Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Allocation of Digital Sound in a Multi-Plex

This is topic Allocation of Digital Sound in a Multi-Plex 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=003451

Posted by Rick Long (Member # 213) on 05-17-2002, 12:38 AM:

I should like to present a hypothesis regarding digital allocation of equipment, in a multi-plex, for your consideration.

Let us assume that I have a group of theaters with an average of ten screens each, and that in each of these ten-plexes, I have the following digital sound systems : 6 Dolby S.R.D., 2 D.T.S, and 2 S.D.D.S. All systems, using dockers, are movable.

Further, let us assume that (for the purposes of this hypothesis) all prints are fortunate enough to have all three digital tracks.

Some houses are bigger than others obviously, and it is in these larger houses, that the prints will first be shown, then moved down to other, smaller houses, as they "play out".

Because the S.D.D.S. system relies on its information being picked up from the outside edges of the film, the very area most likely to first be damaged (due to gate-trap friction, misaligned rollers, ect.) is it not reasonable to suggest that the larger houses be equipped with S.D.D.S systems, the next smaller houses with S.R.D. systems and finally the smallest houses with D.T.S, systems (the D.T.S. relying only on a coarse time-code - not audio, thus being the least susceptible to scratch)?

Obviously, conditions will vary, according to the requirements of each print, thus this is suggested only as a general guideline.

I would appreciate your thoughts on this. Thank you.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 05-17-2002, 12:56 AM:

I would equip for Dolby and DTS in the largest house(s)...I prefer DTS, but the disks don't always ship immediately with the print, so you would then use Dolby as a backup (or in those cases when the movie isn't offered in DTS).

The drawback to this approach (given your example) is that it would then leave at least one house as "analog-only."

Real-world:

Largest Houses - Dolby
Midsize - DTS (due to disc delays)
Small Theatres - SDDS

By the time your discs arrive, they'll be in the mid-size DTS houses.

I see your concerns with the potential vulnerability of SDDS data, but my experience was that they held up pretty good (assuming they play right when they're new). Alas, I'm hearing more and more that SDDS experiences dropouts even with new prints nowadays.

An SDDS system is very costly. Frankly, I would "pass" on the format. Use the money to get 3 DTS systems (cost is about the same) and do this:

Largest screen - Dolby + DTS
Next 5 screens - Dolby
Smallest 4 screens - DTS

------------------

~Manny.

Now...where was I ?
Leonard Shelby, MEMENTO.

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 05-17-2002, 11:56 AM:

As an owner/operator of an Art House, the only answer is Dolby Digital in all houses. It looks as though we will achive that goal if we aquire another theatre. Financing remains an issure though.

To further explain, most Art Films come with the Dolby Digital track. Very few come with the SDDS track. And although most films have DTS time code, very few come with discs. So Dolby Wins.

If DTS did more with subtitling and Open Captioning then they would have an advantage. But so far these options are not wide spread.

Posted by Adam Fraser (Member # 1074) on 05-17-2002, 11:58 AM:

Im not the most technical person, but why not have most of the screens with Dolby and maybe have a DTS unit or two as modular backups if they are the least seceptable(sp.) to damage. I would think that having multiple types of digital sound would just increase the risk of user error on the part of the operator(if they are inexperienced).

------------------
Adam Fraser
www.pinestheatre.com

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 05-17-2002, 03:16 PM:

I prefer the convenience of Dolby (data-on-fillm) and its superior performance over SDDS makes it almost a no-brainer. Unfortunately, equipping every screen with Dolby Digital is an ideal that remains out reach for a lot of cinema owners: Installing Dolby Digital can be pricey (but SDDS costs even more).

If money is no object and the staff is good, then I believe that premiere houses should have DTS ready-to-go as the first choice if the discs are available with Dolby Digital as a fallback if DTS isn't an option (or if the discs are late).

DTS is not only an excellent system, it is also the least expensive of the three digital systems available. I'm slowly working my way to having all houses DTS-equipped (with some Dolby's, too).

------------------

~Manny.

Now...where was I ?
Leonard Shelby, MEMENTO.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-17-2002, 05:43 PM:

There are many reasons to favor one sound format over another, but let's be practical here. Having 3 different sound formats under one roof is just foolish. The print can only be screened in one format and it could be a few weeks before it is moved to a house with a different format where a lurking problem would pop up.

That being said, SRD has more prints than anything else. Plus the sound is on the film, so there are no discs to have to screw with when they come in missing, scratched or more frequently these days, broken.

My lineup would be SRD in every house with 2 floating dts and 2 floating sdds. All prints should be screened in SRD and reels replaced in order to run that format. The other two players should be reserved for prints without SRD or in the event of an SRD malfunction. At least that's the most logical way of doing things.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-17-2002, 05:52 PM:

Quad format prints are so common these days that most any theater can just simply equip all houses with one single format and be done with it. The decision then gets down to what system you prefer. There is no real agreement on whether DTS or Dolby Digital is better; both formats have plenty of fans. There seems to be a growing dislike against SDDS. It certainly is the last of the three systems I would recommend. One big advantage of using only one single digital audio format is you don't have to change any format snipes on the print (provided that you even use the trailers at all in the first place).

If you play a lot of art house films like Ian Price, your decision is pretty much made for you --Dolby Digital is the only way to go since most indie film product has only Dolby Digital, if it has any digital track at all. DTS is just too rarely used. If you played a lot of French films you might be able to justify installing DTS, but otherwise you have to go with DD.

One could install a mix of formats in a theater. I think the current trend is to install one base format in the booth rack of most auditoriums (such as a Dolby CP-500) and then have an alternative format like DTS available in a rollaround cart to plug into any auditorium.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-17-2002, 06:54 PM:

My usual stance is to equip for all SRD but with the miserable SRD all in one processors that are available for that format these days, I'd go with all DTS but seperate DTS playback only and seperate high quality Analog procecssors like the Panastereo. You may not get all the DTS disks right away with your films, but if you have reverse scanners in your sound reproducers with a processor as good sounding as the Panastereo I'd bet no one would be able to tell the difference in alot of cases anyway. A day or two without disks is almost irrevelent with a very high quality backup analog playback system.
Mark @ GTS

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-18-2002, 04:14 PM:

IMHO, the best sounding setup (or at least my favorite) for DTS involves using a Dolby CP-65 cinema processor, DTS-6D player, QSC amplifiers (and a THX crossover). But I haven't visited a DTS equipped auditorium using a Panastereo processor yet. I don't know what the judgment is on DTS' 6AD cinema processor.

At any rate, one can equip auditoriums in all-DTS fashion and hardly ever miss out on a digital sound film. The Carmike 8 here in Lawton has shown only two or three films in the last year with analog tracks, and all those releases were wierd indie product (like "Space Race," some Mormon church film that good booked there for some odd reason --but that one had SRD on the print, hehe).

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 05-18-2002, 04:30 PM:

I would split it down the middle with panastero for analogue and an equal mix of DA20's and DTS 6D's
SDDS can be used for the lobby music

Posted by Rick Long (Member # 213) on 05-18-2002, 09:00 PM:

Thank you for your replies. I agree with pretty well all of them.

Sorry that I was not clear in my original post. This situation (6 SRD sets, 2 D.T.S. and 2 S.D.D.S) is not for planned booths, but in existance in many of our existing booths. (I had no part in choosing this set-up, honest!)

I guess what I was asking is, given this combination, the logical set-up to ensure the best chance of proper digital performance.

Many of the booth personel here are reluctant to change digital units from one theatre to another (even with the docker system).

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-18-2002, 09:08 PM:

Please give us an approximation of seating. For example:

#1 400 seats
#2 200 seats
#3 150 seats
#4 150 seats
#5 200 seats
#6 400 seats
#7 300 seats
#8 300 seats
#9 300 seats
#10 100 seats

That'll help.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 05-19-2002, 12:40 AM:

Assuming that the analog systems in every house in the multiplex were top-notch and I wanted to spend the $$$ for digital, I'd put SR-D in every screen, mostly because there are so many films which do not have either DTS or SDDS tracks, yet have SR-D.

If I wanted a second format for the larger houses, I'd probably go with SDDS for an 8-channel installation or DTS for a 5.1 installation. If I had one or more 70mm-capable houses, I'd go with DTS as the secondary format (with DTS-70 readers and redundant units). Of course, I'd have the 70mm mag stuff, too. (but it would probably never be used)

My personal feeling is that SDDS doesn't really make sense except for 8-channel houses. DTS sounds the best to my ears, but SR-D is a very, very close second in sound quality and has better title availability and doesn't require receiving the disks.

Posted by Rick Long (Member # 213) on 05-19-2002, 01:20 AM:

Brad, sorry, I don't have the actual seating capacities in front of me, but let's say, for the purposes of this discussion that:
Theatres 1 & 2 are 400 seats each,
Theatres 3 and 4 are 300 seats
Theatres 5 through 8 are 200 seats
Theatres 9 and 10 are 100 seats.
This question, by the way, involves several theatres, not just one

Again, this is an existing situation in many of our houses, and I am not afforded the luxury of changing the equipment. The 6, 2 and 2 formula I mentioned is what I am stuck with.

Now, the booth personel situation has changed over the last few years such that anyone that has been working in the booth for two years is a "veteran".

Unfortunately,I cannot visit all of our theatres every week to assure the best digital presentation. (Too many times I have gone into booths to find that they are running in optical in maybe half the auditoriums, when a little thinking would have allowed them to present all the features in digital). They are not likely to move these systems around. Such is the world as it presently is and this is beyond my control to change.

It is for this reason that I am looking for a "generic" set-up (or allocation of digital processors) that would acheive the best chance of digital sound reproduction in most of our auditioriums (in other words, "The most digital presentation for the buck").

All this, of course, being done site unseen (by me anyways).

Again, I thank you all for your advice in this matter.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-19-2002, 02:55 AM:

I have to disagree to a large extent about Dolby Digital getting so many more releases than DTS or SDDS. It really has to be clarified which and what kind of releases Dolby Digital is getting as exclusives. Much of that product is of indie film and foreign film nature, of which most first run theaters hardly ever book at all.

The large majority of major releases (I'd say 19 of 20 on average) get distributed in quad format. In the last couple years I've noticed studios that deal heavily in quad format, such as Miramax, using quad format delivery more and more often. Even the promos for the "Operation Greenlight" film say it is going out in quad format (and this is a film that cost under $2 million to make).

I said it in an earlier post, but I'll repeat if you have a theater that specializes in showing only independent film, you should use a Dolby Digital system. If you deal in traditional Hollywood fare, it makes little difference at all between using DTS or Dolby Digital.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-19-2002, 02:57 AM:

I have to disagree to a large extent about Dolby Digital getting so many more releases than DTS or SDDS. It really has to be clarified which and what kind of releases Dolby Digital is getting as exclusives. Much of that product is of indie film and foreign film nature, of which most first run theaters hardly ever book at all.

The large majority of major releases (I'd say 19 of 20 on average) get distributed in quad format. In the last couple years I've noticed studios that deal heavily in independent film, such as Miramax, using quad format delivery more and more often. Even the promos for the "Operation Greenlight" film say it is going out in quad format (and this is a film that cost under $2 million to make).