the
tracks and the light in the conversation will darken. There’s a reason that
dialogue is premixed on a dubbing stage.
I don’t mean that you can’t achieve a decent dialogue premix with a workstation.
It can be done, but you need time and a decent interface that encourages
you to constantly interact with your tracks. You have to work with a controller
whose latency is small enough and whose fader resolution is high enough to
allow for instant, fi ne adjustments. Even with the right tools, however, you’ll
probably spend as much money—and a lot more time—doing a competent
dialogue premix in a workstation as you’d spend on a budget board mix.
Unfortunately, mixing “in the box” is usually associated with low-budget
2 The English language is not “rich” when it comes to describing sound qualities. Often
the most effi cient way to discuss sound is through metaphor. Hence, descriptions such as
“wet” (reverberant), “dry” (little or no reverb), “sharp” (rich in high frequency, when
describing nonmusical sounds; high in pitch when describing musical sounds), and “dull”
(poor in high-frequency elements; the opposite of “bright”).
3 Under normal circumstances it’s nuts to add reverb to a track while you’re working in
a cutting room. When I say “add reverb” I mean organize your tracks in such a way that
the mixer can easily add reverb (or EQ or dynamics or delay) to the shot.