Hello. I am getting into videography, and am learning that good sound is equally important.

I am looking for a way to have background music playing in some of my video interviews, and need something that is lightweight an mobile, since I am a one-man camera crew and already have two bags full of video gear plus a tripod to lug around.

I was thinking that maybe I could use my 2nd iPhone as a music source, and get some sort of a wireless/Bluetooth speaker so I could place it out of frame and still have some subtle background music in my video interviews.

Bose supposedly makes really awesome speakers, and I believe they have Bluetooth ones, but I am open to suggestions.

Also, I would need something that has good battery life, because I might be playing the music for a couple or several hours out in the field, and I don't want to have to pack up and go find a wall outlet to charge up my speaker.

Fwiw, the music will be at low volume, so hopefully that lowers the power requirements?

And I would hope that a wireless speaker would work up to at least 10-15 feet away from my iPhone, because sometimes I shoot wide angle.

I have a UE Megaboom 3 which I think has decent sound though certainly not exceptional. I’ve read good reviews about the Sonos Roam but I have no personal experience with it.

For that use case why not add the background music in post? I guess it’ll be harder to make it authentically sound like the music was in the space if that’s the intended effect but it’s also just harder to get it to not just sound like “Oh there was some poor quality background noise in the video”.

Do you mic up both yourself and the person you’re interviewing or do you have a centralised mic?

This speaker has great bass and long battery life, It's pretty hefty which is a good thing component wise.

Link

I think it’s better to get clear vocal audio for an interview without interference of background music. Then, if it adds more effect, to add a balanced level of background music in post-interview editing.

casperes1996 said:

For that use case why not add the background music in post?

Because I am trying to skirt something...

You see, if I add copyrighted music to a video, it is either impossible to get licensing rights, or the royalties would be mega expensive.

However, if music happens to be playing in the background, then it is fair game if it can be heard in a video I am creating.

I suppose me playing music on a Bluetooth speaker is technically not legal, but it's a grey area that would protect me and add a little flavor to *some* videos I might create.

I'm not looking to abuse this, but sometimes it would add color to a scene. (e.g. Beach Boys playing while interviewing a surfer on the Pacific Ocean, or a country song playing while filming at a county fair).

casperes1996 said:

I guess it’ll be harder to make it authentically sound like the music was in the space if that’s the intended effect but it’s also just harder to get it to not just sound like “Oh there was some poor quality background noise in the video”.

If I do this, I'm just looking for some subtle "color" in the background. In fact, I don't want it to sound like like some music video are some dramatic promo video for a new product from Apple.

If it sounds like someone has a transistor radio (Is anyone here old enough to know what I'm talking about?) or like music coming from a ceiling speaker in a lobby or a restaurant then that is exactly what I'm looking for.

Also, if I can get good sound, there might be future situations where I get royalty free music, and then I would crank things up and that might sound more like a music video.

casperes1996 said:

Do you mic up both yourself and the person you’re interviewing or do you have a centralised mic?

I have a broadcaster headset and microphone like you see sports announcers use on TV. It cost like $300.

For my talent, I usually use a pro shotgun mic plus my iPhone mic as a backup, and in some situations I have a wireless lav setup I use. I also have a pro reporters mic, and a boom pole, although I've never been motivated to use that as a one man crew. All of my mics are pro XLR setups going into a Zoom H6 recorder.

Panther61 said:

This speaker has great bass and long battery life, It's pretty hefty which is a good thing component wise.

Link

All of the speakers recommended so far look great, except one problem...

They have LOTS of BASS.

This is a generational issue...

My generation *hates* lots of bass.

(I wanna smack the snot out of all of these punks with their BOOM, BOOM, BOOM playing there cars that I can hear a 1/4 of a mile away. So annoying!)

Is there any way to get a wireless Bluettoth speaker that doesn't sound like it's for some punk "gangsta" or "thug"??

Big Bad D said:

I think it’s better to get clear vocal audio for an interview without interference of background music. Then, if it adds more effect, to add a balanced level of background music in post-interview editing.

Which is why I want a speaker that I can set 10, 15, maybe 25 feet away.

It is also why I don't want a heavy bass speaker.

Any music I play should be audible, but not dominate the interview.

You are right in that the subject's words are the most important. But just like they do in movies, some subtle background music can add color.

Having music in the physical scene makes it sound more natural, and the biggest thing is that it allows me to use music that I otherwise wouldnt be able to use.

TwoLaneHighway said:

I have a broadcaster headset and microphone like you see sports announcers use on TV. It cost like $300.

For my talent, I usually use a pro shotgun mic plus my iPhone mic as a backup, and in some situations I have a wireless lav setup I use. I also have a pro reporters mic, and a boom pole, although I've never been motivated to use that as a one man crew. All of my mics are pro XLR setups going into a Zoom H6 recorder.

OK, so a few tips. Though some of this might make the legality even greyer... Or black.
1) Mic "the room" not just yourself and the talent. Either specifically near the speaker, or even better with stereo mics and then make sure you don't just have everything mono in the edit. Especially with background music/audio you want to add space to the audio.

2) Especially with background audio you want to pay attention to syncing issues

3) Semi-related to the above points, be mindful of levels and spacing. If all the mics you have capture the background audio but with different character to the sound you may also want to EQ them to try and make it sound like they belong in the same space.

TwoLaneHighway said:

This is a generational issue...

My generation *hates* lots of bass.

This is not a generational thing. This is a matter of quality awareness and a lack of quality awareness. One time in an electronics store in Germany, my dad and I stumbled upon a speaker with a big red button labelled "30 seconds BASS BOOST". Both of us nearly cried that something so abhorrent was being sold.

There's nothing wrong with a lot of bass, *if* it was the intended effect of whatever you're listening to. Speakers should be able to reproduce it but they should not artificially accentuate or highlight it. Whatever age range you look at, you will not find a single audiophile who will buy a speaker with a "30 second BASS BOOST".

However, "good enough" technologies I do think have had a harmful effect on audio, and some people will have grown up only with mono smart speakers, TV/monitor speakers, built-in laptop/phone speakers and earbuds that came with their devices. It's a real shame.

casperes1996 said:

OK, so a few tips. Though some of this might make the legality even greyer... Or black.
1) Mic "the room" not just yourself and the talent. Either specifically near the speaker, or even better with stereo mics and then make sure you don't just have everything mono in the edit. Especially with background music/audio you want to add space to the audio.

2) Especially with background audio you want to pay attention to syncing issues

3) Semi-related to the above points, be mindful of levels and spacing. If all the mics you have capture the background audio but with different character to the sound you may also want to EQ them to try and make it sound like they belong in the same space.

Click to expand...

Interesting suggestions, although I think that was over my head since, while I have pro-level audio gear, I am not yet a pro-level audio engineer!

When I am interviewing people - usually outdoors - I'm not sure how practical it is to mic the sound.

My understanding of your advice is to place a 3rd mic near the audio source, so I have a better and dedicated recording of just the audio, and thus it will be on it's own track.

The problem with that is that I don't want the music source to sound like it has a dedicated mic on it, because the idea is that the music is supposed to be ambient sound. In fact, if I mic up an audio source, then that defeats the excuse of, "I had no control of there being music in the background."

I suppose I could have a 3rd shotgun mic facing towards my music source which is off in the background, but then I not only have to babysit a Bluetooth speaker in the background, but I have to manage a 3rd ic and cable potentially running some distance from me and my primary gear.

That is a lot to manage on a street corner or at some event like a county fair.

I was thinking that if I used my 2nd iPhone as the music source, and then I set a Bluetooth speaker off behind my subjects maybe 20 feet away and out of frame, then my shotgun mic that I use to record the subject would pick up the music, but it wouldn't dominate the person speaking, and it would sound like it is naturally in the background.

casperes1996 said:

This is not a generational thing. This is a matter of quality awareness and a lack of quality awareness. One time in an electronics store in Germany, my dad and I stumbled upon a speaker with a big red button labelled "30 seconds BASS BOOST". Both of us nearly cried that something so abhorrent was being sold.

There's nothing wrong with a lot of bass, *if* it was the intended effect of whatever you're listening to. Speakers should be able to reproduce it but they should not artificially accentuate or highlight it. Whatever age range you look at, you will not find a single audiophile who will buy a speaker with a "30 second BASS BOOST".

However, "good enough" technologies I do think have had a harmful effect on audio, and some people will have grown up only with mono smart speakers, TV/monitor speakers, built-in laptop/phone speakers and earbuds that came with their devices. It's a real shame.

Click to expand...

My point is that in the past 20 years, whenever I hear "music" all I hear is this pulsing bass and nothing else.

Bass travels like nothing else, and often it is some dominating, you can't even hear the rest of the music or the words unless you are close to the source.

I hate that.

And in the last 20 years that is considered "music". BOOM, BOOM, BOOM, THUMP, THUMP, THUMP.

With music prior to 2000, you could hear the singer, hear individual instruments, hear the treble, the midrange, and also a little bass.

There also have been numerous studies that show you will have a generation of deaf kids because all they listen to is mega bass, mega distortion, and mega volume.

At any rate, not here to debate musical tastes, but rather to say that I do not want mega bass in a wireless Bluetooth speaker, because it is not the sound or effect that I want.

TwoLaneHighway said:

My understanding of your advice is to place a 3rd mic near the audio source, so I have a better and dedicated recording of just the audio, and thus it will be on it's own track.

Yes, but the idea is to capture the way the audio sounds in the "room" or environment, not just how it sounds in itself. So you wouldn't want to really target the audio device either. It's the opposite of wanting to have a clean audio track in a way; For that you might was well put the original recording in your editor. It's getting the sound of the audio in the environment while still having enough control over just that to turn it up or down or place it in the stereo/surround mix relative to everything else

As for all the rest, all I'll say is that that is just a subset of music. This was 2007 for example

I'd say if a rights holder decided to come after you, it would have decided you are a big and rich enough offender to spend corporate legal resources on punishing you or making you stop. So I doubt the "ambient sound" defense would matter much. When a company like Iconic or MPL Communications goes to court, they don't mess around.

TwoLaneHighway said:

Which is why I want a speaker that I can set 10, 15, maybe 25 feet away.

It is also why I don't want a heavy bass speaker.

Any music I play should be audible, but not dominate the interview.

You are right in that the subject's words are the most important. But just like they do in movies, some subtle background music can add color.

Having music in the physical scene makes it sound more natural, and the biggest thing is that it allows me to use music that I otherwise wouldnt be able to use.

Click to expand...

Sorry I am lost. Maybe I am missing something, but I don’t understand why adding music post interview recording would make a difference to what music you can or cannot use? In most movies, unless it’s an integral part of the scene, music is added in post editing - not played during the shoot.

I don't like bass heavy speakers either and I recently gave up my JBL Charge 4 for a https://www.bang-olufsen.com/en/ca/speakers/beosound-a1. I really like it - much truer sonics to my ears! It also has 3 microphones, which makes it a great companion for Conference calls. It has a RRP of CAD$ 350 but the anthracite colour version sells on Amazon CA for $296.

casperes1996 said:

Yes, but the idea is to capture the way the audio sounds in the "room" or environment, not just how it sounds in itself. So you wouldn't want to really target the audio device either. It's the opposite of wanting to have a clean audio track in a way; For that you might was well put the original recording in your editor. It's getting the sound of the audio in the environment while still having enough control over just that to turn it up or down or place it in the stereo/surround mix relative to everything else

So if you mic for the "room" (or environment) then the goal is to capture how the music sounds naturally, but trying to capture it on a dedicated mic/channel so you have more control in post-production, right?

casperes1996 said:

As for all the rest, all I'll say is that that is just a subset of music. This was 2007 for example

I didn't understand your muical sample. Sounded pretty treble-y to me, which is how I grew up listening to music - not all of this BOOM, BOOM, BOOM rap/thug/gansta crap on the radio in the last 20 years... *sigh*

KaliYoni said:

I'd say if a rights holder decided to come after you, it would have decided you are a big and rich enough offender to spend corporate legal resources on punishing you or making you stop. So I doubt the "ambient sound" defense would matter much. When a company like Iconic or MPL Communications goes to court, they don't mess around.

I think people should take the theat of being sued seriously - because some "little people" has gotten their asses sued off!

However, if done properly, and if not done on every single video I ever make, I think it would be impossible to prove it wasn't ambient background music.

Which is sorta my mildly nefarious angle...

I already shot in a lot of places where there is background music from bars/clubs/apartments/cars.

And to be honest, my real motivation for doing this is more practice and learning how sound might make things better. If this technique works with great effect, maybe I start doing the same thing with royalty-free music, r I even see if I can pay to use more widely known music.

Big Bad D said:

Sorry I am lost. Maybe I am missing something, but I don’t understand why adding music post interview recording would make a difference to what music you can or cannot use? In most movies, unless it’s an integral part of the scene, music is added in post editing - not played during the shoot.

Because the sound of soft music playing in a restaurant or cafe or in the distance at a park or music festival does not song the same as if you add a studio-quality song in post production.

I don't see how you can confuse the too.

Would a street fair or live concert off in the distance sound the same as a studio album from the same artist? Of course not!

njvm said:

I don't like bass heavy speakers either and I recently gave up my JBL Charge 4 for a https://www.bang-olufsen.com/en/ca/speakers/beosound-a1. I really like it - much truer sonics to my ears! It also has 3 microphones, which makes it a great companion for Conference calls. It has a RRP of CAD$ 350 but the anthracite colour version sells on Amazon CA for $296.

Microphones make me nervous as there have been lots of scary stories in the news of Alexa and what-not spying on people.

Can someone recommend a good outdoor,, weather-proof speaker, that is NOT bass heavy, and that won't spy on my with microphones?

Also, can I buy any of the previously mentioned above speakers and just adjust things - maybe with an equalizer on my iPhone - to adjust things so the bass sounds more normal?

TwoLaneHighway said:

So if you mic for the "room" (or environment) then the goal is to capture how the music sounds naturally, but trying to capture it on a dedicated mic/channel so you have more control in post-production, right?

Correct

TwoLaneHighway said:

I didn't understand your muical sample. Sounded pretty treble-y to me, which is how I grew up listening to music - not all of this BOOM, BOOM, BOOM rap/thug/gansta crap on the radio in the last 20 years... *sigh*

That was exactly the point. It was a modern song - at least modern as in 2007. The point was that your association that modern music is all "boom-boom-boom" only accounts for a subset of music and there certainly still is loads of other stuff being produced

casperes1996 said:

That was exactly the point. It was a modern song - at least modern as in 2007. The point was that your association that modern music is all "boom-boom-boom" only accounts for a subset of music and there certainly still is loads of other stuff being produced

Then why is it that everywhere I travel across the US, all I hear is BOOM, BOOM, BOOM?

Even out in the country side where all there are are cowboys, all I hear is BOOM, BOOM, BOOM.

And because nearly everyone listens to this low-frequency, mega-bass music, I can't even hear the sing itself or the lyrics.

I just assume that everyone under 30 in the US listens to thug music - which in and of itself is disturbing to me.

And as a result, it appears that most manufacturers of audio gear cater to this market and everything is MEGA BASS.

In the 70s and 80s, music hard very very little bass in it. I mean you might have a steady drum beat - like Led Zeppelin or AC/DC - but it was still all about the guitars, the synthesizers, the other instruments and the vocals. Can you imagine listening to The Eagles if all you heard was THUMP, THUMP, THUMP?

Maybe a better solution is using free music from the Youtube Audio Library
All of the music there is allowed to be used in videos, usually without attribution, and in every popular genre.

As someone who's made thousands of videos - interviews, education, short films - the things you need to think about during a shoot isn't choosing the bedding soundtrack.
What if the person being interviewed is distracted by your music choice?
What if the ultimate mood of the video doesn't match the song you chose during filming?
What if a random live song comes on and there's applause instead of thematic music?

The biggest issue you'll have when editing video that has background music lumped in is that editing will be that much harder. If there's any recognizable music in the background, cuts will become less smooth because you'll be fighting with that second audio source.
In addition, your video setup process will be greatly extended because you'll have to listen to your audio carefully in headphones to ensure your background music level isn't overpowering your interview.

#OKBoomer

Seriously though, just about everything Bluetooth is going to have a lot of bass emphasis. Why? Because the market for wireless audio gear, especially lower cost models targeted to non-audiophiles, is overwhelmingly people who want the bass to be emphasized.

If I wanted to minimize the lower end on a BT speaker or headphones connected to a phone, tablet, or desktop, I would adjust the sound output settings on the signal source. On iOS, for example, Settings/Music/EQ allows this.

Side note: if you're in the market for neutral sound headphones, take a look at Sony MDR7506.

Finally, if you attract the attention of corporate lawyers to a level past a cease-and-desist letter, any use of copyrighted music will be messy unless you can make a fair use claim. So if you are risk averse with respect to legal activity, you'll be better off using royalty-free or public domain music.

macsound1 said:

Maybe a better solution is using free music from the Youtube Audio Library
All of the music there is allowed to be used in videos, usually without attribution, and in every popular genre.

I realize there is tons of royalty-free music out there, but if might be nice to experiement playing the BEach Boys while interviewing a surfer on the California coast.

macsound1 said:

As someone who's made thousands of videos - interviews, education, short films - the things you need to think about during a shoot isn't choosing the bedding soundtrack.
What if the person being interviewed is distracted by your music choice?
What if the ultimate mood of the video doesn't match the song you chose during filming?
What if a random live song comes on and there's applause instead of thematic music?

As someone who has made "0" videos, those are all valid points.

macsound1 said:

The biggest issue you'll have when editing video that has background music lumped in is that editing will be that much harder. If there's any recognizable music in the background, cuts will become less smooth because you'll be fighting with that second audio source.

Okay, THAT is a very valid point.

macsound1 said:

In addition, your video setup process will be greatly extended because you'll have to listen to your audio carefully in headphones to ensure your background music level isn't overpowering your interview.

Also true.


But to counter your valid advice above, I was shooting at a small rodeo this summer where they played country music briefly after they released the bulls and it added A LOT to my video. And it wasn't overpowering or distracting and sounded very natural, because it was natural.

In fact, I think that and a couple other instances at county fairs is what inspired me to try this out and see if I can make it work in a small percentage of my videos.

TwoLaneHighway said:

Then why is it that everywhere I travel across the US, all I hear is BOOM, BOOM, BOOM?

Even out in the country side where all there are are cowboys, all I hear is BOOM, BOOM, BOOM.

And because nearly everyone listens to this low-frequency, mega-bass music, I can't even hear the sing itself or the lyrics.

I just assume that everyone under 30 in the US listens to thug music - which in and of itself is disturbing to me.

And as a result, it appears that most manufacturers of audio gear cater to this market and everything is MEGA BASS.

In the 70s and 80s, music hard very very little bass in it. I mean you might have a steady drum beat - like Led Zeppelin or AC/DC - but it was still all about the guitars, the synthesizers, the other instruments and the vocals. Can you imagine listening to The Eagles if all you heard was THUMP, THUMP, THUMP?

Click to expand...

The main reason bass has become more prevalent in the modern age is because we aren't recording or playing back to tape and amplifier and speaker quality has improved.

Analog mixing and mastering systems weren't designed in the non-linear systems we have today where bass can be harmonized and enhanced to sound amazing and full, no matter the speaker.

Magnetic tape a phenomenon called "print through" where loud bits of the recording would transfer their magnetism to the adjacent rolled pieces of tape. This is also why the roll a reel of tape a certain way, so even if the sound bleeds through, it sounds intentionally like reverb.

Also think of a pair of headphones from the 70s. They sounded fine. Better than a telephone, better than an AM radio, but listening to classical or rock music on them was just mediocre.
Now think of your iPhone speakers. At mid volume everything sounds rather nice.
Advancements in tiny transducers, electro-acoustic engineering, and amplifiers that sip power means that we can now produce much more of the audible frequency spectrum than we could 40 years ago.

All of that to say, there's more bass in music now because it's technically possible.
Overall it's more technically possible for $50 bluetooth speakers to have more similar frequency response to live PAs and the actual instruments.

macsound1 said:

The main reason bass has become more prevalent in the modern age is because we aren't recording or playing back to tape and amplifier and speaker quality has improved.

Analog mixing and mastering systems weren't designed in the non-linear systems we have today where bass can be harmonized and enhanced to sound amazing and full, no matter the speaker.

Magnetic tape a phenomenon called "print through" where loud bits of the recording would transfer their magnetism to the adjacent rolled pieces of tape. This is also why the roll a reel of tape a certain way, so even if the sound bleeds through, it sounds intentionally like reverb.

Also think of a pair of headphones from the 70s. They sounded fine. Better than a telephone, better than an AM radio, but listening to classical or rock music on them was just mediocre.
Now think of your iPhone speakers. At mid volume everything sounds rather nice.
Advancements in tiny transducers, electro-acoustic engineering, and amplifiers that sip power means that we can now produce much more of the audible frequency spectrum than we could 40 years ago.

All of that to say, there's more bass in music now because it's technically possible.
Overall it's more technically possible for $50 bluetooth speakers to have more similar frequency response to live PAs and the actual instruments.

Click to expand...

I'd also say the way people perceive sound quality is highly influenced by the format and by the device they used to listen to music when their tastes were forming.

Those who began by listening to MP3s played through laptop speakers or cheap earbuds might feel lossless AACs on an iMac's speakers sound pretty good. Similarly, I grew up listening mostly to records. So anything on vinyl sounds warm and inviting to me. But somebody who loves megabass and wants maxed-out levels on everything probably prefers CDs or uncompressed digital files.

For anybody interested in doing a deep dive on this stuff, this is a cool book:

https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780865479388
"In 1915, Thomas Edison proclaimed that he could record a live performance and reproduce it perfectly, shocking audiences who found themselves unable to tell whether what they were hearing was an Edison Diamond Disc or a flesh-and-blood musician."

Now, here's what early 1900s recordings actually sound like:
http://cylinders.library.ucsb.edu/