Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Early non CinemaScope stereo films

This is topic Early non CinemaScope stereo films in forum Film-Yak 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=8;t=001818

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 02-25-2003, 03:44 PM:

Just about the time 20th Century Fox released "THE ROBE in CinemaScope and four track mag in 1953, there were also other non widescreen films released in multi channel sound that year including "HOUSE OF WAX" in dual projection 3-D and "FROM HERE TO ETERNITY". Before "THE ROBE" opened, I do not believe any theatre in Hawaii was set up for stereo playback and that is the reason I have never had the pleasure of seeing the movie with stereo sound before "THE ROBE". Here is a question I have for anyone who have seen or handled "H.O.W." and "F.H.T.E." with stereo sound. Was the stereo system the same as Fox's scope films or was it different? While "WAX" was a Warner Brothers picture, "F.H.T.E." was released by Columbia. Some of the other non scope pictures Columbia released in stereo was "THE CAINE MUTINY" and "THE JAZZ SINGER" with Larry Parks. Yes, I know the "JAZZ SINGER" was a stereo remix from mono but "CAIN" and the others were true stereo. "FROM HERE TO ETERNITY" will be released again on DVD next Tuesday as part of their Superbit series and this time it will have a Dolby and DTS 5.1 stereo soundtrack. From a review I read, the mix is very stunning. I dont know if they went to the original multi track source but I was told that a lot of the sound was newly recorded for the DVD like they did for "BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI" with fantastic 5.1 digital sound.

-Claude

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 02-25-2003, 04:47 PM:

House of Wax I have delt with
Projector 1 has a mono optical mix on it
Projector Two had effects track (surrounds now days)
A full coat Altec dubber with a 3track head had the 3 screen channels

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 02-25-2003, 05:24 PM:

The HOUSE OF WAX system that Gordon alludes to was called Warnerphonic Sound and was also used on other WB 3-D films. Basically, the system used on FROM HERE TO ETERNITY, THE CAINE MUTINY, and many others before THE ROBE in 1953, used the 3-track full coat 35mm format playback system, sans the optical track used for surround speakers of Warnerphonic Sound. (a good placeto read about this is in the Widescreen Museum). This was usually accompanied by the films being projected in various aspect ratios wider than 1.33, though (BLOWN UP AND CROPPED by the theatre.

WB also experimented with 3-track stereo (optical based from seperate 35mm film) back in the early 40's. This system was similiar to what Disney used for FANTASIA in 1940, without the surrounds.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 02-25-2003, 05:39 PM:

Claude

The Larry Parks movie was "The Jolson Story". It was later
released in the 70's in 70MM.

Remember the first stereo movie was "Fantasia". Sound was
recorded on three tracks for the screen and a fourth control
track containing a control tones. That control tone which
could increase the loudness of the other three track by up to
20db each. In the theatre the four tracks ran on a separate
piece of film that was interlocked with the picture. The
picture had a standard mono track as emergency back-up.
Fantasia opened at the Broadway Theatre (the same theatre
that Cinerama opened in New York) The Fantasound system cost
$85,000 for that engagement. By 1942 the film was in mono
only format, it would not be heard in stereo until 1956 reissue
in a four-track magnetic format.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 02-25-2003, 06:01 PM:

Bill,

When I think about Al Jolson, I always relate him to "THE JAZZ SINGER". You are right, the movie was the "AL JOLSON STORY". I have the movie on an old Columbia laserdisc as well as the sequel. Both of the movies are very entertaining and the original movie features the stereo remix from mono and it is not too bad. I also have the original "THE JAZZ SINGER" with the real Al Jolson along with several other films he had made in a MGM laserdisc box set. The original Vitaphone sound although very 'ancient' is not bad.

-Claude

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 02-25-2003, 06:50 PM:

quote:
Was the stereo system the same as Fox's scope films or was it different?

The 1952/53 pre-CinemaScope and 53/54 non-scope stereo films were generally shown "double system" rather than sound-on-film.

quote:
The Larry Parks movie was "The Jolson Story". It was later released in the 70's in 70MM.

The Carr & Hayes book Wide Screen Movies lists it as a 1968 U.S. re-issue. My research indicates this had its 70mm re-issue in Europe in 1969 and the USA in 1975.

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 02-26-2003, 11:17 AM:

The "American Film Institute Catalog, Feature Films, 1941-1950" notes The Jolson Story: "was rereleased in 1954 in widescreen format with stereophonic sound. On 14 Aug 1969, a re-issued version of the film in 70mm format began a roadshow engagement in London. The 70mm re-issue had its American premiere in Aug 1975."

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-28-2003, 06:33 AM:

The British engineer Alan Blumlein is generally believed to have demonstrated the first working stereo variable area soundtrack, in the mid-1930s.

Two of his films survive in the National Film and Television Archive. The first shows a horse-drawn fire engine travelling across a field, and the bell can be heard panning from left to right. The second shows a train running through a station - you get the idea!

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 02-28-2003, 12:18 PM:

Ah, the first (Dolby) train trailer. I wonder if it made the kiddies cry. [evil]

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 02-28-2003, 12:27 PM:

The first Dolby Digital house in Eugene was at the now-closed Moyer West 11th Movieland 6. That THX house was Scott Hicks' baby (Scott now runs American Cinema Equipment). I don't remember what their first digital feature was, but I sure as hell remember the Dolby Digital Train!! Oh yeah, baby, that was the all-time best sound snipe. [thumbsup]

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 03-07-2003, 06:56 PM:

Speaking of non-CinemaScope stereo films, does anyone know what the first official "CinemaScope" branded film was released in mono only?

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 03-07-2003, 07:19 PM:

quote:
does anyone know what the first official "CinemaScope" branded film was released in mono only?

Not sure. It was likely something among the following:

At Gunpoint
Bengazi
The Black Shield Of Falworth
Captain Lightfoot
Chief Crazy Horse
Long John Silver (aka Return To Treasure Island)*
Sign Of The Pagan
Sitting Bull
Vera Cruz

*not positive it was a scope production; sources conflict, and I've never seen it myself

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 03-07-2003, 07:37 PM:

quote:
Vera Cruz

wasn't that a SuperScope film?

aspect ratio was transfered at 1.66

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 03-07-2003, 09:09 PM:

quote:
wasn't that a SuperScope film?

Shot in Superscope...but weren't Superscope productions released in "CinemaScope" with black mattes printed into the frame edges? I suppose it was a technicality for me to include it on that list of possible first-mono scope releases.

quote:
aspect ratio was transfered at 1.66

Transferred where??? A 35mm print? A DVD?

The ratio for Superscope was 2.00:1.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 03-07-2003, 11:06 PM:

Beside "VERA CRUZ", some other SuperScope features were the original "INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS" and "UNDERWATER" starring the luscious Jane Russell with Richard Eagan & Gilbert Roland. I saw all of these SuperScope films at the Waipahu on a scope screen that was nice and wide. As I recall, the picture did not fill the unmatted screen.

-Claude

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 03-07-2003, 11:48 PM:

quote:
The ratio for Superscope was 2.00:1.

According to www.widescreenmuseum.com, some Superscope films were 2.00:1 and others were 2.35 (with further cropping of the original flat frame and without the side mattes of the anamorphic print). This was called Superscope 235, according to the site.

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 03-08-2003, 07:11 PM:

quote:
This was called Superscope 235

Which is known today as Super 35 (aka Super-35, Super35, System 35, and Super Techniscope).

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 03-08-2003, 09:01 PM:

But wasn't there a diffreence? Wasn't the image for the old SuperScope process carved out of an Academy frame, and not going into the area normally reserved for the optical soundtrack? A quibble, perhaps. [Smile]

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 03-09-2003, 09:51 AM:

No, full silent aperture.

Superscope specifications

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 03-09-2003, 01:35 PM:

My stupid mistake. It won't happen again. I should know better than to state things I know nothing about.

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 03-10-2003, 01:12 PM:

quote:
My stupid mistake. It won't happen again. I should know better than to state things I know nothing about.

Maybe you were misled by Carr & Hayes' assertion in their Wide Screen Movies book that Superscope was shot in Academy and Superscope 235 was shot full aperture....

On one page they show some film frame reproductions that clearly illustrate a full aperture original photography image for Superscope. Then, in text, a couple of pages later the authors contradict that by claiming: "In 1956 Superscope 235 was introduced. The only difference in photography was that the taking camera had a widened aperture that exposed over the soundtrack area and the crop factor allowed for a 2.35x1 ratio."

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 03-10-2003, 01:21 PM:

quote:
Maybe you were misled by Carr & Hayes' assertion in their Wide Screen Movies book that Superscope was shot in Academy and Superscope 235 was shot full aperture....

No, it was from my misunderstanding that the AR of the actual SUPER 35 frame (in the camera) was around 1.66 to 1. So when I read the article in www.widescreenmuseum.com that said Superscope used the original silent apeture (which I thought was 1.33), it lead to my confusion. So I mis-stated. (I hadn't read the article as carefully as I should have).

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 03-10-2003, 02:17 PM:

quote:
No, it was from my misunderstanding that the AR of the actual SUPER 35 frame (in the camera) was around 1.66 to 1.

Shame on you for having not read WSR's "What So Super About Super 35?" article from a few years ago which explained all of the pertinent details of these formats. [Smile]

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 03-10-2003, 05:47 PM:

The Carr/Hayes book is full of really stupid mistakes.
however, at the time it came out, it was better than nothing.
Beware of "3D Movies" by same author, it gets things mixed up even more!

Corrections listed by Dan J. Sherlock can be found here:

http://members.aol.com/filmteknik/wide.html