Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
On Tue, 3 Jan 2012 04:12:34 -0800, William Sommerwerck wrote
(in article ): At least with respect to ambience, the brain responds most strongly to lateral sound -- so the "rear" speakers should actually be at the sides, and only slightly behind the listener. This effected a big improvement. ------------------------------snip------------------------------ Yes, the Holman and Toole books I referred to you emphasize that surround channels (at least for film) are usually done on the sides, not the rear. The overwhelming majority of home systems have a Dialog speaker. Why should the mixologists worry about whether the mix works correctly when there is no Dialog speaker? ------------------------------snip------------------------------ The re-recording mixers are supposed to check *stereo* compatibility, either doing a separate stereo mix or a stereo downmix that's programmed into the DVD or the Blu-ray. The stereo mix is important, because a lot of cable viewers are going to watch and hear the shows on TV sets without external speakers -- and that means no center channel and no surround tracks. Those all have to get folded down, and when that happens, unpredictable things can occur. --MFW |
#82
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
... William Sommerwerck wrote: No. There weren't any. But all quadraphonic matrixing systems -- SQ, QS, EV, etc -- require logic steering for good subjective separation, even though they don't have center channels. Actually, I have never seen an SQ or QS matrix system with steering. The ones I saw all required pretty precise level setting to get good separation and they all drifted a bit. I've owned four SQ decoders. The Sony decoders used gain riding (rather than cancellation), and produced extremely crude effects. The Audionics Space & Image Composer was the first that worked without drawing too much attention to itself. The Fosgate Tate II decoder (which I still have) had such rapid logic action that you could turn sideways and the image remained stable. I had two QS decoders, the Sansui QSD-1, then the QS-D1000. The first was a multi-band unit, the latter single-band. QS wasn't very good for classical music, because it required lateral separation enhancement (which SQ doesn't). You could hear the orchestra image slightly widening and narrowing. (I no longer have these, because I didn't have a lot of QS recordings, and I needed money. They each sold for a large sum.) The Fosgate is a-workin' still (classic MAD ad spoof), and is stable. The only user adjustment is an input-balance control, and it's required the same setting as long as I've owned my current pickup. The first generation of Dolby Stereo had no steering, and really none of the theatrical Dolby Stereo decoders have ever had analogue steering. As far as I know, that isn't true. The earliest generation used a modified QSD-1. Steering isn't quite the right term. Fantasound used steering. Dolby Stereo (and SQ and QS) used dynamic cancellation. They just assumed everyone would do the A-chain alignment properly enough that the separation would be good. Sometimes they did, sometimes they didn't. That's a different issue, of course. |
#83
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
|
#84
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
On Dec 31 2011, 4:16*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
William Sommerwerck wrote: What does "do not use a dialog speaker" mean? You have 4.1 with the center missing? How stupid could I be, Scott? No, the system is configured for no Dialog speaker -- center front is split through left and right front. Right, but what ratios is it splitting it to? You're always going to have somewhat lower intelligibility when you do this, compared with using a center channel. *But the ratio at which you want to set the level depends on the mix itself, because you are basically downmixing everything to a different presentation format. Once the center channel is not physically separate in space, you lose some ability to pick it out, so the appropriate relative dialogue levels are not exactly the same. *And, the more cluttered the mix is, the more you will need to punch the dialogue channel up. Your dts decoder should have a bunch of menus that let you adjust downmix parameters. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ___ It's ironic, Scott, and I did notice this - movies are more intelligible with a full(with center/dialogue spkr as our across the pond friend calls it), but music is more intelligible WITHOUT the center, in surround! Is that just because of diffs in the way music and films are mixed?? -ChrisCoaster |
#85
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
On Jan 1, 11:20*pm, "None" wrote:
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message ... "Marc Wielage" wrote in message s.com... On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 04:54:22 -0800, William Sommerwerck wrote (in article ): I started watching the "collector's" cut of "Avatar" last night, after having watched the terrific Blu-ray of "King Kong". (The films are thematically similar.) The dialog sounded rather distant and lacking in presence. Raising the overall level a few dB fixed this, without causing the music and effects to be unduly loud. (I do not use a Dialog speaker, and I don't generally have this "problem" with other films.) Would anyone care to comment on this? ------------------------------snip------------------------------ You're just noticing this now? It's not something I've (much) noticed on other films. The problem is endemic to the business. *Many, many, MANY films are mixed in such a way that their dynamic range is too wide for home video. This has been an issue for a decade or more. I have very good playback equipment, so this might not have been apparent to AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaargh! Yes, you've got wonderful equipment (you forgot to mention the planar speakers one more time). You're a professional writer (god knows why), and you're rarely ever wrong (hehe). You're trying to play 5.x material on a 4.x system. Numerous suggestions have been given, including deploying a center channel speaker, and learning how to adjust the settings on you (very good, of course, very good) equipment. But you just don't seem to get it. If you're not using a center speaker and watching it in 5.1 surround, then you'll never hear it in the way the re-recording engineers intended. That pretty much goes The "quality" of the system is not the issue. The planarity of the speakers is not the issue. The issue is that the system does not implement the format found in the source material, so manipulating the processing is required, and different manipulation may be required with different source material. If you tried to reproduce stereo audio with a single (very good, planar) speaker, it would probably sound screwed-up as well. /uncloak __________ I was JUST thinking the same thing! Theres a lot of phase-related and psychoacoustic stuff going on here that WS needs to grasp. I remember as a kid growing up on a Mono record player the kind you fold up the case and carry it any where, and a portable mono am/fm radio. Because of that SETUP I assumed that's how a certain song I liked was "supposed " to sound. Later as a teen I listened through headphones on a decent receiver or even a walkman and suddenly heard a lot more within those same songs. At first I was surprised and wasnt sure if I liked the effect. But gradually I realized that stereo sources ar not totally revealing unless listened to on a STEREO set up. FFWD to today, and apply to your setup, Will. -CC |
#86
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
It's ironic, Scott, and I did notice this -- movies are more
intelligible with a full [setup] (with center/dialogue spkr as our across-the-pond friend calls it), but music is more intelligible WITHOUT the center, in surround! Is that just because of diffs in the way music and films are mixed?? If the Center or Dialog speaker isn't identical to the Left and Right, the imaging might be degraded. This is one of the reasons I don't use a Dialog speaker. |
#87
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
On Jan 6, 6:32*am, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote: It's ironic, Scott, and I did notice this -- movies are more intelligible with a full [setup] (with center/dialogue spkr as our across-the-pond friend calls it), but music is more intelligible WITHOUT the center, in surround! Is that just because of diffs in the way music and films are mixed?? If the Center or Dialog speaker isn't identical to the Left and Right, the imaging might be degraded. This is one of the reasons I don't use a Dialog speaker. _________ To a point, Will. Modern centers have largely caught up to a good pair of mains, particularly in the bottom end. Also, some a/v receivers have a "timbre" control that can do a good job of overcoming most differences. The point everyone on here has been trying to make is of course the movie you saw in an(hopefully SMPTE compliant)auditorium with full center & surrounds will not sound the same at home downmixed to a setup with fewer speakers. Avatar may represent the worst common denominator in revealing dialogue clarity issues in your setup, but I'm sure it's not the only picture that may see signif improvement with the addn of a center speaker. Try out Titanic or some other Cameron-produced films and see if they too have intelligibility issues on par with Avatar. If they do, then its a Cameron issue or an issue with his prodn chain, but still, its good to have a reference point to judge film production issues by, and that platform is the maximum # of speakers a feature may be designed to play on. -CC |
#88
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
On Jan 6, 6:32*am, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote: It's ironic, Scott, and I did notice this -- movies are more intelligible with a full [setup] (with center/dialogue spkr as our across-the-pond friend calls it), but music is more intelligible WITHOUT the center, in surround! Is that just because of diffs in the way music and films are mixed?? If the Center or Dialog speaker isn't identical to the Left and Right, the imaging might be degraded. This is one of the reasons I don't use a Dialog speaker. ________ If you read carefully you may notice I said that the center - in my setup at least, greatly benefits movies & tv shows but seems to have the opposite effect when listening to music, excepting country/ western, where the lead vocal is given "space" in the mix. Anything else, from Katy Perry to Taio Cruz, and they sound drowned, esp with the amount of stuff sent to surrounds!(Pro Logic for 2ch sources) |
#89
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
"ChrisCoaster" wrote in message
... On Jan 6, 6:32 am, "William Sommerwerck" wrote: It's ironic, Scott, and I did notice this -- movies are more intelligible with a full [setup] (with center/dialogue spkr as our across-the-pond friend calls it), but music is more intelligible WITHOUT the center, in surround! Is that just because of diffs in the way music and films are mixed?? If the Center or Dialog speaker isn't identical to the Left and Right, the imaging might be degraded. This is one of the reasons I don't use a Dialog speaker. _________ To a point, Will. Modern centers have largely caught up to a good pair of mains, particularly in the bottom end. Also, some a/v receivers have a "timbre" control that can do a good job of overcoming most differences. The point everyone on here has been trying to make is of course the movie you saw in an(hopefully SMPTE compliant)auditorium with full center & surrounds will not sound the same at home downmixed to a setup with fewer speakers. Avatar may represent the worst common denominator in revealing dialogue clarity issues in your setup, but I'm sure it's not the only picture that may see signif improvement with the addn of a center speaker. Try out Titanic or some other Cameron-produced films and see if they too have intelligibility issues on par with Avatar. If they do, then its a Cameron issue or an issue with his prodn chain, but still, its good to have a reference point to judge film production issues by, and that platform is the maximum # of speakers a feature may be designed to play on. Please don't take my "not interested" response personally. My system is set up for music reproduction, not theater sound. (The surround speakers are normally fed from a JVC hall synthesizer or the "rear" channels of SACDs and audio Blu-rays.) Reproducing the theater experience is not of much interest to me -- the fact that my electronics and speakers are better than those found in theaters is more important. I am curious as to why there is this anomaly with a handful of recordings -- but I don't have the time to experiment. |
#90
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
On Fri, 6 Jan 2012 06:32:13 -0500, William Sommerwerck wrote
(in article ): It's ironic, Scott, and I did notice this -- movies are more intelligible with a full [setup] (with center/dialogue spkr as our across-the-pond friend calls it), but music is more intelligible WITHOUT the center, in surround! Is that just because of diffs in the way music and films are mixed?? If the Center or Dialog speaker isn't identical to the Left and Right, the imaging might be degraded. This is one of the reasons I don't use a Dialog speaker. Not on my system. I thought you said the reason you didn't have a center was because there was no where to put it... Regards, Ty --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA |
#91
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
ChrisCoaster wrote:
It's ironic, Scott, and I did notice this - movies are more intelligible with a full(with center/dialogue spkr as our across the pond friend calls it), but music is more intelligible WITHOUT the center, in surround! Is that just because of diffs in the way music and films are mixed?? Bingo! --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#92
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
William Sommerwerck wrote:
It's ironic, Scott, and I did notice this -- movies are more intelligible with a full [setup] (with center/dialogue spkr as our across-the-pond friend calls it), but music is more intelligible WITHOUT the center, in surround! Is that just because of diffs in the way music and films are mixed?? If the Center or Dialog speaker isn't identical to the Left and Right, the imaging might be degraded. This is one of the reasons I don't use a Dialog speaker. You'd think so, but it doesn't work that way in a film mix, which is all panpotted intensity stereo anyway, and where the center channel is carrying almost entirely dialogue. The center channel doesn't degrade the imaging of the stuff that isn't mixed into the center channel, which is most of the mix. Try it and see! --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#93
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Avatar's sound track
William Sommerwerck wrote:
It's ironic, Scott, and I did notice this -- movies are more intelligible with a full [setup] (with center/dialogue spkr as our across-the-pond friend calls it), but music is more intelligible WITHOUT the center, in surround! Is that just because of diffs in the way music and films are mixed?? If the Center or Dialog speaker isn't identical to the Left and Right, the imaging might be degraded. This is one of the reasons I don't use a Dialog speaker. KEF Coax designs do a good job. Kind regards Peter Larsen |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Sound Track Pro vs Pro Tools? | Pro Audio | |||
Why does a track sound bad at lower .mp3 bit rates | Pro Audio | |||
How to retain the cassette 4-track sound without actually using one? | Pro Audio | |||
Sound track for Gold Rush - 1st version? | Pro Audio | |||
SOUND DESIGN STEREO 8 TRACK PLAYER | Marketplace |