Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: SDDS and EX???

This is topic SDDS and EX??? 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=006190

Posted by Roy Martinez (Member # 2343) on 05-20-2004, 12:44 AM:

Hello everyone,
I have been reading your posts and I never really started a new thread but it feels great, thanks for having me be a part of this! [Big Grin]

At my theatre we have several auditoriums with sony sdds processors (DFP-3000's) and we also have installed into the sound racks SA10's. I found this to be quite interesting [Confused]

. Does the Sony SDDS sound processor support EX prints?

I know its a on-going struggle when it comes to EX and ES on the forum and I would hate to beat a dead horse but I wanted to know.

Also, I have a couple of solely DTS houses with SA10's installed. I figure thats a complete waste; am I right?

Thanks for the help! [beer]

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 05-20-2004, 03:28 AM:

Both DTS and SDDS will support EX (ES in the case of DTS) if the LS and RS outputs are properly wired into the SA10.

Now, if they would just make more EX encoded films...

-Aaron

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-20-2004, 03:32 AM:

For final clarification, "ES" does the same thing that "EX" does. DTS just decided to call it "ES" to confuse people and annoy others. (There was also probably a trademark issue, but it's still annoying.)

Posted by Roy Martinez (Member # 2343) on 05-20-2004, 09:16 AM:

My original question refers to the idea of the SA10 being operational with the dfp3000. Q1: In other words if an EX print is released (whenever that happens) and I run it in the SDDS house will the EX unit function as it would with a dolby processor (CP500)? Q2: Or will the SA10 only work with dolby processors? Q3: And will the SA10 work with a CP500 that doese not have SRD installed but does have external connection to DTS?

Thanks for the help!! [Smile]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-20-2004, 02:34 PM:

Manually yes, automatically no. Still, it's no big deal to play your entire presentation in EX, even if only the feature is EX.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 05-20-2004, 02:41 PM:

Except that the optical Dolby track played in EX will have all the surround information playing through the back speakers only.

This is a nonissue if your entire show is 5.1 digital, but many of us prefer to play trailers in analog. In that case, ideally, the EX decoder shouldn't be engaged until the (digital) feature starts.

I believe that the CP650 has some sort of "auto EX" feature which works with newer films.

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 05-20-2004, 03:21 PM:

EX is going the way of SDDS...

>>> Phil

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 05-20-2004, 05:21 PM:

Scott,

Since the majority of all trailers come with all three digital soundtracks why would you and many others prefer to run them in alalogue? The only exception is a trailer in DTS if the disc you are running during a DTS feature presentation does not have the soundtrack encoded on the disc. In this case, the trailer should automatically play in analogue.

-Claude

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 05-20-2004, 06:10 PM:

There is also an SDDS technote about DFD-D3000+SA-10("satan") which you might want to check for detailed info. It is available for download for free (!) from sdds.com or this very film-tech.com website.

Posted by Roy Martinez (Member # 2343) on 05-21-2004, 01:03 AM:

Thank you all for your posts! I was informed that the way our Sony DFP3000's are actually reading EX is by a special adapter created by our friends at Oddyssey that allows the Sony processors to decode EX soundtracks. I will supply you guys with a picture of it very soon because we thought it may be interesting for you guys to see it... its quite cool!

Once again thank you so much! [beer]

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 05-21-2004, 01:45 AM:

No, no. That adapter allows the DFP-D3000 to switch the SA-10 into EX mode. The DFP itself does no EX-decoding whatsoever. The way it works is that the back surround channel is mixed into the left and right surround channels. The DFP (or Dolby Digital or DTS processors) outputs those two channels as if nothing had happened. The SA-10 then looks at the two surround channels and if it sees signal components that are the same in both channels, extracts them and routes the resultant signal to the back surround. If you don`t have a surround EX or ES adapter, it doesn`t matter because the back surround is in the left and right channels, so you can also play these two channels on a regular installation without losing the back components.
The reason there has to be an automation interface between main processor and SA-10 is that you do not necessary play digital all the time. The analog soundtrack however only contains a mono surround channel. That means the output signal for left and right surround is exactly the same. The SA-10 would assume this is a back surround situation and would route the signal to the back surround. So you would have the surround channel in analog coming from the back only all the time instead of from both sides.
Therefore the SA-10 has to be engaged when a digital format is played, and disengaged when analog playback occurs.

Posted by Roy Martinez (Member # 2343) on 05-21-2004, 01:47 AM:

your right! [Big Grin]

But can I still take a picture of it... please!? [Razz]

j/k

To be honest with you, I dont know about everyone else, but analogue sound is kind of "emergency use only" sort of thing, being that basically everything that is put on film will have some sort of digital track; not everything but basically everything.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 05-21-2004, 02:29 AM:

Maybe, but it shouldn`t sound like an emergency when the system reverts to analog. A well aligned and maintained analog system can sound almost as good as a digital system in most of the typical program material. When your system drops out, there should be no noticeable dialog level difference. Don`t make the mistake of looking at the analog system as old stuff that is only there for redundancy.

Posted by Roy Martinez (Member # 2343) on 05-21-2004, 02:59 AM:

If that was the case for analog why invent digital?? [Confused]

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 05-21-2004, 03:06 AM:

Because it can give you that extra dynamic headroom for sonically very active movies, split surrounds and a separate subwoofer channel for one of the most important elements in movies these days - explosions! Plus it is less maintenance intensive (not that maintaining an analog system is intensive work, but most of the systems don`t get maintained at all). But for a lot of the more moderate content, it doesn`t make that big a difference.
And of course, unless people damage the tracks or CDs, it doesn`t degrade with multiple showings.

A lot of people think digital necessarily sounds much better because they had been treated to bad analog systems for a long time. On the other hand, many digital systems have simply been added to older installations - now we have digital! - without taking into account that the digital formats have 10dB more headroom which is simply too much for a lot of systems which were dimensioned for analog. So the amplifiers go into clipping, the speakers into distortion and eventually components start blowing up. Plus when you have speakers with a high frequency response just good enough for 70s analog tracks, you lose the theoretical full frequency range of the digital format.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 05-21-2004, 08:24 AM:

Why I Don't Play Trailers In Digital:

1. Trailers are invariably mixed too loud, and playing the optical track (in SR, without subwoofer, at a lower-than-7.0-level--easy to set up as a custom format on the CP500) provides a sort of natural compressor/limiter. Quiet sounds don't become inaudible as they would in a digital track with greater dynamic range, and loud sounds don't blast the audience members out of their seats. I have no problem with blasting the audience members out of their seats during a well-mixed action film, but I do have a problem with trailers that are louder than the feature. [Smile]

2. Not all trailers or features are available with digital tracks, and playing trailers in SR and the feature in SR (or A or mono, as appropriate) provides greater consistency to the presentation. This is especially true with limited-release art-house titles, but also applies to some mainstream titles. Trailers shouldn't sound noticeably better than features.

3. Many of the venues where I am likely to show film don't have digital capability, anyway. Some are still mono.

If every piece of film that I handled had a playable digital track and every venue were capable of reproducing digital sound reliably and if trailers were mixed in a more reasonable way, then I might feel differently.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 05-21-2004, 03:55 PM:

quote:
Why I Don't Play Trailers In Digital:

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre trailer must have been very unimpressive in your theaters, then... (That's the most recent trailer I can remember that took full advantage of split surrounds)

quote: Brad Miller
For final clarification, "ES" does the same thing that "EX" does.

Actually, isn't Dolby Digital EX matrixed, and DTS ES discrete?

According to Dolby:
The system uses 5.1-channel Dolby Digital and delivers an additional surround channel by mixing the signal into the left surround and right surround channels using a process called matrix encoding.

And according to DTS:
DTS-ES encodes a 6.1 input (L, C, R, Ls, Cs, Rs, LFE) to provide simultaneously both a discrete 6.1 bitstream and a downmixed 5.1 bitstream that is backward compatible with existing decoders.

In theory, this should result in a slightly better Center Surround channel. However, in my experience, the back channel has never been much of a noticeable factor in the films I've seen in theaters. This is most likely due to the fact that I'm pretty far away from that back channel since I don't like to sit too far up in the stadium seating auditoriums around here.

Now, home theater is a completely different animal. Watching Gladiator in DTS-ES with a good home system was a very good example of putting that back surround to good use. (Movie theaters can't afford to keep losing to home theaters like this)

Posted by Dean Kollet (Member # 1789) on 05-21-2004, 04:16 PM:

From what I read...it is saying that the channel is encoded onto the 5.1 Audio track so that it's backwards compatible, and if you have the EX decoder, it will pick it up. It's not just matrixing the surround channels to make a new channel. Sort of the way SR is on a Stereo Print right?

quote: Scott Jentsch
(Movie theaters can't afford to keep losing to home theaters like this)

Well, a good tuned Home Theatre will sound amazing, but then again the rear speakers commonly set WAY too loud just so people can hear it. And as far as Video....how are Movie Theatres losing to Home Theatres.....

A Properly set up Movie Theatre (of the right size of course) will blow away many Home Theatres (unless you are spending the same amount at Home as you would in the Movie Theatre)

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 05-21-2004, 05:47 PM:

I had an opportunity to see "GLADIATOR" at the Waikiki #1 a few months before it closed and the the digital sound in that auditorium was SDDS-8 with a Dolby EX unit. According to the operator, the EX was engaged and the presentation as usual was awesome but the rear speaker sound was very weak. Because the Waikiki' had a 60 foot screen, I always tried to seat as close to the rear as possible whenever I saw an EX presentation there. The home video presentation on the other hand was a total different aural experience. I have the DTS-ES 6.1 DVD and the rear surround sound is very powerful. I also think the home video version is more powerful than the theatrical presentation with a much stronger LFE in addition to the discrete rear surround track .

-Claude

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-21-2004, 06:43 PM:

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
I also think the home video version is more powerful than the theatrical presentation with a much stronger LFE in addition to the discrete rear surround track .

NEWSFLASH - it ain't the DVD!

I think you are forgetting that no two rooms and no two systems will sound the same. For instance, I was at a theater I service yesterday that was running Van Helsing in a JBL auditorium and another auditorium with Klipsch speakers. (The Klipsch were put in before I started servicing this location, so don't blame me!) The JBL auditorium sounded absolutely phenomenal, and the Klipsch auditorium sounded bland and extremely weak in the low frequencies. This is par for the course, as Klipsch speakers have never had a really good low end and are a lousy choice for cinema sound. I tuned both of those houses with the same gear and everything about the auditoriums and sound racks are identical, except for the speakers. The mix of Van Helsing was fine, it was just the substandard choice of loudspeakers killing the presentation in the Klipsch auditorium.

I also have a unique situation of being able to play a SRD / DTS / SDDS 35mm presentation in my screening room and A/B comparing it to the 5.1 DVD playing alongside it. While many DVDs have a little bit different mix to compensate for the typical home video system, (and yes there is a higher bitrate for you super nerds who are only interested in numbers), the 35mm sound is always either a tie, or preferred to the DVD sound by everyone who has heard the side by side tests.

Simply put, the blame for the Waikiki #1 presentation was either a poor choice of speakers, poor tuning or a little bit of both. It is also possible that your home video system is not properly calibrated as well, with too much LFE and your surrounds turned up too high. Either that or a combination of everything in this paragraph combined.

(BTW, anyone want to buy some Klipsch speakers?)

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-21-2004, 07:55 PM:

Which klipsch speakers are they, perhaps La Scallas and no subwoofer? Its hard to type Klipsch as I don't have a lisp to my typing! Actually Kilipsh speakers can and will sound excellent when EQ'd with the R-2. They also HAVE TO be mated with a horn loaded Subwoofer to sound their best... to help keep the LF stuff in phase. I would definately say that its an inproperly designed system on top of what ever else may be wrong. In the past I have installed tons (literally because they're VERY heavy)of Klipsch speaker systems along with the aid of an unnamable person we are not allowed to mention on this site. These systems to my ears always had a boomy bottom end and definate lack of high frequencies, especially the extreme highs. I also have had quite a few opportunities to confirm that exact audible effect I get when I listen to them. HOWEVER....they can be tuned to sound really good if you use the R-2. I've owned and tried several other analyzers with single and multiple mics and they simply don't work like the R-2 does on these speakers for what ever reason. I tuned a set of them last January and the before and after results were way more than dramatic, all of the people at this location also thought the difference was nothing short of phenominal. I have these graphs saved on my laptop and wish I could post them here... Will see if I can print and then scan them if possible.

NOTE: I do not advocate purchasing or installing these speakers any longer.... Its been 15 years since I installed my last pair.... There are other speaker systems today that are far, far better.

Mark

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 05-22-2004, 07:23 AM:

Scott J. asks, "Actually, isn't Dolby Digital EX matrixed, and DTS ES discrete?"

No.

Theatrical DTS-ES is matrixed, just like SRD-EX.

Discrete DTS-EX exists for home theatre DVDs only.

--jhawk

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 05-24-2004, 12:02 PM:

John,

You are correct. I double-checked the documents that I referenced, and the DTS doc did mention DVD and home presentations. Wanting to confirm that theatrical ES was matrix, I went digging on DTS' site and found a press release that said

About DTS-ES
DTS-ES is a 6.1 matrixed system enabling cinemas to deliver extreme spatial effects that quite literally surround the audience. The 19” rack mounting DTS-ES decoder creates a back surround channel from encoded surround tracks, in typical theatre applications feeding a Back Surround (BS) speaker array (configured as left-back-wall and right-back-wall for stereo operation).
http://www.dtsonline.com/cinema/press-article.php?ID=1149094120&yID=2003&cID=

quote: Dean Kollet
And as far as Video....how are Movie Theatres losing to Home Theatres.....

Well, for many reasons. The fact that DTS-ES has a discrete back surround channel on DVD instead of matrixed on theatrical release is just one.

The fact that studios often make much more on video than they do during theatrical release is another. Capitalism dictates that businesses go where the money is, and shortened release windows and composition with an eye towards the home market are just a few signs of that fact.

Currently, the most significant advantage that theaters have is exclusivity of the product. Pirates and file-swappers are eroding that advantage as well.

The good news is that theaters have the ability to make the complete movie-going experience better than home theaters, and also show how putrid bootlegged and swapped versions of movies really are. But that's digressing from the original topic of this thread.

Very few theaters, in my experience, do anything to advertise that they are showing a movie in EX of any variety. Their box office does not indicate sound formats, the auditorium entrance does not display the sound format, and god-forbid a theater should show a sound format trailer these days.

The BigScreen Cinema Guide (my site) has the ability to show all the digital sound formats and the ES/EX varieties. I can't remember the last time a theater indicated anything beyond Dolby or DTS, and mostly they just say "Digital Sound".

I didn't even bother creating an SDDS-8 graphic, since we only have one theater listed which has SDDS-8 capability, and they never indicated it in their showtimes.

The formats BigScreen can indicate:
http://www.bigscreen.com/Help.php?id=7

Dolby's site lists many, many theaters here in Wisconsin that are EX-equipped. It's very unfortunate that these theaters are not taking advantage of the opportunity provided to them to advertise to their customers of that capability.

By using technology such as ES/EX and 5 screen channels, and using them to augment a flawless picture presentation, theaters have the ability to invest more money than consumers ever could in their home systems. I heard at one point that a height channel was being explored, but I don't recall where or who was involved. That's something that would be very difficult for most to try in their home.

However, the home system I'm building right now will eclipse the sound performance of most of the theaters within driving distance. The projector will also deliver a sharper and more stable image than what is common in theaters, with a black level that is pretty comparable, if not a little better.

Like I said, studios will follow the money, and that means that theaters will continue to be squeezed to compete with home video. Right now, a theatrical run is still deemed necessary to make a video release a success, but how long will that last? It's largely a marketing and PR challenge that can be overcome given the motivation and budget.

From the DTS web site, only 2 movies in theaters are in DTS-ES (Alamo, LOTR:ROTK) and Harry Potter is the only upcoming movie with ES. Unfortunately, Dolby doesn't differentiate their EX movies. Are there any sources for that information for upcoming films?

I think BigScreen is a bit of a rarity among sites that list showtimes for theaters regardless of corporate affiliation (Yahoo, Hollywood.com, etc.) in that we try to help theaters with that aspect. Usually, all they display is "Digital Sound" if anything.

Are there examples of theaters that do publicity right?

Posted by Alan Haigh (Member # 1781) on 05-24-2004, 03:24 PM:

I hate to break it to you, but Harry Potter is not ES/EX. No tears now... [Smile]

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 05-24-2004, 05:38 PM:

But what about the IMAX DMR sound mix? [Roll Eyes]

Seriously, are the two edited in-sync so you could actually port the sound from one to the other, technical and legal issues aside?

--jhawk

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 05-24-2004, 06:38 PM:

IMAX is a L-C-R LS RS system with the added top channel which I doubt they use for DMR and the sub is a bass management sum of the mix