my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Smart mod 7 processor, too good to be true? (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Smart mod 7 processor, too good to be true? Kevin Wale Expert Film Handler Posts: 167 From: Guymon, OK USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 08-23-2003 04:50 AM                     Oooh, I'll look into those. Someone told me that the SMART6 just didn't have good shielding itself at that time. If one of those things fixes it I would be ready to do backflips with exitement. Thanks for the tips...  |  IP: Logged Don Sneed Master Film Handler Posts: 451 From: Texas City, TX, USA Registered: Aug 2001 posted 08-24-2003 09:25 PM                        I always liked SMART processors...even the SR300, As Ken said, Smart has the best customer support, Oscar at Smart was so helpful on a problem I had in Baytown Texas that he gave me (I no longer have)his home phone # since I would be working on the problem over the weekend, I ask you...how many tech support would do that!!! my answer...NO ONE !!! Thank you Oscar for your help...  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-25-2003 06:10 AM                     Not to take anything away from Oscar...but I do have several tech support home phone numbers!...many such numbers are guarded to ensure they don't work 7-day weeks every week. For many people, calling is easier than figuring it out. The difference is, if you figure it out yourself, you've learned something...if someone else tells you how to do something, you may have learned something. Steve  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-26-2003 09:52 AM                     Don, You ACTUALLY liked the SR300??? I always like the way Osacar smiles when I mention that model to him. Perhaps the very last units wer acceptable??? Not sure he actually liked it that much. I removed more of them for customers than I can even remember and usually installed Dolby back when they made really good processors. The SR300 had the worst surround decoding ever!! More bleed through into the surrounds then any other processor I've worked with. I did like the Mod 2B alot.... great bang for the buck. We are bringing in a Mod 7 for testing puropses for our mom and pop theatres that just can't afford the Panastero(or really wealthy theatre owners that are just too cheap to buy the best). Since Dolby no longer manufactures a viable cinema processor that I'd install, that leaves just Panastero, Ultra Stereo, and Smart. My preference in that order btw. Mark @ CLACO  |  IP: Logged Brad Allen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 688 From: Evansville, IN, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 02-02-2004 06:17 PM                     Mark, did you ever have the opportunity to do the testing mentioned in the last post? And if so, the results are? Thanks.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 02-02-2004 08:29 PM                     I'll go on record again that I don't agree with Mark's condemnation of the Dolby CP-650...for what it is, it is really quite a nice piece and performs as claimed. Steve  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-03-2004 05:43 PM                     I believe the SR300 dynaspan matrix was deseigned to meet a requirement of AMC for a "fat surround playback" and a major customer does get what they want:)  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-03-2004 07:06 PM                     Yes, We did install a MOD 7 for testing and listening purposes and it was good if you take the price into consideration. You get alot in return for what you pay. I will state again and not to rustle Oscar here but I didn't think the SR was passable. It not only pumped but there was also some mufflung of the high end that was going on. I will make one thing clear on this though and that is that Oscar wants this particuluar processor back to check the SR to be sure that it was calibrated at the factory and we have not had a chance to do that. Hopefully in the next week or so though. So in this thread I am not going to fault the SR emulation scheme they use. We did install 4 of these for a customer and he was quite content with the way the SR sounded. I was not on that install so did not get to hear those 4 other units. Beware there are a couple of other minor problems such as the preamp oscillating when you attach your scope leads...this apparently happens with only some scopes as it didn't occur with my Tektronix 465B but did with one other techs Leader scope that worked on the install. A 100 ohm resistor in line with each scope lead stops the oscillation. The red and green jacks are also reversed as per Dolby's color standard and the slots in the back of the chassis that the DB 25 connectors stick trough is a bit too narrow for some types of mating DB25 connectors. I think this is all minor stuff though that Oscar will most likely rectify in future production runs. As for the CP650...There are other far superior, much more flexible routes to offer to your customer that don't really cost very much more, and under certain circumstances can actually cost you alot less. The CP650 isn't even in my dictonary. It is way, way overrated and its sound quality doesn't begin to approach the alternative processor. Mark @ CLACO  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 02-08-2004 09:38 PM                     Did Dolby piss in your Wheaties or something, Mark? The CP-650 is an excellent processor. For the typical cinema that has choosen Dolby Digital as, at least, one of their format it is the most cost effective. It does well on analog and digital and I have had ZERO complaints from it. Its SR emulation seems better than even Dolby's analog alternative. The sound quality was always good with the CP-650 and it has improved with time. There are software improvements (noise optimization) as well as hardware improvements that have been continual with it to improve the sonic quality. It has an excellent service record. More so than other models and brands. As for features...sure it is not as flexible as others but it does offer some attractive features like AES or S/PDIF decoding. It also has optional AES outputs. Your dictionary is really defective if the CP-650 is not in it. Steve  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-08-2004 10:50 PM                     No Steve they didn't. I'm just not a fan of digital processors, I am a fan of the analog stuff they made though and I do like the sound of the CP500 but not its quirks. There is just something far superior to offer the customer at about the same price and I'd simply rather go that route. Mark @ CLACO  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 02-08-2004 11:44 PM                     Here is what is odd...I never liked the sound of the CP-500 but do like the sound of the CP-650. The CP-650 is notably quieter and has been getting more so with time. As to being in the digital world...it all depends...if you have say Dolby Digital as your primary format then keeping it in the digital domain has distinct advantages over doing a D/A conversion...sending it through more processing then out to the amplifiers. Another issue I've had to deal with is post processor...there are analog and digital crossovers. For 3-ways, I have found that DSP based crossovers have very desirable features and qualities that outweigh the extra A/D D/A conversion. I'd rather keep the signal in the digital domain and send it to the crossover/EQ in the digital domain and only do one D/A conversion. I'm completely sold on the parametric EQ as the best choice for most tunings. Minimal phase problems, maximum benefits. It would be a snap for Dolby to put a parametric option in for the CP-650. Then again, the CSP-1200 could have parametric EQs if Pana was so inclined (and I request it of Ray monthly!). Depending on the installation and the requirements of the system, I could see either the CSP-1200 or the CP-650 getting the nod...I wouldn't discount either out of hand, however since the both bring something to the table. Steve  |  IP: Logged Matt Zeiner Expert Film Handler Posts: 146 From: Windsor, CT USA Registered: Sep 2003 posted 02-09-2004 06:42 AM                     quote: I'm completely sold on the parametric EQ as the best choice for most tunings. Minimal phase problems, maximum benefits. It would be a snap for Dolby to put a parametric option in for the CP-650. That would make the 650 a very nice processor. The 650 sounds more than acceptable with the channel eqs bypassed - if the filters were limited to 5 rather than 33, they could spare a lot of DSP to design more phase coherent filters and better NR. Using 1/3 oct eqs to tune a room is like using a sledgehammer to align a gate and trap. Never got a staight answer from Dolby as to why they never offered this..  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-09-2004 08:47 AM                     the use of 1/3 octave eq dates back to the early days of filter sets and the work of davis and co at synaudcon less than 1/3 octave the filters tended to be too wide less than that the phase shift was the problem  |  IP: Logged Matt Zeiner Expert Film Handler Posts: 146 From: Windsor, CT USA Registered: Sep 2003 posted 02-10-2004 07:05 AM                     quote: less than 1/3 octave the filters tended to be too wide less than that the phase shift was the problem Phase smear doesn't have to be an issue with modern high-end digital EQ algorithms.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.