quote:

---

I'm not saying "hands off" but just be sure that your superiors are okay with you going in and working on the equipment. Also, I'm assuming you know what to do.

---

He's shown me how to do an EQ, it's jsut convincing my other bosses to let me spend the money on the needed equipment. I do most of the EQs, just with his equipment when he is there.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-28-2003, 04:46 PM:
 
Any fair comparison HAS to be based on listening in the same room, on the same system, with both digital units set to reproduce exactly the same SPL levels.......

If you feed both a DA-20 and a DTS 6D into the available digital inputs of a Panastereo CSP-1200 allowing instant A...B comparison there is but little sound difference on a properly set up JBL based 4670D system. YES, you have to use the correct analyzer, THX R-2, to be absolutley sure the B chain system is conforming to a known standard. NO other analyzer will suffice for this sort of testing.

Listening on a high quality three way system such as the JBL 5672 the DTS will win by a fair margin, especially on the higher octave resolution ability. Another interesting experiment is to listen to a good dynamic SRD special effects film with just the left or right channel going. The acoustical masking used by Dolby in the SRD encoding can become quite apparent with just a single channel open. This is hardly noticable at all on left or right chan only DTS playback. Also please note that some SRD films will display this phenomina more than others and it seems to be dependent on the level of the data rate required for individual channels.

All in all if you listened to them on the same "average 4670D" system and both the DTS and the DA-20 were perfectly level matched you'd hardly notice any difference at all.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 12-28-2003, 04:57 PM:
 
Too bad the R2 is out of production.

In light of that, we really shouldn't be holding it up as a standard bearer until it becomes accessible again in some manifestation.
 

---

Posted by Matt Zeiner (Member # 1914) on 12-28-2003, 05:21 PM:
 
I dunno, Mark - seems like we could leave the R-2 out of the equation for this type of test. I don't see why the analyzer used would make a shit of difference when comparing systems run through the same B-chain. Its a great tool, but it is by no means the only means, nor am I convinced that it is the best means. Those mics suck. Good point about dropping the center channel on SR-D, tho. Makes it very easy to tell the difference.
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 12-28-2003, 05:21 PM:
 
No it should be held up as the membership card to the club:)
Just because it isn't made doesn't mean it isn't the best
But to be far there are many other RTA's and multiplexers out there
The skill at using it is the key more than the hardware
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-28-2003, 05:36 PM:
 
When critical comparison of any type of equipment at the head end is made it is a good idea and starting place to know what your B chain is doing. If you can't be sure that your system B chain is following the 2969 curve and operating properly then any comparison is pretty much meaningless. If there are irregularities in the response curve and balance is off then why even listen at all. The case of analyzer being used is due to it being pretty much the standard for this work. If anyone else knows of another comparable "standard" out there....except for the upcomming one to replace it..... I'd like to know about it?

As for the mics on the R-2...they were chosen because they can do the job and they kept the cost of the system at a level that just about any serious tech could afford. The "Live" sound direct out of the mics has nothing to do with how the analyzer works at all. Also, consider that it is very close to having the condenser element itself in free air. Only the screen is there to protect the element. I agree, it is very unfortunate that its no longer prodused. Thats also why I preach not to base a cimema syatem on a digital type processor!! Digital components become obsolete far too quickly while analog components, with the exception of a few, are around practically forever and are continually improved.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 12-28-2003, 06:14 PM:
 
I know few, very few people here in Italy that knows how to align correctly a DTS. A simple thing, just set the levels, but hard to found done correclty...

When the room is correctly set, the difference between DTS and DD is minimal. There is, but is just the difference you can found between a 160 and a 192 MP3 (perhaps not the best example!).

If you hear a LOT of difference between DD and DTS there is something wrong in the auditorium. And do not compare DTS with DD using different screens, or different films!

Bye
A
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-28-2003, 06:23 PM:
 
I can generally hear the difference between DD and DTS. One has a characteristic sound in the HF department (as in I can generally tell you what digitial I'm listening to if the speakers have a good HF response).

I would not use the 4670D as my reference speaker...the 2380 horn is very much a compromise as compared to the 2360...in fact the 4670D and the 2380 horn are not THX approved. The 4675 is the JBL reference speaker. As to using a 3-way over the 4675...the 3-way depends heavily on the xover used and has an inferior response (the HF drops like a rock above 12KHz). Whereas I can hear the difference between DTS and DD on just old-stock A-4s (Multicell HF sections with 288C drivers)...I don't buy you need the lastest to hear it.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-28-2003, 06:34 PM:
 
Steve,
Thats really my point by using the 4670D as a for instance speaker and as a result there would be little differences heard. In the many areas I travel to this is a common speaker to find installed. While a good three way would easily exhibit the diferences in the two systems. No matter what system it is though it need to be correctly aligned.

Antonio said....
"If you hear a LOT of difference between DD and DTS there is something wrong in the auditorium. And do not compare DTS with DD using different screens, or different films!"

That is only true to a point. Sure, there might be something wrong, but on the other hand if these huge differences you've heard are at a very reputable theatre then you might just be listening to a system with very high reasolving power which is located in a room with a very low NC level. At any rate if there is no spectrum analyzer of some stagdard brought in to check up then no one would ever know what is going on. Typically I find that there are little differences between digital playback systems when the B chain is a two way system, but with a good three way system the differences are definately there.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-28-2003, 06:55 PM:
 
I don't buy that either that you have to have certain speakers or the R2. So long as the two formats are being played at EXACTLY the same level and both formats are going through the EXACT same B-chain, it doesn't matter if the EQ (or other factors) is off a bit or not. The test is still fair.

Also, no group of customers are going to pay to watch a movie with only the LEFT channel playing, so tests like that doesn't matter when it comes to choosing a system.
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 12-28-2003, 06:55 PM:
 
Mark,

Yes, that's what I mean!

A bit OT: I noted too that three way systems had lower freq. response. Why? Shouldn't have three way system improved frequency response?

Steve
One of the theater I worked for had poor acoustic quality on the very high frequencies and had JBL 4670D speakers. I can always say if the DTS was playing since the high frequencies sounded a bit harsh!
But in another theater, better acoustic, I loved that clarity and brilliant high frequencies!!!!!

Bye
A
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-28-2003, 07:05 PM:
 
Brad,
Aside from performing this test for ones self to hear this interesting SRD artifact I also couldn't imagine only running the left chan. for a paying audience.

Its only fair when making critical comparisons to know that the rest of the system is performing properly.... Why would anyone ever want to assume anything in regards to this sort of thing?
Mark
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 12-29-2003, 12:05 AM:
 
The fact that DTS can amintain the channel seperation in a discrete fashion which is something SRD fails to do during complex sound portions shows up the most in a theatre with wide speeker seperation
Also one are DTS does have a benifit is at the high end
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-29-2003, 08:48 AM:
 
To be hypercritical of DTS...The surrounds have nothing below 80Hz and the subwoofer has nothing above 80Hz since the surrounds and subs share the same channels...DD does not have that particular problem. So to do a single channel test on any of the digitals to prove/disprove its capability is a bit of a false test.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-29-2003, 10:52 AM:
 
A test of any of the front channels would be very revealing. I actually prefer the surround channels the way that DTS designed them. There can still be surrounds and SW at the same time too...with the sub doing what its intended to do and the surrounds being band limited in the very lf area is actually a good thing. The typical JBL, or EV surround could not reproduce much high level below about 80 hz anyway. And those surrounds that attempt to reproduce below around 80 hz from a DD track are actually wasting power. Typically, attempting to make many types of surrounds reproduce info below 60 to 80 hz also drastically increases harmonic distortion from the woofer. These 8" to 10" woofers cones were not designed for lots of output below that and will end up absorbing alot of excess LF power in their voice coils. To me DTS appears to have thought out its design to be more practical for the surround channels than did Dolby.

Mark @ CLACO
 

---

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 12-29-2003, 01:37 PM:
 
One aspect of operation that no one has mentioned is how well the two systems perform in less than desirable conditions.

How do they perform over the splices, done well or not-so-well? Back in the mid-90's, that's the way I could tell if it was DD or DTS, just watch for the reel change and listen for the splice. DD would drop out pretty reliably (at least at the Marcus theaters here in WI), and DTS didn't present them with that problem.

Eventually, they must have figured it out, since it's very difficult to tell which sound format is used by that measure. Although, at a recent screening of one of the LOTR Extended Editions, the sound dropped out (completely, no analog either) at every splice, so something must have been done to screw it up.

How many frames can each be missing before dropping back to analog or dropping out?

As far as the discs go, my theory is that the new hard drive-based models will drive down the dependence upon every print having the discs included as they should.

Theoretically, they could begin supplying disc images via the Internet for those theaters that are missing them for a particular movie. Two discs only take up about 1.5GB, which is possible for a broadband connection to download between the time you notice the missing image and when you run the feature.

Aside from that, if you're missing DTS discs, isn't that an issue with your distributor? Shouldn't they be inventorying what they are sending out, and then also the prints coming back from theaters?
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-29-2003, 03:45 PM:
 
Scott,
On at least the latest DA-20's there is about a 4 second buffer of audio stored in the player so splices and minor damage to a frame here and there shouldn't affect the playback much, same for the DTS playback....4 seconds of audio is stored in its buffers. In fact a customer in Ketchum, ID had gotten 3 defective reels of The Last Samauri. Reel one was the worst with the green time code light constantly blinking on and off for just about the whole reel and amazingly the audio only defaulted a couple of times and then went right back to digital during very long dropouts of time code. I'd bet that time code was only being read on the average for one second on and two to three seconds off.....it seemed to come though in spurts from reel 1. DTS certainly has that part of their system nailed in place and that reel was one of the best demo pieces as to how well the buffer works! After I did a peoper "A" and "B" chain on their system it was difficult to tell when it reverted. New reels arrived a day later and they ran for 4 showings that way with no complaints. This sort of test would have been interesting to do with the new XD-10 to see if its as good at keeping up with things.

Dolby is also at least this good in their buffering system but you cannot be missing more than 4 consecutive blocks of data, or one full frame for it to not revert to analog. Another thing I've noticed with Dolby is that they have been doing continual inprovement and upgrades to the boards in the DA-20. Some of the latest boards barely resemble the earlier versions and the DA-20 seems to give the most reliable DD playback...more so than either the CP500 or the CP650. The 650 would be second best though for reliable DD playback.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 12-29-2003, 03:52 PM:
 
Mark

4 seconds of buffer for DD? On ky Dolby Digital installation splices are always present in sound. Nothing terrible but a little glitch in the sound is always present (and the CP doesn't revert to analog).

DTS handles splices much better.

Bye
A
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 12-29-2003, 04:20 PM:
 
Scott:

Theoretically, they could get the discs to ship with the movies.

Theoretically, mind you!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-29-2003, 04:26 PM:
 
You guys must not be calibrating your SRD readers properly. A dropout at splices? NEVER! And I even run all screenings with the analog exciter/led turned off, so I know that no matter how good the A-chain on the optical is that the dropout would be heard. For that matter, I have my optical in the screening room set up on it's own breaker and I never even turn it on unless I am running an analog film, and some of the prints that go through there are abused.

Anyway, I don't believe that I am that lucky or overly skilled at aligning the SRD readers. Likewise I don't believe you guys are not aliging them up properly. I can use opaque yellow tape and even with that there is no dropout.

Maybe Utah is the Bermuda Triangle of SRD. Something is amiss here.
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 12-29-2003, 04:34 PM:
 
Brad,

I didnt say dropout. I say that you can hear where are splices when in SRD. A Good printed film and a well aligned reader does minimize the problem but I can always hear the splices.

Bye
A
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-29-2003, 04:36 PM:
 
Are you missing a ton of frames at the reel changes maybe?
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 12-29-2003, 04:38 PM:
 
What do you mean?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-29-2003, 04:59 PM:
 
Exactly what I said. Are you missing a bunch of frames where you make your splice? Being in Italy, I am guessing you pretty much only get used prints that have many frames lost at the leaders, meaning when that splice comes up, the audio is "jumping" over those missed frames since they do not exist to play it, and what you are hearing is nothing more than a jump in the sound. DTS has a cross-fade implemented on their splices, so that is why I feel it may not be as obvious.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-29-2003, 05:07 PM:
 
Note I said the the latest DA-20's buffer 4 seconds of audio. I'm not totally sure about the older units, CP500's and such. But it does not seem to methat they buffered more than a second or two at most. I may be wrong though and perhaps Steve G. might want to chime on on this. I do know that DTS has always buffered 4 seconds of audio. But DTS also USED TO HAVE lots of time code read and tracking related problems as well making the buffered audio usless. Those problems have obviously been cured though as reading a second or two of DTS time code allows the DTS to keep on outputing audio for 4 seconds no matter what....even if you shut down your projector. The last DA-20's that I installed did exactly the same thing with the 4 seconds of buffered audio.....shut down the machine and the audio keeps playing from the buffer.

With SRD if you have a high error rate print or as Brad said, if your penthouse is out of alignment then a splice going through will be obvious.
Mark
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 12-29-2003, 05:40 PM:
 
Brad

I live in Italy, not on Mars! We have our labs (Technicolor, Deluxe and Cinecittà plus many little others) that prints hundreds of copies each week. Since I work for a multiplex (Warner Village Cinemas) I always receive brand new copy of print! However I do not mean the jump on sound caused by chopped frames but an instantly hesitation on sound when splice pass. I have to say that in the past with my CP500 and older prints the splices were more audible!

Mark
Do you mean that on DD prints future data is printed at the end of reel to compensate the splices?

Bye
A
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-29-2003, 06:36 PM:
 
Sorry Antonio, I don't know the distribution specifics outside of the US, just that an awful lot of US prints get sent to the rest of the world, frequently with laser scribed captions.

If you have brand new prints and you hear a dropout of any sort, your reader is not set up properly or your splices are something nasty.
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 12-29-2003, 06:49 PM:
 
No, in Italy we have ALL dubbed prints.

Brad/Mark
I agree that with CP650 and new readers (my situation) the splices can barely heard. Perhaps I'm the only one in the audience that can hear them (it depends on the prints) but they're there!

Bye
A
 

---

Posted by Max Biela (Member # 1919) on 12-30-2003, 03:58 AM:
 
No brad, we are sometimes getting prints that are brand new and have a high error rate. "Finding Nemo" had an Error rate of 6-7 in the first week! And no, its not our Reader, the Ice cream Commercial (running for nearly a year now) tracks 3, some new trailers even 2! We are not the only cinema that is having problems with SRD..

We don't get DTS-Disks either - because of piracy

Max
 

---

Posted by Alan Haigh (Member # 1781) on 12-30-2003, 04:44 AM:
 
One thing no one has mentioned is the effect of the source material on the listening test. SRD is very cleverly "tuned" to the average soundtrack, with average cinema loudspeakers in the average cinema. It's when it's taken out of this environment, such as, say with classical music in a rich acoustic, or with good hi-fi speakers, or in a small listening room, that differences are more noticeable. Here the "numbers" of the data rate win out. It is miraculous just how good SRD sounds at 320kB/s or whatever it is, the "algorithm" person is a true genius, who has ears and uses them! However, we CAN do better!
 

---

Posted by Kevin Wale (Member # 1851) on 12-30-2003, 09:30 AM:
 
I've never heard a drop in sound at the exact same time I see the splice. It's always after or before. The DTS reader is usually on top of the projector so if DTS was going to drop out, it would likely be before the splice is seen since the splice will pass through the DTS reader berore it passes through the film gate.

Dolby is often on top or bottom but either way, there would be a noticable delay between seeing and hearing the splice.

Lab splices are that way. I often find them by hearing them 'pop' through the optical. Watch it again and it's seen before heard.

I haven't seen very many DD presentations but I wouldn't use a tendancy to drop out as a very harsh judge because DTS has it's own drop out tendancies. If Brad can keep them from dropping out, it would seem to me that drop outs are for the most part either impropperly set up equipment, or the operator/s maybe not cleaning things or whatever.

Splices are very seldom in the middle of a high volume of sound so I would think that a properly set up system should survive such dropouts virtually unoticed. Recovery time I guess becomes the major issue here, but again if things are set up right, much of the equipment out there performs well in that department(referring to the dolby processors.)

Basically, Dolby requires more attention to be payed when building up a print(Isn't that a good thing?) and probably needs things to be cleaned more often and the film taken better care of. From what I have heard, read, and seen the formats all work like the're supposed to. Otherwise there would be no theatres messing with the ones that don't and I've heard of many theatres running DD that don't seem to have dropout issues.

I also agree that there is no comparison unless it is in the same room in most cases. The rooms themselves can greatly affect things. Also, things tend to drift. EQ and whatnot need maintained. Temp changes, pressure changes, humidity changes. You can't expect things to hole the same. Therefore you can't really assume the two rooms would be the same. We had a power spike followed by an immediate blackout. The next day the surrounds in two of hte auditoriums were 10 dbs louder than they were and that much louder than the stage speakers. Also, one side was louder than the other. Had to run in analog that day until we could re eq the room. Other houses had other issues. Some were fine.

There are just too many variables that can occur(even overnight) to fairly judge things in two different auditoriums.
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 12-30-2003, 10:57 AM:
 
I think there may be some confusion here about the Dolby Digital and buffering. It is impossable for the Dolby units to buffer 4 seconds because there is not way to advance 4 seconds ahead of the soundtrack to buffer the information. However, Information can be buffered but it is only 4 of the individual blocks that are on the film or one frames worth of information. That is the amount of time allowed for a fault to occure. Anything longer it will drop out.

The first DTS units, the ones used for Jurrasic Park only had a two second buffer on the timecode board. That was changed when they updated the firmware chip. We had to send that unit in years ago because of dropout issues. They told us that the firmware had to be updated to extend the buffer. This was before they started sending the chips out for field instalations.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-30-2003, 12:57 PM:
 
Daryl,
Perhaps then you could explain why the last two DA-20's I installed continue playing back audio for a couple of seconds after the film has stopped moving??? Also keep in mind while you're trying to figure this out that these are on DP-70's and the delay setting is guite large.

Mark @ CLACO
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 12-30-2003, 01:17 PM:
 
note a quote that you made:

quote:

---

Dolby is also at least this good in their buffering system but you cannot be missing more than 4 consecutive blocks of data, or one full frame for it to not revert to analog.

---

My thinking is that the Dolby Digital track has a delay based upon where the reader is placed. THis delay is probably about 3 seconds on the DP70. That is raw infoprmation that is sent to ram waiting to be processed. However, if their is an error that faults within the four block area it will switch out of digital. With this there is no buffer since there is no oversampeling to correct the error. Note: I am not saying that the DA20 does not sample the information. It just can not go back and sample it again. With DTS the cdrom reads four second ahead on the disc samples the information and puts it in a buffer to play. As that buffer dumps it keeps repeating the process. That is why timecode can be gone for four seconds without dropping out. When the buffer is empty there is no more information.

So in a sense there is a buffer but then there really is not one.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-30-2003, 02:32 PM:
 
Darryl,
I agree its a data buffer, data goes into memory and the processor continues to process that data till the memory is cleared. I didn't actually mean that it stores 3 or more seconds of actual audio. That would require ungodly amounts of RAM. With that ability it would seem to me that DD would be able to work the same as DTS if they wanted it to. If it missed 4 blocks or more it would keep outputing audio based on how far it was actually being read ahead....till it could read good data again and then simply drop data blocks to go back in sync again. Only if it ran out of buffered memory then it would revert to analog till more good data came by. I've got to wonder why they didn't go that route...makes too much sense. Perhaps thats one patent that Ray doesn't own and can't buy......
Mark @ CLACO
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 12-30-2003, 05:31 PM:
 
Mark,

I don't knwo much on this but... Since DD reader can be installed on top of the projector the processor should have a sound buffer since the sound is read in advance of the projection. I do not know how much space is allowed for installing a dolby reader but my CP650 setup software go up to 512 perforation that are 128 frames that are 5.3 seconds of sound buffer from the analog "time".

I think that it would be strange for Dolby to have "future" datas on that little square of white and black pixels!!!

Bye
A
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 12-30-2003, 05:33 PM:
 
The big thing is is that raw data is a one time thing. Therefor the dolby processor can't go back in a milisecond to sample the source data again if there is a major fault. That is why there can't be any longer than four blocks of bad data. The processor just can't mask any more than four blocks. On a CD the source data can be read more than once. That is one reason why if a CD is badly scratched it will skip or keep repeating the same thing.
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 12-30-2003, 06:25 PM:
 
is a "block" the data between two perforation?

Bye
A
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 12-30-2003, 06:28 PM:
 
That is correct Antonio.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-30-2003, 06:31 PM:
 
That may be true but it seems to me that if there is that much capacity to store raw data in a DA-20 and then to keep on processing it that it might be possible to do it with a slight redesign. At any rate DTS seems to have made much better use of the buffered data and IMHO that is certainly something major that DTS has in favor going for it over the Dolby format. That deective reel 1 I ran into of The Last Samauri was a very good example of how well DTS stays in the digital mode with just a mere second or so burst of time code comming through every 3 seconds.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 12-30-2003, 06:45 PM:
 
Mark,

The main problem for me is that while DTS has all of the data it wants on the CD, the Dolby cannot play without the data on the film in good condition! If timecode is lost the DTS plays what it found on the cds. If CD is damaged DTS cannot play anything!!!! The same for DD, if DD datas is damaged, there is not buffer that can help...

Bye
A
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-30-2003, 07:27 PM:
 
Apparently no one informed the general technical community about splice-caching?

For quite some time now, the DA-20 has been able to do what Dolby calls splice-cache. How it works is that using one of the low-bit-rate data tracks, they replicate the audio information around the reel-change splice and this is stored in the buffer. In the event there is a loss of data around the reel-change splice the buffer data is inserted and the splice plays through without a drop out.

This will only work for the reel change splices on those films so encoded and ones where the data track has not been so damaged to prevent the storage. This will not help poorly made reel repair splices or cutting out poor lab splices.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 12-30-2003, 07:41 PM:
 
Steve,

Yes, I remember that I read of that on this forum but I remember that it wasn't made on all films... Is the actual dolby's prints featuring this or is it just an idea or a future feature?

Bye
A
 

---

Posted by Rich Ferrando (Member # 2056) on 12-31-2003, 02:06 AM:
 
In our SRD house, we usually get dropouts or dips to SR between trailers (mostly because some folks here like to cut the trailers pretty tight, often not giving enough room for the Digital to recover before the sound kicks in - I usually like to leave at least 10-frames of black at the head and tail of each), but at reel changes such a thing is extremely occasional.

We rarely have the luxury of getting a new print, so we're often at the mercy of whoever came before us. Most often, there's just the one-frame cut at the head of each reel, which never causes a dropout for us. However, we do have occasions where two or three frames are cut at the head (and once, FIVE) and those can give us a bit of a "pop", but usually don't cause the processor to switch to SR unless there's also an issue with the splice.
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 01-01-2004, 09:19 PM:
 

quote:

---

In our SRD house, we usually get dropouts or dips to SR between trailers (mostly because some folks here like to cut the trailers pretty tight... I usually like to leave at least 10-frames of black at the head and tail of each)

---

I'd bet there's something else afoot at your place, Rich. I don't do anything special for my Dolby house that I don't do for my DTS screens. I have no dropout problems in the Dolby auditorium, and I also tend to run a pretty tight sequence on my trailers.

Obvious question here... you aren't possibly adding to the issue by using opaque splicing tape, are you?
 

---

Posted by Rich Ferrando (Member # 2056) on 01-02-2004, 12:08 AM:
 
Now that you mention it, yes. Our splicing tape is clear over the picture area and analog soundtrack, but does have yellow bands that cover the sprocket holes, thus blocking out a half-frame worth of digital soundtrack on either side of the splice.

Oi! I'm not particularly perceptive of the obvious, I guess.

I suppose, if I misalign the yellow bands on the splicing tape so that both the digital and analog tracks are uncovered, that would eliminate the issue. Of course, this would put one yellow band into the picture area, but that wouldn't be an issue during a black period between trailers. Or, maybe we should just buy all-clear tape.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-02-2004, 12:50 AM:
 
Buy all-clear splicing tape, or insist to your dealer that you buy "yellowline" tape from www.jackroeusa.com (Click on product link)
 

---

Posted by Antonio Marcheselli (Member # 373) on 01-02-2004, 06:59 AM:
 
Do you believe that DD can be read on a clear-tape made splice? I never did a test but seems strange to me that Digital reader can read anything throw two pieces of tape.

Did someone made a test?

Bye
A
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-02-2004, 09:12 AM:
 
Brad said in a previous post.....
"Personally, I feel the Neumade tape wins out in durability and ease of removal. Quick splice tape (manufactured by Hudson Photographic) is probably the best tape to use for archival splices, as it is extra thin, applies evenly, but does not peel off as easy as Neumade."
________________________________________________________________

So are you now saying the JackRoe tape is better overall than the clear Neumade tape? Perhaps a product review of the Jackroe tape is in order. Personally I don't remember any other splicing tape comming back off as cleanly as the Neumade clear stuff does. The majority of our customers are using the clear Neumade tapr with no problems what so ever.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-02-2004, 10:38 AM:
 
Both Jack Roe and Neumade have their virtues. Neumade certainly has the best adhesive out there if you don't want it to run. The tape always peels off clean.

Jack Roe tape (trading under a couple of different names) is a UK product and is notably thinner and clearer than Neumade. I have not had any peeling problems (leaving glue behind) but some have noted that it does after a period of time. It is available in skinnier sizes so if you like 4-perf splices (19mm wide) you have a choice. Both Neumade and Jack Roe have 16mm tape but only Jack Roe has it with magenta or yellow stripes for 35mm film.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-02-2004, 02:46 PM:
 
Mark,

If you want clear tape, my personal preference is Neumade/Splycemar. It peels off EFFORTLESSLY and projectionists with "less than ideal" skills in splicing can make a better splice out of it than anything else. However a skilled splicer should be able to get a quality splice out of the Jack Roe clear tape. I've seen lately the Hudson Photographic (Quick Splice) tape is starting to have severe slitting issues, so that's pretty much getting thrown out of the option. Like Steve said, both are fine if you are going to make a splice and leave it. However for reel changes, nothing beats the Neumade because it peels off effortlessly and does not promote the chopping of another frame. As of current, if I am going to make mid-reel splices for archival use (never to be taken apart), I choose the Jack Roe clear. If the splice will ever be taken apart, I choose the Neumade/Splycemar.

If you want a marked tape with lines (zebra type), then nothing beats the Jack Roe line of tape at any price. Oddly enough, the Neumade has peeling issues on their zebra stock, and only Jack Roe has gotten the yellow markings spaced properly. Again, if you want a marked tape, it's Jack Roe or nothing. They have 100% cornered the market.

If you want solid opaque tape, then you are a terrible projectionist and should spend all eternity being wrapped in that opaque tape like a mummy. However if you JUST HAVE TO USE THAT CRAP, go with the Neumade.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-03-2004, 01:05 PM:
 
Maybe I'm missing something, but what exactly is the purpose of the yellow lines on splicing tape? You've already cut the film, and if you've cut on frame, there's no need for marking it. If you haven't cut on frame, the line isn't going to do any good anyway.

I can understand the horizontal lines to help mark the reel change splices in an older, much-spliced print, but for anything else, what does anyone need any kind of marking for?

(Looks like this topic is drifting...)
 

---