|
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
|
Author
|
Topic: DTS OR DOLBY DIGITAL
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 07-23-2004 08:28 PM
Well Per you're right. Up until a few years back I was working with SDDS and DTS 99% of the time with only one SRD unit in town. As such my comments were based upon SDDS vs. DTS. Needless to say, DTS was the clear winner due to various problems with SDDS's reliability, but over the last 2 years the reliability of DTS has become a joke to me with defective timecode tracks, scratched, broken or nonexistant discs, drives failing, and my personal favorite...the DTS company screwing over all the little guys by making them pay for their Toshiba drive mistake while they gave out free replacement kits to the big chains!
Needless to say, Dolby doesn't screw the independents over and their customer service is top notch. Plus I just don't have any problems with tracking issues! Like I said when DTS works, and you get the discs with the print, and there isn't a defective timecode track and the discs aren't scratched or broken and the drives aren't crapping out on you, DTS works great. Regardless, my preference towards SRD over DTS is well backed.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster
Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 07-23-2004 09:02 PM
Steve,
I've installed about a dozen CP-650's so far(more than I would have wanted to) on a large variety of systems....two way, three way, large systems and small systems, biamped and not. So, yes I've worked with them in enough of a variety of situations to get a good feel of its sound capability. And sure it is ok, but only ok, and only ok for alot of money. Dolby USED TO produce spectaculuar products, but they have discontinued doing that today. The 650 is around because it is cheap for Dolby to produce. It looks cheap, and has a cheap feel to it, it takes for ever to boot up. Software excluded I doubt it costs them much more to produce one than it costs Dell to produce an average home computer.
It is very simple to get better performance from any system with a CSP-1200. All you need to do is install one in place of ANY other cinema processor. It is that simple. Perhaps your customers can't tell the difference but ours can and as a result of the audible difference usually ask for the CSP before considering anything else.
Mark
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 07-23-2004 09:47 PM
Wow...a whole dozen CP650s or so...that does indeed make you experienced...then again...your bias has shown through since that was more than you wanted....
I too have installed dozens of both CSPs and CP650s...as you say...bi-amped and tri-amped and these are often in discriminating rooms...one would be quite hard pressed to find audible faults in the CP650 rooms. The most recent screening room in a filming facility I was at had a CP650 and I didn't hear them saying there was any problem with the sound (and it wasn't my installation...I was working on the Kinotons).
To take the position that the DA-20/CSP1200 would inherently sound better is to almost take the position that the D/A converters in the DA-20 are superior to the D/A converters in the CP650. Is there a reason you would believe that? In a two-piece system one depends on the logic between the digital processor and the analog one to make smooth transitions...I've yet to find a system that wasn't obvious when it was switching between digital and analog. Remember, the DA-20 will wait until the last bit goes out the door before telling the host processor to go to SR.
The CP650 has some cost effective options too. If one gets the EX board(s) then they also get an AC-3 decoder for their DVDs or other video sources...including up to 6-channels of digital source. With the Cat. 778 card one can keep the digital audio in the digital domain and send it digitally to the crossovers and amps or choose a D/A converter of a quality they want.
I take exception to your quality statement in reference to the CP650 as compared to their previous products (I believe you used the wording they used to be spectacular). The CP650, if you are running a mainstream cinema is indeed a spectacular product. It is EXTREMELY reliable. Its service record has already past all other sound products I've ever used by Dolby or other brands. In our service area, we have had exactly ONE CP650 failure...glory be, it was the first one we installed too. And with a mere upload, all previous settings were restored. Not too shabby.
As to the cheezy front panel...I'll give you that one. And whom ever decided that format numbers, which only make sense for a CP200, should be used instead of the formats themselves should be shot. Then again, I have had negative comments on the CSP1200's look and feel with the cracky membrane switches that are near impossible to read in subdued lighting. So no body is perfect.
As to the cost of the CP650...this is a small industry and with comparatively small production...the CP650, after all of the engineering, marketing and support...plus semiconductor obsolesence, is not that cheap to make...far more than a Dell, dude.
The CP650 is a smart processor for them to make....if you have a typical mall theatre...it is easy to install right out of the box and it has the features you need.
If you need special venue customization...then that is a different story. The CP650 does only what the engineers wanted it to do...not what YOU want it to do. Analog processors almost always win in that contest.
Panastereo is still my #1 processor but I wouldn't dismiss the CP650 out of hand...sometimes it is the wiser choice. For my high-end systems...it is Panastereo...if you read some of Matt Jaro's posts he sure seems proud of his...and that is a 3-way system too!
Steve
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster
Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 07-24-2004 10:30 AM
Steve,
I hope that the D to A converters in both the DA-20 and 650 are both doing the exact same job! Almost seems a must to me for them to do the same job so if one units chips are of newer design than the other is totally irrelevant to how a decoded SRD track sounds. Keep in mind of all the board revicions that have taken place in the DA-20 that incorporate many of the semiconductor revisions. Compare the boards in a first generation DA-20 and one made this year. BIG DIFFERENCE! The newer chips although performing the same functions probably use less power though.
>"The CP650 has some cost effective options too. If one gets the EX board(s) then they also get an AC-3 decoder for their DVDs or other video sources...including up to 6-channels of digital source."<
Thats hardly a cost effective to those that may want EX but never use the other options. This is all part of the scam that makes it cheaper for Dolby to produce the 650. Covering the R&D cost of other options by forcing people to have to buy them that may in all probibility never use them. The Panastereo EX decoder also wins hands down and its also the easiest to set up.
>"Then again, I have had negative comments on the CSP1200's look and feel with the cracky membrane switches that are near impossible to read in subdued lighting. So no body is perfect."<
I agree with that position. I've never been a fan of membrane panels but the lcd display somewhat makes up for that lack and all one has to do is to light the booth properly in order to see it. We normally spec out track lighting, and bright between show florescent lighting so seeing the buttons has never been an issue for us.
>"As to the cost of the CP650...this is a small industry and with comparatively small production...the CP650, after all of the engineering, marketing and support...plus semiconductor obsolesence, is not that cheap to make...far more than a Dell, dude."<
You are correct! The marketing and semiconductor obsolescence is part of what makes the 650 overly expensive to buy. The people buying the 650's are covering those hidden costs themselves in part by paying the overly high price for the unit. So I will change my mind a bit there and say that its not cheap, perhaps the cost of three Dell computers to produce, but its definately by far Dolbys cheapest to manufacture processor so far.
As for the "shopping center theatre" syndrome which you seem to be a part of, we too build theatres in shopping centers but have never classified them as "shopping center theatres". To us they are another theatre location that diserves the same attention and high end equipment that those screening rooms that you mentioned are getting. Except for the direct digital inputs how the 650 is better for a "shopping center theatrre", or screening room environment has somehow slipped by me. The CSP has proved itself better for us in all operating environments that don't require a direct digital input.
Mark
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 07-24-2004 10:31 PM
Fine Steve, call it a "favor". Would you like to hear the bedtime story of how DTS screwed me over with the unit in my screening room? Good, because here it comes...
I bought a new dts6-d for my screening room and had only put a handful of hours on it (several movies) before it started giving me fits. Now had that unit gone into a regular theater, it would've started failing within a couple of days and DTS would have quickly sent a replacement or replacement parts. However even though they knew how many hours my unit had on it, because it had just passed it's warranty point, it was a big fuck you I received towards warranty service. That is about as low as you can get and I did not appreciate spending more $$$ in the end to fix what was a lemon dts6-d player right out of the manufacturer's warehouse.
Ooooooh, what about the evil beasts from hell? (Yes I am speaking of the dts6-AD units, possibly the biggest excuse of a sound processor to evolve in the last 10 years.) I had to kick and scream at DTS for a few MONTHS just to get a friggin' cdrom with a firmware upgrade on it so the units would stop randomly playing the feature during intermission or non-timecoded prints. (Of course they couldn't just email an image file. That would've been too easy and far too quick of a solution.) Customer service? We don't need no stinkin' customer service! Yes indeedy, DTS loves their customers.
Seriously, I could go on with various bullshit ways DTS has treated people including customers of mine. However in my experience I cannot recall a time where Dolby screwed someone over. (Feel free to refresh my memory Mark.) You like DTS and they haven't bent you or your customers over yet, so fine...keep buying them, I don't care. Dolby has never screwed me over and their products do the job with better reliability than DTS has. The projectionists at theaters I service also unanimously prefer SRD to DTS. Oh yes and not like it's really all that big of a deal, at least Dolby has a decent sound trailer! DTS still has that insanely old flying disc and pathetically lame piano crap to "impress" customers with in their advertising.
I must agree with Schaffer though that this thread is pointless and is going nowhere. This Dolby vs. DTS debate has been done to death elsewhere. Do a search.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
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