|
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
|
Author
|
Topic: cinema speaker brands
|
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 11-22-2012 12:59 PM
I've been trying to find the time for a reply and Thanksgiving has come (in the USA).
We'll start with Scott: quote: Scott Jentsch
While I completely get that your statement above is reality, it's also a slippery slope that I think too many theaters get stuck on.
This is in reference to my statement regarding how many more buckets of popcorn will one sell. I was not trying to say that striving for a better system should be avoided but that each increment of improvement, in a business, has to also be tempered with what positive business it will bring. With most things, one will find that at the lower-end, each increment of improvement costs relatively little more...however as one gets towards the tippy-top end of things, each increment of improvement costs progressively more to achieve. So while one can discuss say EV, JBL, QSC and a dozen other brands as small cost variances. Even 2-way to 3-way is not too big a jump and one could argue benefits/cost on some brands...when you make a relatively BIG jump in cost...one really has to evaluate if the business of that investment will follow. In some theatres and markets...the best really does matter. In the majority of markets/cinemas...it really does not. Part of the problem also is...what is best? That is subjective so you still won't please every one even if you spend top-dollar. You are trying to please as large a group of people as possible. A speaker, like the QSC SC-424 is going to do that (in an appropriate sized room with reasonable acoustics). There are others but I'm using that as an example.
quote: Louis Bornwasser
Basically if you are not doing the best you can at the time you are doing it, you are a fool. Good equipment can always be moved to another venue if the first one fails. Bad equipment ????
The problem with this statement is what is best? And even if we could reach mass consensus on what "best" is...is there not a top price limit on it? Let's exaggerate a bit. If the BEST speaker as reviewed by anyone that reviews cost say $100,000 each. Should everyone use that simply because it is the best and may be moved if the theatre folds due to, among other things, the high overhead?
People should get high-quality and excellent performing equipment, agreed. Junk is junk. Anyone that knows me knows I don't peddle junk...some might even say I deal in pie-in-the-sky stuff. Remember, the Kinoton FP30/38E is my standard film projector! It isn't exactly cheap and can easily outperform competition on most measurable specifications but you didn't see the industry drop their Simplexes/Centurys, Christies...etc for them. Clearly, people did a cost/benefit comparison with respect to their business. In the studios...the Kinotons generally outplaced the others. I know I've pulled other brands out for them.
I don't regret the JBLs, Altecs and QSC's I've sold and installed. I've never had a customer feel like they settled for them. I have also never had a customer come out of a Meyer room and think..."Why can't my theatre sound like that?" Getting the room right, I maintain, is the bigger and more beneficial challenge to exhibitors.
quote: Cameron Glendinning
I personally think that the difference between speaker brands found in cinema is a lesser issue, as the person who lines it up ultimately has a bigger effect on the audio outcome.
I'll agree with that...so long as you reach a "good" threshold.
quote: Cameron Glendinning
There are several forums where the science is being seriously questioned. I am surprised that none of this has appeared here on film tech. Here are some quotes.
Absolutely...again the SMPTE and others have never claimed it was the only or even the theoretical "best" method. It is "A" method that can be universally applied using available equipment that, can yield VERY repeatable results. That is, if you use calibrated microphones in a 4-mic plex...if you tune it and I come behind you and set up my calibrated mics (not even knowing where you set your mics other than as per the spec)...I'll, within +/-3 dB have the same reading...I've done it MANY MANY times. In fact, they are closer than +/-3dB. Normally, where this falls down is the lack of calibrated mics (1st) and the quantity of mics (2nd). Those of you that have the USL mic plexer that think they have "calibrated" mics...you are delusional. Now it is far better than a single mic and the mics are decent enough but not what I would call calibrated...they are not even level normalized on any given room unless you take the time to do it. Compare the response to an R2 or D2 system...those are CALIBRATED mics on a frequency-by-frequency basis through out the passband.
So back to the statement...Brian doesn't like the x-curve...there is nothing new there...he has been vocal about it for decades. He is entitled to his dislike. Let him devise, publish a method/procedure that can be codified and presented to the industry. To say there is a better way is not good enough...it would have to be a method that can be adopted by nearly everybody. And as soon as that happens, there will be the next guy that says it is all wrong. A key to ANSI/SMPTE 202 is that, right now, just about the entire industry is on the same page and marching to the same beat. Not many other industries have that luxury. No matter what individuals may say, the X-curve has its merits and is, presently, the best method we have. If you have something better, present it.
quote: Cameron Glendinning
So if your cinema has sound leakage issues perhaps the EV and their choice of smaller 3" voice coils, may in fact give your audience better results overall.
I have no problem with the V.C. size...I have a problem with the sound of the EV speakers. Using them because you built the structure of the building improperly isn't the solution...the real solution is to fix the building...if that is not feasible, then tune the room to minimize the transfer. I have indeed done STC testing and then based on the results tuned the rooms to keep the transmission down to acceptable. At least with that method, what sound you hear is good.
quote: Louis Bornwasser
ANY reference will work as long as both sides agree. Hence no reason to change unless there is an upside.
You stepped into it on that one Louis (sorry). The problem with that statement is that anyone that does measurements knows that a measurement only measures what it is measuring, not everything. In the case of an RTA, you are only "seeing" the volume of each frequency. This doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of what constitutes the sound we hear. Part of the X-curve does try to take into account reverberation (the roll off) but it works (by those that believe it does) because many of the parameters of a theatre are reasonably well known. When the X-curve falls apart is when the room is made poorly such that the x-curve does not reasonably apply. If the RTA was the final word in sound...all speakers that meet the curve should sound identical...and most everyone knows that isn't true. There are many other parameters to perceived audio. THX took this a bit further by ensuring that the room was better made so that RT-60 was in the proper range, the NC level was in the proper range and that the equipment was inherently good. That will have the X-curve work even better.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scott Jentsch
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1061
From: New Berlin, WI, USA
Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 11-26-2012 10:13 AM
quote: Steve Guttag
I was not trying to say that striving for a better system should be avoided but that each increment of improvement, in a business, has to also be tempered with what positive business it will bring. With most things, one will find that at the lower-end, each increment of improvement costs relatively little more...however as one gets towards the tippy-top end of things, each increment of improvement costs progressively more to achieve.
Ah, OK. I agree that once you meet that point where extra performance requires a significant uptick in price, you need to carefully consider what you're getting for the extra money and why you're looking for that last x% towards perfection. It is where I usually stop in my value assessments, as you can usually get very close to "perfection" but there is a point where you get very small increments of performance for increasingly large increments in price.
Many many years ago when I was considering striking out on my own full-time, I received some advice that I think rings true for just about any business. That advice was to not work on a shoestring budget, because doing so meant that you would often make choices that were not good choices, but necessary ones just to get by. And making bad choices is a sure way to head towards failure.
That advice was tempered somewhat by someone else that I respected, which was "do what you need to do in order to get going, because if you can't get on your feet, you can't move forward and be successful enough to do it the 'right' way in the future."
While those two pieces of advice would seem to be in conflict to a certain degree, I have taken them to be complementary. You can be "scrappy" by doing whatever you can to get started, but doing so should only be a means towards getting to the point where it can be "done right."
I see too many businesses where they never get out of the "scrappy" stage and it turns into just being cheap, which compromises the end product due to the bad decisions that have to be made.
To use the home theater analogy again, when I first got into that hobby, I didn't have a surround sound processor, so I wired out two rear speakers out of phase with the fronts for a pseudo-surround arrangement. It actually didn't work too badly, but I was never under the illusion that it was as far as I needed to go. Shortly after that, I was able to afford a new receiver and did it right. Once I was able to save up enough money, I replaced the front (two) speakers with some pretty good THX units, which I'm still using to this day, some 20 years later. I went without a subwoofer for quite a while, but when I got one, I got a good one. Still using that, and it's been 15+ years. Never through this process did I make the mistake of diving into the ridiculous realm of high-end "audiophile" speaker cables or $10,000 speakers. That's great for some people, but not me.
Being scrappy can work at first, but at some point, a person has to put on their big boy pants and make the hard choices so that they can be proud of what they're offering to their customers and earn their business on a recurring basis.
As a customer, I would respect an operation that was brand-new, just trying to get started, and maybe didn't have the best presentation, but they were cognizant of the fact and were transparent in their desire to do better as time goes on. But I would have no respect for a theater that was still running crappy equipment many years after getting started, with no apparent regard for the fact that they were delivering a substandard presentation.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Pasquesi
Film Handler
Posts: 28
From: Geneva, Geneva Canton, Switzerland
Registered: Sep 2012
|
posted 11-30-2012 04:00 AM
Carsten, Scott, Louis -
Thanks for the advice on the surrounds. Maybe we should just test all our surrounds to make sure they are functioning, and keep them.
However, we ar sure the front left speaker has a frequency weakness... several comments...
The 6 KCS SR10's for surround would cost us about 2,500 chf plus install.
The PSI 38-3 seems unfindable on the PSI website, as Carsten pointed out - weird...They would cost us about 2,100 chf
and the no name sub-woofer, only 600...
His pricing is often quite..Swiss. He has helped us out in the past, but..the prices climb at times in an Alpine way..
example:
He wanted to sell the dezoned Oppo 93 for 1,300 chf. I picked it up in France, with tax, import tax, and delivery, and a 3 year guarantee, for only 900 chf (I know, 750/850 for in the US, but the shippingand border tax gets us...)
For a USL JSD 80, plus DA 20, plus unnamed amps,
with other extras (rack, messaging for diabled),
he wants 16,000...
I think to myself, why not stick with our dolby cp 55,
and set up a balanced analogue audio patch to handle the 35mm in 4.1, or DTS from the Oppo through the Dolby 750 analogue ins?
Or get the AP20 with the 35 mm card ?
Anyone have pricing on these?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
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