quote: Richard May

---

True, but with SRD and DTS, you don't need the SR.

---

I completely disagree. Lots of films don't have digital tracks or have digital tracks that aren't playable (DTS disks don't arrive with print, SRD track printed badly, etc.). Many of us don't play trailers in digital and/or regularly show older films that never had digital tracks. Furthermore, digital isn't 100% reliable and the fault to optical should be as seamless as possible.

I can absolutely hear the difference between the 222 "SR"/A card and real cat. 350s, even with mediocre speakers in a lousy room (yes, I've compared them with the same print of the same film). Get a CP55 with SRA5 or a CP65 with cat. 300s or 350s. Don't bother with the fake SR card.
 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 11-29-2007, 10:07 PM:
 
CP65 is better and more practical for everyday use. It's also worth more as a unit. Perhaps $1,500 as compared to $500 for 55.

The real SR does sound better no doubt, but you will be playing almost all the time. You can fit real SR cards to a 65 but you won't like the price.
 

---

Posted by Sebastian Binz (Member # 4567) on 11-30-2007, 02:07 AM:
 
Thanks for your contributions, I will take them into consideration.

Have a nice weekend

Sebastian Binz
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-30-2007, 07:03 AM:
 
I dunno Sam...with analog falling on hard times, even Real-SR doesn't fetch the price it once did...often all one has to do is save it from the scrap heap. I don't know if Dolby even offers the Cat 300 series new anymore...the 363 is gone and can often be found used for low prices...that will have 2 Cat 300s in its popular form.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 11-30-2007, 10:28 AM:
 
In the context of the topic I would assume anything over $500 each would be considered real money.

I've bought up some 363's and had to pay from $500 to $1,000 for them and Coast Recording still gets $2,000 each for 363's.
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 11-30-2007, 12:31 PM:
 
The CP65 with DA20 is a great combination, and extremely versatile. It's worth spending the money on the best SR decoding too, depending on what cards are fitted to the CP65.

You should insist on the CP65 over the CP55. Don't neglect SR - as other posters have noted, you need a well-tuned SR system at all times to back up your digital tracks, and also to playback SR-only material (some adverts and many short films, and even some foreign-language features are still being issued SR-only).

And, if you've really good SR with OBE in a good room, a lot of the time you cannot tell the difference between it and digital, with standard dramatic material, in A/B tests (big action movies etc. excepted of course).
 

---

Posted by Nathan Tarpley (Member # 4476) on 11-30-2007, 01:36 PM:
 
Can someone please expand on what "real" SR is versus a fake? (222SR/A) Is DSP SR in a 650 considered real?

Nathan
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 11-30-2007, 02:23 PM:
 
The CP-650 is REAL SR; as well as the 280T card and the 300 & 350 cards.

Because of size limitations the C/n 222sr/a takes a little liberty with very high frequencies. This was largely inaudible with slit lenses and passive crossovers; however, with excellent speakers & amps and a really good red led reader there is a difference.

IMHO: the difference is not that great, beats that of all other manufacturers, and might not matter anyhow if the "A" chain is not tuned perfectly. Louis
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-30-2007, 03:04 PM:
 
The thing that really convinced me that the 222 "SR"/A sucked was that the one time that I used it instead of cat. 350s for a public show was the one and only time over a three-week run of a particular film that anyone complained about the sound being too loud. Several people complained, actually and I had to turn the sound down to "6." These were regular patrons, not sound mixers or anyone who would be expected to notice the difference. The film was mixed slightly hot, but otherwise there were nothing but positive comments about sound quality during other shows, all of which played at "7."

This was in a 1920s theatre with lousy acoustics and rental speakers designed for sound reinforcement, not cinema use (these may have actually made the problems worse). I did an A-chain and B-chain per the instructions in the Dolby manual prior to the start of the engagement, and the theatre had new BACP reverse-scan LED readers.
 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 11-30-2007, 05:41 PM:
 
I don't know that the 650 has "Real SR". It is a digital representation of the real SR on the 280 and 300 series which were analog cards. We don't know what model Dolby used as the golden example, but the task of getting it perfect to the original is daunting. IMO, real SR is analog 280 or 300 series.

Someone should ask Ray Dolby his opinion.

[ 11-30-2007, 09:12 PM: Message edited by: Sam D. Chavez ]
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 11-30-2007, 09:22 PM:
 
And would he give a answer
 

---

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 11-30-2007, 09:28 PM:
 
At 74 years old I'm not sure if Ray's ears are still sharp enough to tell the difference. If they are then I want to know what diet he eats and what vitamins he takes.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-30-2007, 10:01 PM:
 
Just to drive the point home....the Cat 222"SR"/A has much more wrong with it than mistracking at the high end. Its frequency response is notably wrong and its dynamics are wrong and many frequencies and at varying levels. It has SR like characteristics but so does every other SR knock off to varying degrees...some do it better than others. SR is a complicated system that has a self-adjusting transfer function. It is essential that the encode/decode are identical, above and beyond any other noise/harmonic concerns.

I've never had a problem with either Cat 280s or the 300 series not sounding natural with a well set up system...I can't make that same claim from most if not all of the others. Panastereo does really well as does the CP650's digital clone of the SR. Nothing on either has ever jumped out and and waved a flag saying it was mistracking on the occasions that I have heard them running in SR. I've also found that optical stereo and its inherent random noise floor will really show off bad SR decoding more so than say a Mag track that tends to have steady-state noise floors.

And the CP65 is by far the better choice over the CP55...way more flexible and still very usable in today's cinema. The CP55 just needs too much money thrown at it to bring it up to psudo-CP65 capabilities. Now, if the CP55 is fully updated, that is another story...then your functionality is much closer.
 

---

Posted by Sebastian Binz (Member # 4567) on 12-01-2007, 05:26 AM:
 
Hi again,
it seems like the CP65 is already sold and the only option left is the cp55.
It is updated to SR though, containing the crappy 222 SR/A card as well as a Cat 441.
It comes wired within a rack with DA20 and DTS6, so I suppose I will stick to the deal. Maybe some time in the future I will throw out the processor and put something better in that place, but with our house from 1938 and the poor accoustics I guess we are within a region that no one will be able to tell the difference between real SR and fake. Plus, the price of the rack is within a range that some other companies were asking just for the DA20.

Theres just one thing: The rack comes out of a cinema that was running a platter on a FP30D. Now we will put it into our changeover house. What kind of modifications are necessary to get the processors running with two projectors?

(I know that we will have to put in a motor switch, although I'm not quite sure how we are gonna accomplish that for now. Maybe we'll just have a simple switch for the projectionist to throw at the beginning. Are there any drawings or something how that is done elsewhere?)

best rgrds

Sebastian Binz

[ 12-01-2007, 09:12 AM: Message edited by: Sebastian Binz ]
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-01-2007, 08:53 AM:
 
Since the CP55 has the Cat 441 and the 222SR/A...you have most of the functionality of most CP65s...it isn't a bad deal. Is the SR as good as it should be? No but it is better than nothing.

As for 2-projector...not to worry...most every cinema processor is 2-projector capable and the CP55 is no exception (nor is the DA20). A simple held contact closure is all that is needed to send the CP55 to projector #2. If using toggle switches for sound changeovers, then wire them up a 3-way switch to the "C/O" terminal. If you want something more automatic....in the States it is most common to use a latching relay like the P&B "KB" or "KBP" series (still available but EXPENSIVE). One is hooked up to the changover coil (open and close as the relay is a dual coil relay) so when the changeovers energize, it will follow it.

If you have Kinoton or like changeover, most people use a relay or use a provided contact that follows when projector #2's C/O douser is open (it is common in non-US machines for the c/o douser to funciton as the fire douser too and thus is held open by its own electronics and closes if the machine is turned off). For my Kinoton installations, I made a PC board with relays on it that will monitor each projector's motor and changeover functions so that the cinema processor is only told to look at a machine that is running and its dowser is open.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 12-02-2007, 10:17 AM:
 
How about:

a) Selling the CP55 on again to partially fund a CP65;

b) Raising more funds to buy a CP65 and if necessary Cat. 300 / 350 cards, make modest improvements to your room acoustics and hire a local projection engineer to install the new equipment ?

Just some suggestions...consider doing it for your Audience and have it that they will indeed be able to tell the difference in the quality of the SR, etc.
 

---

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 12-02-2007, 10:47 AM:
 

quote: Sam D. Chavez

---

Someone should ask Ray Dolby his opinion.

---