Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: CP-55 and CP-65 -- Major Differences?

This is topic CP-55 and CP-65 -- Major Differences? 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=005312

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-12-2003, 09:33 AM:

What are the key differences between a CP-55 and a CP-65?

While you're at it...are they similar?

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 09-12-2003, 10:44 AM:

I understand the CP-65 is much easier to interface with a digital processor such as the DA-20 or the DTS-6D.

Ihave heard people swear AT the CP-65, and some swear BY them. on the other side of the coin, I have heard some swear AT the CP-55 and some swear BY them.

The CP-55's we had appeared to be very reliable. So, I would swear BY them. [Smile]

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 09-12-2003, 11:10 AM:

The CP-55 does not have internal SR cards, it requires CAT 180s in an SRA-5. The CP-65 has two internal CAT 350 SR cards.

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 09-12-2003, 11:24 AM:

The CP55 only has a 4-channel aux mode, and must be modified to handle 6-channel aux sources (Like digital plyers)
The CP55 uses a 222 A-type NR card but can be modded to take the 222SR/A card or can be interfaced with a SRA5 adapter to get 'real' SR from 280T's.

The CP65 has a 6 channel aux mode and all the hardware to provide split surround and subwoofer EQ and control right out of the box.

quote:
The CP-65 has two internal CAT 350 SR cards.

I have NEVER seen any CP65 with Cat 350 cards. All I have seen had the Cat 222 SR/A NR card in them.

-Aaron

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-12-2003, 12:00 PM:

THe CP65 also supports format 42 70mm when the two extra NR cards are installed

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 09-12-2003, 12:48 PM:

quote: Aaron Sisemore
I have NEVER seen any CP65 with Cat 350 cards. All I have seen had the Cat 222 SR/A NR card in them.

I have heard (mainly in this forum) that the CAT 222 SR/A cards don't track as well as the 350s do.

[ 10-20-2005, 02:14 PM: Message edited by: Jack Ondracek ]

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 09-12-2003, 01:43 PM:

Aaron wrote:

quote:

I have NEVER seen any CP65 with Cat 350 cards. All I have seen had the Cat 222 SR/A NR card in them

It is exactly the opposite with me, all the 65s I have seen have had 350s, I have never seen a 222 SR/A.

The 65 was offered in several configuration, including:

A mono version. Why is difficult to imagine, I suppose It gave an upgrade path to a future stereo installation, which a 364/E2 didn't.

An 'A' only version with a Cat. 222 only.

An SR and A version with a 222 and two 350s

An SR and A version with a 222 SR/A, I assume this was cheaper.

An SR and A version with four channels of 'A' for magnetic with a 222 SR/A and two Cat. 300s

All of these are listed by Dolby, but all the 65s I have seen have been the 222 + 2x350 version. I have no idea how many of each version were sold.

Paul wrote:

quote:

Ihave heard people swear AT the CP-65

Any idea why they don't like them? I thiink they were the best processor Dolby made, unless you need something special like more than two projectors, magnetic followers, full support for all 70mm formats etc.

I haven't used the 100 or 650, but I prefer the 65 to the 50, 55, 45 or 500. I haven't used anything other than a 65 for recently.

Quite recently Dolby were still offering two versions of the 65, I don't know if they still are, but these were only available to studios and dubbing theatres. Dolby refused to supply to anyone else. I don't know why.

Posted by Peter Hall (Member # 695) on 09-13-2003, 08:04 AM:

I dont believe that the CP65 has achieved CE certification, and with a pile of holes, an internal power supply and a flip down lid it'd unlikely to. You could debate the virturs of CE till you're blue in the face, as I doubt if anyone in reality has experienced a CP65 generating any sort of electrical noise - so be it though...

Steven - doesnt Croydon have a 222SRA ?? You are right - the CP65 Mono was a de carded version for sites intending to upgrade - the only one we've seen was at the Irish Film Institute, which came as A type Mono. (Now upgraded to SRD)..

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 09-13-2003, 11:20 AM:

The original version of the 65, equipped for SR but not for 70mm, had the 222 (2 channels of A on one card) and 2 Cat.350's (1 channel each of SR). The 70mm version (basically just for Format 42) had the 222 and Cat.300's (1 channel each of A or SR) in place of the 350's. to allow for 4 channels of A. (I guess at the time the idea of 70mm SR was too mind boggling to contemplate.)

Later when the 222 SR/A card came out (2 channels of A and pseudo SR on one card) the standard 65 came equipped only with one of those cards and the original version with "real" SR (Cat.350's) became the model 300 and was recommended for studio use, etc.

Going back to that original version, I once questioned a Dolby official why the basic SR version didn't simply route optical Lt/Rt through Cat.300's (1 channel each, SR or A) and dispense with the 222 card entirely, adding it only for the 70mm version for the 2 extra channels of A. This would seem to be a much more efficient and less costly way of building the box. I was told it was internal politics at Dolby, the folks who made the 222 card not wanting to lose the bulk of their sales.

Posted by Darren Briggs (Member # 1071) on 09-13-2003, 03:56 PM:

The CP65 can't do 70mm SR correctly, and can't do split surrounds, (Format 43) Switching from 4 channel Mag to 6 channel is a pain, due to the jumpers on the back that dissconect the Optical Preamp stage. A switch card was avalable to do this when you press Mag though.
Also to switch from Dolby 70mm to Non Dolby 70mm requires a jumper change on the back
All in all you need to add a pile of other electronics at it to do 70mm with no hassle. External NR is the way to go.
Future Projections from London helped mod our CP65 to be able to handle any 70mm format and they even supplied external Dolby NR units for A type or SR. Works a dream. Not in a huge rush to switch it out for the CP200 i have waiting in the wings.

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 09-13-2003, 04:36 PM:

quote:
The CP65 can't do 70mm SR correctly

70mm SR?? What's that? What format is that and what films were released in that format?

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-13-2003, 04:40 PM:

the Harris restoration of Lawrence of Arabia had 70mm SR prints Far Away had a 70mm SR print the Toronto print of hamlet was 70mmSR some of the new 2001 prints are 70mm SR Also the CP200 is far more versitile than the cp65 with any mods is anyday

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-13-2003, 08:05 PM:

quote:
70mm Dolby SR? What format is that?

It's just 70mm with SR noise reduction applied to the mag tracks instead of A-type. 70mm SR actually has greater headroom (+/-22db) than that of 16-bit digital (+/-20db). For a good part of the 1990's many film productions had their 5.1 audio tracks put on 35mm full coat mag six-track printmasters with Dolby SR noise reduction. Now pretty much everything is done in 20-bit or 24-bit digital for archiving.

I watched "Born on the Fourth of July" in 70mm SR at the Ziegfeld theater in New York. It sounded a lot better there than the version you find on DVD.

"Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" is another that had a few 70mm Dolby SR prints (I saw the one booked at Loews Astor Plaza). It should also be noted that Dolby SR theatrical made its debut in 70mm on two special prints of "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home" (billed as 70mm Dolby Spectral Sound in the Los Angeles ads).

I'm sure there were some innacurate ads for 70mm Dolby SR listings. So I'm unsure about SR being on the 70mm prints of "The Godfather III," "Total Recall," "Air America," "Mountains of the Moon" and "The Doors" just to name a few.

Didn't Dolby sell the 70mm-capable version of the CP-65 as a "CP-65 300"? Two add in cards is all that makes the difference?

Posted by Per Hauberg (Member # 529) on 09-13-2003, 11:00 PM:

quote:
Didn't Dolby sell the 70mm-capable version of the CP-65 as a "CP-65 300"? Two add in cards is all that makes the difference?

I my papers it is called "CP65 (70)" - and yes, that's all.

Local tech mounted a small printcard in my 65, so that both jumper functions can be done from switches in the front, but he told me, this switch card was not available from dolby as original stuff, because, they wanted us to buy CP200.
Remember also the words from the manual and the flyer about CP65: Theatres who run 70mm frequently should chose CP200 - which was not available at that time either (summer 1992).

CP 65 have been working very fine all these years, both screen 1 with MPU-1 (+ dts + ex) and the standard version in screen 2 (sr and dts only).

Only 70mm SR print, I have been running was "Spartacus", from which I got the feeling, that something was not done right. 70mm Dolby A prints sound terrific, but Spartacus was very hissy - no good sound at all. Shouldn't the difference between A and SR normally be like the same on 70 as on 35. I could live with that, but this great one sounded as if I was using kitchen speakers [Confused]

.

Per

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 09-14-2003, 12:08 AM:

Maybe I'm having a memory lock, but I never realized that SR was used on 70mm mag prints. At least I don't think I did. But thanks for the info. Were they still considered formats 41, 42, 43?

I'm in the middle of another research project requiring the use of the NY Times on microfilm. Next time I'm in the library, I'll recheck the ads for these films because I really don't remember SR being used in the ads for any 70mm presentation in NYC.

I did however also see many of the shows that Bobby Henderson saw: "Born on the Fourth of July" at the Ziegfeld and "...Last Crusade" at the Astor Plaza. Also saw "Godfather III", "Total Recall" and "The Doors" in 70mm in NYC, but I don't remember where. I think I remember the sound on "The Doors" being pretty superb, but I don't remember the sound on "Godfather III" being anything special.

What's interesting is that I went back and checked my film/format lists and of the films mentioned, "Born on the 4th of July", "...Last Crusade", "...Voyage Home" and "Mountains of the Moon" do not appear to have been included on Dolby's list of 70mm films. But maybe they fell off the Dolby list precisely because they were in SR. Born, Crusade and Mountains were however on the "in70mm.com" list of 70mm films. My notes on the "The Doors" is unclear, but they seem to indicate that while The Doors was released in 70mm mag, it wasn't necessarily Dolby (or maybe it was Dolby, but discrete and not baby boom). But I'll recheck the ads. Were any of the films mentioned Split Surround?

I also saw the restoration of "Spartacus" and I'm sure the source materials weren't that great. What do you expect for a restoration?

By the way, as I've posted elsewhere, the Ziegfeld seems closed. I don't know whether it's temporary or permanent. I believe the last show was a revival of "The Way We Were." I know that some years back, Disney wanted to buy the Ziegfeld from Clearview, but Clearview didn't want to sell. It would be a real loss if the Ziegfeld has indeed closed.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-14-2003, 01:15 AM:

This is a copy of the ad that ran in the NY Times for "Spartacus". I went to a special screening of this film held for School of Visual Arts students at the Ziegfeld. There, Robert Harris described the difficulties in building up a new print from black and white separations. He showed us a few sample rolls of 70mm film where the seps didn't quite line up. Looked like something out of a 3D movie without the glasses. Really fascinating stuff. I thought it was really cool to meet the guy responsible for restoring "LOA".

Speaking of "The Doors", here is an ad I kept from the NY Times:

I'm pretty sure "Gremlins 2: The New Batch" (does anyone remember that flick at all??) had Dolby SR on a couple 70mm prints. The ads for NY showed both A-type and SR-type Dolby 70mm mag listings in its ads.

I don't remember much from that Gremlins2 show. To be honest, the only thing funny was the part where the film pretended to jam up in the projector and melt. You saw a white screen with gremlins supposedly up in the booth making hand shadows out on the screen. Their cackling was all in the surround channel behind your back. Kinda cool. But the movie sucked. I guess Joe Dante never ate lunch in that town again.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-14-2003, 08:18 AM:

Upon listening to the director's commentary on GREMLINS I learned a lot about how that movie was originally intended to play out. The movie that was made was restrained somewhat by pressures from Spielberg and other higher-ups. Still, director Joe Dante came off sounding like he rather enjoyed the process even though he often said that he got to put all of his more scandalous ideas into GREMLINS 2.

I was disappointed by GREMLINS 2 when I first saw it at the movies but I caught it on cable a few months ago and laughed a whole lot. I think I was too young to get most of the jokes when the movie first came out and it also helps if you can get some of the "in-jokes" too.

It's not as bad as I thought but I could easily understand if someone didn't like it or couldn't remember it. Did that movie perform well at the box office?

I think the fire announcement was pretty funny. I looked it up online and here's what I found:

"Fire! The untamed element! Giver of warmth! Destroyer of forests! Right now, this building is on fire! Leave the building and act the age old drama of self-preservation!"

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-14-2003, 11:11 AM:

Martin the same format numbers were used since one had to manual pull the cat 22's out of the cp200 and replace them with cat 280T's

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 09-14-2003, 07:35 PM:

Well, Bobby, you proved that at least in the case of The Doors and Gremlins 2, my brain is mush.

I biked past the Ziegfeld today. A sign says the theater is closed for upgrading. I asked some people who were sitting (I guess protecting) the lobby what that meant and they said a booth upgrade. I asked if they were once again replacing the projectors and they said, "no", but then I asked what they were upgrading in the booth and they claimed they didn't know. I asked if they were simply installing new digital projection and they claimed again that they didn't know. I was at the Ziegfeld recently for Open Range and there was no equipment sitting in the lobby. In the past, I had seen new equipment sitting under the stairwell for what seemed like months.

Frankly, considering that the whole chain is for sale, I'm surprised they're doing much of anything in the theater. The Ziegfeld installed new projectors, new seat lighting and had a general major cleaning a few years ago.

Hope they're not removing the CP200.

The sign said that the theater is going to reopen around Sept 22nd, but the next attraction is Brother Bear and I thought that wasn't opening until Nov 1.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 04-14-2004, 06:54 AM:

About six months ago Peter Hall asked:

quote:
Steven - doesnt Croydon have a 222SRA ?? You are right - the CP65 Mono was a de carded version for sites intending to upgrade - the only one we've seen was at the Irish Film Institute, which came as A type Mono. (Now upgraded to SRD)..

You asked just after I was there, and I didn't do another shift there until last week, but I had a look on Saturday, and it has a 222 and a pair of 350s. I'm doing several days there this month.

How much difference is there between the 280/350/300 'real' SR, and the 222 SR/A version of it?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-14-2004, 07:47 AM:

Related question: I have a CP65 with the dreaded cat. 222 "SR"/A card (this was originally purchased and installed in a screening room in 1995, which must have been early in the life of the fake SR cards). Suppose I can find a real cat. 222 and a pair of cat. 350s somewhere. Do I need to do anything besides just installing the cards? The manual is a bit sketchy here as it apparently wasn't written with the assumption that the processors would ship with the cat. 222 "SR"/A.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 04-14-2004, 07:53 AM:

There is actually a pretty significant difference between the 222SR/A and real Dolby-SR...differences that even the layperson can hear and measurements on the cards also show significant differences.

Now the characteristics are similar but at the higher frequencies they don't track very well and, depending on the level, the mid frequencies don't do well either.

As such, some films show off its short comings better than others.

Steve

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 04-14-2004, 09:00 AM:

Scott, neither the 222 nor the 350 are difficult to get hold of, but the 350s are quite expensive. I don't think you need to replace the 222 SR/A; I remember reading, somewhere on the Dolby site I think, that 350s are recommended for certain purposes, playing mag masters was one of them, and I'm pretty sure it said that you can just plug in a pair of 350s when required, and the CP will use them if they are there, and fall back to the SR circuitry in the 222 SR/A if they are not. Still doesn't help with the cost of the 350s though, if you have somewhere with a tight budget. It might be worth trying to borrow a pair of 350s from somewhere to try, and see if you think the difference in sound is worth the cost; if so, demonstrate the difference to whoever controls the budget!

It's a year now since I saw you; how's things? Im coming over again next week, visiting a couple of cinemas, and the new Diesel light rail line from Trenton to Camden.

I know we have somebody here from Trenton, but I can't remember who. How's the River Line doing?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-14-2004, 03:00 PM:

I'm doing well; if you will find yourself in the Boston area, let me know.

The CP65 is for my living room, which means that a) the budget is tight and b) I'll probably be running mono (with NR, as appropriate) for the moment anyway, so as not to blast the neighbors and get evicted as a result. Still, I want to do things "right" and am hoping to come across cat. 350s someday (do they ever show up on Ebay?).

Are there any issues with the Dolby A decoder on the cat. 222 "SR"/A, or is it just with SR?

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 04-14-2004, 04:22 PM:

I'll be very close to Boston on Thursday next week, in the early afternoon, but, unfortunatly, a few thousand metres above it!

I don't know much about the 222 SR/A, though I have now used a CP-65 with one in. I suspect that the 'A' is the same as on the normal 222.

I'm projecting on Saturday, a full shift, about 11 1/2 hours, having a rest on Sunday, then working normally on Monday to Wednesday, including Monday evening which I have to do every week during term time, another 12 hour day, then I fly out on Thursday morning. The journey takes about 12 hours from door to door. I'm staying rather longer than in the past, flying back on the following Thursday evening, the 29th, getting home on the morning of the Friday. I've got that day off work, then there's the weekend, and I've just realised that the Monday is a Bank Holiday, so I won't start back at work until the 4th of May, a nice long break.

Have you ever been to England? If you ever find yourself anywhere near Croydon, let me know.