Gary has stated that he wants the film to have a "dream-like" quality and be "unsettling" in parts. I do still want to be sensitive to the original material that I have recorded and I am concerned that if I process the sounds, they will lose their identities and then I would ask myself the question, is it even necessary to include recorded sounds of the area at all? If they are going to be so coloured by technological manipulation. And what of introducing sounds that are not field recordings? or recordings that I have made?
I set out to find what sounds are interesting, to me, what are unexpected, and in having found very little of real interest in my recordings, nothing which really speaks of the area, nothing with a real identity, I am now trying to reconcile the use of effects processing in order to create something unique sounding.
I have already started using contact microphones and a telephone pick up coil in order to increase the variety and palette of my recordings, these I feel are justifiable because they are still recording what is already present.
I have also changed my stance, when recording sounds, from an observer, to actively interacting with the environment. By striking and knocking against objects and surfaces I am actively creating sound so as to capture it. This change I decided upon is because I felt the need to explore the area not just by listening to it, but by participating with it. This area is an urban area, built by man, its an area where people interact with it every day, all of the sounds I recorded were man made, I could hear none of the natural world, save for the scraping of dead leaves on the ground. So why not manipulate it? Why not make my own man made sounds?
So now thinking of technology; Elephant & Castle is a fabrication, a construction built with human technology, full of concrete, steel and glass. So why not take the raw elements that I have and create a construction that whilst using natural ingredients, is in the end a manufactured product?
And what of introducing sounds that are not recordings I have made of the area? What about artificial sounds? electronic sounds that I create at home? How do I justify doing this? What if a sound that I have, that is completely unrelated to Elephant & Castle, fits the idea, the impression of what the film is about, much more effectively than a sound I have recorded in the area? Is this cheating? They do this in films all the time. Some sounds sound better than the real sound does, in evoking the emotional response the film maker wants. My previous post about Gary Rydstrom's work on Saving Private Ryan, is an example of creatively "cheating" with the sound of the bullets underwater, in order to get the desired effect. This is a film, that for its battle sequences has been commended by war veterans for its realism.
An example of the emotional response that a sound track can evoke is with the below recording.
First Composition for BB by AudioHive
This recording is pretty much devoid of any effects processing or manipulation, save for a little bit of delay effect, however, Gary (the director) on Broken Bottles responded that it sounded "doomy". This segment is made up of contact microphone recordings, with me knocking on surfaces, and by simply presenting this as a piece for the soundtrack to the film, this sound track is already inflected with the emotional response of the audience. That contact microphone recordings are very susceptible to low frequency vibrations, and through cultural influence and quite probable primal nature, one can't help but get the impression that there is an ominous identity to this piece. So even through choice, or not, assumptions as to the intent of the film-maker will always be drawn, by the audience.
I will try processing and manipulating the sound for Broken Bottles but I will have to be very careful with my choices. As I begin, I will document my decisions.
No comments:
Post a Comment