|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: 70mm Sound Formats
|
|
|
Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 06-03-2002 10:28 AM
After reading the SA-5 manual, I can see that I have had an incorrect impression of how the track allocation for Apocalypse Now worked. However, my understanding was based on every article I read at the time, and they all essentially said the same thing, that instead of using two boom tracks and one surround track, they used one boom and two surrounds. There was never a mention that a mono summed surround was included (Variety noted that theatres were required to use the SA-5 adapter(cost around $3500)to show the 70mm print, but based on the technical manual, this must have been a contractual, rather than technical requirement.) Obviously, they were incorrect, since the boom tracks STILL appeared as two (albeit,shared) tracks. I came across a home theater magazine (MAYBE Stereo review, or Sound & Vision, or something like that) that went into a detailed (and correct!) description of how Dolby Format 43 works, but made the claim that TOP GUN (this WAS based on the AC-3 Laserdisc release of the film), was the first to use this "new" type of single inventoried split/non-split surround format, as opposed to "dual inventory" used on older 70mm titles. Bobby, it's interesting that you note that there are those who have seen some reference to APOCALYPSE NOW in "8 Track Quintaphonic Sound". The only ads I have seen using the term "Quintaphonic Sound" in conjunction with this film were the NY Times and LA Times advanced ticket ads (for the Ziegfeld and Cinerama Dome), but these only stated "6 Track Quintaphonic Sound." Perhaps since "Quintaphonic Sound" was already used as a trademark by John Mosley, this term got dropped quickly. (Although I still wonder whetjer Tommy was in "QuintAphonic Sound (as all newspaper logos at the time showed) or QuintOphonic Sound (as the end credits of the film shows). BTW, Gordon, the name of that strange format for DAMNATION ALLEY (AKA Survival Run) was Sound 360. It was especially odd in that all three house speakers were full stage-sized units (at least at the installation I saw, and the surround track was of course the normal narrow width playing through a full sized stage-speaker. While I never heard the film in this format, this theatre CONTINUED to use these three house speakers as their surround system when they installed Dolby Stereo. The film was a huge BOMB (a Fox dud in the fall following Star Wars' debut). The studio kept going back and fourth on the title in advanced marketing. Star Wars changed a LOT for the studio. One pick-up that summer, the cult hit Suspiria, was annoinced as a Fox release, but came out under some dummy corporation, International Classics, instead of Fox, but Variety discovered (and reported) the corporate names attached to this "new" company were the SAME as Fox (a company named that had actually been used by Fox decades earlier to "hide" undesirable films from the Fox name. Too bad studios are no longer embarrassed by the "quality" of their product.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 06-09-2002 11:16 PM
quote:
I'm trying to remember the specifics on why "Superman: The Movie" was mixed with Format 43 in mind, but with no prints actually being made in the process.
Bobby, What is it you're trying to remember? Could it be that you simply do not know the specifics of this film and its soundtrack and, therefore, there is nothing to recall? Despite the "unofficial" status of "Superman" being a 70mm split surround (aka: "stereo surround"/Format 43) title, my feeling is that the prints (or at least some of them) *were* in Format 43, regardless of theaters possibly not being equipped to run the format until the release of "Apocalypse Now" several months later. "Superman" was a test of compatibility, was it not? "Superman" enjoyed a long, successful run and has had special and revival-type screenings in the years since the "official" introduction of the 70mm Dolby split surround format, so why couldn't those screenings be in split surround, if screened in an appropriately-equipped theater? Anyway, I can only comment on my own experiences with the title in question. I've not handled a print of the film but have seen the movie many times, including twice theatrically (in 70mm) in the last ten years (not counting the 2001 expanded cut of the film which I was also lucky enough to see in a theater). A 70mm print of "Superman" has been screened in Southern California on at least four occasions during the 1990s. One late-90s screening that I attended was held in a theater in which I knew the projectionist and one which was Format 43-capable. It was made clear to me prior to the show that the theater's audio processor was set for "43" for that screening, and I was asked for my impression of the sound presentation following the movie. Now, the question is -- and I'll need help from experienced projectionists here -- if a 70mm print is sounded only in Format 42 and the projectionist sets the playback for "43," what will the audience hear? Wouldn't the "baby boom" and surround content disappear in this scenario? My point: this recent screening of "Superman" clearly had "baby boom" and surround activity suggesting to me that the prints were in Format 43 (with backward compatibility with "42," of course).
| 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.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic