Author Topic: Calling shows: Calling sound cues  (Read 12758 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

kjdiehl

  • Permanent Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 201
  • Gender: Male
  • The Turtle Moves.
    • View Profile
  • Affiliations: AEA
Re: Calling sound cues
« Reply #15 on: Jul 31, 2006, 10:39 pm »
I may have been a bit unclear. It's not that I think all Sound and Scenic cues should be descriptively named and called; just some, when it's more helpful to do so. And really, LX as well.

For example, If there's 300+ LQs in a show and they're all a matter of hitting the GO button, EXCEPT for the cue between LQ266 and LQ267, which is for the operator to flash a Submaster in time to the audience's applause, then I would prefer to call that cue as Lites Sub 1... GO, or something similarly descriptive. Or at least, in the standby I would describe the cue, as in "Standby LQ267.5: Flash Sub 1. ... LQ267.5... GO," or something similar. Cause how often does a LBO follow a cue sheet, even early in a run?

Likewise, I do prefer to number or letter SQs, and really it depends on how the show is weighted in terms of types of cues, and between you, the designer, and the operator how you name and call them. Mac, if your show was consistently as complex as you indicated, then yes, I probably would have gone with straight numbering for each and every sound cue action, as you did, and rely on Sound Op to follow his cue sheet closely. It'd be laborious and silly for me to call each and every board setting for the op- that IS what cue sheets are for. (Mind you, there's an awful lot of regional work out there where you may be working with rather inexperienced ops who may really need some major hand-holding. I've more than once had to call board presets or mic cues for green operators.)

But sometimes it might make more sense to call the cues descriptively. For instance, imagine a hypothetical sequence where 3 cues are running at once and they all have to be taken out in very quick succession, and sometimes in different order, depending on the precise stage action at the time. I might prefer to call them MD1-Out, CD-Out, and MD2-Out, rather than SQ25, SQ 27, and SQ26.

And of course, Board Ops should generally be depended on to run their own EQ, Volume shifts, etc, but sometimes it can make total sense to call it. Say you have a straightforward Sound show, with all very discrete cues that you call one after the other- totally easy to number every cue. But say there's just like one weird point in the play where a single cue gets an important volume boost on a specific actor's line. I'd feel remiss if I didn't differentiate that cue from the others in some way, either in the Standby or the call itself.

Do you get my drift now? Does it make sense what I am saying?

Also, I like the method Matt noted:
Sound Cue 5 - Start the cue
Sound Cue 5.5 - volume change
Sound Cue 5.9 - Sound Out
It's similar to my method, by helping to contain the discrete cue within the artificial descriptors of the numbers.



Oh, and btw, I don't think I've ever heard of calling Out cues "Prime," or calling any cues "Prime" for that matter. Granted, I'm sure many many people do, but I certainly know of at least 50 or so Sound people who never did so on any of my shows. Maybe it's less common regionally? I'm just saying there's an awful lot of theatre professionals out there and it'd be downright silly of ANY of us to assume that ANY of our experiences were the norm across the entire profession.
-Kris Diehl, AEA SM

"Somewhere in the city there's a stage manager waiting,
standing in the shadows with a clipboard in hand..."

loebtmc

  • Forum Moderators
  • *****
  • Posts: 1574
    • View Profile
  • Affiliations: AEA, SAG, AFTRA, SMA
  • Current Gig: Caroling, caroling now we go — and looking for my next gig!
  • Experience: Professional
Re: Calling sound cues
« Reply #16 on: Aug 01, 2006, 01:44 am »
(fwiw, and I've done regional theater all over the US, and even in Edinburgh, I have never, ever heard "prime" either)

stagemonkey

  • SM Expert
  • ****
  • Posts: 104
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Calling sound cues
« Reply #17 on: Aug 03, 2006, 05:34 pm »
I'm gonna just say like anything in theatre there really is no standard.  Its whatever the group of people you are working with at that moment all agree on what works.

For me when I sound designed I was taught to use letters for sound cues cause it helps differencitate between lights (why my operators cant distinguish between me saying lights 1 and sound 1 I dont know.) Anyway, my cue labeling looked like follows.

A: plays a sound
Af: adjustment in level (as in fade up or down)
Ax: sound out (as in cut)
Afx: fades out

However when calling things I'm more inclined to say:

Sound A...Go
Sound A fade up...Go
Sound A out... Go
Sound A fade out...Go

In terms of short tracks that play themselves out fully (ie sound effects) I just call "Sound F..Go"  and then my op should know from rehearsal and his cue sheet how the cues operates.  I have also put the responsibility on my sound op to take the cue on his own visual.  In this case say the music needs to start when the actor turns on the record player.  Well since there is no way for me to predict the exact moment before to tell the sound op to go I would just be like:

"Stand by Sound G, take it once the actor starts the record"

as I'm gonna see it the same moment he does its easier to trust the sound op to do it, it also works when like somoene has to close a door and sound has to stop. 

Ultimately i look at it as whatever me and the sound op cooridinate at the start to work.  In some shows I gave my sound op a cue sheet to follow.  I haven't seem to have a problem, just find what works for that show as the next show you might have to do somethign different. Thats the fun of theatre each show is always a different set of problems with their own unique solution.

 

riotous