Daniel Pellerin is the Genie and Gemini Award winning director of mixing services at Deluxe Toronto, an audio post and post-production house specializing in feature films and long-form TV.

Could this be the end of our search? Is there a perfect digital standard out there with all the features we are seeking that links to all our existing systems without creating compatibility issues? Is integration of existing imperfect technologies the answer? Does the missing link to reaching this technological Holy Grail even exist, or are we consolidating our way to oblivion? Are temporary Band-Aid solutions the best we can achieve? Will NAB2001 bring us closer to finding solutions to these nagging issues, or is this utopian concept just a mirage on the never-ending digital horizon?

Don’t get me wrong. Digital technology has revolutionized the way we operate in sound, and on a creative level, most of us have embraced the benefits of this technology with passion.

As we prepare to upgrade Theatres 1 and 3 at Deluxe Laboratories in Toronto, we have a clear vision of the changes required in order to meet our future needs in mixing large-format projects. These projects, with their increasingly complex parameters and compressed schedules, are imposing ever-greater demands on our facilities.

As we begin consolidating our digital technology into large-format mixing environments, we realize something’s amiss. Some processes integrate quite nicely, and some are just temporary adjustments to get us through to the next stage of development. People who work in smaller, self-contained mixing/editing environments are less prone to experiencing these problems. It is when you need to interface with standards from outside your facility or even varying systems within your facility that confusion and unnecessary problems arise.

These new challenges await us not only in terms of servicing our local markets, but also with the added demands of doing post on projects based out of New York and L.A.

As with all long-/large-format projects from outside our own immediate sphere of influence, these projects come from differing technical cultures with varying needs based on different standards and formats (in music recording, mixing, onset recording, picture and sound editing, ADR, Foley, rerecording, etc.). Every stage of post, if not done within the control of your own facility, can be presented in a format that needs some form of conversion, even if it is a format you can handle in-house (i.e. Pro Tools).

It is unwise to put all your technological eggs in one basket. One equipment company has one part of the answer and another deals with the other part of the equation. And to drive you even crazier, there are many compatibility and conversion issues to add to the mix of variables when assimilating all this new technology. And we call this progress?

Well, in fact, when this technology has been integrated conscientiously and with purpose, it benefits us all in many ways. It has made all our tasks easier and far more precise in execution. But instead of trying to develop a product that serves only a select part of the intended market, companies should develop this technology with the intention of unifying formats into one accepted universal standard so that we can all just get on with it.

Just when you thought things were starting to settle, the product you fell in love with is no longer supported and becomes obsolete, or some other company buys your favorite manufacturer and renders the product useless because it’s no longer compatible with your setup or work methodology. It all becomes an incredible fudge-mucking kluge, with no relief in sight.

These gear companies don’t seem to realize your work depends on the ability to apply their technology creatively to your job, and that their systems should at least be compatible and fit into the normal patterns of digital studio life. This would ultimately facilitate your tasks and simplify the process so you don’t need NASA to run your daily operation.

We are finally, comfortably ensconced in a computer-driven film and TV industry. In a way, Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick were dead-on in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Computers should serve people and assist them in everything they do, technically and creatively. HAL 9000 was programmed to control everything aboard the spacecraft, including life support. We begin to realize, however, that the treacherous little fiend has other plans for the human travelers.

Like HAL, our little electronic companions lurk in every corner of our existence, whirring away benignly, waiting to pounce on us when we least expect it. We must come to grips with our HALs and not allow them to take over.

These are some of the main issues and challenges in audio post as we get ready to explore the various possibilities at NAB2001. *

-www.bydeluxe.com