quote:

---

The CP-650 takes a day and half to boot up (don't know if this is a "feature" persay).

---

Our local Cinemeccanica guy said that this way the CP650 load "better" the software....

Bye
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-30-2002, 05:00 PM:
 
From the material I have heard, the CP-650's emulated SR is as good or better than the CP-500's Cat 222SR/A emulated SR!

Obviously, I'll take Cat. 300s or 350s over emulated SR, which the CP-500 is certainly capable of using. However, the noise of the CP-500 almost nulifies the benefits of the SR track

But back on topic...for the typical mall theatre...the CP-650 would be my choice of Dolby product of the current or recent Dolby processors. Neither are what I would have designed.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-30-2002, 05:21 PM:
 
With the faults of the CP-500 and CP-650 being weighed, I suppose it would be a good thing to just get a CP-65 and separate digital sound playback processor.

How much more does it cost to get a CP-65 and Dolby DA-20 or DTS unit versus buying a CP-650?
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-30-2002, 05:51 PM:
 
According to their web site, Dolby only sells the CP650 and CP45 at this time, which seems like an odd mix of products.

I think Dolby "almost" got the right idea with the CP500--it's a very flexible device which works nicely in many situations (though 70mm isn't one of them). If only the software had been a bit more stable and there had been a provision (probably either PCMCIA card or network connectivity) for easily saving the configuration data.

For a 35mm-only venue, does the CP200 really offer much of an advantage over other items in Dolby's past and present product line? (other than looking more impressive in the sound rack, of course)
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-30-2002, 05:56 PM:
 
Your 35mm-only restriction still rules in a lot of possibilities like 4-track mag, double system, not to mention house related things like multiple surround delays, etc.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-30-2002, 07:47 PM:
 
Steve,
Out of curiosity....What would you have designed? Its obvious that Dolby wasn't thinking at all when they laid out the 650. Also...there is really no choice of processors at Dolby if your really weigh the two options. I don't, and never did even consider the 45 as a candidate for installation anyplace.

Bobby,
The Panastereo, or Ultra Stereo and a DA-20 are the only real two routes to go at this time if you want seperates.
Yes, the 500 is alot noisier....just put your scope on the outputs of it and have a look see. Whats there would scare alot of techs! Have not looked at the output of a 650 but will in the next couple of weeks out of curiosity, hopefully all the RF is gone. I already regard the 500 as obsolete and I am quite sure that Dolby does too. It still had alot more of the analog sound quality to it than the 650 does, and thats what I prefer. I don't remember the noise level ever being a problem an any shopping mall type installations either. In a room that has a very low noise floor it could be a problem though. All in all, the 650 still does not impress me much.
Mark
 

---

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 12-30-2002, 08:08 PM:
 
Mark, maybe what you feel is a "more stride high end" of the CP650 maybe comes from the fact that there is less noise which "veils" the sound less?
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-30-2002, 09:51 PM:
 
For high-end, I wouldn't put the JS series Ultra with a DA-20 in the mix...the CP-500 is quieter! Ultra stuff has its place in the world, for sure but it definately is not in top-notch rooms.

As to what I would design...I think Dolby in the 70s had it right...have a basic processor that does what most exhibitors want (the CP-50) and have a wiz-bang processor that can do it all and then some so as to be very flexibible (the CP-100)....that carried over to the 80s with the CP-50 and CP-200...then the CP-55 and CP-200, finally the CP-65 and CP-200. The CP-500 was a such a poor replacement to the CP-200 it didn't have near the flexibility.

The "ACC RACK" Idea was an excellent one and one that Pana seems to be using though with the CP-200 it was designed from the get-go...the Pana really is just an input expander (give the 4600 a free 5.1 input and It'll give you a whole lot of flexibility.

If I were to design a processor for the high-end (there really isn't one now from Dolby)...I would have looked at the CP-200 very hard and tried to bring out something that took those concepts and brought them into the modern age.

The CP-650, to me really is just the progression of the CP-50 line but in a digital form. It does what it does but it wont do what Dolby engineers have not thought about yet.

The difference between the Dolby way of today and my way...if you want to have 3 user format buttons...place a rotarty switch below each button with a 2-digit display...all the user has to do is rotate the switch to the format number they want and on the fly you can change the format....ala CP-200 format selectors. Then again, I'd make all 8 formats changeable...

Using the software, you can create new formats as they are needed, assign format numbers to them and the above method of selecting them will allow the end user to have them.

It would take me many pages to layout the look and feel of a processor designed by me...but the above example is the way I would have gone with an upper-end processor. For main-stream theatres...just the basics...they don't need the grief or complexity nor the reliability issues associated with complex systems.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 12-30-2002, 10:00 PM:
 
Ah just bring back the CP100 and a SA5 and be done with it (and give the operator a good soldering iron for each format
And scott is that a BNCR camera you are standing behind in that new photo
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-30-2002, 10:46 PM:
 
Michael,
You hit the nail on the head. Strident is the word for the high end on the 650. I don't feel the noise level in the 500 did much masking at all of overall sound quality, not at the levels that films are typically played back at. Noise floor is really the factor on the 500, and probably more so in the studio than the real film theatre world. I feel that the 500 was just more analog sounding, like the 65....which to me is more natural. Noise level is not really the criteria here as the 500 noise level, considering all the garbage on the ouput, was acceptable, just not superior.

Steve, I like your ideas.....its to bad the important people at Dolby are not as bright as you are. They then would obviously have the superior product. I too see the 650 as being a generic, run of the mill replacement for the 50, but it also has it other uses to in the A-V realm of things. I definately don't agree with you on the JSX1000 though. Its alot more bang for the buck than the CP-45, and is usually what I used in lieu of the 45. Ultras SR decoding is excellent, however, I do agree that they could do better on the noise department. They are made with alot of inexpensive run of the mill components but they have also proven to be very reliable, and sound VERY good. Right now, in general, I have alot more faith in what Jack does than in what the the big D is doing. Perhaps some ex-Dolby employees also feel that way.

Panastereo is in a class by itself, and at the very top. The very highest quality in cinema prrocessors can be found there, a quality that the big D can only dream about. They seem to carry through on the designs they set forth(even though they may only sell a very few of an item) and I like that about a company. THEY CARE!!!!! Dolby on the other hand does not seem to carry through on alot of things...and issues, nor do they have very good customer service. Alot of customers I've met over the years have been totally turned off by Dolby and some of their personel's attitudes. To me it appears that they have really turned from a quality product company into an only for their profit company that really cares little. To me the 650 really reflects that philosophy and again we're back to them making only a generic processor. Too bad, they were once a very brilliant company.
Mark
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-30-2002, 10:58 PM:
 
Gordon--very close. It's a reflex-converted BNC. I'm sure that Tim can fill in the details.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-31-2002, 08:08 AM:
 
Mark,

I totally disagree with your assessment of the JS processors...I have found them to be unreliable, noisey, poor A and SR tracking, and their EQs are missing Bass/Treble shelving filters...requiring yet more 1/3 octave EQing for more time-domain problems. The JFM-20 has way too many failures and doesn't echo all of the button pushes to the automation terminals so a DA-20 won't see all of them. I find it too noisey to be used in any serious theatre. Would I take them over other non-premium processors...absolutely! For me, they have nothing for the upper-level. Why you and Gordon bring up the CP-45 as a comparison I don't know...I've never mentioned the dumb thing...not even in my diatribe above is it given any place!

As to customer service...I've been very pleased with both USL and Dolby. Ken and Lonny (the two most will talk to for customer service on the technical side) are top notch and have always treated me extremely well with any and all issues. The guys in New York (like Brad) also get high marks from me. The people in the Dolby RXO department also have always come through for me...I don't know where in customer service you have had your bad experiences but I can't back you up on your claim at all.

None of the above takes anything away from the great support from USL though. They too have always supported their product and shown high interests in what their customers and dealers have had to say. These two companies are not exclusive in this regard either. SMART, Panastereo/Panalogic, DTS have all earned sterling customer service marks from me.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-31-2002, 08:38 AM:
 
Steve,
I have nothing against the technical knowledge of Dolby's customer support or the rxo department, and my personal experiences with them are positive. I am only relaying the feedback that I get from various customers, old and new. I have met several new customers recently that have been seriously put off by one of their top people....there is no excuse in the book for this....ever to happen. While it is the dealers job to try to clear that up if possible, some customers are VERY sensitive to being put off by anyone and always end up going with another manufacturer that offers the best and most consistant support weather the product is superior or not. Also, my personal experience is that there is occasionally no one in tech service at Dolby to offer any support, however they do return my phone calls promptly. Lonine and Ken have always been excellent and very helpful. While I too will continue to install the 650 in typical type installations I will be thinking to myself that gee, here I am installing the second best processor available. Actually, it should be the best one out there. Its just unfortunate thats Dolby has nothing better to offer than this.
Mark
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 12-31-2002, 09:38 AM:
 
Actually without exception all the manufacturers go that extra mile for providing good service when called upon
As to the p45 I don't think I brought it up
The USL format board failures and the lack of the bass treble on the eq boards have been the only complaints I have had with the USL processors.
Also the JSX 1000 is much quieter than the other regular one probably due to the design of the backplane
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-31-2002, 03:19 PM:
 
Gord, I totally agree with you on the JSX-1000, and I ahve not had a format card failure in years....and there are hundreds of US processorsd in this neck of the woods(ok, mountains).
Personally, I would specify almost any product that is presently, or has been THX certified at some point in time, and the JSX 1000 fits that bill.
For the next month or so while I will be carrying my AC millivolt meter with me on the road to compile some S/N ratio measurements just out of curiosity. We'll see if Steve is right on his comments.
It will be interesting to record what units really are good, and which are really poor in that department. Since I am exposed to alot of different processors in the field over a months time it will be easy to do, plus the measurements will be in real world installations as well.
Mark @ CLACO
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-31-2002, 09:25 PM:
 
Please do! Where I do USL installations, there is almost always Dolby brand equipment in use somewhere and the USL processors just stand out on the noise department...compared to the CP-500 and especially the CP-650 (which now has a low-noise mode in exchange for headroom...no headroom problem if you keep the fader at 7.0 or less).

Now I will admit that most, of the USL processors I deal with at present are JS-280S which use the same cards now as the JSX...THX doesn't approve of the JS backplane due to it's ability to have the various goofy speaker configuations (ie Left, Right, Surround, without any Center) or so I'm told.

Panastereo is notably quieter than anything else I've come across and is about the only unit I could imagine using for screening rooms with close seating (5-15' from screen) and no non-sync music to mask the noise.

BTW...Mark is your AC voltmeter Digital or Analog?

Steve
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-31-2002, 10:27 PM:
 
Steve,
Its digital. A Racal/Dana thats good down to 120 uv. I also have a Leader analog meter with dual pointers in the meter movement. Will ahve to have a look and see how low the lowest scale is on that one...... Good for comparing input/output and checking gain calculations. I will probably use the Leader meter cause its alot smaller and easier to transport around.

I was at a plax today that has 2- JS220's, 2- CP-500's and 2- Sony DFP2000's. Coulda covered alot of processors in a short time butnhad to weed out an intermittent Sony problem. Have a very happy and prosperous new year!!
Mark
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-01-2003, 11:50 AM:
 
Had to weed out a Sony problem? What the dumpster was full? <I just couldn't resist>

Steve
 

---