Appropriate sound levels for TV – music, dialogue, etc

[Marck Savoie voyer]

I usually set my tone to -20db. Then I set my audio peaks to max -6db. Usually, my dialogues, are ranging inbetween -12db to -20db. As for background music, I put it in the sequence with the dialogues and play with the audio level so that the dialogue will be around -20 to -12db and that the background music doesn’t interfere with the dialogues.

In the end, as long as the audio levels are technically respected, it’s your ears that will set the proper balance…

Hope this helps! 🙂

[Shane Ross]

Depends on the network and what their spec sheet says. My levels never stray above -12, and my tone is often -12 or -20, depending on what the network wants.

As for the relative db for music, talking and SFX, it is a matter of how it sounds to your ears. Is it too loud? Can you hear the person talk? Can you hear the music?

I often play back…or the audio guy plays back…the show thru TV speakers, so we know how it will sound when it hits people’s TV sets. SO we know if the music really is too low or too hot.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD now for sale!
http://www.LFHD.net
Read my blog!

[Chris Borjis]

For most work overall, you don’t want to exceed -10 digital or the analog equivalent (Zero) as measured on a VU meter.

[Michael Gissing]

Apart from variations at the regional broadcaster level, there are two international broadcast standards, SMPTE & EBU. Ask your delivery broadcasters. They should all have published specs, many of them online.

SMPTE (NTSC countries)- tone of 1 Khz @ -20dbfs (which means decibels full scale on a digital meter). Peak levels should not exceed -10dbfs although the odd momentary spike to -8dbfs may be acceptable.

EBU (PAL countries)- tone of 1 Khz @ -18dbfs. Peak levels should not exceed -9dbfs. The BBC (bless them) however only accept peaks to -10dbfs.

To achieve this, sound post facilities use high quality peak limiters & compression to contain levels and achieve a balance within those parameters. The “correct” balance of dialog to music & FX cannot be measured or quantified in db. It is a mater of taste & experience and varies wildly according to program style, quality of dialog recording etc. As for Shane’s experience of checking the mix on small TV speakers, that frankly is a waste of time. There are so many variables with cheap small speakers that all you can do is get an idea of how it will sound on those speakers.

A much better idea is to use high quality studio monitor speakers which you will find at any decent sound post facility. Listen to the mix with the VOLUME TURNED DOWN. That is the best test of dialog to music & FX balance as it triggers the Fletcher Munsen characteristics of frequency perception to volume. If the dialog is clear at low volume it will work on most speakers.

Broadcast audio mixing in FCP or STP is not advised. They are useful tools but are usually let down by the fact that they are used in edit suites, not sound suites so both the operator and the monitoring are less than ideal.

Their other issue is that you can’t easily create stem mixes undipped of your music, dialog & FX elements which are standard deliverables. Sound is the area that is poorly understood by many picture oriented people. I am unusual in that I am primarily a sound post person that grades & finishes picture in FCP. Know your limitations and pass the job on to a pro for broadcast sound. I certainly do the same for graphics which is my limitation.

[Paul Johnson]

Actually I like Shane and his mixer’s strategy. Why not listen to a mix where it’s eventually going to be played?

After I mix something (on studio monitors) I always listen to it on a TV or computer speakers, sometimes even my car.

I was fortunate enough to sit in on a mastering session in a major facility in LA. As soon as the session was done, the recording artist burned a CD and went to listen to it in their car leaving behind the million dollar room. I’m pretty sure none of their fans had a mastering room, but I’m sure they had cars.

“Blind respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.”

–Albert Einstein

[Michael Gissing]

[Billy Johnson] “Actually I like Shane and his mixer’s strategy. Why not listen to a mix where it’s eventually going to be played?”

Two very good reasons. Firstly small TV speakers are highly variable so all you are doing is hearing it on one particular speaker that the mixer might be familiar with but the director, editor & producer aren’t. Secondly time is often wasted trying to make it sound better on the smalls only to find it has ruined the balance on the big speakers.

If I said it was a great idea to grade on a crap badly set up TV you would probably tell me why that’s stupid. This is the same idea for sound and frankly from my experience mixing 800+ docos I think it a waste of time. Time is money and there isn’t enough time or money so why waste it on tail chasing?

[Paul Dickin]

[Michael Gissing] “EBU (PAL countries)- tone of 1 Khz @ -18dbfs. Peak levels should not exceed -9dbfs. The BBC (bless them) however only accept peaks to -10dbfs. “
Hi
Here’s a quote from an ex-BBC audio professional:
“The UK, and most of Europe, still specify signal levels in terms of readings on an analogue PPM — and that is important because the meter is specified with certain ballistics and integration times that materially affect the measurement of transient peaks.

Sadly, some companies have mistakenly calculated digital levels from static tone PPM levels (eg, the infamous -10dBFS peak level limit) without any understanding whatsoever of what the metering is all about or what the numbers mean — and that just adds further confusion into an already confusing subject.

…in the UK and in most of Europe you won’t go far wrong if you use a standard Type II analogue PPM, and keep peaks at or below a metered +8dB or PPM6 on each channel (+9dB in parts of Europe). Dialogue, music and effects levels depend on the nature of the balance, but in general, speech would be expected to lie between PPM 4 and PPM 6 (0dB and +8dB), with music and effects balanced to suit the artistic intention.

The ONLY relation to digital levels is during line up with steady tone, when PPM4 (0dBu) tone should align to -18dBFS (in the UK and Europe). Since most digital meters are true peak reading rather than integrating (as per the PPM), transient peaks will be seen regularly as high as -6dBFS and sometimes even higher. This is quite normal and completely acceptable to anyone that understands the engineering of a broadcast transmission chain.

Anyone who insists that programme peaks of PPM 6 = +8dBu = -10dBFS is a complete muppet and should be sent to stand in the corner of the room until they have learned their lesson!”
https://www.soundonsound.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=569913&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1#569913

[Shane Ross]

[Michael Gissing] “Firstly small TV speakers are highly variable so all you are doing is hearing it on one particular speaker that the mixer might be familiar with but the director, editor & producer aren’t. Secondly time is often wasted trying to make it sound better on the smalls only to find it has ruined the balance on the big speakers.”

They don’t mix to the TV speakers…that’s just plain silly. They mix to nice speakers. But they play back the mix on a TV…and not a crappy one, but a big one with good speakers. They mix for both mediums.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD now for sale!
http://www.LFHD.net
Read my blog!

[Chris Borjis]

In our audio suites we have those very small “am radio”
type speakers that can be turned on by a switch to simulate that, but its something we have not done in years, because quite honestly it is a waste of time.

If you observe your meters while monitoring your output and everything is good, there really is no reason to spend any more time on it than that.

[Paul Johnson]

Those small AM speakers in most rooms were called Auratones, and were standard equipment by many recording and broadcast people. Any professional mixing room should have at least three sets of monitors, typically back in the day the third set was auratones, or better referred to as horratones, because as you can imagine they didn’t sound very good. However that is what most people were listening to the broadcast or recording on, so many professionals liked to check the mix on them.

I feel it would be irresponsible for a mixer to not check his mix on anything other than his studio monitors. Just my opinion. Just like when we color correct, we CC on a broadcast CRT, but also have a broadcast LCD and consumer LCD all hooked up. I want to see what it’s going to look like on a TV just like I want to hear what it’s going to sound like on a crappy speakers. Lets be honest, whatever we work on is always going to look and sound as good as it can in our suites, after that point it is almost always a compromise. I personally want to see and hear what that compromise is.

Now I apploigize for taking this thread further off topic…

“Blind respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.”

–Albert Einstein