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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » 35mm Digital Sound Playback Preference? (Page 3)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Author Topic: 35mm Digital Sound Playback Preference? Marin Zorica Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 671 From: Biograd na Moru, Croatia Registered: May 2003 posted 04-25-2010 05:14 PM                     You all know I'm fan of SDDS, and to Catalin and Demetris, please come here to her some sound Now, I've worked with 2000 and 3000 systems both performing very well, indeed before some couple of weeks I was at friends cinema, we did realign complete CAT700 reader, performing very well, that day some bad print came, normally SRD did drop out often, but SDDS did stay all the time. Now to forward to LED problem, that same SDDS is all ready 2yeard or so working without problems, LED's aren't from sony, but some I found on local store and they are pervertedly cheap, but after I did change them all one by one and align level and bit tweak them it works till now...so that led is not so big problem at all, not to mention there are some even better led available! Same thing on one other print with SDDS 3000 system, print is dealdy demaged, but SDDS don't drop out, as for 3000 series reader LED, you probably don't even need to change them! Why? Well....somebody clever did think to use normal "bright" led, but on normal conditions and it can last forewer, like on DVD player power button , but because of that they made perfectly good electronic hardware and even better decode and error correction algorithm. Dolby isn't bad at all, but is most bad in sound, normally due to big compression, as for DTS, they are good, even I newer loved some older hardware with PC supply. As dolby don't have either much better power supply, sony 3000 series has only 5V SMPS and all other power is made from internal DC/DC converters which are one or more per board, and to be perfectly quiet, 6 input operational amplifiers on optical input has DC/DC converter, only for it self, which are used ONLY to power analog input stage!!! Also on DTS6 de coupling transformer, which is by the way great, but somebody instead of making all outputs fully balanced, did make COLD pole of transformer all together in one point, which don't have them great use of using transformers there.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-25-2010 09:33 PM                        I've never heard SDDS; there's only one system in Montana that I'm aware of, at the Washoe Theatre in Anaconda. We used to have DTS and now have Dolby Digital. I started seeing more and more instances of prints not being shipped with DTS disks, or the disks being smashed, so we decided to switch systems as part of a system upgrade. There was a noticeable improvement of sound quality when we made the switch, but I'm sure that was because we bi-amped the speakers and replaced all the amplifiers at the same time.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 04-25-2010 11:38 PM                     quote: Catalin Balaceanu I don't get it! A while ago most of the people here were sh***ing on SDDS big time. Even in the reviews section it got a lousy F score. Now it became the #1 choice. How come? Am I missing something? Is it a matter of DFP-2000 against DFP-3000? SDDS got a bad reputation when it first came out due mostly to acetate film stocks and poor lab work. Their reader is also a bit tricky for some people to calibrate, and trust me LOTS of techs did more harm than good! Finally their internal pink noise generator being high frequency deficient really made the end resulting sound shrill and harsh, which was a major turnoff to many people. The 2500/3000 series reader was also a nice improvement.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 04-26-2010 12:23 AM                     quote: Mike Blakesley I've never heard SDDS In all due actuality, they all sound the same..  |  IP: Logged Sean McKinnon Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1712 From: Peabody Massachusetts Registered: Sep 2000 posted 04-26-2010 11:38 AM                        I havent read the paper on SR in a long time but I beleive SR is both a recording technology and a playback technology so it's possible that a dolby digital track is recorded using the Spectral Recording process then converted to a Digital Track making it a Digital Spectral Recording or... (Wait fot it) SR*D. This is all speculation on my part as I don't really know but it seems to make sense to me.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-26-2010 12:02 PM                        SR (like A) is noise reduction. Like Dolby B and C on cassette tapes. You run the signal through an encoder when recording, then through a decoder when playing it back. It only really works right when the levels are set properly (hence, cat. 69T), but gives passable results when played back through a mono system as well. It also plays back acceptably well with A-type decoders. Dolby SR noise reduction is used for music recording as well as film, and the outboard encoder/decoder boxes use the same cat. 300/350 cards as the cinema processors (or cat. 280s in the older units). The idea behind most noise reduction schemes is that certain frequencies are boosted in the recording process and then cut in the playback process. Noise reduction does not really apply to digital recording, since it solves a problem (background noise) which does not exist with digital media. Presumably the "SR" in "SRD" refers to the fact that prints with SRD tracks (almost) always have SR optical tracks as well. Plus, it is easier than saying or typing "Dolby Stereo Digital" or "format 10." As for digital playback, I have not noticed a huge difference among the systems, and dislike dropouts to optical. As such, I don't like SDDS because it tends to drop out during playback. DTS seems to be the most reliable, as long as the disks arrive. But SRD wins for having the sound on the film.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 04-26-2010 02:25 PM                        quote: Scott Norwood prints with SRD tracks (almost) always have SR optical tracks as well. Anyone have a list of the Dolby Digital prints which have an A-Type or mono backup?  |  IP: Logged Adam Martin I'm not even gonna point out the irony. Posts: 3686 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Nov 2000 posted 04-26-2010 04:23 PM                     Is it format 10 because it's digital?  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 04-26-2010 06:23 PM                     I liked DTS, especially during the 1990s when it was clearly the more reliable system. Dropouts to analog are distracting. Dolby Digital grew more reliable as its film readers improved. Now those lossy compressed formats are becoming irrelevant as digital cinema brings uncompressed linear PCM into more theaters. Despite the growing use of uncompressed PCM audio in theaters, I don't think digital surround equipped movie theaters sound as good on average as they did back in the early 1990s. I don't think the movie theater companies care as much about sound with stadium seating, digital projection and digital 3D being the newer gimmicks to sell.  |  IP: Logged Sean McKinnon Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1712 From: Peabody Massachusetts Registered: Sep 2000 posted 04-27-2010 09:09 AM                        I think they fell that they can save money by under spec'ing speaker systems, amps, proper acoustical construction as long as it says "Digital" on the door. Older houses were built to a higher standard to get the best out of the analog systems of the day so an upgrade to digital could sound better than a new install in some cases.  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 04-27-2010 10:40 AM                        I hate to dash water on this, but the discussion seems to be going in the same direction that every other sound comparision chat has since digital was first rolled out. Seems to me that, to the vast majority of people, the difference is so minute as to be nearly undetectable. Most of the people who could pick up a difference would only be able to do so in an a/b comparison in the same auditorium. Just the differences between auditoriums would be enough to throw off a reasonable evaluation. Years ago, I got letters from a couple of people who were fairly well known for their "ears". They complimented me on the quality of the digital sound systems we'd installed in the 4-plex we'd recently reopened. Thing was, we didn't have digital on any of our screens... just regular old SR, adjusted by someone who really knew his stuff back then. At our drive-in, I have 2 DTS screens and one SR-D. It wound up that way because that was the equipment we had at the time. All have had their issues. The Dolby has had a power supply and a couple of cards replaced. It became much more reliable when I updated the reader. Now, it plays pretty much everything. In my DTS players, I've replaced one power supply and a couple of drives. Aside from occasional alignment issues on the reader (I've busted warranty and adjusted the "hidden" screw), they work as well as the Dolby. My only issues with DTS are the need to change disks for each show (we're double feature) and whether we have disks at all... though the latter is not a frequent problem. As for sound quality, a drive-in with everything mixed down to 2 channels, then processed, pre-emphasized and fed into an FM transmitter is probably not a great test site. When moving prints around, there are times I think each has its better day.  |  IP: Logged Sean McKinnon Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1712 From: Peabody Massachusetts Registered: Sep 2000 posted 04-27-2010 03:36 PM                        I am suprised you even bother with digital at a drive in instead of just sending lt and rt. How do you mix down the channels into 2? Do you have each channel going into a mixer in put panned for left right or center? How do you have the surrounds/LFE set?  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 04-27-2010 04:13 PM                     It's really a shame the movie industry and auto industry haven't made any effort to work together on digital surround sound standards in vehicles. I realize some vehicles do have Dolby Digital 5.1 surround capability for DVD playback. Unfortunately, consumer Dolby Digital decoders cannot decode the AC3 format used on 35mm film prints. That makes it impossible for a car to play the DD 5.1 bit stream being processed in the drive-in theater's projection booth. With a few changes to the car's decoder and radio, a drive-in could broadcast the raw DD 5.1 signal via FM or AM and cars that are equipped could play the signal properly. With so few drive-in theaters it's easy to see no effort has been made to address this issue. However, I think if the issue was addressed it could actually help drive-in theaters. You control the volume in your own car. Some dude in another vehicle isn't distracting you with his cellular phone abuse. If the back of your seat is getting kicked you just tell your kid to go play in the playground under the screen.  |  IP: Logged Aaron Garman Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1470 From: Toledo, OH USA Registered: Mar 2003 posted 04-27-2010 05:37 PM                     That's a wild idea Bobby. I could, however, see some people abusing it by blasting there system when other folks have a measly sound system. It's been far too long since I visited our drive in. AJG  |  IP: Logged Marin Zorica Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 671 From: Biograd na Moru, Croatia Registered: May 2003 posted 04-27-2010 06:28 PM                     If we stick to opinion that "most people won't nottice" what sound we have and etc, than we could stay in MONO forewer....  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

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.