Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Sound Sample Rates

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » Sound Sample Rates (Page 6)

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

Author

Topic: Sound Sample Rates

F. Hudson Miller
Film Handler

Posts: 48
From: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 2009

posted 03-21-2013 01:14 PM

I vowed not to get back into this but. Yes I am a sound editor. I have been on the stage with the mixers of dozens of shows. I cut, they mix. Together we listen and collaborate on the track. I have been there for pre-dibs, finals, print masters, and near-fields. My most valuable asset are my ears.

| IP: Logged

Victor Liorentas
Jedi Master Film Handler

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

posted 03-21-2013 01:33 PM

I really appreciate your participation here Mr Miller! [Smile]

That is an impressive list of movie credits!

A question I have...when changing a mix for the near field...is a high end home theater considered? Many out there have a home theater in a box type system while the best high end equipment is for those who really care and can afford it.

Cheers [beer]

| IP: Logged

F. Hudson Miller
Film Handler

Posts: 48
From: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 2009

posted 03-21-2013 02:00 PM

I would say that we make the very best sounding near-field we can. The engineering dept comes in and sets up the room with near field studio monitors at prescribed distance from the sweet mix chair. I would guess about eight feet out (they use a tape measure) and then the pink the space.

Then what ever adjustments are needed are made to make it sound as close to the theatrical as we can. There is an art to this, otherwise we could just send it through a processing chain in transfer and have a near-field. But we actually spend at least a day going through and making the two sound as close as we can.

Given the equipment and set-up we use, it would be definately called a high end mix, and the same tweaks that make it sound good on high end gear should make it sound good all the way down the food chain. Garbage in - garbage out and visa versa.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

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

posted 03-21-2013 02:36 PM

F. Hudson -- please don't look at people's comments as making you a punching bag. This is a forum where people will say EXACTLY what they think, meaning you have to be kind of thick-skinned sometimes.

We have all been in situations when we've proposed some idea that turned out to be bad, only to have our fellow Film-Techers tell us in no uncertain terms how boneheaded the idea was.

I for one am glad you are here and participating. We don't often get a chance to shoot dialogue back and forth with somebody who actually works in the movies we know and love. I'm just hoping you can put up with the occasional "Why the HELL would they do that?!" types of questions...they only get asked because all of us are passionate about presentation, whether it's in the home or the cinema.

| IP: Logged

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

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

posted 03-21-2013 02:46 PM

Personally, I don't think this discussion has helped anybody.

How useful is it to complain to somebody who is too low on the food chain to really do anything about it?

How useful is it to try to persuade somebody who is locked into a "status quo" mindset of anything?

It's interesting that, in a discussion about sound, neither side is really "hearing" the other.

And on and on it goes.

quote:
As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be.

| IP: Logged

Aaron Garman
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 03-21-2013 06:24 PM

It's helped me: I don't feel so alone in thinking many remixes absolutely suck.

[Wink]

| IP: Logged

Jarod Reddig
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 513
From: Hays, Ks
Registered: Jun 2011

posted 03-21-2013 07:06 PM

Mr. Miller I wanted to say that I really appreciate you posting here. I think in general you may have been the skape goat to the anger some of us and myself have towards the big wigs calling the shots. I think it's cool to here your perspective and I respect your opinion as well as everyone else on here.

Bobby i too am in the minority as I will travel hours out of my way for the best film prese!ntation. I have a dedicated theater space with a 10 foot perf screen and cinema style DIY speakers in a 7.2 traditional arrangement and I take movies very seriuosly.

| IP: Logged

F. Hudson Miller
Film Handler

Posts: 48
From: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 2009

posted 03-21-2013 07:17 PM

You guys should find jobs in LA! (I know easier said than done) There are so many places to see film on the big screen, and really good ones at that. Some suck, just like everywhere, but the level of presentation here is pretty high. If you are that passionate I sure as hell would consider living here. [Wink]

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 03-21-2013 07:18 PM

In the case of some of the movies being mentioned I honestly think something else is happening to make the remixes really stink. There's more to do with it than merely the difference between near-field and far-field listening environments.

Case in point: the original Dolby Digital Train sound format snipe. The original trailer, with the Dolby Stereo Digital logo, had quite a dynamic mix. It was startling enough to scare the hell out of kids and make them cry before the start of The Lion King (I personally witnessed this scenario).

Dolby released two revisions of the Train trailer. The first revision was a little longer and added some sort of pan flute stuff into it. The second revision took place when Dolby dropped the word "stereo" from their logo. Both of those revisions didn't sound all that bad, but they were definitely toned down compared to the original mix. Why did they do this?

I don't think the near field argument came into play when those mix revisions happened to the Dolby Train trailer. The first Dolby AC-3 Laserdiscs appeared in the summer of 1995. DTS and Dolby Digital mixes on Laserdisc were known for being every bit as dynamic as their theatrical counterparts (and maybe even a little more so). Home THX re-eq was still popular at the time.

Seven is one of the first DVDs I'd heard of that featured a specific near field home theater mix. The "Platinum Edition" DVD was released in 2000.

Yet several years earlier we had a perfectly good Dolby Digital trailer that, for reasons likely very subjective, was changed for the worse.

| IP: Logged

F. Hudson Miller
Film Handler

Posts: 48
From: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 2009

posted 03-21-2013 07:25 PM

Don't know why Dolby dialed it back. It is possible that some theater owners complained it was disturbing adjacent rooms. Or possibly, Dolby thought they were just over-playing their hand. When I see one of the Dolby guys I will ask them.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 03-21-2013 08:44 PM

quote: F. Hudson Miller
You guys should find jobs in LA! (I know easier said than done) There are so many places to see film on the big screen, and really good ones at that. Some suck, just like everywhere, but the level of presentation here is pretty high. If you are that passionate I sure as hell would consider living here.

F, I'm sure you have seen many presentations you consider great, but in speaking of theaters in your area these are the 3 I have seen:

Arclight - dirty prints, out of focus picture, blown stage woofers
Chinese - dirty prints, good but not great sound
El Capitan - best condition print I saw in LA, but still dusty (these LA projectionists need to learn what "film cleaner" means), sound was nothing mindblowing

At least the transition to digital will help with the poor film handling skills, but as you might've guessed, I wasn't completely blown away with the sound.

So are there better theaters, or did I already visit the best LA has to offer?

quote: Bobby Henderson
Dolby released two revisions of the Train trailer. The first revision was a little longer and added some sort of pan flute stuff into it. The second revision took place when Dolby dropped the word "stereo" from their logo. Both of those revisions didn't sound all that bad, but they were definitely toned down compared to the original mix. Why did they do this?

The story I heard was that it was blowing people's speakers. You heard it at GCC Northpark with Lion King and we never blew any speaker on it. I absolutely agree with you though that the remixed versions were awful. Their most recent remix was the closest to the original mix, but none of them were as good. This is another good example of where people are catering to the lowest denominator by remixing, when the proper solution is to blow those speakers and force people to put in proper systems.

quote: Aaron Garman
It's helped me: I don't feel so alone in thinking many remixes absolutely suck.

Come visit and we will run some theatrical prints along side DVD, bluray and Laserdisc for comparisons. You will only end up hating home video remixing even more by the time you leave though. [Razz]

| IP: Logged

F. Hudson Miller
Film Handler

Posts: 48
From: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 2009

posted 03-21-2013 09:05 PM

Arclight - dirty prints, out of focus picture, blown stage woofers
Chinese - dirty prints, good but not great sound
El Capitan - best condition print I saw in LA, but still dusty (they need to learn what

Arclight generally is pretty good. Digital projection has helped the dirt. The run lots of rep titles as well. Cinemarama festivals in the Dome every couple of years.

Chinese - is only good to experience the room. Sound sucks, its mostly Hollywood fun.

El Capitan - Flash, Owned by Disney. The only good sound is the front of the balcony. When we do premiers there the subs are augmented.

AMPAS _ Goldwyn has lots of public screenings. They use archive prints from the studios and from their own collection.

The New Beverly - recently purchased by QT and reworked. I have not been there since he fixed it up. (rep house)

LA County Museum

ULCA USC film schools

Directors Guild of America (runs public stuff regularly)

The Egyptian. American Cinematheque theater.

AMPAS is building a new Museum that has three new public screening rooms in it. They will be equipped with just about every format you can think of. 35/70 will be Norelco.

Those are a few that come to mind.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 03-21-2013 09:58 PM

BTW I was speaking of the new auditoriums at the Chinese. The big one wasn't running. Not that it matters since I'm guessing the big auditorium is worse than what I heard.

The rest of the places you listed are not regular theaters, so I'm sort of getting that feeling theater-going isn't all that great out in LA like LA'ers want everyone to think?

| IP: Logged

Aaron Garman
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 03-21-2013 11:49 PM

You can still run LaserDiscs? In AC3? That might be more impressive than 70mm mag.

AJG

| IP: Logged

Daniel Schulz
Master Film Handler

Posts: 387
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Registered: Sep 2003

posted 03-22-2013 12:00 AM

As an LA resident, I would say: the commercial cinemas are not as good as they should be, but on average are somewhat better than other cities where I've frequented movie theaters.

But as a film (or I guess I should say movie) lover, I think LA is a great place to live because of all those specialty houses screening stuff for the public. Presentation standards at AMPAS, the Cinematheque (both the Egyptian and Aero Theaters), the DGA, UCLA, WGA and so on are very, very high, and they routinely screen material you'd be lucky to see almost anywhere else in the world. It's an embarrassment of riches for film buffs.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

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

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.