Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Star Wars Ep 3 : Revenge of the Sith on DVD Nov. 1st 2005

Film-Tech Cinema Systems

Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE

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

next oldest topic

next newest topic

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » The Afterlife » Star Wars Ep 3 : Revenge of the Sith on DVD Nov. 1st 2005 (Page 6)

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

Author

Topic: Star Wars Ep 3 : Revenge of the Sith on DVD Nov. 1st 2005

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 10-13-2005 03:15 PM

Email Bobby Henderson

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote: Andy Summers
So I’m just going to take a guess will it have five-screen channel and the usual split-surround configuration with Dolby surround-EX including .1 sub bass LFE, sounds like the SDDS 8 format, or will it be left centre right split-surrounds discrete centre back surround and discrete height surround or “Sonic Whole Overhead Sound” with the .1 sub bass LFE, which configuration will it be?

And I thought I wrote long sentences!

The speaker layout for 8 channel audio on either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray formats has not been settled -at least I haven't read anything official anywhere that settles the point. At this point the only thing anyone can do is make suggestions for what they would prefer.

I personally don't think a five-screen channel layout is necessary unless you have a really gigantic screen at home. I think the 7.1 layout would be far more effective by using three channels for the stage, two side wall surround channels and two rear wall surround channels.

Another alternative for 8-channel audio is a 6.2 layout, using stereo subwoofer channels. It might be good for accurately recreating the stereo subwoofer mixes from 70mm format 42 releases.

There's a very strong chance most HD-DVD and BD-DVD movies will only be in 5.1, but perhaps at higher bitrates. You'll see some discrete 6.1 stuff in both Dolby Digital Plus and DTS-ES. Dolby Labs simply engineered more foward-looking capabilities into DD-Plus so it could adapt more easily to future audio trends.

Of course the main thing to drive audio trends in movies is the movies themselves. New DTS XD-10 cinema players have the upward capability to play 10 or more channels of sound. But they're just going to be stuck playing back 5.1 as long as filmmakers and film producers maintain the status quo.

quote:
Paul, The whole point to Dolby surround-EX is to eliminate---(snip)

I'm pretty sure Paul (as well as most others reading this thread) already know those points.

| IP: Logged

Andy Summers
Master Film Handler

Posts: 397
From: Bournemouth Dorset United kingdom
Registered: Jun 2005

posted 10-13-2005 07:18 PM

Edit/Delete Post

Bobby’

Correct me if I’m wrong hear, wasn’t Dolby format 42 the baby boom sub bass track mono?

With the release of Superman the movie and the replacement of the 2 remaining tracks well 1 replaced so that they can mix films with what they called split-surrounds, thus leaving one sub bass track playing, as the baby boom was simply playing the same signal and that would present as waste….

One other thing I’ve only worked with Dolby A type SR and Dolby digital playback formats when I was last working as a projectionist, so I may be a little rusty but I still know how to lace up, so the audio format 42 that wasn’t for the baby boom no?

As for the layout for “Dolby Digital Plus” I think we should have five-screen discrete with left and right side surrounds centre back matrix “Sonic Whole Overhead Sound” matrix and .1 sub bass, now that’s more wow and refreshing….

Now if the two back surrounds are discrete or stereo then Dolby or some re-recording mix is going to play around with those tracks, or some one like myself LOL….

Woo, hold on there, dts X-D 10, now that will have five-screen discrete with side surrounds left and right, centre back surround discrete, height surround discrete and the .1 sub bass discrete.

Now if that’s the case I like to hear it, but where does the first rain drop, drop?

3-D, thinking in sound, I wonder if there’s a limit to what dts can do?

There maybe cinemas with true 1-D above and below?

I’ve done a diagram for this; it’s around somewhere, oh yes it’s still in my head, a bit damn complex to talk about, 15.1? Now if anyone can make that happen Dolby would be on the case…

Like THX said motion picture theatres loudspeakers have not changed in 35 years when advertising there THX sound system program back in 1983…

So with all these wonderful Digital formats we have Dolby digital dts and SDDS.

There are limitless means to where digital sound technology, can go so where else is there to go…

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

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

posted 10-13-2005 09:07 PM

Author's Homepage

Email Joe Redifer

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Overhead sound is retarded, just like your posts. I would much rather have underfeet sound.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 10-14-2005 01:20 PM

Email Bobby Henderson

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote:
Correct me if I’m wrong hear, wasn’t Dolby format 42 the baby boom sub bass track mono? With the release of Superman the movie and the replacement of the 2 remaining tracks well 1 replaced so that they can mix films with what they called split-surrounds, thus leaving one sub bass track playing, as the baby boom was simply playing the same signal and that would present as waste….

You're confusing details of Format 42 with Format 43.

70mm Format 42 has three stage channels, two subwoofer channels and one mono surround channel. It is essentially a 4.2 format.

70mm Format 43 prints held the typical 5.1 channel layout, but were backward compatible with Format 42 setups. The surrounds held the subwoofer audio for Format 42 playback. The subwoofer channel held the mono surround audio for Format 42 playback. A crossover simply filtered out the audio bands that weren't needed.

quote:
As for the layout for “Dolby Digital Plus” I think we should have five-screen discrete with left and right side surrounds centre back matrix “Sonic Whole Overhead Sound” matrix and .1 sub bass, now that’s more wow and refreshing….

Huh? Wow and refreshing?

After visiting a number of AMC movie theater sites, I have decided I don't like surround audio over my head. Of course the typical AMC movie theater just has speakers in front of you and the surround array stuffed up into the ceiling. Absolute suckage. Any theater doing that gets an instant grade F in my book. I don't care how great the projection looks or how fancy the auditorium was decorated. Grade F period.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

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

posted 10-14-2005 02:22 PM

Author's Homepage

Email Joe Redifer

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote: Robert Henderson
After visiting a number of AMC movie theater sites... absolute suckage.

I agree! AMC is known for their awfulness. Anyone who currently works for AMC is a horrible individual. There can be no exceptions to this rule.

| IP: Logged

Adam Wilbert
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 590
From: Bellingham, WA, USA
Registered: Mar 2002

posted 10-14-2005 02:55 PM

Author's Homepage

Email Adam Wilbert

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote: Andy Summers
I’ve done a diagram for this; it’s around somewhere, oh yes it’s still in my head

this sentance is classic. Where is that damn thing? Oh, wait... I never drew it. [Razz]

[Razz]

.

My home set up is a 6.1 deal. I've got the usual 5 speakers, plus 11 ".1" subs. I rule.

| IP: Logged

Andy Summers
Master Film Handler

Posts: 397
From: Bournemouth Dorset United kingdom
Registered: Jun 2005

posted 10-14-2005 03:29 PM

Edit/Delete Post

Bobby’

So it was Dolby format 43, know idea which films on DVD I’m talking about the classic the “Dolby” Stereo 70mm films like “Starman” which format was that, or better still do you have a list comprising all the “Dolby” format 42 and 43 though 42 would have been remixed, that sucks, I think the planning of “Dolby Digital” for the home cinema hasn’t been thought out very well by “Dolby”, tell now with there “Dolby Digital Plus”

What does AMC stand for, “Amateur Movie Cinemas” I thought other projectionists liked other projectionists, well I guess I was wrong, tell you the truth I don’t like ODEON they say there “fanatical about film” now if AMC gets a grade f in your books, the ODEON gets a grade “X” in book for the rest of all time….

Anyway I’m going to fire up the THX sound and watch the last 1hr 20mins of “Kingdom of Heaven” with “Sonic Whole Overhead Sound” LOL….JBL kicks ass…Back in a jiffy…. [beer]

[beer]

16 days only 16 days left now….

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 10-14-2005 06:12 PM

Email Bobby Henderson

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Although Format 43 pioneered the 5.1 split-surround model, I don't consider it to be the "classic Dolby" format. Format 42 was used on the vast majority of 70mm Dolby mag releases. I consider Format 42 to be the "classic Dolby" sound format because it was used on Star Wars' 70mm release prints. And that's the movie that made Dolby famous. Even though Format 43 debuted at the end of 1978 it didn't get much of any regular use on 70mm prints until the end of the 1980s and early 1990s.

quote:
format 42 and 43 though 42 would have been remixed, that sucks, I think the planning of “Dolby Digital” for the home cinema hasn’t been thought out very well by “Dolby”

I don't agree with that. Certainly not in terms of the channel layout. New sound formats need to be designed more for the future rather than be rooted soley in the past. The 5.1 format's trade of a second subwoofer channel in return for stereo surrounds is a good compromise. Many argue subwoofer audio is not directional and that only one sub channel is needed.

| IP: Logged

Andy Summers
Master Film Handler

Posts: 397
From: Bournemouth Dorset United kingdom
Registered: Jun 2005

posted 10-14-2005 06:48 PM

Edit/Delete Post

Bobby’

That’s very true “Star Wars” was made famous on its bases and use of sound, for many years was one of controversy and still is I think to this day.

Subwoofer directional, depending on where you’re sat in the cinema, or the home cinema, the crossover point setting also is critical the higher the setting your eras will detect it and therefore localization of it will be located the setting on my JBL 4645 “THX” modified is set to 80Hz hears a link to my small but “Just Bloody Loud” home THX cinema http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/3/158039.html

The images are around 2 months old, and since that time the positioning of the three-screen is different…

Not the JBL sub bass placed to the corner, as I don’t dare place the multi standard SONY monitor on top of the sub as it may pull on the electro guns, though I have had a Panasonic on top of it with no pulling on the colour at all, just lucky, but it may pull on the SONY, but the problem will be sound, the sound playing are with psychoacoustics.

All the three-screen channels are at the same height at the moment, and placed a little bit wider with a toe-in angle, also this is still in the workings, when I get the time and money to build a sound stage extending the fall width of the front, along with a vertical wall a THX baffle.

Also note the JBL placed on top of the JBL control 5 this gives me upper centre sounds when playing most films, and at the press of the button on the Yamaha DSR-70Pro, works fantastic on “Apollo 13” dts THX laserdisc chapter 11 trough to chapter 16, well the whole damn film…

You will see the black box that I’m using for the stereo surrounds decoding the pioneer VSP-200 and that “Sonic Whole Overhead Sound” LOL. [Smile]

[Smile]

| IP: Logged

Robert Harrison
Expert Film Handler

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

posted 10-15-2005 04:29 PM

Email Robert Harrison

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Attention: Andy Summers!

This just in! DON'T go out and buy "Revenge of the Sith" on November 1st, because Lucas is going to pull a "Lord of the Rings" and bring out an expanded "Special Jedi Knight Edition" on January 17th.

It will include another 45 minutes of footage, including the following scenes:

Miles Solo teaching his son, Han, how to pilot a spaceship.

Annakin and Amidala boogeying at a space disco to the tunes of Guum Wanglow and the Inter-Galactic Jug Band.

Jar Jar Binks getting blown away when he discovers Palpatine's secret identity before anyone else.

Yoda visiting his secret girlfriend, who just happens to be Mace Windu's sister, Melonda.

And, C-3PO and R2-D2 declaring their homo-robotic love for each other.

The soundtrack will be completely re-mixed in Tom Holman's 10.2 channel system, which has been adapted to be 5.1 compatible via matrixing. This Christmas, stores will begin selling the new processors which will decode these soundtracks. BUT ONLY IN AMERICA! SO MOVE HERE NOW!

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

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

posted 10-15-2005 04:35 PM

Author's Homepage

Email Joe Redifer

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I knew they shot the Miles Solo footage and wondered why it wasn't in the movie. The same goes for the disco and Jar Jar scenes. I guess we will finally get to see them! Also Ultimate Electronics (a store here) is advertising the 10.2 already. Prices are speculated to be between $650 and $1400 for the good ones!

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 10-15-2005 04:46 PM

Author's Homepage

Email Brad Miller

Edit/Delete Post

Andy, no need to wait...just download a pirated copy.

| IP: Logged

Andy Summers
Master Film Handler

Posts: 397
From: Bournemouth Dorset United kingdom
Registered: Jun 2005

posted 10-15-2005 05:20 PM

Edit/Delete Post

Brad’

I will not have anything to do with pirated copy’s sorry Brad’ I’m not that dodgy LOL it’s only 15 days to go now, and unlike those two Canadians who got nicked for filming “Star Wars Episode 2 attack of the clones” in 2002 sorry I not fancy a $250,000 dollar fine or 5 years in a federal prison, for a petty crime…hear in the U.K. I think it’s up to 20 years in the nick bugger that man, 20 years of your backside been done in, that is going to be very sore when you get out… [sex]

[sex]

[puke]

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 10-15-2005 05:54 PM

Author's Homepage

Email Brad Miller

Edit/Delete Post

Here you go Andy. You should bid on this.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 10-15-2005 05:56 PM

Author's Homepage

Email Mike Blakesley

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote: Robert Harrison
Lucas is going to pull a "Lord of the Rings" and bring out an expanded "Special Jedi Knight Edition" on January 17th.

I wouldn't be surprised if this was true. Which would be too bad, it's a decent movie the way it is. If they add a bunch of padding to it, it'll be just as bad as I and II which were all padded out to start with.

| 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

Move Topic

Delete Topic

next oldest topic

next newest topic

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic^TM 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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.