Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Newsflash - Dolby EX and DTS-ES are the same thing!

This is topic Newsflash - Dolby EX and DTS-ES are the same thing! 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=006416

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-30-2004, 04:15 PM:

Really!!! No joke. They are the same thing. WOW! [Big Grin]

(This thread posted for the benefit of people who still think that ES is something different than EX. Guys, if a movie is listed as EX, then it *is* "ES" as well. It's just the dorky name that DTS gives EX tracks.)

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 07-30-2004, 06:44 PM:

I suppose you can lock this thread now? [Big Grin]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-30-2004, 06:47 PM:

No, I'm waiting for someone to adamantly come on and tell me how ES encoding is somehow different.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 07-30-2004, 06:49 PM:

It's on a CD not on the film [Big Grin]

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 07-30-2004, 07:03 PM:

Or you could say that EX is just the dorky name Dolby gives to DTS's Extended Surround tracks.

Besides, was this ever disputed?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-30-2004, 07:09 PM:

Not trying to pick on any one person here, but I see this all the time. link

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-30-2004, 08:36 PM:

If you use Panastereo's you get Surround-SX. So am I to believe that is the same thing? Where will all of this end?

Will Surround-EX work with cyan film? Does Surround-ES care if the film is cyan (or faded red for that matter)?

What about "Circle Surround"?

Since the DTS XD-10 could do a discrete BS channel(s)...I guess we might see Discrete Surround-ES

Since they are the back surroud channels...why was there no truth in advertising...just call em Surround-BS

Some clown will probably "discover" a four channel surround system and call their decoder "Super-Surround-EX" or some such nonsense.

Steve

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-31-2004, 06:40 PM:

"Surround BS"

Bwahahahahahahah......
Now you've hit the nail on the head!

Mark

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 07-31-2004, 07:31 PM:

Steve, We're talking about sound formats used on the print. Just because Panastereo wants to decode the EX/ES matrix and call it something else, that's great. That doesn't change the format used on the print.

Brad, I agree that EX and ES are from a technological standpoint identical, however they are competing formats, and they're licensed separately. And since someone like Spielberg, who has a hard on for DTS, COULD in theory license ES on the DTS track, and then mix the track down to 5.1 for the SRD crowd and screw them out of EX, I see no problem in stating both.

If you want a sound format misunderstanding and redundancy issue to champion, how about joining me and condemning the folks who constantly type "SR/SRD." That is a CLEAR redundancy since it basically means "there is an SR track, and a Digital track with an SR backup track." But unfortunately too many people just accept that now, and I'm sure I'll get criticized for not knowing what I'm talking about. Fire away, folks... I'll just ignore you.

I fear the day when AMCs way of notating the sound tracks becomes mainstream. In an email from the corporate office, they tell us all every week that movies are "A/SR/SRD..." [Confused]

But the bottom line is, I know they are the same, and yet they are different, and one does not necessarily imply the other, although usually they do at the moment. It is your site, though. So if you don't want me to correct DTS into DTS-ES when someone else has already corrected SRD into SRD-EX, then I won't do it. Your FITA forum won't be as complete and accurate as it probably should be, in my opinion, but again, it's your site, and your call.

Cheers,

Mark

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-31-2004, 07:43 PM:

I said I was not picking on any one inparticular. You just happened to be the lastest example. And yes EX and EX is the same damn thing and NO there has not been a difference ever, nor should there ever be. What about people with SRD but coupled with an ES decoder, or the reverse? It's stupid and yes I do wish people would stop stating the blindly obvious. However noting EX is different than simply posting SRD.

I do agree with you on the whole SR/SRD thing. That is moronic.

Equally useless info is when someone makes a post after opening weekend on first run letting everyone know what trailers came in their cans or attached to the print. [Roll Eyes]

We have considered making it so that after the movie has opened the thread gets locked, but occasionally that forum becomes useful in repertory times for posting noted good or bad prints via print number.

I'm surprised no one has noted "in color" yet.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-31-2004, 07:56 PM:

But ES is indeed different! It uses a discreet (discrete?) rear surround! So their EX is discrete. It is easiest just to called it EXcrete.
[av=f]

Oh wait. That's DVD. This is a film forum. Silly me.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-31-2004, 08:01 PM:

Dolby•EX and DTS-ES have different logos. Well, at least DTS finally developed a logo a year or so after launching its competing format (after getting some suggestions to do so from some particular people).

But the logos mean nothing! At least they don't mean anything to the folks making the newspaper stack ads. In browsing through the latest Gemini and Wagner Zip Change catalogs, there aren't any Dolby•EX or DTS-ES logos in there that one can put on a marquee. Of course, you could call some anal-rententive graphics guy like me who could make you some for a phat phiggidy price. Brad has the only 70mm sign I've been able to make though.

With the effort in advertising these formats being absolute crap, there's little reason for commercial theaters to invest in the next big thing. Dolby•EX and DTS-ES have been failures in this regard in both the theatrical and home venues. No ad blitz to support it. Most home theater systems are still sold with 5.1 speaker packages in spite of most new receivers supporting the 6.1 formats.

For the DTS XD-10 to get anywhere two things need to happen. First, someone like Universal Pictures needs to have a real, 10 channel discrete movie. And they need to promote the shit out of that fact, just like they promoted DTS with its launch for "Jurassic Park". You need new logos, new posters, and jeez-louise -a new freaking trailer!

For now, the vast majority of people just treat all this stuff like it is the same old generic digital 5.1 thing. They don't understand it and there aren't any titles really showing off the advantages of the new stuff.

[ 07-31-2004, 11:40 PM: Message edited by: Bobby Henderson ]

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 07-31-2004, 08:34 PM:

Oh, I know you weren't picking on me, and I don't take that stuff personally anyway. It didn't look like anyone else wanted to speak up though, so I figured I'd take a stab at it. [Smile]

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 07-31-2004, 09:30 PM:

Why does it have to be licensed from DTS at all (except maybe use of the name)? Let's say you're mixing using Dolby's EX matrix equipment. You end up with a 6-track digital master. If you hand it over to DTS to encode and make disks are they going to care if the two surround channels represent matrixed info?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-31-2004, 09:56 PM:

I think using the term "Brand X Surround Decoding" should cover just about all of them....

Mark

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 07-31-2004, 10:03 PM:

quote: Mark J. Marshall
someone like Spielberg, who has a hard on for DTS, COULD in theory license ES on the DTS track, and then mix the track down to 5.1 for the SRD crowd and screw them out of EX

You still don't get it. Both formats DO MIX DOWN TO 5.1 because the third channel is matrixed into the 2 standard surrounds.
Brad is right. There is no difference between the two, whatever it says on the film cans or anywhere else. The whole discussion is just as pointless as the SR/SRD vs. SRD thing.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 07-31-2004, 10:16 PM:

Actually this discussion is even less pointless then the SRD vs. DTS discussion. At least in that discussion the true "best processor" was revealed.

Mark

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 07-31-2004, 10:52 PM:

I said SR/SRD vs. SRD not DTS! I meant the whole which-is-the-right-abbreviation discussion (when everybody really should know it's simply SRD or more elaborate SR*D).

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-31-2004, 11:53 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
I think using the term "Brand X Surround Decoding" should cover just about all of them....

This is actually something I suggested to the folks at Dolby and DTS years ago. Something generic like an "Extended Surround" notation in the stack ads would have made the concept easier to advertise.

It's already a complicated thing for newspaper stack ad builders to keep track of three different kinds of symbol "dingbats" to denote Dolby Digital, DTS and SDDS. They could barely handle noting the difference between Dolby Stereo, SR and 70mm mag back in the 1980s.

Flash forward to 1999. You're going to add separate Dolby•EX and DTS-ES (or even Circle Surround or whatever else) logos to the mix? It just could not fly, especially when theaters could confuse the situation further to a horrible extreme by hooking up a DTS-ES unit to a Dolby Digital system or a Dolby SA-10 to a DTS equipped rig. How the hell do you advertise that? Even worse, how do you keep that straight when many theaters have more than one print and sometime have different prints playing in different formats? I don't like it that most movie-going markets don't do anything anymore to denote digital sound formats and such. But I can understand why they got fed up with it and quit providing the information. In my opinion, I still think it is information at least a few customers find important. At the very least, they like the warm fuzzies they get when they know a theater they're visiting is equipped well (and hopefully well maintained).

[ 08-01-2004, 12:00 AM: Message edited by: Bobby Henderson ]

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 08-01-2004, 12:58 AM:

quote: Brad Miller
And yes EX and EX is the same damn thing and NO there has not been a difference ever, nor should there ever be.

Who would'a thought?

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 08-02-2004, 01:55 AM:

Did anyone ever suspect that we spent all that hard earned cash on EX cp650's/DTS-ES just so home theatre amps could be marketed/marked up.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 08-03-2004, 11:09 AM:

quote: Michael Schaffer
You still don't get it. Both formats DO MIX DOWN TO 5.1 because the third channel is matrixed into the 2 standard surrounds.

I do get it. Maybe I didn't state my point properly. Either there are three matrixed channels on the two surround channels, or there's not. My point is its possible to mix one format one way (with the three channel matrix on the two channels) and mix the other format the other way (two standard surrounds without the third matrixed in). Just like it's possible the DTS track could be 5.1 channels, and the SRD track could be mono. Hardly likely, I'll grant you, but technically possible.

The whole point of FITA is to note the technical specs of the film for the folks who will be showing it. Whether or not "technically possible" is a good enough reason to allow both to be noted in FITA is a call for Brad. If he says it's not, then it's not.

Posted by Peter Hall (Member # 695) on 08-03-2004, 12:26 PM:

OK, so DTS sucks the subs off the combined surround channel like format 43 did. Inevitably there is some sub info on the surrounds (and the surround on the sub), at around (I think) 200hz. So surely there IS a difference - any of this crosstalk will pile up on the rear wall in DTS-ES, whereas this would be fed to the sub only on SRD.. Monitor the subs or surrounds if you dont believe me - for example (a long time ago) the helicopters in True Lies were recorded on the sub alone. IN DTS the whole theatre resounds with them, in SRD only the sub is alive.. Mind you, have never had to change a disk drive in a DA20 ..