Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: An open letter to Tyler Perry

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » An open letter to Tyler Perry (Page 7)

This topic comprises 12 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Author

Topic: An open letter to Tyler Perry

Sam D. Chavez
Film God

Posts: 2153
From: Martinez, CA USA
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 06-28-2012 02:00 PM

I've never understood the idea of old people wanting the sound turned down even now as I am becoming one.

There used to be a sign at the steam calliope in Central Park Merry go Round boxoffice, "If the Calliope is too loud, you're too old".

Also, the idea of saving the sound by turning it down for empty houses vs. full ones is just wrong. I used to do it myself until it was pointed out to me.

| IP: Logged

Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"

Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 06-28-2012 02:05 PM

...after all, movies are mixed in big empty theatres. (Universal's Hitchcock dub stage is pretty freakin' big, for example.)

The whole notion of reference level presumes an empty room -- that's the state of the room during both calibration and mixing -- so "norm" is an empty room.

If anything, for a full house, you'd make it louder.

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 06-28-2012 02:41 PM

Yes, but I think that is what happens. People turn the sound up for the bigger crowds then it gets left alone at the same level. So while it might not be a default action of "turn it down for the small crowd" but it happens that way anyway (in many theaters anyway).

| IP: Logged

Aaron Garman
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: Toledo, OH USA
Registered: Mar 2003

posted 06-28-2012 02:45 PM

They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into...

I say, let their ears bleed.

AJG

| IP: Logged

Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"

Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 06-28-2012 02:58 PM

Let 'em crash! LOL

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 06-28-2012 04:18 PM

Somehow I missed this comment the first time around:

quote: Scott Jentsch
If varying sound levels of movies is such a concern, how about we shed some light on it? Perhaps a thread for each release so that people can comment on what they are experiencing in their theaters?

Nice in theory. Not too sure how much response it would get. I raised quite the issue with the horrible sound in the Digital IMAX version of Mission Impossible 4 I saw at the Regal Colorado Mills. Very loud, extremely harsh and painful to the ears. Manager claimed the IMAX version had a hot mix and it's not the fault of the IMAX auditorium filled with shitty Klipsch speakers and an equally inept EQ. I couldn't get any other responses from people who had seen that in digital IMAX to confirm or deny the manager's report.

| IP: Logged

Robert Harrison
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 239
From: Harwood Heights, Illinois, USA
Registered: Jun 2005

posted 06-28-2012 05:33 PM

If reference level is so holy and sacred, why then have I received no less than 3 notes from distributors recently to go past it? Both "Snow White and the Huntsman" and "Ted" were to be run at 7.3 (in the latter case, only for 35mm, not for DCP) and on "Rock of Ages," a vague note about playing it as loud as we could. Well, I ran it at 10 and the friggin roof caved in.

Who's gonna pay for that? Hmmm! WHO'S GONNA PAY FOR THAT!

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 06-28-2012 07:07 PM

Seriously, the biggest problems that cause "the turning down of the fader" are:

*EQ
*Room acoustics
*Speaker choice
*Speaker layout and physical alignment

Typically the biggest offender of the above is the actual EQ settings. Most techs tune "to the line" and they end up over-EQing which sounds awful. Few techs actually keep a reel with them of familiar content that checks the system in various ways. Fewer seem to understand the X curve does need to be tweeked slightly depending on the room. Some techs don't even understand how the X curve works and go for a horizontal line all the way up to 20KHz on their RTA.

The worse the EQ, the lower the volume MUST be played to prevent ear fatigue (or just flat out offensive sound). Once the EQ is fixed, the overall level in the room will go higher. The problem the sound mixers don't take into account is that their mixing rooms are carefully calibrated, but few movie theaters in the overall scheme of things actually are. The result is "turn it down".

Here are some basic rules to follow. Kick your sound tech out of the building if he:
*Doesn't listen to his work after he is done.
*Doesn't bring in his own reel to listen to and instead uses whatever is laying around (often trailers).
*Has a beautifully straight line on his RTA when he is done.
*Has wildly varying EQ settings from band to band (assuming a graphic eq).
*Doesn't start by checking the crossovers before he attacks the EQ.

Also when he is done if you find each auditorium has to play at a different volume for the same movie, you need to find a new sound tech. For example, a movie that plays comfortably at 6.5 in one auditorium should play comfortably at 6.5 in ALL auditoriums.

Also note the less of a difference the fader needs to be set at between trailers vs. feature, the worse the EQ is.

| IP: Logged

Jonathan Goeldner
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1360
From: Washington, District of Columbia
Registered: Jun 2008

posted 06-28-2012 08:47 PM

I thought the letter was going to be about 'stop making stupid movies' ... [Wink]

quote: Joe Redifer
Nice in theory. Not too sure how much response it would get. I raised quite the issue with the horrible sound in the Digital IMAX version of Mission Impossible 4 I saw at the Regal Colorado Mills. Very loud, extremely harsh and painful to the ears. Manager claimed the IMAX version had a hot mix and it's not the fault of the IMAX auditorium filled with shitty Klipsch speakers and an equally inept EQ. I couldn't get any other responses from people who had seen that in digital IMAX to confirm or deny the manager's report.

I thought the IMAX-Digital presentation I saw of 'Titanic' (3D) at AMC Rio Gaithersburg Maryland - was the loudest most abrasive listening experience ever - the sound was simply too loud for the size of the auditorium - in my mind it was beyond acceptable.

| IP: Logged

Aaron Garman
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: Toledo, OH USA
Registered: Mar 2003

posted 06-28-2012 10:04 PM

I saw Titanic in digital IMAX 3D at the Portage IMAX in Portage, IN: too harsh, poor EQ. I very vividly remember the 4 times I saw it at our old General Cinema, specifically the SDDS showing. That is my reference standard and nothing yet has touched it.

I'd pay extra to see a movie in a house I knew had a proper EQ. Does anyone even know how to do one anymore? I wish I did, because at least I give a [bs]

compared to some of the techs I met in my service in the booth.

AJG

| IP: Logged

Victor Liorentas
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 800
From: london ontario canada
Registered: May 2009

posted 06-28-2012 10:31 PM

My liemax experience of Titanic was also harsh mainly when anyone shouted but my IMAX Experience at the Henry Ford Museum was just as loud but sounded smooth and perfect.

What in the eq is wrong here??

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 06-29-2012 12:23 AM

Sounds like digital IMAX is just a raw deal. Raw on your ears, anyway. I think IMAX purposely wants to damage people's hearing. Someone should file a lawsuit against them as it can permanently damage people's hearing. I honestly don't think they know what good sound is.

quote: Brad Miller

Here are some basic rules to follow. Kick your sound tech out of the building if he:
*Doesn't listen to his work after he is done.
*Doesn't bring in his own reel to listen to and instead uses whatever is laying around (often trailers).
*Has a beautifully straight line on his RTA when he is done.
*Has wildly varying EQ settings from band to band (assuming a graphic eq).
*Doesn't start by checking the crossovers before he attacks the EQ.

Seriously. Everyone should abide by this. The part I bolded is also something that many overlook. For example, on Cat 64 cards I'll often see one frequency dialed in at 8 or 9 o'clock. The one next to it at 5 o'clock and then the next one at 8 or 9 o'clock again. For a graphical EQ you'd have a giant spike next to a large dip or whatnot (on the settings, not the reading). Basically you want it smooth as you can get it. Having each band all over the place like that creates a very harsh sound, even if it's only a few bands on any given channel. Hopefully Dolby Atmos takes the EQing out of the equation (and does a good job with it).

| IP: Logged

Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God

Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 06-29-2012 12:35 AM

Victor, most of the issues with IMAX and LIEMAX sound seem to stem from both their use of "cinema wannabe" speakers and the lack of proper EQ, in the first case you mentioned I'm betting too much high end and midrange.

To back up several posts and respond to Marc's statement:

quote: Marc D Fishman
I never said that people don't create noise in a room... I said they don't absorb sound to a meaningful degree... if you can point me to reattach which suggests otherwise I'm all ears.

Marc, NO ONE here has said that the issue is people "create noise in a room", but you sir are dead wrong in your opinion that people don't absorb sound to a meaningful degree.

I assume by "reattach" in your post you meant research well I can tell you from my OWN measurements (and my 30+ years in this industry as a service tech) I have PROOF that they make a measurable difference. I am sure that with some effort (which I don't have time to spend on right now) online there will be plenty of studies that prove my (our) positions right and yours wrong.

I am surprised and dismayed that someone in your profession does not know or acknowledge the simple FACT (of the physics of sound waves,) i.e. ANY materials in a given space WILL have (often profound) effects on the acoustic properties of said space.

Human bodies provide a multitude of surfaces and sizable surface area which will affect sound wave propagation and reflection..and of course clothing also has many properties which affect acoustics, mainly by absorption.

When you are mixing a film on the dubbing stage, is the room full of people or empty? What acoustic treatments are in place? Are those treatments "adjustable" i.e. can they be removed/relocated to make the space more (or less) reverberant? If you change ANY of those variables when you are working on a mix you WILL hear audible differences which you will need to re-mix to correct. (And if you can't hear those differences then perhaps it's time for an ear exam or to hang up your hat and go fishing. [Smile]

)

Sound and acoustics are a very complex discipline and there is one sure thing in the discipline: NO TWO SPACES WILL EVER HAVE THE EXACT SAME ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES OR "SIGNATURE". If there ever was a way to perfectly recreate the same acoustic signature in the construction of spaces of all the infinite possible sizes/shapes/configurations/seating capacity/properties of the people in the space/number of people in the space etc. then there would be no need for any type of on-site EQ or delay processing now would there?

[thumbsup]

Off to bed, got to work early tomorrow and I have spent more time on this that I should have.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 06-29-2012 01:46 AM

This thread has gone on long enough without a clear understanding of the problem.

Pop quiz time...what is wrong with this picture?

It is obvious the guy tuning this room TRIED to keep things somewhat smooth in his calibrating, but where he screwed up was trying to correct a problem with EQ rather than investigating WHY he needs to crank the shit out of the 1.25 and 1.6k frequencies.

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

What is wrong with this one?

Here we have a pretty good example of OVER-EQ'ing. I see this sort of stuff all the time in the field, and it is flat out wrong. For example, what's going on there at 100hz where he feels the need to single out this one frequency band and crank it about 8-10db over the adjacent frequencies? Same thing at 250hz and 500hz (which is particularly bad since that is at a typical speaker's crossover frequency). Overall though, this EQ is pretty bad end to end.

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

How about this one? Can ANYONE tell me what is wrong with this picture?

Seriously??? Whoever tuned this room should be the poster child for "how to completely fuck up the sound in an auditorium".

Get used to it Marc. There are idiots out there in charge of tuning MOST sound systems and there isn't much of anything that can be done. The days of "sound techs" are gone. The big companies are hiring anyone off the street or the Best Buy "Geek Squad" to install the digital systems...and then these same guys are destroying the sound presentation you guys labor over so hard to create.

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 06-29-2012 02:52 AM

DAMN, Brad....honestly, I would venture a guess that you would be better off switching those EQs out of the chain altogether and you'd probably get better sound. Do you actually see end results like that in the field? Wouldn't even a mildly competent sound tech take one look at those final settings and realize right away he's mucked up big-time or at least something is seriously wrong with the room, the equipment or his procedure? First thing I would say is, "When's the last time you checked the accuracy of your RTA," or "Hey, dude, did you drop your calibration mic from the balcony?"

Scott asked about standards on older titles. When I first started, I worked in the State Theatre in Austin. No matter what the audio level "standard" might have been, if any -- and yes, you saw "Play this film 3 points lower than average for sound level for this theatre" or some such printed right in the leader itself, the antithesis to the concept of a standard, even negating whatever the projectionist set on his fader, was the House Sound Master.

This contraption was nothing but a wall box in the house with a control knob ganged to a small sylsen; that motor was wired to a sylsen motor mechanically ganged to the Simplex Sound Fader in the booth. No matter what the "level instructions" might have been on the leader or stuffed in the film can or even what the projectionist had set his fader at, the last and final word was the Manger's ears since he was the one who had a key to that box in the back of the orchestra. Everything else was at the mercy of what he felt was a comfortable level for this room.

The fear that we voice today that perhaps turning it down for this or that reason might mean it would never get turned back up I think was probably much less a concern back then when you had pretty attentive and conscientious people in those positions; they actually took pride in what they did. First time I saw that piece of equipment in action was when I turn up the fader for the opening of a TCFox CinemaScope film. Imagine my amazement when I watched the fader turn itself back down against my wishes. The director wouldn't have a chance against that final arbitrator of sound level!

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 12 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.