Is it time to reconsider how we get credited for our work? In this article, Damian Kearns makes the case for redefining post production audio roles in the 21st century.
The Thought Process
I recently completed a very intense project in which I was engaged during Preproduction, Production and of course, Post Production. It’s rare, but not necessarily unprecedented, that my contribution to a job has been ‘end to end’ like this. Sometimes people need me from the start because they’re new to a workflow or because the process demands I’m in at the conceptual stage. I’m down with that.
As someone with a fair few tv, film, radio, podcast and web credits, I wasn’t exactly worried about awarding myself any sort of job title until I was approached to do so, nearly at the project’s end. That’s the time I typically ask myself “What the hell have I done on this job anyway?”
Most of my gigs see me wearing a variety of hats but the usual head coverings include working with dialogue, sound effects, recording voice, Foley, or ADR, and my favourite bit, the final sound mix.
There are only so many credits I’m allowed on any given credit roll— my record is three, so my usual title of choice is “Re-recording Mixer,” as this was the position to which I aspired early in my career. Seeing it onscreen anywhere never gets old for me, especially when it’s been on actual film stock, glittering on a movie screen. Anyone who’s ever earned this title will probably say the same thing.
My latest completed project is a podcast series comprised of 5 original, specially scripted theatrical plays. The parts were performed by actors in studio, then the takes were assembled at my facility, music edited by three different talented people using our assembly to form the structure of the plays, and then Foley, VO and SFX recorded or constructed by myself and my assistant Ben before I mixed everything- “Re-recording Mixer” would have been the wrong credit for what I’d been asked to do all year.
During this series, I guided the entire project’s audio work, selected and arranged for the recording studio for the acting talent to record the script and brought in someone to select, edit and shape the music on three of the five episodes. I was in charge of all the dialogue editing, SFX editing, Foley performance and recording and the final mixes. It was a mountain of work and quite frankly, I’m glad it’s behind me now. From the pre-production meetings, to the lengthy email chains, to long days editing whilst following the scripts with dogmatic adherence, it was clear my usual ‘Re-recording Mixer’ moniker is a wholly inadequate job description.
A Dose of Modern Reality
I recently started philosophising about my modern workloads and came to the conclusion that since the digital age came along, ‘Re-recording Mixer’ isn’t an accurate reflection of the totality of what I do. I no longer merely take recordings from one set of tapes and mix them onto or into other tape (possibly adding reverb or some other effect as I go). Editing is now an integral part of my jobs, as is conjuring sonic elements of greater and greater complexity. I am regularly cleaning up and restoring dialogue. Then taking a hatchet to said dialogue to reimagine sentence structure so I might create spaces in my mix for other elements to have their moments. I won’t even get into versioning of multiple edits of a show for various distributers.
So Re-recording Mixer doesn’t seem to fit me anymore, as I’m also an editor on virtually all my projects. I find ‘editor’ by itself a problematic term as well, since it evokes images of someone sending people out to do the creative work, then making decisions about their work later on. Perry White or J. Jonah Jameson, I am not. in my opinion, this title excludes other portions of the job typically assigned to ‘editors’ these days.
For example, dialogue editors can also be charged with ADR calls and matching disparate takes, as well as applying noise reduction and complicated vocal effects. These last two items used to be entirely in the hands of the Re-Recording Mixer in years gone by. Also, in the 21st century, Sound Effects Editors do more than just copy and paste sounds from libraries onto a DAW session’s timeline: SFX can also involve the recording and creation of original sounds, as well as sculpting new sounds using tone generators, naturally occurring tones, archival restoration of show materials from past productions for modern use, and many other artistic manipulations of sonic elements.
In Foley there’s also been a shift as well. We’ve always had Foley Artists, who perform sounds using a trove of props, their own bodies, musical instruments, and work microphones as well as any great singer might. But then there’s the recordist and the mixer. I’ve been a Foley Recordist, a Foley Mixer and both at the same time. Now, above and beyond the traditional use of reverb to augment recordings, Foley Mixers regularly pitch audio and layer sounds, edit as they go and as always, are producing and interacting with the artist on the floor.
The Language Of Our Crafts Needs To Evolve
I think our traditional titles need an overhaul. Some people have adopted “Sound Designer” but recently, when this appeared under my ‘Re-recording Mixer’ credit next to the SFX Editor’s name, I got upset. This one jabbed at me because of the implicit suggestion the SFX person had a senior position to mine when this was not the reality of the situation. In fact, I also edited all the dialogue, location sound and designed a lot of SFX for the show so I was also not giving myself enough credit. by sticking with my traditional favourite title. I called the SFX person about this. It turned his credit was not his doing. Someone else involved in the production had confused “Sound Designer” and “SFX Editor”, believing them to be one and the same. They are not the same.
A sound designer is someone who oversees post audio crew and directs the flow and style of the creative contributions of the team (At least, this is my understanding of the term). Whilst it’s opaque wording, it does offer some sense that there is more to post audio than assembly line ‘sausage factory’ work and moving bits of sound from one medium to the next. This got me focusing in on how I want my future credits to read so I can be judged for the totality of my work, not just a piece of it.
For the podcast series I mentioned earlier, we settled on “Supervising Sound Designer” for me. This, I feel, underlines the fact that I did more than just mix the episodes. It also implies that everyone else I worked with on the post audio team is an artist, rather than solely or only technicians. Again, ‘technician’ is only part of any of our jobs. Everyone operating a computer now is a technician of sorts so this again, excludes the other ways many of us contribute to our assignments.
An Artful Rewording
Art and design reflect the technical skill of their originators. It’s true. Artists and Designers, I think, have transcended the technical to the point they can make something that elicits a desired emotional response from those experiencing their work. I mean, anyone can do pottery but how many can produce a Ming vase? This is where I think our credits need to head, in the direction of crediting us as artists or designers, rather than job doers, employees or task accomplishers.
So, in this article, I’m suggesting we all consider re-examining our output and our contributions. Have a look at this list. Rather than ‘editor’ or ‘re-recording’, I’ve used one word to try to reward each team member for their creative contribution:
Mix Design
Dialogue Design
Music Design
Foley Design
ADR Design
SFX Design
Post Audio Design
Supervising Sound Designer
In my view, recognising that our art form is collaborative, sound for picture credits ought to reward both the individual artists involved and the collective achievement as art in and of itself. While I know not everything we all work on might be deemed ‘art,’ we are always artists, designing the sonic structure for everything we do. Sometimes we’re doing the audio version of constructing Gaudi’s Church and other times we’re basically plopping the signage atop a fast food restaurant and calling it a day. In my mind, it all takes creativity, technical skill and experience to do well.
Respect
I’m not saying that everyone should adopt the credits I proffered above— the word ‘artist’ also works but it’s potentially confusing when we talk about Foley performers and other Foley crew- but I do think that by respecting everyone on our teams as creative contributors, everyone on our teams and everyone hiring post production teams, might well see in these sorts of credits a more accurate reflection of who they are and what they do.
Some will rightly suggest that by ascribing the word ‘Design’ to further define the contributions of the Post Production Audio team, I might be belittling the Production Audio crew. Not my intention. They can use ‘Design’ too to reflection their creative input on their various projects. Not being a production audio crew member— save for a few, memorable times- I really feel I am not able to speak to their workloads. The respect I have for production audio is exactly the same as for post audio, I just don’t do it for a living.
In this article, I’ve avoided two terms that have been linked to me for the past 28 years: Engineer and Operator. I’ve never felt comfortable with ‘engineer’ as a job definition, though it hung around my neck for 15.5 years as “Post Production Audio Engineer” while I worked for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. I trained in the art of audio, not engineering, which I think of as one aspect of the job description . Actually, without ‘engineer’ tacked onto my job title, I might have been seen as having a more holistic approach to working with sound, as is actually the case. And ‘Operator’— also a title I was stuck with a few times- is a word that right from the start I thought to be reductionist to the point of being insulting. Imagine pointing at J.S. Bach and saying “Well, he’s the church organ operator”. I’m not comparing myself to Bach per se but he is an excellent example of someone who was certainly aspiring to be known for more than the ‘jobs’ he had in his lifetime. He was using his jobs to pay his bills and building his body of work at the same time.
I always felt ‘engineer’ and ‘operator’ are partial/non titles enlisted by corporate management in attempts to avoid paying me and my colleagues properly. By defining us as technicians only— we were well trained technicians, it’s true- these companies sidestepped having to deal with artistic differences, and artistic temperaments. The fact I and all my former colleagues were musicians and most of us read and write music as well as other traits only artists and musicians can rightly be attributed, was immaterial; this naming strategy enabled them to take more than their fair share of the credit for our individual achievements when we were recognised because they framed us as corporate assets. I mean, if we were seen as artists, why would we need managers? Right, Britney? Also, grunt employees are cheaper than artists and designers. Nomenclature is everything.
Final Words
Everything is always about words. Respect or lack thereof is embedded in our job titles and job descriptions. Mastering our words helps us thrive, not merely exist. And we should all thrive. We are providing the soundtracks for the lives of billions of people after all. Our greatest works have the potential to outlive us which of course, is what audio people, musicians, designers and artists dream of for their creations.
I believe in the modern ‘gig economy’, we need to fight harder than ever for every syllable of recognition and one of the toughest fronts of that battle is certainly the psychological barrier people who don’t work in audio have built between us and our works. Audio people are toiling longer and harder than ever before and we all are tasked with elements of our job descriptions that defy prior codification. If we don’t define our own work, who will?
As is always the case, I wish you all luck and success with your projects. I’ll be looking for you names in the credits. I hope for you, the credit reflects your contributions.
Photo by ThisisEngineering RAEng on Unsplash