Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: SDDS an the 8 Channel difference, er, joke.

This is topic SDDS an the 8 Channel difference, er, joke. 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=000760

Posted by Nic Margherio (Member # 273) on 03-17-2000, 02:44 AM:

Below is an excerp from the letter sent with Erin Brockovich prints:

"Prints of Erin Brockovich contain all three digital sound formats along with a Dolby SR stereo optical analog track. In case you have more than one format in your theatre, this is our order of preference:

1. SDDS 8-CHANNEL (Five speakers beind the screen)
This is the version of the film that we monitored during the mix of the film and what we consider to be the best. However, to play this format properly you MUST have five matched speakers behind the screen. If your theatre does not have five screen speakers, and you are equipped for Dolby Digital or DTS Digital, then our second choice is:

2. DTS Digital or Dolby Digital
Of course, if you have a DTS processor and don't recieve a disc with your print, please contact your local film exchange immediatley.

3. SDDS 6-CHANNEL (Three speakers behind the screen)

4. Dolby SR (Format 05)

5. Dolby Stereo (A-Type: Format 04)"

At first I was a little confused as to why they would prefer DTS or SRD over SDDS-6 when their first choice is SDDS-8. After I gave the matter some thought, however, it became painfully clear why they would choose this order: an 8 channel mix "folded down" by the processor to six channels CANNOT sound as good as a mix designed specifically for 6 channels (the DTS and SRD versions)

Therefore, what 8 channel mixes essentailly do is make SDDS-6 playback (which will occur on the vast majority of SDDS intallations) inferior to the DTS and SRD versions and also inferior to a genuine SDDS-6 mix! And for what? To play back in 8 channels on maybe 15% of all SDDS installations?!?! What a joke. Just another reason why SDDS is such a lousy format.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 03-17-2000, 05:22 AM:

What was their sixth choice? Mono? Smart?

Posted by Martin Frandsen (Member # 74) on 03-17-2000, 07:35 AM:

SDDS is and always will be a joke, im glad no theaters in my location have it. I only think that there is 2-4 screens in my country who have it. Over here dolby digital is the #1 digital system and dts is #2 represented very good even in very small theaters.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-17-2000, 10:03 AM:

Isn't that a Sony pictures release?

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 03-17-2000, 03:49 PM:

Brad Said:
"Isn't that a Sony pictures release?"

Universal. though its a Sony/UI joint venture production

Aaron

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-18-2000, 01:22 PM:

>>"At first I was a little confused as to why they would prefer DTS or SRD
over SDDS-6 when their first choice is SDDS-8. After I gave the matter
some thought, however, it became painfully clear why they would choose
this order: an 8 channel mix "folded down" by the processor to six
channels CANNOT sound as good as a mix designed specifically for 6
channels (the DTS and SRD versions)"<<

I don't think they did a separate 6-channel mix (for the other two formats) and that is was just a fold down mix or perhaps just omitting the two screen channels (I didn't hear the 8-channel mix so I can't comment on it).

There is nothing wrong with the 8-channel concept, exhibitor acceptance notwithstanding. Everyone here has their own opinion on the SDDS implimentation of it but again that is not indicative on the 5-screen channel concept. Personally, I would prefer to have a 7-screen channel system and 4 or 5 surround channels but I will settle with the 8-channel format if they were to start panning dialog again. I don't know about the rest of you but hearing a voice separated from the actor by upwards of 25-40 feet on some of these newer theatres really kills the illusion and that ISN'T something Digital Cinema can fix.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

Posted by Stefan Scholz (Member # 147) on 03-18-2000, 04:51 PM:

Steve, normally they do a seperate 6 channel mix for the non SDDS formats, or at least monitor the performance. This is probably why they choose the 6 track formats first. SDDS 5.1 folddown is more like a compromise.
It would be really nice to have 5 front channels more often on movies, and it would be even greater if it was done the way it was present with dialogue on the old 6 track films. But that was a different generation of filmmakers.
Today 5 channels seem to be used mainly to add extra gimmicks. How sad.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-18-2000, 05:08 PM:

>>"Steve, normally they do a seperate 6 channel mix for the non SDDS
formats, or at least monitor the performance. This is probably why they
choose the 6 track formats first. SDDS 5.1 folddown is more like a
compromise."<<

I'll take your word for it on the separate mix, it is the right thing to do if it is to be issued as a 5.1 mix as well.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"