|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Amadeus re-issue
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 03-24-2002 02:30 PM
Before 1993, most 6-track mixes made for 70mm were derived from the 4-track master made in mind for 35mm stereo optical release. If too much dynamic range is put into that four track master the matrix would be crashed. What you get in the end is a 70mm mix that does not sport all of the high end and low end capable of the format. The format is basically treated as an afterthought. If the film's sound mix was made with 6-track in mind, it was a very rare thing. Only in the last decade has the 5.1 mix been the prominent mix for films.It is true that DolbySR magnetic has 22db of headroom versus the 20db of 16-bit digital. But the format is only going to be as good as the mix being recorded to it. If it is hamstrung already by compromises over the 35mm matrix, then that mix is not something appropriate for use on DVD. When a film's source stems and other original elements are revisited, chances are far better in a really good 5.1 remix being possible. The source stems are not affected by release mix limitations. For instance, "Dances With Wolves" has a really great sounding 5.1 mix (in DTS or Dolby Digital) even though the film was originally released only in Dolby SR optical. But it did have 6-track SR stems and other material in mind for a potential 70mm release (that never was ordered). That source material was revisited to create a really powerful 5.1 mix. So, in general, I don't think it is a good idea at all to take a 6-track mix from a 70mm print made 20 years ago and do a straight dub to DVD in Dolby Digital 4.1. The stems and other source material has to be used to make a completely new remastered soundtrack.
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 03-24-2002 05:27 PM
Bobby said: "Before 1993, most 6-track mixes made for 70mm were derived from the 4-track master made in mind for 35mm stereo optical release."A primary goal with the 80's-era 70mm blowups was to achieve better sound quality than the 35mm optical systems of that era could deliver. If the filmmakers knew they were going to release in both 35mm optical and 70mm mag (and assuming they are cutting costs by creating a single 4-track master mix), it seems like all they would have to do is create the highest quality 4-track master possible and use that for the 70mm mag. I mean, this should be no extra effort at all -- it's the master stems (or whatever they are called) mixed for 4-track. There's your superior mag release and everybody's happy. Then for 35mm optical, take that mix and run it through some kind of dynamic range limiter and filter to achieve a more conservative result that optical can deal with. Why would they have "processed" the 4-track mix for optical first, and then apply that compromised result to mag? Makes no sense. It would be very interesting to see/hear some of those 70mm blowups today, delivered exactly as they were back then, and compare their sound quality against modern mixes and digital theater systems that we are now accustomed to. I suspect they would not fare well. I remember the editor of "The Absolute Sound" magazine used to rave about the superior sound quality of 50's and 60's roadshow movies with mag sound. I just don't believe it. If the sound was that good, how come the DVDs and laserdiscs of those movies always sound so "dated", as Widescreen Review likes to say.
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999
|
posted 03-24-2002 05:56 PM
My understanding was that it is not uncommon to create different mixes for different sound formats (optical or mag.) This is usually done with "A" buget films, anyway. The Dolby AC3 specification includes a feature to alter the mix depending on the playback format (mono, 2-channel stereo, matrixed 4 channel, 5.1, etc.) While not exactly related to this discussion, (because that feature is not used at motion picture theaters) it demonstrates the desire to have different mixes for different formats.The quality of 50's and 60's roadshow films may have been great, but I'm guessing some DVDs or laserdiscs could not get a great soundtrack. Mag must be cared for, or it will erase, suffer print-through, drop out, etc. I bet there are several titles where the orginal stems are bad, and there are no surviving mag prints from which to get a sound equal to the orginal quality.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000
|
posted 03-24-2002 06:39 PM
Bobby Henderson claimed: >Before 1993, most 6-track mixes made for 70mm were derived from the >4-track master made in mind for 35mm stereo optical release. If too >much dynamic range is put into that four track master the matrix >would be crashed. What you get in the end is a 70mm mix that does not >sport all of the high end and low end capable of the format. The >format is basically treated as an afterthought. If the film's sound >mix was made with 6-track in mind, it was a very rare thing.Not true. In that period film mixes were made to separate 4-track DME stems which were then mixed down to a 2-track Lt Rt printmaster and, if 70mm prints were to be made, separately used to produce a 6-track print master with the addition of LF info for tracks 2 and 4. "Since most major studios are recording their master mixes as separate four-track music, effects and dialogue stems, the dynamics of each section can be separately controlled during the print mastering step..." --- Larry Blake, sound mixer in "Recording-Engineer/Producer" June 1985. Your comments about DVD mixes I have no opinion on as I am only talking about film soundtracks.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 03-25-2002 11:03 AM
Leo said: "if memory serves me correctly the Eastmancolor from that far back was effectively a rebadged version of the Nazi Agfacolor stock"That is NOT correct!  The technical paper "Color Negative and Color Positive Film for Motion Picture Use" by Wesley T. Hanson Jr., published in the March 1952 SMPTE Journal introduced the Eastman Color Film System. It was originally presented at the SMPTE Technical Conference on April 27, 1950. This film technology was unique to Kodak, and a great advancement over the German technology: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/about/chrono2.shtml Kodak print film with greatly improved dark keeping was introduced in 1979: EASTMAN Color LF Print film, 7378. Improved cyan dye post processing keeping. Process ECP. Markedly improved cyan dye dark-keeping stability. Discontinued January, 1982. EASTMAN Color LFSP film, 7379. Same as 7378 except for Process ECP-2. Markedly improved cyan dye dark-keeping stability.1 Discontinued 1983. http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/about/chrono3.shtml And in 1982: EASTMAN Color Print film, 7/5384 Improved cyan dye dark keeping and red sensitivity to process variations. Process ECP-2A. Replaced 7/5381, 7/5383, 7378, 7379. In SMPTE Journal December 1982 and BKSTS Journal August 1983. http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/about/chrono4.shtml ------------------ John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243 E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karen Hultgren
Master Film Handler

Posts: 492
From: Agoura Hills, CA, USA
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 03-25-2002 12:39 PM
For Joe Walsh...We have break-out spacers that allow you to mount either a 35mm or 70mm reader on the same bracket (not at the same time, of course). We put a skinny spacer one on the 70mm and a fatter one on the 35mm. Then, a hefty thumb-screw to secure the reader to the bracket. All you have to do is then redjust the offset and you're ready to roll in a few minutes. You only have to position the bracket on the projector once and that really saves time! More information can be found in the online techcenter at www.dtsonline.com/cinema Look at DTS 70mm. Karen at DTS khultgren@dtsonline.com
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 03-25-2002 06:37 PM
I have a quote below highlighting some of what Terry Beard (president of DTS at the time) said in an interview with Widescreen Review in 1993. What he states implies that mixing two completely different 4-track mixes (one for 70mm/35mm mag and the other for 35mm optical) was not a common practice and that the Dolby matrix was always a limiting factor. I have found 70mm mag shows to sound very smooth, full and clear (especially SR mag shows like "Indy III" and "Born on the Fourth of July). It was not until the early 1990's when shows like "Jurassic Park" and "The Fugitive" hit theaters that I heard dynamic range and bass extension levels hit new points. Dolby SR mag was fully capable of doing the same thing, but I never heard that potential utilized on 70mm mag release prints. So I figured someone had to be pulling back the levels.Anyway, here's what Terry Beard said in 1993: "One of the things that we want to happen when filmmakers start mixing movies for this format is to have them mix the movie without watching little red lights which indicate that they are crashing the Dolby Stereo matrix. As you know when people now mix a Dolby how they must often compromise. They manage the levels so that it will work for an optical release. They monitor through the 4-2-4 matrix while they are doing the mix. They mix this way because that is the way movies are released in the optical format. But with the format change to digital discrete release, the pictures are going to be mixed primarily for discrete digital playback. For the new format the prime mix has almost no dynamic range restrictions. We developed and are providing equipment to the studios that will take the multichannel discrete digital mix and push it down in a very agreeable way to fit the dynamic range restrictions of stereo optical. It uses multiband limiters to compress the dynamic range. This piece of equipment does this in a very elegant way that is easy for studios to use. Motion pictures are mixed now into the six-track release format intially in a four track discrete format (left, center, right and mono surround). This four track mix is spread to six tracks by splitting the surrounds and some additional effects and subwoof. The 35mm stereo optical is made by putting a dynamic range restricted master of the four-track discrete through a 4-2-4 box which encodes the four tracks down to two tracks which is decoded by the theatre's matrix decoder back to four tracks. That's the way things are normally done. What's going to happen is if they know they are going to do a 5.1 discrete release they will mix to that initially. That's what they did for "Jurassic Park." Afterwards they crunched it down to get it into the Dolby Stereo optical format. Universal Pictures had already licensed the Dolby logo to be used on "Jurassic Park" and the optical mix was matrixed the Dolby matrix. Our objective was to recognize that people are going to go to discrete mixes for all movies and we wanted to have an integrated system that would allow them to do that without worrying about the levels, and have a way to generate their stereo optical soundtrack in a straight-forward transfer process instead of having to remix the show. Our piece of equipment allows them to toggle between listening to the discrete mix or the optical soundtrack on the spot. There's an optical simulator that allows them to hear exactly what the optical will sound like as they are making the discrete tracks."
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000
|
posted 03-25-2002 08:02 PM
Wasn't the Six tracks on a 70MM print derived as L,LE,C,RE,R,SUR....with the LE,RE serving as both a sub info and an extra left and right for behind the screens. Basically you had 5 sets of speakers behind the screen for L,LE,C,RE,R and you had mono surrounds and Sub bass also carried on LE, RE
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|