Film-Tech Cinema Systems
  Home     Products     Store     Forum     Warehouse     Contact Us    
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Dolby's new sound system (Page 9)

 
This topic comprises 38 pages: 1  2  3  ...  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  ...  36  37  38   
Author Topic: Dolby's new sound system
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

- posted 05-11-2012 10:13 AM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Regarding down-mixing from quad surround 7.1 to split surround 5.1, I agree the DCI committee should have done something about this early on to make it a standard feature in any DCI-compliant server. Not only that, they should have standardized down-mxing from 5 stage channels to 3 since the DCI specification has Right Extra and Left Extra channels assigned. The DCI folks probably could have gone even farther in regard to ceiling surround and other channel assignments that officially remain undefined.

quote: Steve Guttag
The way Dolby Atmos was presented to me was that unlike other formats, it resides within the 5.1 (or 7.1) mix.
The only way I could see this being possible is if the Atmos track was fake embedded in the LPCM 5.1 or 7.1 track similar to the way Dolby Digital tracks are hidden alongside Dolby TrueHD tracks on Blu-ray disc. The Blu-ray player will default to using the hidden but not embedded Dolby Digital track if the player isn't set up for transmitting lossless surround audio on HDMI.

Linear PCM audio isn't very friendly to having extra types of data added to it without compatibility being threatened. I can't add thumbnail album cover images and other stuff like that directly to LPCM music files I have ripped to an external hard disc. Lossy music formats like MP3 and AAC are friendly to extra pieces of data being added since the capability is built into those formats. In order to add things like album cover art and other info media players like iTunes or Windows Media Player must either convert Linear PCM music files into another audio format or add separate cover art images and what not that are associated with the LPCM tracks by the media player. Dolby Atmos data would have to be piggy-backed on top of the LPCM track rather than baked into the LPCM data itself.

Another problem is Linear PCM data is just "plain" audio data in discretely separate channels. I don't see how one can have "layers" of individual audio objects floating above the LPCM track, particularly when the independent audio objects are locating themselves across the separate channels as well as moving to dozens of room locations the standard LPCM track cannot support.

It's kind of like trying to add layers of floating image objects on top of a flattened JPEG image. You can't do that sort of thing without saving the changes into another flat JPEG image or saving it in a format that can support layered/floating image objects like Photoshop .PSD or TIFF and end up with a much bigger sized file.

I don't know how Barco is adding its Auro 11.1 stuff on top of LPCM 5.1/7.1 other than perhaps using crossover tricks like Theatrical DTS did to redirect subwoofer audio really embedded into the surround channels over to the ".1" channel.

 |  IP: Logged
Carsten Kurz
Film God

Posts: 4340
From: Cologne, NRW, Germany
Registered: Aug 2009

- posted 05-11-2012 06:21 PM      Profile for Carsten Kurz   Email Carsten Kurz   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Bobby Henderson
The only way I could see this being possible is if the Atmos track was fake embedded in the LPCM 5.1 or 7.1 track similar to the way Dolby Digital tracks are hidden alongside Dolby TrueHD tracks on Blu-ray disc.
Atmos tracks are not embedded into 5.1 or 7.1 mixes. The Atmos data is not track-based but file based. The Atmos mixing system supports creating a plain-vanilla 5.1 or 7.1 mix for backwards compatibility.

The Auro-Codec mixes multiple channels into one, but adds information in unused/least significant bits (24->20) on how to separate the individual channels for true Auro playback. This sounds rather weird, but it seems to work well.

The benefit is - you can play it on any standard 5.1 or 7.1 system, the additional height channels will be played over the normal screen and surround channels. No dedicated 5.1/7.1 mix is needed for backward compatibility. Only Auro enabled processors can separate the height channels for playout over dedicated height speakers.

Every system has it's own strenghts and weaknesses. I doubt that any of them will gain significant market dominance.

- Carsten

 |  IP: Logged
Ray Derrick
Master Film Handler

Posts: 310
From: Sydney, Australia
Registered: Sep 2001

- posted 05-11-2012 09:14 PM      Profile for Ray Derrick   Email Ray Derrick   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Nice to see you too, Sam.

Your devotion to Dolby is well known in the industry (which is understandable since you once worked for them), but it is also well known that I do not share that devotion. That is not to say that I don't have enormous respect for the design engineers at Dolby. They have come up with some brilliant technology over the years and that absolutely demands respect. But it does not automatically translate that everyone who works for that company also deserves that respect.

Do I have stories to tell? You have no idea !!!!! But I am not in the custom of making personal attacks against people (or companies for that matter) on the Internet, no matter how much they may deserve it. I simply stated my personal opinion on this particular topic. Either you agree or you do not and I have no problem either way. But calling me "bitter"? Bitter over what exactly?

Just for the record, my congratulations to Dolby were genuine and NOT made tongue in cheek. It is an excellent marketing move at a time when the company could easily face potential extinction and I have no doubt that the techology is indeed revolutonary. As I stated, as an ex-sound mixing engineer I love the idea, but.....

Sam, it is people like you that stopped me participating in these forums in the first place. You may well have succeeded in doing so a second time. Well done and have a nice day.

And thanks Steve, you are a true professional and a gentleman. It's always a pleasure to read your very informative posts.

 |  IP: Logged
Sam D. Chavez
Film God

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

- posted 05-11-2012 09:39 PM      Profile for Sam D. Chavez   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Ray says,

"Sam, it is people like you that stopped me participating in these forums in the first place."

What do you suppose that means?

Although I do not believe the word stooge was aimed anywhere near me, it is still sounds mighty abusive and personal.

I've been gone from there since 1994 but I still have many friends there.

I read the post again and it still sounds like someone with a chip on the shoulder.

I know you have been treated badly more than once in our industry, but the person(s) that treated you badly are not named Dolby.

 |  IP: Logged
Jonathan Goeldner
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

- posted 05-11-2012 10:11 PM      Profile for Jonathan Goeldner   Email Jonathan Goeldner   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Bobby Henderson
Not only that, they should have standardized down-mxing from 5 stage channels to 3 since the DCI specification has Right Extra and Left Extra channels assigned.
absolutely. Why no studio particularly those who have (70mm) 6-track mixes that feature five stage channels can't be archived in that configurement for future DCP application is just claiming complete ignorance. As the trend has evolved into the chains installing custom large screen amenities and multiple channels of sound, it's completely counterintuitive for the studios to not release classic films that WERE mixed as such. In ten years from now, I don't think anyone will be able to hear the original five front sound mixes of '2001', 'The Sound of Music' 'West Side Story' etc., etc., etc., - the waiting game in seeing how or when the LE and RE channels of sound are going to be implemented and is ultimately just odd in how studios are turning a blind eye to classic movie soundmixes.

(And yes, I know I'm a broken record on this particular topic)

 |  IP: Logged
Ray Derrick
Master Film Handler

Posts: 310
From: Sydney, Australia
Registered: Sep 2001

- posted 05-11-2012 10:20 PM      Profile for Ray Derrick   Email Ray Derrick   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sam, I used the word "stooge" in the sense of someone that is superfluous, that does not need to be there. If it means something else to you then that was not my intention.

As a matter of fact, in the early 1980's I was asked by Dolby Labs in the UK if I would become the Australian Dolby Consultant for Dolby Surround (TV and Post Production sound tracks). I told them at the time that I was not interested.

It could have been quite an interesting and lucrative job but I was on good terms with most if not all all of the seniour sound mixers in the country and I felt it would just create resentment. After all, mixing a 5.1 soundtrack was not rocket science, we all worked it out pretty quickly and we certainly didn't need another engineer looking over out shoulders telling us how to suck eggs.

And I am not sure what you alluding too as far as being "treated badly". If a company that sends it's men in black to visit all of the major exhbitors in Australia and threatens them with cutting off supply (which is actually against the law in this country) can be termed "being treated badly" then I guess you may be right with the first part of your sentence at least.

I could have had them in the Supreme Court over that, but I did nothing because I just accepted (and still accept it to this day) that it as one of those things that happen in business. The world is not fair place and being bitter about it would be completely non-productive.

Sam, a small Australian electronics company with limited financial resources managed to create cinema products that were installed in over 30 countries around the world, not because they were cheap, because they weren't, but because they were better. Now is that something to be bitter about? No Sam, I have no chip on my shoulder, I am very proud of what we achieved.

 |  IP: Logged
Sam D. Chavez
Film God

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

- posted 05-11-2012 10:46 PM      Profile for Sam D. Chavez   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
To be clear, I like most of your work and know well of your drive to make the best possible products.

I do not know of the story of black suits, but I'll take your word for it.

Enough said, we'll just bore everyone else with our banter.

I do hope you stay and contribute to Film-Tech.

 |  IP: Logged
Ray Derrick
Master Film Handler

Posts: 310
From: Sydney, Australia
Registered: Sep 2001

- posted 05-11-2012 11:21 PM      Profile for Ray Derrick   Email Ray Derrick   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Thank you Sam

Sorry to everyone else for this getting off topic.

Cheers

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

- posted 05-12-2012 10:01 AM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Carsten Kurz
The Atmos data is not track-based but file based. The Atmos mixing system supports creating a plain-vanilla 5.1 or 7.1 mix for backwards compatibility.
Any computer-based movie sound design project is file-based. Each individual sound element will have cues to make it play at certain volume levels in specific channels over time. I don't know how Atmos will manage all the audio "assets" of a given movie. Will all the sound objects be embedded into a single Atmos container file? Or will the Atmos container be a folder with thousands of audio objects, sub-folders and control files (in XML or some other format) to tell the Atmos processor how to play them?

One thing is certain: this sort of thing cannot be embedded inside a standard Linear PCM 5.1/7.1 audio track. It would be like trying to bake a Pro Tools project into a music CD LPCM track and still expect the LPCM track to play on a CD player.

The 5.1/7.1 Linear PCM mixes would need to be created on the studio end and supplied with the DCP hard disc. 5.1/7.1 tracks couldn't be derived from an Atmos file on the theater end without the specific Dolby Atmos hardware to do it.

quote: Carsten Kurz
Every system has it's own strenghts and weaknesses. I doubt that any of them will gain significant market dominance.
I like the concept behind Dolby Atmos quite a bit more. I've been wanting something like 10.2 Surround installed in movie theaters for over a decade. Atmos has the potential to be much better than that. Underscore the word potential.

Formats like Dolby Atmos and Barco's Auro 11.1 will go nowhere without both the support of movie studios providing mixes in those formats as well as theaters installing the more elaborate sound systems and properly maintaining them.

Home video is a big enemy to either of those formats. The bean counters who run Hollywood have a one-track mind of getting movies into home video release as fast as possible. The way they see it: why spend any extra money on an Atmos or 11.1 mix that will be played for only a few weeks in theaters when the home video mix will only be 5.1/7.1 and be played for years afterward?

One advantage Dolby Atmos will have if the software is designed properly is it shouldn't really cause any huge change or create lots of extra work for sound designers. That might make it relatively simple for a lot of movies to be mixed and released in the Atmos format. Still, if there is extra licensing costs involved the studio bean counters might balk at that. The biggest issue is getting movie theaters to spend the big money installing it.

 |  IP: Logged
Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

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

- posted 05-12-2012 04:46 PM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
One thing I haven't heard yet is how ATMOS handle regular 5.1 and also the common 7.1 mixes. ATMOS isn't an add-on like Dolby Digital, it must be its own sound processor. No other processor can do 64 channels, after all. So do you tell ATMOS that you want these speakers over here to represent the left surround? And these cluster of speakers over here to represent the right? Or does it figure it out for itself. If so, it sounds like anybody can install ATMOST, no technician required. You certainly won't need somebody skilled to EQ the room or set the levels, that's for sure. If you can hook up a home stereo receiver, you can install an ATMOS system, it just might take a few more minutes.

Also, how do you guys pronounce ATMOS? Do you say it like "Dolby is at most a poor man's Panalogic". Or do you say it like you say you're at Kate Moss's house? "I'm over at Moss right now. Tons of Coke for everyone! Oh, and Coca-cola, too!"

 |  IP: Logged
Mike Frese
Master Film Handler

Posts: 465
From: Holts Summit, MO
Registered: Jun 2007

- posted 05-12-2012 10:52 PM      Profile for Mike Frese   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Frese   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
More on Cinetopia

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150877147479485&set=a.10150877137974485.431276.6570614484&type=3&theater

GXL #1, with an 85 foot screen, and the Atmos Dolby 128 channel sound system. — at Cinetopia Vancouver Mall 23.

Is this the first one?

(The comments are interesting.)

 |  IP: Logged
Ray Derrick
Master Film Handler

Posts: 310
From: Sydney, Australia
Registered: Sep 2001

- posted 05-13-2012 10:27 AM      Profile for Ray Derrick   Email Ray Derrick   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
On Dolby's website announcing Dolby Atmos:

http://www.dolby.com/us/en/professional/technology/cinema/dolby-atmos.html

Ioan Allen states in the video:

"The theatres want an immersive experience that is something superior to anything that the public can have in the home, because that's what keeps the cinema business driving..."

Yet in an article on Hollywood reporter website:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/peter-jackson-hobbit-dolby-atmos-318708

about Peter Jackson considering atmos for the Hobbit. At the end of the article is this sentence:

"Dolby indicated that after a cinema launch, the “longer term” goal is to bring an Atmos experience to the living room, including on tablets, PCs and mobile devices."

So theatres will have something the public can't have in their home for what, maybe 6 to 12 months?

Also 128 audio channels on your mobile device? So those little push-in-your-ear headphones will soon have an array of 128 sub-miniature speakers? Now that will be revolutionary [Smile]

 |  IP: Logged
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

- posted 05-13-2012 10:43 AM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
One of the things about ATMOS is that it is scalable. In the home, without a perforated screen in a projection environment, you are never going to really create the behind-the-screen audio experience.

There is also the difference between what can be attempted in the home and what will be realized. 4K for instance...yes, it can be had in the home...but the incremental benefit on such a small scale is notably less.

People can and have put Cinerama in the home...but now you are talking about a VERY small percentage of potential homes that would attempt such a thing. Most homes are dictated by aesthetics which often combat technical excellence. Every time I've had to make invisible surround work...it has been a struggle to make them work well.

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

- posted 05-13-2012 10:56 AM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm still wondering how this can fit in with IMAX branded big screen theaters. IMAX has their own branded sound systems. While they boast a lot of wattage (at least the film-based screens do) they're just pretty straight forward sound systems. Would the IMAX company allow a different brand of sound system into its theaters?

This kind of brings back the whole question about whether Dolby Atmos will involve some kind of surcharge to the ticket price. At the very least, I figure Atmos will be installed in premium priced auditoriums that are trying to copy the IMAX Digital concept.

A multiplex with an IMAX Digital screen might not be open to installing Dolby Atmos on another screen or two if it is going to steal premium priced sales from the "Lie-MAX" screen. I wouldn't put it past the IMAX company to make demands its theater partners don't equip neighboring screens with processes that threaten to upstage the IMAX installation.

quote: Mike Frese
GXL #1, with an 85 foot screen, and the Atmos Dolby 128 channel sound system.
Dolby Atmos doens't do 128 channels. It does support up to 128 simultaneous sounds events across 64 speaker leads (I presume one could have one speaker lead going to more than just one speaker).

quote: Joe Redifer
One thing I haven't heard yet is how ATMOS handle regular 5.1 and also the common 7.1 mixes. ATMOS isn't an add-on like Dolby Digital, it must be its own sound processor. No other processor can do 64 channels, after all. So do you tell ATMOS that you want these speakers over here to represent the left surround?
I would be very surprised if the Dolby Atmos processor didn't have compatibility modes built in to handle D-cinema LPCM 5.1/7.1 as well as other stuff like lossy Dolby Digital or Dolby TrueHD audio coming in from a Blu-ray player.

It shouldn't be difficult for the Atmos processor to recognize a LPCM 5.1 mix and merely route its channels to only the speakers that are standard for 5.1 setups (LCR channels behind the screen and fewer surround speakers on the side walls).

It would be a pain for movie productions if all of them had to go through an extra step of blowing up standard 5.1 mixes to Atmos and create a separate sound mix inventory just to be compatible with a few theaters equipped to play Atmos sound files. It would be the whole DTS/SRD/SDDS format war crap all over again.

 |  IP: Logged
Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

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

- posted 05-13-2012 02:46 PM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, but that doesn't answer my question about it. Can you allocate clusters of speakers to act as one channel? Are you allowed to EQ those channels? You're not allowed to EQ individual channels in ATMOS from what Steve Guttag has said. I think the bottom line is that nobody here knows jack shit about ATMOS yet.

 |  IP: Logged


All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 38 pages: 1  2  3  ...  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  ...  36  37  38   
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
- Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

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