|
|
This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Sound Sample Rates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aaron Garman
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1470
From: Toledo, OH USA
Registered: Mar 2003
|
posted 03-19-2013 02:23 PM
I should note that this is more of an issue for catalogue titles as opposed to new releases. Most new titles seem to feel the same or better at home, most likely because as you said, most near field mixes are being created by the original sound team that worked on the film.
I'd imagine most catalogue titles are being worked on by someone who did not work on the original film, and are merely trying to create something "better". I don't want "better". I want the same mix that was created when the original film was released. Jurassic Park is a great example. The original 5.1 theatrical mix was virtually perfect. It won several awards. Yet Universal, in their great wisdom, decided that a 7.1 re-mix would "be better" and help them to market the film to all the countless people with 7.1 in the home. And while it sounds "good" it sounds completely different than the theatrical 5.1 track, and does not even come close to re-creating the theatrical experience. Thank goodness I kept my LaserDisc because it comes quite a bit closer than the new and "improved" Blu-ray.
And even if a new mix like that is offered, why not also give us an original mix for posterity? Disney did this for some titles, specifically Lady and the Tramp, and I was very pleased with the results.
And thanks Brad, I was thinking about buying Back to the Future, but you've now convinced me otherwise.
AJG
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 03-19-2013 03:38 PM
quote: F. Hudson Miller
If you want the theatrical mix on the Blu-ray, you are going to have to get the distributors to provide more storage space on the disc (good luck with that one).
Actually, more often than not the typical Hollywood studio release on Blu-ray has plenty of empty space left on the disc. There's lots of movies on dual layer 50GB discs that have 10GB or more of unused space remaining on the disc. The "feature" portion of some of these discs would have no problem fitting on a 30GB HD-DVD. It would appear to me that many of these discs could fit in lossless tracks for both the original theatrical mix and a home theater optimized version.
There are some bandwidth intensive Blu-ray discs out there, like Saving Private Ryan. The "feature" portion on Disc 1 uses up nearly all 50 gigs and it has video bandwidth peaks that don't leave a lot of additional space for the lossless and lossy surround tracks alongside the video stream. However, discs like this seem more like the exception than the rule.
While Blu-ray definitely boasts an improvement in audio above that of DVD, there are startling differences in how sound will be treated from one movie to the next. Some discs have pretty standard sounding dynamics and then a few others such as Dredd or Prometheus will have me wondering if I'm gonna blow a speaker driver. They're not all being mixed and mastered the same way. I wonder about various tweaks that are done to the mix from one audio format to the other. The Blu-ray I have of Close Encounters of the Third Kind had Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio tracks on it. The DTS version doesn't necessarily sound better, but it does sound quite different -a lot more bass is the most notable thing.
If both the theatrical mix and "home theater" (near field, no X-curve, etc.) mix are being done at the same time I don't see why the theaters should be cheated out of a 7.1 layout if such a layout is going to be used at all. Especially these days when the "print" is a DCP on an external hard disc with very ample capacity. If more 7.1 channel tracks are being distributed this might actually encourage theaters to wire their surrounds for 7.1 rather than using the excuse "there aren't enough 7.1 movies to justify the effort." It might even get them to do more about properly maintaining their sound systems.
This sort of thing has been going on for over a decade now, all the way back to the "Dolby Digital Surround EX" days. From 1999 on forward numerous movies were released with standard 5.1 mixes in theaters but had Surround EX tracks on DVD. Lots of catalog titles were remixed with EX. DTS upped the ante by delivering a discrete back wall surround channel exclusively for the home in their DTS-ES 6.1 format. Then Blu-ray introduced 7.1 discrete capability for home theater in LPCM, Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD formats, years ahead of d-cinema offering something similar (after Dolby provided a push to use the capability). DTS' newer theatrical sound processors could do 8-channel audio right out of the box and scale to more elaborate layouts, but Hollywood studios ignored the extra capability.
D-cinema can, at least in theory (but certainly not practice) support more elaborate formats than 7.1. A discrete 9.1 layout with five channels up front, four surround channels and one LFE is do-able. But is anyone gonna bother? I suppose theater operators could pin their hopes on Dolby Atmos to give the commercial theater a way to one-up home theater. So far, I don't see a whole lot of movies being mixed in Atmos or theaters installing the sound format either.
quote: F. Hudson Miller
We often do new field recording at high rez sample rates, but often it is so it will give us more latitude in the digital post-production processing world.
Sounds similar to the principal of editing photos in deep color depths (16-bit per channel or higher). Screwing around with curves, hue sliders, etc. in 16-bit mode isn't too bad. Doing the same in a 8-bit per channel image can create all sorts of problems with banding, noise, shadow crush, etc.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marco Giustini
Film God
Posts: 2713
From: Reading, UK
Registered: Nov 2007
|
posted 03-19-2013 05:19 PM
Hello F.
Thanks for sharing your experience here, it's very educational.
I am afraid I do agree with most of the guys here. I see what you're trying to do, but the point is that a BD run through a TV or a cheap/average home theatre system will sound awful anyway.
Whoever is investing time and money on a proper setup, would like to enjoy the full dynamic, the full stereo image and so on.
Even though I am not a mixer and I have very little understanding of the workflow involved, I do believe that you should leave the tracks as they are.
Question: why a theatrical track should take more space on the media? DTS-MA and Dolby True HD are already lossless, what would be the difference in terms of space when using a theatrical track?
Also, you mention that the home track is optimised for, say, 83dB rather than 85dB.
Do you know many cinemas running their feature at 7.0? It would be 6.0 if you're lucky (that would be 82dB). More likely 5.5 (80.5dB) or 5.0 (79dB - hope that my figures are correct here). To follow your argument, you should release different theatrical tracks as well, for different fader settings! (DON'T!)
Brad,
Funny, I played the Back to the Future trailer today for the first time and I was shocked to see how much sharpness they put on the picture, it's completely ruined ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 03-19-2013 06:22 PM
Most commercial theatres would be lucky to get a full B-chain once per year, assuming no equipment upgrades or changes.. In principle, nothing should change significantly in that time, assuming that there are no blown speakers or amplifiers and that no one has touched any gain pots.
quote: F. Hudson Miller
I am sure it drives you guys crazy when we arrive for a preview and rip your rooms all apart, but the cool part of that is it should be perfect when we leave (we hope).
This is when it is nice to have a modern digital cinema processor (CP650, JSD100, etc.), where settings can be saved and recalled as needed.
Out of curiousity, why do mix facilities need to have the B-chain adjusted so frequently? I'm guessing (hoping) that it is not due to equipment damage.
I should also add that it is not uncommon for "7" on the fader to be set to some other value than 85 dBC. This is done for various reasons, ranging from the need to have additional headroom in theatres that run a wide assortment of new and old prints to problematic multi-use rooms where 85 dBC is just too loud. I hate multi-use facilities, but they are a reality, and need to be dealt with as best as possible. And is there really any difference between setting the levels so that "7" plays at 82 dBC or setting the levels normally and playing every film at "6"?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
|
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