Voyagers blew our sub!?!

[Harold Hallikainen]

I don't recall the origin of the USL fader curve. I think it was there when I got there in 2007 and was used in the first processor I worked on (JSD-80). Later, I wrote code to use the Dolby curve, but it was never implemented since everyone had set up their automation cues and saved levels based on the existing USL curves.

Harold

[Jon Dent]

Yes, there's a few different reasons for it. http://www.associationdesmixeurs.fr/...AGE-CINEMA.pdf

I've seen that survey before. It's certainly interesting. Most movies I've screened in our theater since becoming the projectionist have been mixed fairly well, but some are most definitely louder than others and far less dynamic because of it.

It's funny how expectations don't always match up though. For instance I thought Mortal Kombat would sound very compressed and overpowering. It wasn't. It certainly brought the goods when it wanted to, but overall it sounded great and was very dynamic. At no point did I wince at the volume of the music, but some of those magical effects and body impacts (and Lord Goro) hit hard. Same with Wrath of Man. Guns in that movie are loud (far louder than most movies) but the rest of the track wasn't crazy so they hit with a lot of (appropriate) force.

[Marco Giustini]

No, the clip limiters on the 1222 are not on, as I was told by our installer that they weren't necessary. The more I learn about all this, the less I believe him, and I will be changing that... And we will be saving up for dedicated amps.

Anybody telling you that a SINGLE CHANNEL of a 1222 won't need the clip limiter on when driving a 4642A in a large room doesn't understand sound. Your guts feelings are right!

Interesting about the various fader curves, I wasn't aware of that.

I still stand my opinion though: while some movies are excruciatingly loud at 7.0, many other are perfectly fine at reference level. Some other may need a minor tweak. Only a small minority needs something below 6.0. This is my opinion of course - which comes from screening movies in person of course. That doesn't make that right, it's just to say that I am claiming that based on my direct personal experience. I do respect others opinion of course and I am not suggesting your sound systems are bad etc. etc.

Back onto topic, if your system was calibrated at 85dbC, when running at 4.5 you are about 9dB below the reference. Whether you feel that's loud or not, that should be taken into account. You can mix as loud as you want but you cannot mix ABOVE 0dBFS!

[Steve Guttag]

I don't recall the origin of the USL fader curve. I think it was there when I got there in 2007 and was used in the first processor I worked on (JSD-80). Later, I wrote code to use the Dolby curve, but it was never implemented since everyone had set up their automation cues and saved levels based on the existing USL curves.

Harold

It seems to me that USL wanted a curve that didn't dive people into running faders at 4.0 and lower. so, by changing the slope to a more aggressive 1dB/whole number, starting at "5.5" would do so as it has one be 20dB down by 4.0. This would push the fader level a bit higher. Back in the day of analog pots and VCAs, one wanted to stay out of the lower regions as tracking became very poor and small adjustments resulted in larger changes in level...hence 7.0 (or 70%) was a bit of a sweet spot in a fader range with enough room above/below to fine tune a level.

Since we have a predominance of Dolby cinema processors (from film up through the CP750) in cinemas, all of our Q-SYS systems follow the Dolby fader characteristic. We do have some sites that have a mix of Dolby and USL processors and yes, below 5.5, they don't match but the problem really is that one is running their fader that low because Hollywood has unrealistic expectations of cinema audiences.

What I think we NEED is a more rigid standard based on Leq(m) and set up a maximum acceptable level that has to be followed or the content cannot be run in cinemas. It is detrimental to the industry to have movies so loud as to make patrons feel uncomfortable sitting through the experience. Trailers and Ads are particularly bad. Ads are normally due to fools making them that don't realize that we reference at -20dB so "mix" with their sound peaking at 0dB, not realizing that would mean 105dBc from each channel playing that content. The people that mix trailers knowingly mix loud and should be curtailed. While there would be balking at having a loudness restriction, I think it would blow over once it was established and that EVERYONE had to play by those rules so nobody's ad/trailer would be louder than the others. A nice thing of Leq(m) is that it averages over time so features could have their crazy loud moments for explosions since there would be a lot of quieter moments to balance it out...but the shorter ads and trailers would have to keep their average levels "reasonable." This should be a NATO and like organization thing.

I've been toying with coming up with an automatic leveler in Q-SYS that would note if content was particularly loud and then throttle it back. The trick is to know when content is changing without an overt cue within the playlist. Looking for silent spaces in the track seems like it would be too easy to miss something. I don't want to, necessarily, use an AGC on everything as that would tend to quash dynamics on a feature, depending on the duration of the effect.

[Carsten Kurz]

Well, some movies will probably never work for all audiences. Take for example a Daniel Craig James Bond. It will attract a younger audience as well as older James Bond fans. There's a load of action, crashes, shooting, etc. The younger crowd yells for it. The older have bleeding ears.

Now, what do you do? Schedule showtimes for different ages? Do we need to check people's ages at the box office and then dial in an age factor?

You simply have to have someone experienced and with an emphatic connection to the audience who makes an educated decision about the 'right' playback level. It will still be wrong or not optimal for some, but, is there a best beer for everyone?

[Stefan Scholz]

When it comes to Woofers, it mostly looks like none did ever read the technical requirements for Dolby Stereo sound, and that's not been a recent publication, but from the early 1990s. This states quite clear, that a lot of cabinets are required in most cases. And these were from the time of analog Dolby Stereo, with the hint for mag or a future digital sound to require even more.
For the mentioned 4642a in a room 18m (50 ft) in length in the analog times a minimum of 2 to 3 cabinets war required, and its digital track today, with a whole more possibilities.
instead of going into a fader discussion, I prefer to discuss correct dimensioning of sound systems.
On the other hand, not all mixes are properly mastered for cinema replay. this does not help, omitting the professionals mastering people in a calibrated sound theatre or mixing room.
In these cases well designed sound sound system will still never fail, as there's headroom.
This also includes well dimensioned power amplifiers. Nothing is worse, that an amp too small for the purpose. With the above mentioned cabinets, and 2 of them, you're still in the range of 1.5 kW peak requirement...
Do your homework before opening a sound movie theatre.

[Gordon McLeod]

In the days of film we always ran adds and trailors in mono and since most processors had a mono trim it could be set lower and if the processor switched to digital or SVA on the feature pres tag then it gave a nice boost and lead up to the film. with digital we usually have a cue that sets the pre feature at 3db down. In most of the older theatres i still install a afterburner as most of the audience complain about it being too dynamic and it bothers their hearing aids. And since they represent about 80% of the patronage then they get to choose.

[Marco Giustini]

Carsten you're right. I do remember politely dealing with a very angry customer who showed up in a cinema after 20 years of TV to watch 007. "Dynamic" and "Digital sound" were born in the meantime. He wanted to call the police! I explained him what was happening and then took him back to the auditorium after the action scene had finished to show him that dialogues were ok - and he agreed with me.

Now, I can't possibly remember what fader level was 007 running but I'm sure it was close to 7.0! And to be honest we were getting quite a lot of enthusiastic customers enjoying our sound.

I wouldn't mind different screenings with different levels. The point is that there will ALWAYS be some customers complaining for the volume being too loud. Always. And you can turn it down to 4.0 and they will still complain (that happened to me). I won't turn my movies to 4.0 because a small minority of customers cannot stand multichannel digital sound. Again, to clarify, I am not talking about those bunch of movies which are way too loud and impossible to run at 7-ish level.

We could have the same conversation for auditorium temperature here!

[Steve Guttag]

...For the mentioned 4642a in a room 18m (50 ft) in length in the analog times a minimum of 2 to 3 cabinets war required...

In at 50-foot deep room, two JBL 4642A are sufficient. You need 1650 continuous watts for digital, presuming no baffle wall. Each driver can handle 600-watts continuous so you have 2400-watts of capability. The next trick is getting that much power available to the subs. A single DCA 3022 with a sub on each channel will suffice. Alternately, two DCA 1222, each bridged to its own subwoofer will, very likely, be sufficient or a pair of DCA 1622 will, for sure handle it. If going QSYS, a single DPA4K4 (CX-Q 4K4) with one channel per driver will work or, if desired, parallel two channels of the amp to each cabinet. Now, you might get away with using just a 2K4 amp but I don't like to use "Max" or "Burst" power on subwoofers...particularly when all of the outputs are going to the subwoofers since the DPA-Q/CX-Q can't borrow from any of the other channels. If one doesn't run their fader at 7.0 or doesn't run Tenet, then it might squeak by on loud track but I'd user the larger amp, in this case. Now, if you have an 8K8 amp being used for other channels too, then using 2-channels of that per cabinet would also satisfy it.

[Jon Dent]

You simply have to have someone experienced and with an emphatic connection to the audience who makes an educated decision about the 'right' playback level. It will still be wrong or not optimal for some, but, is there a best beer for everyone?

That's the solution we take, courtesy of my judgement, for better or worse. Our owner trusts me to set the right levels, and I usually err on the side of louder when it's 'that kind of movie'. However, I have been known to lower the volume slightly on some children's movies, as I find parents much less tolerant when it's their little ones holding their ears. As a parent myself, I completely get that. For instance I felt Tom and Jerry was pretty hot for a kids movie so I lowered it, but Raya was just fine at 4.5 (if maybe even a little weak) so I left it alone.

[William Kucharski]

Additional info: we usually run at 4.5 on the volume

Ouch; no wonder I'm going to fewer and fewer theaters these days.

The volume should be at 7.

I see many systems using Dolby processors running main features at 4.5

That's the problem.

I usually screen the entire movie before deciding what volume it'll be run at. So when I say most movies we screen are quite acceptable, volume wise, at 4.5 (on a Dolby 750) it's taking the entire movie into account. I'm not a noise baby, and I like my movies at a good, impactful level. I feel that, by and large, 4.5 accomplishes that.

If it's your theater, it's your decision but I would never patronize it.

Movies are mixed and produced for the fader at 7, and if you're not willing to present it that way, I'm not coming to your theater.

That's what THX was all about once upon a time, sigh…

If I were a theater owner I would make sure everyone knew that if I ever saw the fader at anything other than 7, the person who changed it would no longer work for me.

[Carsten Kurz]

Movies are mixed and produced for the fader at 7

No, they are not. They should be, but most of the time they aren't.

[Jon Dent]

That's the problem.

No, I'd say the problem originates from filmmakers mixing their movies at absolutely ridiculous levels that in certain circumstances have caused hearing damage to patrons. If they didn't do that, theater owners wouldn't feel the need to turn the volume down in the first place.

Dolby's own mixing guidelines suggest a level of 75dB for dialog. That's a very comfortable level that leaves 30dB on the table for the biggest impacts (not every single whoosh and car drive by). Most films I've screened have dialog much louder than that, and sound FX are regularly above that even. Like I've said, GvK at 4.5 made my ears a bit muffled. After years of mixing in a contemporary church (with our Devil's rock n' roll music) I know how my ears respond to spl, and they do that when its over 90dB for a while. So you do the dial conversion that means that at 7, GvK would be pushing over 100dB pretty often, in multiple channels, over the course of two hours. That's just stupid.

There's a quote that I think encapsulates this absurdity well: "People present during the mix of movies like Tron were advised to wear hearing protection." That right there is a sign that your movie is too damn loud.

Interesting article on the issue: https://www.pro-tools-expert.com/hom...n-cinema-sound

If I were a theater owner I would make sure everyone knew that if I ever saw the fader at anything other than 7, the person who changed it would no longer work for me.

That would be your option as an owner. But I'd argue that your insistence to run movies at ear splitting levels would ultimately cost you customers, customers that you need to keep the doors open. So what then? Was your rigid devotion to '7' really worth your place of business potentially closing? That's what theaters ultimately are: places of business. Our owner is half deaf, and he thought GvK at 4.5 sounded great. And when we see viewers walking out of our theaters with smiles on their faces and we don't hear many complaints, that's more important to us than whether a dial on a piece of equipment is set to where it's quote-unquote 'supposed' to be.

[Steve Guttag]

No, I'd say the problem originates from filmmakers mixing their movies at absolutely ridiculous levels that in certain circumstances have caused hearing damage to patrons.

Even as loud as movies can be, it isn't causing any unusual hearing damage to patrons (good luck proving it as there are volumes of studies on how loud a person can be exposed to various levels without hearing damage...movies never hit those levels/durations).

There's a quote that I think encapsulates this absurdity well: "People present during the mix of movies like Tron were advised to wear hearing protection." That right there is a sign that your movie is too damn loud.

While I would agree it is a problem, the exposure of mixing a movie for a full work day is not the same as a person exposed for a nominal 2-hours for a single viewing. It is one thing to sit through an explosion scene for a minute or two and it is another thing to be mixing it for hours on end. You can't equate the two, in terms of hearing exposure.

Theatre owners are going to adjust their volume levels based on customer satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) and it would serve everyone to acknowledge that. For every patron that is lost due to not playing movies at 7.0, you don't lose 100 that can't take it at that level. It is easy numbers.

As or 7.0 as the reference level

No, they are not. They should be, but most of the time they aren't.

I've done a LOT of studio screenings...including last night (yup, it has started up again) and the fader was at...7.0. It is VERY rare that I have a studio tell me to back off on the fader and they get to set the volume...it is THEIR show.

There are three factors that I think play into the volume level debacle:

1. Soundtrack (all) need to use Leq(m) and have an acceptable level to not exceed to ensure that, over the duration of the movie/ad/preview, the volume is not obnoxious. You can have your explosions but you better balance it with some good, old-fashioned, dialog.
2. Theatre sound (build) quality. If you don't build your theatre well and you don't use good equipment, the distortion levels will make the same SPL sound louder. I've heard this time and again. Those rooms that are inherently better due to construction (RT60 times) and equipment can run their volume levels louder without complaint. The meter is just reading a single point of information, SPL, but it doesn't tell the whole story. Furthermore, as you deviate on either of the above, the installer is likely to tune the crap out of the sound until all that is left is over-eq and time/phase anomalies.
3. Which leads me to #3...don't over EQ a room. If you are putting that much effort into the EQ, you are trying to fix the unfixable. The problem is the room or the equipment, not the EQ. The +/- 3dB window on the "X-Curve" is there for a reason...if you are in the window...STOP!!! I use a fair number of QSC SC-424 speakers now. I have a voicing for it that I've used on many rooms and the net result is, little to no EQ needs to be done to those speakers beyond that voicing, no matter what room I put them into (since the rooms are not poorly made). That is the goal. The goal should be no-EQ onsite. If the room is good, the speaker(s) is/are good, the EQ is little to none.

Studio dubbing stages typically have better than normal speakers and acoustics were taken into account when they were built. They can run their movies higher there and 7.0 may not sound all that uncomfortable. Cinemas, were value engineering gets involved do not use, typically, better than average, speakers and acoustics are some covering over drywall with either painted or wall carpet at the seated ear height, rarely baffle walls, WAY under insulated ceiling areas and next to no acoustic treatment down by the screen area (where the sound comes from). The problem isn't just how the movie was mixed, it's the theatre and equipment that are contributing to the volume complaints.

[Jon Dent]

All of what you said is right, but.... Just for the sake of argument (it's a slow day at work), wouldn't it be in the best interests of the filmmakers and mixers to work in a mixing environment that accurately reflects where these soundtracks will be reproduced, using the type of equipment that a typical theater has? It's fairly common for music mixers to test out their mixes on earbuds and crappy car systems, just to make sure they translate, so why shouldn't film mixers do the same? Maybe then they could hear just how harsh and punishing their soundtracks can be in less ideal environments.

Theatre owners are going to adjust their volume levels based on customer satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) and it would serve everyone to acknowledge that. For every patron that is lost due to not playing movies at 7.0, you don't lose 100 that can't take it at that level. It is easy numbers.

Exactly.