This is topic Query on SMART SR-300 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=003906
Posted by Sam Hunter (Member # 1119) on 08-23-2002, 11:24 PM:
Is this thing worth having?
Have a chance to pick one up and was wondering if it was even worth while.
Thanks!------------------
Samuel Hunter Sr.
Death to DLP (Video)
Posted by John Anastasio (Member # 607) on 08-23-2002, 11:38 PM:
I use one and it works like a charm. It's really quite a nice little unit. You'll need the sound test films for a proper alignment, but it's easy to set up and costs a LOT less than most other decoders. When it's properly installed, it does a very good job.
Posted by Stan Gunn (Member # 554) on 08-23-2002, 11:47 PM:
I also use a SR300 in my home cinema, and also service a cinema with one. A simple to use reliable unit with with features before its time, and it sounds good to.------------------
KALEE FOREVER. CARBON ARC, THE ONLY LIGHT FOR THE STARS!
ALL PARTS FOR VICTOR AND KALART VICTOR 16MM PROJECTORS.SERVICE TO 35 AND 16MM PROJECTION EQUIPMENT.
35MM sprockets made to order.
Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 08-24-2002, 12:00 AM:
I have one of those, which I bought on the cheap through eBay over a year ago to replace a Dynaco PAS-3X I used as an optical preamplifer (using the "Special" inputs) for my home rig. There's not much for me to say about its performance except that it handles the EQ on optical soundtracks better than the Dynaco did.My feeling is that for a hobbyist on a tight budget seeking to get a home 35mm projection system going, the SR-300 serves its purpose fairly well, but you can do better if you can afford to. IMHO, the SR-300's usefulness in the commercial theatre has long since passed.
BTW, you can find the manual for the SR-300 in the Manuals section of Film-Tech.
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 08-24-2002, 12:16 AM:
Features ahead of its time? Which feature would that be? The lack of slit loss correction? The lack of true A-Type NR? The lack of EQ?
Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-24-2002, 05:20 AM:
Stan, What features of this unit were ahead of the CP-50 at that time? I'm sorry but thats one unit to stay miles away from. First, you have to be sure that it is at least a very late unit SN wise, or has had the factory upgrade done to it. Second, Steve K. is right! No slit loss correction, no EQ, no noise reduction. Keep in mind that this is what Smart was building during the CP-50 era. Even with the upgrade these units are famous for the surround channel "spitting" during loud passages, or loud dialog. I pulled out alot of them over the years and the theatre owners were all glad to see em go.
Now I do have faith in later Smart products starting in the MOD 3 era, as well as faith in Oscars engineering ability, but look for a later model processor starting with the MOD-3 or thereabouts. The Mod-2 is also excellent for the money and ultra reliable. Todays stuff is even better and has decent SR noise reduction emulation. There was a MOD 3 on E-bay yesterday at this link. I paid 300 bucks for a nice clean CP-50 off of E-bay three years ago. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1374891030
Mark
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-24-2002, 06:23 PM:
Mark, you gotta be kidding! The ModIII? Now that was a load of crap...There must be something like a 100% failure rate and they are some of the most god awful sounding pieces of crap out there. As to the Mod II...I trust you mean the Mod2B and Mod2C. For what ever it's worth, those seem to have been reliable. I still don't care for the sound but they don't seem to die.
To the original post...the SR300 is what it is...what are you looking to do with it? We have one or two on the "shelf of shame"
Steve
------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
Posted by Sam Hunter (Member # 1119) on 08-24-2002, 07:44 PM:
I was thinking about using this thing on my setup I am building, but I guess due to budget concerns I should forget it.
I will just run Mono sound for now and spend my resources getting the projection equipment right first.
Thanks for all the input guys!------------------
Samuel Hunter Sr.
Death to DLP (Video)
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-24-2002, 07:55 PM:
If I were on that tight a budget contraint...I'd be looking out for some older Dolby...CP-50s and even CP-200s are showing up as being dinosaurs. Heck, you might even be able to locate a deal with a CP-100.Steve
------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 08-24-2002, 08:07 PM:
The MODIII was originally designed for a manufacture client who did not honor the contract so it went on the open market....based on when the products mentioned where introduced, they did not sound too bad vs mono ( Eprad Starscope anyone??? )......I did a press screening of Das Boot during a cinema trade show and the studio rep came in the booth and commented on the great sound.....SMART SR135 decoder and UREI 1/3 octave equalizers.
Richard Fowler
TVP-Theatre & Video Products Inc. www.tvpmiami.com
Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 08-24-2002, 08:16 PM:
Approach with crucifix in hand.
Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-24-2002, 09:24 PM:
And sprinkle some Holy water on it too before adjusting to scare out the goblins! The front channels were sort of acceptable but the null had to be set for each film the theatre played to minimize the spitting and crosstalk. There was no steering in the decoding logic. Smart did make a seperate EQ unit for them too.
Mark
Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 08-24-2002, 09:56 PM:
Ahh......it was fun adjusting with the "factory" supplied earphone....as long as you did not tinnitus of the ear 
....Does anyone remember the sound field tech that Eprad would send out....the one with the two hearing aids 
Richard Fowler
TVP-Theatre & Video Products Inc. www.tvpmiami.com
Posted by Stan Gunn (Member # 554) on 08-25-2002, 12:42 AM:
Mark
As a lower cost unit compared to the cp50, as an off the shelf unit had the remote features that neither the CP50 or EPRAD had.
The units I have had to service have been very stable, and reliable I have never had any problems with spitting in the surrounds. Whereas the CP50s always had film noise in the surrounds, which to me was very annoying.
My home unit gives me no problems and has noise reduction, can`t say that film noise has ever been a worry, and most of my stereo and mono films have been around a long time.
I find slit loss adjustment not worth the worry, as the slits in my WE208 heads are set to .6 mil (not red led yet but am working on it)
What was the factory up grade and the serial No range?
I am very happy with my humble SR300, Better than the EPRAD I had, altho EPRADS were good processors also in their day. 
Stan------------------
KALEE FOREVER. CARBON ARC, THE ONLY LIGHT FOR THE STARS!
ALL PARTS FOR VICTOR AND KALART VICTOR 16MM PROJECTORS.SERVICE TO 35 AND 16MM PROJECTION EQUIPMENT.
35MM sprockets made to order.
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-25-2002, 07:23 AM:
No Richard, I'll disagree with you on that one...given a choice between mono and a Mod3....I'll take mono everytime. I too lived through the EPRAD Starscope, and starlet eras...they certainly were not perfect but I'd take them over a Mod3 too. (I REALLY don't like the Mod3 with either the Gold or Grey face).
The SR135 was indeed better than it oughta be though.
Steve
------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 08-25-2002, 10:08 AM:
The 135 had it's place during the period when most of our accounts where independents with 1 to 4 screens. Norm Schneider, the owner of Smart grew up in his father's cinemas and was ( now focusing on home theater / PanaStereo and digital devices ) always trying to offer an option.
Richard Fowler
TVP-theatre & Video Products Inc. www.tvpmiami.com
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 08-25-2002, 09:46 PM:
The SR300 and the Mod3 had the same single band noise reduction and they did use some logic steering using I believe NE570's for the gain rideing
Posted by Oscar Neundorfer (Member # 458) on 08-26-2002, 07:07 AM:
The SR300 was designed in the early 1980's. I came to work for SMART in September 1983, and we were building the SR300 at that time. It was designed and in production before I came to work for SMART. It was removed from the SMART line by 1985, as I recall. It was a relatively inexpensive stereo processor which was suitable for cinemas who wanted stereo but did not want to or could not afford to spend the money for a Dolby product.It had no eq because we offered the EQ600 stage channel equalizer if you wanted eq.
The matrix, called the DYNASPAN, had no sophisticated steering, but the left and right channels would pull down a good bit in level when center channel material was present.
I do not recall any particular spitting in the surround channel, nor do I recall having to re-adjust for each film played.
We sold quite a few of these, and even with its shortcomings, many theaters who could not otherwise afford stereo, had stereo because of it.
Believe it or not, there are still many of these in use today.
Sam's original question was, "Is this thing worth having?"
Not really. There are much better options out there now. If you asked me this in the mid to late 80's, then the answer would be yes. But this is 2002, and you can do much better.
------------------
Oscar Neundorfer
Chief Engineer
SMART Devices, Inc.
oscar@smartdev.com
Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 08-26-2002, 07:40 AM:
Quite a few of the AMC cinemas in the smaller rooms had the SR-300 during this time period in Florida.
Richard Fowler
TVP-Theatre & Video Products Inc. www.tvpmiami.com
Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 08-26-2002, 11:11 AM:
I will agree with Oscar: Find something better.ALL of the SR300's I have ever come across were horribly noisy (lots of hums and crackling that rewiring the rack did not cure but installing another [non-SR300] processor did) and sounded like crap as well.
-Aaron
Posted by Oscar Neundorfer (Member # 458) on 08-26-2002, 12:37 PM:
Aaron said:
"ALL of the SR300's I have ever come across were horribly noisy (lots of hums and crackling that rewiring the rack did not cure but installing another [non-SR300] processor did) and sounded like crap as well."I am sorry to hear that your experience was such as you describe. There were a considerable number of SR300's installed that had no such problems and sounded OK. Obviously something was wrong, although there is no way I could explain what was wrong at this point in time without actually having been there to see for myself. In fact, the SR300 was a reasonably quiet processor when properly set up. If ALL, or even a large number, had such problems, then I am sure I would have heard a great deal of complaining which I assure you I did not.
I am not here to make a defense for the SR300. It was OK in its day which was 17 or more years ago. As I said, there are much better options available now.
Posted by Mike Spencer (Member # 1364) on 08-26-2002, 01:28 PM:
I am not a Projectionist..nor an Expert by any means... But I did pick up a few pieces of Smart equipment a while back.. That I am using in my Home theater.. On ebay for around $50.00.. I have a Smart SR300 a 1130bx and a Eq. I use the 1130bx on my 16mm projector .. And Of course the SR-300 on my 35mm set-up.. I am very pleased with it.. now (thanks to Russell) I can use it... The results I get seem to be fine... for home use...But Like I stated I am no expert... Just my experience.. and 2 cents worth.. Mike
Posted by Don Sneed (Member # 955) on 09-01-2002, 11:13 PM:
I installed four used SR-300 not long ago at a theatre that wanted only center/surround in small houses...this was great for that, it sounded good....the SR-300 does not like the USL Jaxlights, I had to use different wiring connections to the Jaxlight to get the hum noise out...but when finish it sounded good...I have serval SR-300 in theatres I service, only problem I have is the monitor controls are intermittent and/or noisy...but for a inexpensive system, I would use it....