Randy Marsh calling strikes

[DG]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

Mikes of course can be directed at an audio source, the cup and tee in golf, the net in basketball, etc. But those sounds cannot be alterted on a live broadcast....enhanced in volume,,,but not altered...and certainly no umpire's strike call can be changed to something it is not.

With not much effort I believe the umpire's first strike call could be recorded and replaced thereafter on a live broadcast with "BULLSH*T", if one was so inclined to do so. Computers man, computers.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by DG

With not much effort I believe the umpire's first strike call could be recorded and replaced thereafter on a live broadcast with "BULLSH*T", if one was so inclined to do so. Computers man, computers.

Well, there is certainly that.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by DG

With not much effort I believe the umpire's first strike call could be recorded and replaced thereafter on a live broadcast with "BULLSH*T", if one was so inclined to do so. Computers man, computers.

I just got off the phone with a friend who works for a CBS affiliate who provides production assistance at west coast events. He confirmed they sweeten the audio from the tee mic... "slightly, but not unnaturally" according to him. He stated that they alter the sound to match what "viewers expect to hear.'

"The natural sound of a golf swing, even a pro's does not coincide with the visual perception of the power of the swing. We make the swing and the contact with the ball sound more powerful."

He will send me an email in the AM and I'll cut and paste it here. He'll address the crowd noise issue as well.

I may have to take the pyana man off the ignore list long enough to see if he's still covering his ears and singning la la la la la la la la la.

Edited to add: Yep...he is.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by GarthB

I just got off the phone with a friend who works for a CBS affiliate who provides production assistance at west coast events. He confirmed they sweeten the audio from the tee mic... "slightly, but not unnaturally" according to him. He will send me an email in the AM and I'll cut and paste it here.

LOL


"slightly, but not unnaturally"

So a swoosh becomes a swoooosh?

A kiss is still a kisss?

Randy Marsh's strike beomes a strikee?

LOL

Tell me, when you were in the ESPN truck were you there to empty the trash? Or the "sweetened gar bage' ?

LOL

[GarthB]

You should change you name from jimpiano to some other instrument. A lyre would be good.

It’s amazing what you’ve learned in your thirty years of broadcast:

From post #6:

"How in the world can any technology "doctor" sounds in a live event"?
That is called EDTING, but, to do that, it first has to be recorded."

At first a total ignorance of the capability of audio technology, which you displayed again in post #9

"But those sounds cannot be alterted on a live broadcast."

Then you seem to accept that it could be done, but insisted that it was never done:

"But TV does not change sounds.
…sports broadcasts are about giving the viewer the sounds of the game as heard by those in attendance."

In post 17 you insisted again that broadcasters would never alter sounds at a sporting event:

"The sounds heard at home may be easier to hear , but they are the same sounds you would hear being close to the action at a live event. They are never altered or changed."

Finally, in post 22 you admitted the existence but denied the utilization:

"Ah, the capability exists. Certainly it does, but it is not used to change the sounds of the game."

"The swoosh at the tee is what you would hear standing next to Tiger."

In post 23 you told us:

"I can tell you for a fact that no American network broadcast alters or changes the actual sounds heard at an event."

Finally, you joke that the alterations that exist are basically meaningless.

What a wonderful route you took from being completely wrong to justifying being completely wrong.

Then, you sarcastically asked:

"Tell me, when you were in the ESPN truck were you there to empty the trash? Or the "sweetened gar bage' ?"

Well, unlike you, I stick to the truth. I never said I was in the truck. I said I worked at live events with ESPN. I remained at the event site and communicated with the truck.

But, regardless…it seems that I learned more working two events than you did in 30 years. Tomorrow I’ll post Larry's email and I'll ask him to use small words so you can keep up.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by GarthB

You should change you name from jimpiano to some other instrument. A lyre would be good.

It’s amazing what you’ve learned in your thirty years of broadcast:

From post #6:

"How in the world can any technology "doctor" sounds in a live event"?
That is called EDTING, but, to do that, it first has to be recorded."

At first a total ignorance of the capability of audio technology, which you displayed again in post #9

"But those sounds cannot be alterted on a live broadcast."

Then you seem to accept that it could be done, but insisted that it was never done:

"But TV does not change sounds.
…sports broadcasts are about giving the viewer the sounds of the game as heard by those in attendance."

In post 17 you insisted again that broadcasters would never alter sounds at a sporting event:

"The sounds heard at home may be easier to hear , but they are the same sounds you would hear being close to the action at a live event. They are never altered or changed."

Finally, in post 22 you admitted the existence but denied the utilization:

"Ah, the capability exists. Certainly it does, but it is not used to change the sounds of the game."

"The swoosh at the tee is what you would hear standing next to Tiger."

In post 23 you told us:

"I can tell you for a fact that no American network broadcast alters or changes the actual sounds heard at an event."

Finally, you joke that the alterations that exist are basically meaningless.

What a wonderful route you took from being completely wrong to justifying being completely wrong.

Then, you sarcastically asked:

"Tell me, when you were in the ESPN truck were you there to empty the trash? Or the "sweetened gar bage' ?"

Well, unlike you, I stick to the truth. I never said I was in the truck. I said I worked at live events with ESPN. I remained at the event site and communicated with the truck.

But, regardless…it seems that I learned more working two events than you did in 30 years. Tomorrow I’ll post Larry's email and I'll ask him to use small words so you can keep up.

Please do.

Please keep us all posted on swooshes.

And sweetened but not unnatural.

And Randy Marshs' syllables.

I, for one, can't wait to hear the sound of ball going through the hoop during a televised basketball game and the sound of the "cork popping".

Or that elusive "swoosh of the puck".

Keep up the good work creating sounds in the theater.

I am sure the audience loves the sound of a saxaphone coming from a trumpet.

But for the rest of us,,,,the real sounds on a live TV sports broadcast will continue to be what we expect and cherish.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

But for the rest of us,,,,the real sounds on a live TV sports broadcast will continue to be what we expect and cherish.

Garth:

I don't want to get into a semantics battle of "altered" versus "sweetened." I know you know what I mean by those.

Yes, we sweeten the sounds of the tee shot on PGA broadcasts. As I said last night the natural sound of a golf swing, even a pro's, even Tiger's, does not coincide with the visual perception of the power of the swing. We have long tinkered with that. We make the swing and the contact with the ball sound more powerful by upping the low mid-range a bit (800 Hz-1 KHz), dropping off the brightness of the upper range just a little (2.5 KHz-5KHz) and increasing the decay time of the impact with the ball very, very slightly.

This "darkens" the sound a bit and makes it come across more forceful. This is not unlike what is done in tennis.

I don't believe we mislead the viewers and we certainly don't affect the game. We are, after all, in the entertainment business and we are simply addressing the perceptions of the viewer. I also think it makes the game feel more aggressive at times which addresses a weakness the broadcasts of the 60's had. The broadcasts then made the game seem even "weaker" than it was.

As for the basketball question, yes we mic the hoops and, again, we darken the sound a bit. That "popping" sound you referred to was something that the NBA played with for a few seasons about 20 years ago. I haven’t heard it in a long time.

Sweetening sounds in sports is not done with any intention to deceive, but entertain. As for the thought you relayed expressed by someone on the internet that the home viewer hears what the on-site fan hears, that's nonsense. The home viewer hears so much more than what the on-site fan hears, both "actual" sounds and sweetened or enhanced sounds.

The potential for trouble I see down the road is that some of the golf pros, through their agents have suggested the possibility of having their own specific sound enhancement to their swing...sort of an audio trademark. Even with today's technology hat could cause some mild havoc in the truck, particularly if someone brought up the wrong settings when Tiger's on the tee.

So, do we sweeten live sounds? Sure. Do we do this to deceive? No. Again, we are in the entertainment business.

Larry

Edited to add: Back to ignore jim.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Garth:

I don't want to get into a semantics battle of "altered" versus "sweetened." I know you know what I mean by those.

Yes, we sweeten the sounds of the tee shot on PGA broadcasts. As I said last night the natural sound of a golf swing, even a pro's, even Tiger's, does not coincide with the visual perception of the power of the swing. We have long tinkered with that. We make the swing and the contact with the ball sound more powerful by upping the low mid-range a bit (800 Hz-1 KHz), dropping off the brightness of the upper range just a little (2.5 KHz-5KHz) and increasing the decay time of the impact with the ball very, very slightly.

This "darkens" the sound a bit and makes it come across more forceful. This is not unlike what is done in tennis.

I don't believe we mislead the viewers and we certainly don't affect the game. We are, after all, in the entertainment business and we are simply addressing the perceptions of the viewer. I also think it makes the game feel more aggressive at times which addresses a weakness the broadcasts of the 60's had. The broadcasts then made the game seem even "weaker" than it was.

As for the basketball question, yes we mic the hoops and, again, we darken the sound a bit. That "popping" sound you referred to was something that the NBA played with for a few seasons about 20 years ago. I haven’t heard it in a long time.

Sweetening sounds in sports is not done with any intention to deceive, but entertain. As for the thought you relayed expressed by someone on the internet that the home viewer hears what the on-site fan hears, that's nonsense. The home viewer hears so much more than what the on-site fan hears, both "actual" sounds and sweetened or enhanced sounds.

The potential for trouble I see down the road is that some of the golf pros, through their agents have suggested the possibility of having their own specific sound enhancement to their swing...sort of an audio trademark. Even with today's technology hat could cause some mild havoc in the truck, particularly if someone brought up the wrong settings when Tiger's on the tee.

So, do we sweeten live sounds? Sure. Do we do this to deceive? No. Again, we are in the entertainment business.

Larry

Edited to add: Back to ignore jim.

Thanks.

Glad to know the sounds of the game are created by the players.
I can see why garth wants to stop.

[rookieblue]

This is so old, I'm surprised no one brought it up.

washingtonpost.com

TV Golf, Botching the Birdies
Sharp-Eared Viewers Hear False Notes in 'Ambient Sound'
By D'Vera Cohn
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, September 2, 2000; Page C01


The Buick Open golf tournament was in Michigan, so why was the silvery song of a canyon wren--a bird never seen east of Texas--heard on the TV broadcast?

Later last month, during a broadcast of the PGA Championship in Kentucky, birders picked up the thin whistle of a white-throated sparrow, not a bird of summer in the South. Last weekend, that sparrow called again in a place it does not belong--Ohio, during the NEC Invitational.

E-mails flew, between friends and on birding chat lists. Did you hear what I heard? Was it possible that CBS, which broadcast those tournaments, was dubbing in taped bird calls for viewers at home?

Well, yes.

"They have used a [taped] cartridge at one time or another," said Leslie Ann Wade, vice president of communications for CBS Sports. Producers try to use local bird sounds--even putting out a dish of birdseed next to a microphone at tournament sites--but cannot always get "ambient sound," and therefore turn to tapes, she said.

(Spokesmen for ABC and NBC deny their networks use taped calls or even bird mikes, although some viewers say they heard some out-of-place birds during the ABC prime-time broadcast on Monday from California featuring Tiger Woods and Sergio Garcia.)

It is hard to know what to think about this. Some birders are thrilled that networks want to broadcast any bird sounds--and so what if they are misplaced? Everyone knows that TV dresses up the real world. Others, already down on golf courses because their manicured lawns are not bird-friendly, are more ambivalent. A few, though, are ticked off.

"It's deceitful and overkill--just how perfect do they want us to think it is out there?" Gaithersburg birder John Malcolm groused. "Why not dub in harp music and rainbows for certain crucial holes?"

"Besides," he added, "it messes up our harmless little hobby"--keeping lists of birds heard during golf tournaments.

Yes, lists. Birders are fanatic list-keepers. Lists are a way of pinning down a fleeting, sensory experience. They are a means of collecting birds, just as some people collect stamps or antiques, but without bringing them home. For some, they offer a vehicle to compete with other list-keepers.

A list of the types of lists birders keep would fill this newspaper, but here are a few: Birds in their yards. Birds in parking lots. Birds on telephone poles, outside the office window, on the commute to work.

Birds in commercials or movie soundtracks are a special favorite because they are so often wrong for the time or place. Birders know, for example, that the movie "The Last of the Mohicans," set in New York, was made in North Carolina because they can identify the calls. It was like seeing palm trees at the North Pole.

It is a special thrill to spot a mistake--a "kind of birders' one-upmanship," in the words of veteran Bethesda birder Lola Oberman. It shows they know their stuff. And these days, with good quality bird-song tapes so widely available, the fashion is to bird by ear, not just by sight.

YuLee Larner, a past president of the Virginia Society of Ornithology who lives in Staunton, became convinced something odd was going on when she noticed the sparrows at recent golf tournaments sang "the same thing over and over and over again."

Birds just don't do that. They vary their song. Besides, she pointed out, sparrows do not sing much in summer, after the springtime competition for territory and mates.

"It just seems funny to me," she said. "They try to make things sound natural, but a little bit of research would tell producers where birds would be. They probably didn't think people were paying any attention."

North Carolina birder Patricia Moore, who regularly leads bird walks, said she would rather hear no bird songs during golf tournaments than hear the incorrect ones.

"A wrong bird song would be the same as a misidentification of a Beethoven symphony," she said. "It would rub a musician the wrong way to have something in his music misidentified."

© 2000 The Washington Post Company

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

jimpiano, maybe Garth got the Post's writers to "sweeten" this story seven years after the fact.

[bobbybanaduck]

i like small words.

[whitecane]

How 'bout a boxing match? You hear all kinds of suspicious sounds that seem to have no correlation to the onscreen action.

[Tim C]

I LOVE IT when people call jimpiano's bluffs.

Regards,

[UmpLarryJohnson]

Originally Posted by bobbybanaduck

i like small words.

"""The place where I come from is a small town
They think so small, they use small words
But not me, I'm smarter than that,
I worked it out
I'll be stretching my mouth to let those big words come right out""

[mbyron]

Peter Gabriel, "Big" from "So" (1986).