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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Does SONY still make and market SDDS players? (Page 3)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Does SONY still make and market SDDS players? Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 08-20-2010 03:50 PM                        I concur. (Stop using the computer and start using the scope for alignment. This is a sure sign of misalignment.) Louis  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 08-20-2010 04:36 PM                        My prints rarely change Dolby Digital error rates over their lives. Sometimes it'll even get slightly better over time due to cleaning. I've never gotten a used print with bad Dolby Digital, either.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-20-2010 05:02 PM                        After using Dolby Digital for about 4 years, we only had 1 print that would not play in that format. But it was due to sprocket damage from a previous use. Other than that, we had 100% reliability on all prints including used ones.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 08-20-2010 08:02 PM                        The only time I've had unplayable Dolby Digital is on a few Indian prints where the blocks were printed "out of frame" (for lack of a better term). Usually in that case I'll just play in DTS as they've always offered both formats when they fubar the DD.  |  IP: Logged Bill Duelly Film Handler Posts: 92 From: Roselle Park, NJ Registered: Feb 2006 posted 08-20-2010 10:40 PM                     I have a 3000 and I think it does a great job with analog and I love the SDDS... when I don't have a damaged print. Then the kicking back and forth between digital BU as well as down to analog is rather annoying. The initial problem I had was finding the right tension setting as I generally run from 6000' reels. Too tight and I would get too many errors on SDDS tracks.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-21-2010 06:10 AM                     Bill.... The 3000 does a great job with SDDS and is quite reliable in that aspect... It also makes a great D-Cinema processor. But compare it side by side to a CP-650 or better yet a Panastereo CSP-1200 if you can find one and you're in for a big analog disappointment! A USL JS Series with it's SR card actually does a more credible job at decoding SR than the 3000 does. Louis... Use both the scope AND the laptop. The laptop offers pertinent info that the scope does not. Mark  |  IP: Logged Marin Zorica Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 671 From: Biograd na Moru, Croatia Registered: May 2003 posted 08-21-2010 12:07 PM                     Talking about SR on Sony 3000 and rest would be long here, but thing that hates me on dolby units, also CP650 is that analog multichannel inputs are unbalanced!! Again, on all sony equipment is balanced, which again gave it great for using on D cinema, or some multi house which has more than one audio source.  |  IP: Logged Tony Bandiera Jr Film God Posts: 3067 From: Moreland Idaho Registered: Apr 2004 posted 08-21-2010 02:51 PM                     Marin, balanced inputs/outputs don't offer any real advantage in a typical cinema installation. Unless the cable length gets much over 50' you are NOT gonna have the noise and signal loss issues that balanced lines are supposedly correcting for. At UC Irvine in my one room the lines run unbalanced in conduits to the amps backstage, passing through a patchbay at a second rack, for a distance of well over 125 feet and I do not have any noise or signal loss issues. They were fed by first a CP-65 and now a CP-650 with no noise or other problems. (Caused by the unbalanced lines that is. Now the tie-in from the classroom system is another issue and it is causing problems.) Depending on the amplifier, you either tie the shield to the (-) pin at one end or you can do as I have done, which is connect the shield at the amp end ONLY and float it at the processor end. (Depending on the amp's input design though my method does result in a 3-6dB reduction in level.) Noise though has never been an issue with my method..so far. I am sure I will eventually run into the exception to it.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 08-21-2010 04:10 PM                     So am I the only person here who thinks the DFP3000 is awful with optical sound??? The DFP3000 and DFP2000's EQ are also awful in my opinion with hf deficient pn. The only way I will use a Sony product is if I flatten the EQ and do it elsewhere.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-21-2010 05:25 PM                     I'm not a fan of the 3000's A-chain and their NRII doesn't cut it...haven't played with NR 1 enough to determine if it is passable for "A". As for their EQ...it actually is pretty decent...their Pink Noise is tainted and will cause one to overly brighten a signal. However, knowing that...one can achieve a good EQ with it and it can out-sound other film based digital formats. I don't agree that one need go to another EQ system as the other system may be the limiting factor. -Steve  |  IP: Logged Marin Zorica Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 671 From: Biograd na Moru, Croatia Registered: May 2003 posted 08-22-2010 01:05 PM                     I prefer balanced inputs and outputs mostly (and probably) because I do work around some festivals and special venue, where we need to feed couple of sources to unit, then Sony units works as master, and mostly BETA and other systems have balanced outputs with +4dBu reference, which is better to patch in balanced input than unbalanced. Brad, you mentioned couple times Sony B chain, why you don't find EQ good? Is it because of EQ itself, or because internal PN generator? On A chain, I think is pretty okay on 3000, NR1&2 are different thing, even this summer I installed one 3000 in open air for festival, I was relly suprised how did sound good. Even today on my opinion many optical mixes are bad and pretty distorted, as we know in postproduction probably guys don't give lot of time about analog sound. I remember one time talking with guy who did sound mix, it was first run of movie and I was called to do A & B chain, sound was okay, even I didn't like it much, this cinema had analog only, but movie was mixed in digital also, when I asked a guy do they make test and run analog mix for itself, because there is about 10dB difference minimum, he said they just compress it a bit and that is all, doing that I'm not suprised why sometimes SR sounds distorted, specialy when after that I run some print from 1988 and find that mix sound great.  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 08-22-2010 07:51 PM                     Tony writes, "depending on the amplifier, you either tie the shield to the (-) pin at one end or you can do as I have done, which is connect the shield at the amp end ONLY and float it at the processor end. (Depending on the amp's input design though my method does result in a 3-6dB reduction in level.) " (emphasis mine). Huh????????? --jhawk  |  IP: Logged Tony Bandiera Jr Film God Posts: 3067 From: Moreland Idaho Registered: Apr 2004 posted 08-22-2010 08:36 PM                     John, There were certain amplifiers (I believe it was Peavey CS series and QSC Series Ones) where my connection method (a "psuedo=balanced" connection) was supposed to have resulted in less gain than when the amp's shields and (-)terminals were tied together. The QSC MXa Series manual here on the site says something about it on page #6 of the pdf file. They state: "For use with unbalanced signals, connect the unused terminal to ground to avoid a reduction in gain caused by a floating input; use a two-conductor (tip-sleeve)plug, or connect a jumper between the inverting input terminals on the barrier strip and their adjacent ground terminal." In the real world usage I have (so far) never had a problem if I did not install that jumper. IIRC it was in wither the Peavey or Series One manual that they stated an actual dB range.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-22-2010 09:08 PM                        Given the choice of balanced outputs or unbalanced outputs, wouldn't everyone choose balanced? That at least gives the option of putting the amp rack behind the screen (or even using powered speakers in a temporary setup) without needing extra transformers. It can also make life easier when fixing ground loop issues. Balanced non-sync inputs would also be a good idea, especially for multiplexes. It is not uncommon for a multiplex to use a single CD player with a distribution amp for non-sync music in all houses, and doing so properly would require transformers at each end (cumbersome and expensive). I actually had this discussion recently, regarding why it would be a bad idea to run unbalanced lines for non-sync throughout a multiplex. Pretty much every other piece of professional sound equipment has balanced I/O; why shouldn't the same be true of cinema processors?  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 08-22-2010 10:51 PM                     Interesting discussion here, for I also have a question on a theatre that called me for a sound issue while in optical where the optical sound has the sound of a transitor radio (like the center channel has the LF turned down), and they also have SDDS for the digital sound: When in SDDS, it does sound good.. all 6 channels are doing good. They have unmodified CP55's for their optical for 4channel playback. (??? How would that work - having 4channel for one process, yet can do 6 with another??) The have CE-M100's for their monitors. leads for the monitor's input are tapped from the processor's outputs to the amplifiers (ASHLY's) in which the leads to the amplifiers are connected in the balanced fashion (plus, minus, shield) Yet, the plus leads are running up to the monitor amp are heading up to the plus connections, yet the sheild is floating (unconnected, or like a drain of sorts). I told the owner to disconnect the leads from the rear of the monitor amp and his sound return to normal. How should his setup been connected so the house sound would not have been affected and can still use his monitor amp? thx-monte  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

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.