This is topic DLP sound in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000511
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-28-1999, 01:38 PM:
How many on the forum has seen a DLP presentation (not a demo, but an actual movie)? I've seen Toy Story 2 and the sound was pretty lame. This amazes me as Gary Rydstrom produced one of the finest mixes of the year with this one. There was no crispness to the sound (sounds like the tech rolled off the high end too quickly) and there was absolutely NO true low frequencies in the mix (perhaps the tech rolled off the lows because it was a multiplex). Also, the right surround channel was kicking (with dialogue bleed) and the left surround channel was dead. I saw this film the first day and just again a couple of days ago...the problems were exactly the same. Upon walking other DTS and SRD auditoriums in that complex playing Toy Story 2, I found the sound was pretty good.Now to the reason for my asking...I've spoken with 2 people (sorry, neither is on the forum) who've reported exactly the same audio problems at different DLP theaters, specifically the lack of left surround channel and dialogue bleeding into the surround. Does anyone know any specifics? Is there a level balancing problem with DLP audio? Is the DLP audio feed "not" to follow the X curve? Or is DLP audio just lousy? I'd like to hear from others on the forum to find out if this is a common problem.
By the way, the first show I watched I sat 3/4 of the way back and it looked magnificent. The second viewing I was exactly 1 row in front of dead center in the auditorium and the pixels were driving me crazy!
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-28-1999, 02:51 PM:
How is the sound being reproduced for the TS2 DLP presentations?
When I saw the SW show in DLP at the Secaucus, NJ theatre, the sound was six-track uncompressed discrete digital recorded on a Tascam hard-disk system and synched to the picture via timecode. The sound was played through the "Dolby Digital" input in the theatre's existing CP-65. The sound quality was decent but unremarkable. The thing that really bugged me was that the sound seemed to keep going in and out of sync (by a frame or so) with the picture. The TI people explained to me that this was a fairly common complaint and that it was most likely an "authoring" problem with the encoding of the picture and sound information to digital format.
The future of DLP is looking worse and worse given the comments that I've been reading here and elsewhere about the horrible quality of some of the recent TS2 presentations.
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-28-1999, 10:58 PM:
The sound for the DLP presentations?They are interlocking the video player to a sprocketed film projector runing an optical mono track. The thought being they dont' wan't you to be distracted from the picture by stunning sound.
<Couldn't resist>
Steve
------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-29-1999, 09:27 AM:
I heard rumors that the projector running the mono track was a Holmes!
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-04-2000, 11:08 PM:
It actually is a Powers 6B (handcranked version)
Actually on the QBit unit they fed into the mag input of the cp500 which is odd as they can't directly address the subwoofer
Posted by Erich Loepke (Member # 166) on 01-05-2000, 02:02 AM:
I got the chance yesterday to see Bicentennial Man in DLP. The sound seemed a bit more harsh than what I was used to. Maybe that's because I saw it in a theater I have never been to before (it's a half-hour drive from where I live). Guess I'll have to go see the film again in a standard 35mm venue (the same megaplex is also running that title in film as well) and compare DLP with the 35mm presentation.As for the image quality, it's a little better than I expected, but still falls short of 35mm. I sat about 1 1/2 screen heights back, which was just about 2/3 of the way back in the auditorium. Most of the time I couldn't see the pixels, but they jumped off the screen during the closing credits. The contrast range seemed a bit constrained compared to film. It looked, well, like video.
The trailer for "Dinosaur" looked horrid! It was out of focus. I believe that was a poor transfer, not a DLP problem, however. There was a lot of movement in that trailer that looked blurred as well.
I hate to say it, but it looks as if DLP will be here to stay.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 01-05-2000, 07:55 AM:
Personally, I thought that the trailer for Dinosaur looked pretty bad in 35mm, too. It just looked like poor focus, although the rest of the trailers and the feature looked fine.
Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 01-08-2000, 02:27 PM:
Or a Powers 5, Gordon!
Posted by Bruce McGee (Member # 131) on 01-08-2000, 06:25 PM:
I bet it was just awful watching DLP and listening to a beatup old Holmes roaring away up in the booth. Were you hearing sprocket noise on the soundtrack, too?
Pixels and Pukey Sound! What a combo!
Posted by Stephen Jones (Member # 16) on 01-08-2000, 07:09 PM:
Give me a 35mm projector,good light,SR.D and D.T.S any day.The way DLP is shaping up film is still the best. ------------------
Posted by Erich Loepke (Member # 166) on 01-08-2000, 10:42 PM:
Like I said, the sound was barely passable, at least in my opinion. I enjoyed the DTS sound on The World Is Not Enough much more. Maybe they synced the DLP to a Kodak Pageant?But tomorrow, I'll head over to AMC South Barrington 30 (that's where I saw DLP) and see Bicentennial Man in 35mm just for a comparison to DLP in that same megaplex. I can see it now--green lines and the trademark shaky Christie image on those curved screens that make every film look like a big TV. Of course, the sound will be in SDDS! What is it with AMC and SDDS anyway? Luckily, the only AMC houses out here are two 30-plexes.
I'll post my findings with the 35mm presentation after I see it tomorrow.