Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Fader Settings in Theatres... What's yours at?

This is topic Fader Settings in Theatres... What's yours at? 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=001068

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 06-05-2000, 01:31 PM:

Film handlers of the world... I am seeking your assistance. The TASA (Trailer Audio Standards Association) Program has been in effect for one year now. The purpose of this program is to improve the way features are presented, by limiting the loudness of trailers. Previous to June 1, 1999, NATO was receiving 200 complaints a month on the excessive volume of trailers. Since then, complaints have dropped significantly. As of June 1, 1999, TASA has been regulating the volume of trailers by establishing an upper limit which all trailers must abide by. The MPAA is enforcing the upper limit of every trailer released, and is currently running the administration of the TASA Program.

The problem is, trailers are played so loud, that the faders are being turned down to compensate for the excessive volume... and they are not being turned back up for the feature. Hence, the presentation of the feature is being affected by the trailer. TASA was put in place to bring the features back up... by bringing the trailers back down. Make sense?

What I would like to know is:

A) What is your fader set at? (average)
B) Can you tell me the screen number and the Theatre location?
C) Have you turned your fader up at all in the last year?

The TASA committee has been slowly lowering the volume of trailers, and although the complaints have decreased. I would like to know if the purpose has been addressed... Are the faders coming back up, or does TASA have to keep lowering the volume?

And before you bash TASA, let me say that it is a slow process... Due to the numerous trailers that play for long and short periods, TASA cannot effectivly lower the
upper limit too fast or the disparity between trailers released under the upper limit and those released ealier would be significant. That is why we are cycling the upper limit down slowly, one db every six months or so.

I'd appreciate your help in finding out if this is working, and / or if it is working too slowly and needs a swift kick in the pants.

Thank you,
Ted Costas
Manager, THX Theatre Alignment Program

Posted by Josh Jones (Member # 447) on 06-05-2000, 03:26 PM:

WE ususlly have our SRD at 5.4, never touched it. people havent complained so it stays. as for SR is preset at 6.0. We are the Fargo Theatre in Fargo ND. I guess that's it

Josh

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-05-2000, 03:57 PM:

Regardless of where I work or what the systems are, I always have set the trailer fader 10db lower than the feature. Currently this is done on CA21 automations, but before that I utilized a little remote fader trick of mine to accomplish the volume change automatically. The trick is in the "Tips" section at the bottom of the screen.

I can only think of 2 features that were not ran at 85db...The Mummy and The Messenger due to incredibly harsh mixing. Trailers are 10db lower for every channel. Lately however, this has been reduced to about 8-9db, but I've noticed a lot of inconsistency between trailers. Some are now too loud and some are too soft. Personally, I'd rather have a certain date set and WHAM, that's it. It would be easier to deal with drastic inconsistancies for one month than minor inconsistancies spread out for a couple of years.

Posted by Ari Nordström (Member # 288) on 06-05-2000, 04:16 PM:

For what it is worth:

a) 7.0 average, for SR/SR-D features, 6.5 seems to be the average for Dolby A, and 7.0 for mono.

Back in the good old days when we were an "ordinary" commercial establishment (we screen classics and run previews these days, plus a film festival, and- but you don't want to know this), we set the volume separately for each trailer, to give the audience the best presentation we possibly could. We were, and are still, a chgangeover house, so the projectionist's got plenty of time for this.

b) The Draken, Göteborg, Sweden (only one screen; curiously listed as "Folkets Hus 1" at Dolby's SR-D website... Folkets Hus are the owners, but the theatre's not been renamed just yet, thankfully...)

c) Up, and down, and up, and down, and...

At the local multiplex, the answers would be quite different...

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-05-2000, 04:43 PM:

For first-run mainstream stuff, I'd say that 7.0 is reasonable for a house that's 2/3 full of people. I really haven't noticed that the trailer situation has improved at all in the last year--they're still too loud relative to the feature.

For earlier shows (which would draw fewer people), I'd tend to turn the fader down a bit; for Fri/Sat evening shows that sell out, I'd tend to turn it up a bit.

For art/foreign/rep stuff, fader settings can be and are all over the place. Trailers for art-house films are usually not overly loud, so the issue here is more related to the feature.

Posted by Colin Wiseley (Member # 247) on 06-05-2000, 08:02 PM:

We don't get trailers too often for the films we show, but I have noticed that volume levels of the trailers and features are evening out. We used to run the trailers at 5.5 and then jump up to 6.0 - 6.5 for the feature but now can run both at the same level most of the time.

One exception would be Beautiful People, an English film. Both the trailer and the movie itself were loud just at 5.0. It was the first time I ever had to turn the volume up for the trailers and then down for the feature.

------------------
Colin Wiseley
Lyric Theatre
Blacksburg, VA
www.thelyric.com

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 06-05-2000, 09:30 PM:

I run nine screens and all faders are set at 5.0 regardless of equipment. This setting is maintained for both trailers and feature. We have no problems or complaints whatsoever.

Posted by Russ Kress (Member # 461) on 06-05-2000, 11:30 PM:

Every now and then we'll get a trailer that is outrageously loud. Usually, we'll just replace it with something else to avoid possibly playing the feature at too low of a sound level.

Brad is absolutely right. Standardise the levels now and deal with it for a month.

Then you can just call it fixed!

Russ

Posted by Sean M. Grimes (Member # 445) on 06-06-2000, 08:02 AM:

I run a thirteen plex for Hoyts in Syracuse N.Y. in my smaller houses (118 or so) I will run the trailers at five and the feature at six and a half. In my D.T.S houses I run at six period and in my SRD houses I run at seven. All of my houses have been realistically calibrated at eighty five d.b. but with at least three thousand watts in my small houses and close to six thousand in my four hundred seaters the smaller houses just "push" too much. I agree whole heartedly with Brad give em a cut off point for their 1 to 1 compression and please just get it over with.

thankyou soo much for checking with this forum if there were ever a bunch of people I would ask a standing for this would be the bunch.

Posted by Marty Hacker (Member # 485) on 06-06-2000, 03:17 PM:

Ted,
I run a THX complex in Tijuana, Mexico.
All of my screens are perfectly calibrated with EQ/ and SPL levels settings to industry standards. 85dbc screen channels, 82 surrounds and 88-89dbc (digital subwoofer)

I have dolby digital in all auditoriums with 6 movable DTS units and 4 SDDS units. Again, no matter which unit is playing where all spl levels remain the same.

Essentially all my auditoriums can play feature at "reference" level.
My trailers start out at 5.3 then my automations bump up the faders to no more than 6.5 depending on the pre-screened feature. Any exceptions to this rule are sold out shows in which fader is allowed to reach 7.0.

Hope this helps,
Marty
Fader levels NEVER exceed 7.0

Posted by Kevin Crawford (Member # 469) on 06-06-2000, 05:50 PM:

Good God. I think I am the only one here that sets the fader low. My own theatre runs at about 5 to 5.5. This is a sub run theatre, so people do not expect too much.
However, I do service for several other theatres. I do not see any of them with a setting over 5.5, ever. One of our theatres even plays trailers in Dolby A, to cut down on complaints. That is Jack London Cinemas in Oakland. The theatres in Davis Ca. run between 4.5 and 5, however, the people in Davis are a bit picky. They have arrested a woman for snoring too loud.

I do agree with what everyone else is saying, let's get this overwith. A couple of months of dealing with the problem is a lot better than a couple of years.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 06-06-2000, 10:29 PM:

I'd say things are better than they were. We get a lot less complaints lately. We still get a few, though.

We have still been turning the faders down to compensate for the difference but I notice it is less.

Our faders stay on approx. "5". They could be as high as "6" but we are in a smaller town and people just LIKE the volume lower.

I'd say just get the volume lowering overwith. Most trailers only play for a month or so.

Posted by Scott D. Neff (Member # 185) on 06-07-2000, 02:33 AM:

I don't know what db level Aaron Sisemore has set all our systems to --- but we usually keep our faders at 7 for an analog performance and usually down to 5 for a Digital Performance.

We have the SDDS turned to -1.8 so people don't complain TOO much about the sound (which I can hear in my office behind three sets of closed doors)

But that's usually how it works for us. Unless it's a packed house - then we turn Digital up to 6.5 so we can blow people away with our "Might As Well Be THX Sound" sound system.

Posted by Carl King (Member # 398) on 06-08-2000, 09:31 PM:

I run 7 screens and depending on the size of the house my faders are between 5 and 6 regardless of digital or stereo.

I have noticed a great differance in trailer volumes and I'm pleased that someone had finally realized that the goal is quality and not neccessarily quantity. Good sound is always better than big sound

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-10-2000, 05:05 PM:

I keep mine at around 6. If we get a lot of older people, then it goes down to about 5-1/2. I like and enjoy listening to movies at 7, but our audience skews older and I know they wouldn't like it if we played that loud.

I don't believe in the "set it and leave it" method, since some producers/directors just like to make ultra-loud movies, audiences be damned. Gotta compensate for that, or we'd lose business. Of course it makes it easier when I only have one screen to do a listen-test on! (I just KNEW there were advantages to being a single-screen!)

For what it's worth, we've had DTS since '94 and stereo (with subs) since '92 and I have never once had a complaint that it's "too soft," and only two or three "too louds" a year. Mostly I get 'comments' (like "That was a loud one, wasn't it?")....when they say that, it is probably too loud.

As far as trailers, some are too loud, some too soft. I agree with the crowd...cut the volume now, all at once.

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 06-14-2000, 02:00 PM:

Thank you everyone, so far... It'd be nice to get as many posts as the Cap Coding topic, but I'll take what I can get.

To reply that, yes, it would be nice to get this all over in one fell swoop. And have the Trailer volume lowered once and for all, rather than cycling the volume down slowly. This, however, is the way the TASA Committee wanted it done, and unfortunately, it has been the only complaint we've received about TASA. In defending this method of lowering the trailer volume, I must say that in the world of trying to please all of the people all of the time, this is a perfect example. The Studio's Marketing Departments make Trailers, and for obvious reasons, they do not want to sacrifice one of their titles, being played at a lower volume than a competitor, at any time, for any reason. The complaints TASA would get from the Studio's affected by the "one fell swoop" lowering would potentially destroy the program. Hence, the MPAA, TASA, and THX/TAP would much rather get complaints that we're not improving the environment "fast enough", than getting complaints from those trying to improve the environment. In the long run, we're all better off.

And so you all know, I am compiling the various statistics on fader levels for the next TASA vote on lowering the upper limit,
once again. So thank you for responding to this topic. The information you are giving me is INVALUABLE, thank you!

Ted Costas
Manager, THX Theatre Alignment Program

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-14-2000, 02:27 PM:

Ted Costas said: "It'd be nice to get as many posts as the Cap Coding topic, but I'll take what I can get".

Seems Film-Tech folks are more interested in film piracy than loud trailers! Even if we don't act on it, there's a bit of larceny in each of us, as we picture ourselves as the protagonist in "Gone in 60 Seconds" or "The Thomas Crown Affair", looking for lapses in security systems at banks, in art galleries, on expensive cars, and on prints. Daydreaming about defeating CAP code is fine, but please don't act on it. You'll probably get caught.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-14-2000, 04:14 PM:

That post was out of nowhere, John

It is my personal opinion that trailers should never outshine the feature as far as sound, unless the feature is a Woody Allen flick or something like that. In other words, I don't like to play trailers that have all of these whiz-bang effects, and then the feature comes on and it sounds like crap in comparison. There are some "event" trailers that would be the exception to this rule, like the Dolby Digital version of "Twister". That really blew audiences away (unlike the flick).

It is for this reason I have the awesome Pennywise CA-21 automation play the trailers all at a standard volume of around 4.0. If I have an event trailer that needs special attention, I place it last, dim the lights and have the awesome Pennywise CA-21 crank up da sound.

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 06-26-2000, 01:16 PM:

John P.,

Don't get me started on Cap Coding, I'm not a fan... Nothing against you or any of the creators, but I tend to feel cap coding is obtrusive (obtrusive enough that at TAP we have to tell our Reel Reviewers exactly where it is so we don't downgrade the reels because of it), and that its success in halting piracy is limited at best (sure it has caught people, but check out your local street corner, the contraband is conveniently available, domestically and internationally).

Yes, Cap coding is all we have presently to work with. It's been 18 years. Wouldn't it be great if we come up with something better in the next two years, so we can stop cap coding's reign at an even 20 years...?

Yet, until there is something better, and we at THX are doing some testing on future anti-piracy possibilities (audio and visual watermarking, etc.), cap coding is all we've got. And I am reluctantly behind it.

So like I said, don't get me started.

THXfully Yours, Ted

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-26-2000, 02:21 PM:

There's a L E N G T H Y debate over the CAP code a couple of pages back on the site. It's pretty humorous at times.

Perhaps you could just direct the TAP guys to Carl Welles' thread "CAP code secrets revealed" for a nice explanation.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-27-2000, 08:28 AM:

Ted:

Talking to Joe, Tom, Brad and my other contacts at the Motion Picture Association over the 18 years since CAP Code was introduced, I know it has helped find and convict numerous film pirates. CAP Code WORKS, and that is why it is still widely used.

As you know, anti-piracy is one of the many difficult issues that the SMPTE Digital Projection committees are facing. I see numerous postings and lively debate from the DC28.07 (Theatre Systems) and DC28.04 (Conditional Access / Encryption) study groups. Right now, there are many ideas, but no consensus.

Posted by Dave Cutler (Member # 515) on 06-27-2000, 09:32 AM:

John wrote...

"As you know, anti-piracy is one of the many difficult issues that the SMPTE Digital Projection committees are facing"

Which is impossible anyways. Anything that they can come up with for a digital format can be cracked. Which is why we should throw out digital projection and stick with 35mm for all time. After all a movie is just a movie unless it's on film.

------------------
Dave Cutler

"Do or do not, there is no try."

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 06-27-2000, 06:59 PM:

Hold on a minute, fellas.

Let's not turn this topic into a anti-piracy/digital cinema debate. We're trying to raise the fader settings for features by lowering the volume of trailers, remember?

But I will say this, Digital Cinema is coming. There's no stopping it. But don't worry, 35mm film will be around long after we're all food for worms. 35mm is universal. I can play a reel of 35mm film anywhere on the globe... digital cinema will take a little while before it can make that claim. But as far as predictions go, here's a bold one: "by the release of Episode 2, there will be 400 Domestic Digital Cinema Screens." That should get me in some hot water. And regarding piracy, I know the secrets of Cap coding, how it works, etc. That's why I'd like something better.
Picture this... Over a hundred, robust, visual and auditory watermarks, implanted in a film (completely undetectable to the human eye or ear) that require a series of keys to decode and signal both camcorders not to record illegally, and VCRs/DVD players not to play pirated material. Believe it or not, it's not that far off. Sure, some guys will be able to break a code here or there, but once consumers start having trouble playing pirated material, it won't be long before they stop buying it entirely.

"Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one" -John Lennon

Anyway, we're all in this for the same reason... to put on a better show... for the best presentation possible. Lowering the volume of trailers will subtly help that, Digital Cinema is definately a good thing, and Cap coding, to me, if it isn't stoping piracy completely, it isn't completely working.

So get out there and tell a friend: Post your fader settings. The more, the merrier.

THXfully Yours, Ted

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-27-2000, 07:52 PM:

I'll talk about fader settings in just a sec.

If there is a signal that tells a camera not to record or a DVD/VCR not to play, people will just use the older stuff, all of which is available today and the quality is great! The pirate will just know that he can't use the Canon XL4 to pirate Episode 3.5, but that he CAN use an XL1 and still get decent results.

There is no way CAP Code can singlehandedly stop ALL piracy. A pirate has to be sloppy first in who he allows to purchase the tapes.

ANYWAY, back to the real subject. Lately I have had to lower the trailer volumes from 4.0 to about 3.8. It seems the dumbass trailer sound mixers know what we are up to and keep mixing them louder. Either that or people just really really need something to bitch about and no matter what we do they will complain and get free passes. Haven't we trained the public well? Just complain about anything--- any little thing at all and we'll give you a refund and 10 free passes! It's so easy!

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-28-2000, 05:36 AM:

Actually Joe, trailer settings had to be lowered to "3.5" in a few houses due to that damn Kevin Bacon invisible movie and the X-men trailer. If taken any lower, the "normal" trailers would be too quiet, but those are still too loud. Interesting to note, features in these auditoriums are still being played at "7.0", so it's not the SPL calibration of the processors.

I don't think these mixers are paying too much attention to what the friendly folks like Mr. Costas is trying to achieve.

Ted, sure there is no way to get everyone to just drop the ball all at once on these trailer volume issues, say in September when things aren't as busy?

On the CAP code thing, I believe I will resurrect an old thread with some new pictures of interest courtesy Deluxe Hollywood.

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 06-29-2000, 12:00 PM:

Brad, like the turtle, slow and steady, that's the best we can do, when speaking of lowering trailer volume. But, believe it
or not, the mixers are paying attention. They have to, it's the law. Since June of 1999, only three trailers have failed, meaning they tested over the upper limit, and each of them were re-mixed down and later certified before printing began. That X-Men Trailer you are talking about, well, all three of the versions that went out, were tested and certified. I can't say what their numbers were, but like many action oriented trailers, they were very close to the upper limit, which further demonstrates the need to continue to lower the upper limit. That's what I'm trying to do with this topic... Get evidence that we need to continue to lower the upper limit.

And to answer the "subtext" topic, yes, the older camcorders and older players will not be controlled by watermarking anti-priacy technology, so if enacted, it would be again a slow process before pirated material would be stopped completely. But, the discouraging aspect of new technology would eventually saturate the marketplace, five to ten years from its inception... which is better than what Cap coding has done over the last 18 years.

But don't get me started.

Anyway, SPREAD THE WORD TO YOUR FRIENDS, pretend this is some chain letter that will make us all millionaires, and get me more fader settings. Your assitance is greatly appreciated.

THXfully Yours, Ted

Posted by Russ Kress (Member # 461) on 07-08-2000, 02:32 AM:

I thought we solved this one!!

Match the trailer levels to the prints! I'm sure that there must be a published reference level somewhere!

Try http://www.dolby.com

Like the man said, If it's too loud, it's easier for us to just snip it off.

There's the incentive to comply! Ya want your trailer seen? Play nice and use the same levels!

Russ

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-08-2000, 03:40 AM:

Although I agree 100% with Russ and Carl, if customers got wind of this, they'd want us to cut out the "loud parts" in the movies! People hear an explosion and then go complain that it is too loud. The film gets turned down and now they can't hear the dialog! They don't realize that explosions are supposed to be loud! They don't know what dynamic range is!

I would very much like to see some sort of THX program with fancy lobby brochures or posters on display for movie patrons that explains why explosions are louder than dialog and things like that, and what THX is doing to improve the levels on trailers. I bet (or at least hope) that it would really cut down on volume complaints! The movie going public is extremely uneducated about sound, and that should be changed.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 07-08-2000, 05:43 AM:

Ted,

By saying that it's a slow process...what exactly does that mean? Surely it would be simpler to just say 'from x-date, all new trailers mixed must comply to this standard'.

It's becoming annoying and logistically impossible to keep the levels neat with this one up / one down scenario.

BTW, my trailers are set to 3.4

Posted by Ted Costas (Member # 473) on 07-11-2000, 10:45 AM:

Brad,

Slow and steady is the only way to keep the most people happy... I do agree, however, that it would be nice to just, boom, lower it to where it should be (at the same level of Features), but that just isn't the way the powers that be want it. And they have numerous valid reasons for the slow and steady route...

John P.,

This is the last non-positive thing I'm gonna say about Cap coding: Who has it REALLY caught? How many folks? How much time did they actually serve? I think you are doing a terrific job in putting the "fear of God" into people, but I tend to think that that is all it is... fear without the threat of serious punishment. Please prove me wrong... most of the people I talk to question the effectiveness of cap coding as well.

Love to all, Ted

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-11-2000, 11:21 AM:

Ted:

My direct involvement with CAP Code ended 18 years ago with the work I did as part of the team that invented the original version. My contacts at the Motion Picture Association tell me that it continues to be successful in prosecuting piracy. Distributors obviously must feel it is still effective, or they wouldn't be paying for it. Why don't you contact Brad H., Ken J. or Tom S. at MPA and get the scoop directly from them? (Mr. Vee doesn't tell me anything. )