[johnn]

for a typical movie theatre with 5.1 sound system, what is the typical SPL
level ?

[Rick Ruskin]

On Wed, 5 Sep 2007 22:05:11 +0800, "johnn"
wrote:

for a typical movie theatre with 5.1 sound system, what is the typical SPL
level ?

Too loud most of the time. Especially during the previews.


Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://liondogmusic.com

[Mike Rivers]

On Sep 5, 10:05 am, "johnn" wrote:
for a typical movie theatre with 5.1 sound system, what is the typical SPL
level ?

They mix at 85 dB SPL. I think that's A-weighted so the low end can be
anywhere (and usually too much). It's pretty loud.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , johnn wrote:
for a typical movie theatre with 5.1 sound system, what is the typical SPL
level ?

If it is set up properly, dialogue level runs around 85 dB SPL.

At your local multiplex, with high school kids operating the machines
and nobody paying any attention to what goes on in the auditorium, it
is almost certainly much louder. Unless the diaphragms in the speakers
are blown, which is a very common thing to find in such places.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Grammar Police]

"johnn" wrote:
for a typical movie theatre with 5.1 sound system, what is the typical
SPL level ?

Hmm. "SPL level" Is that like "The La Brea Tar Pits"? Or "ATM machine".
I'll check with the Department of Redundancy Department, down at Lake Lago.
;-)

--
Gram R. Pulleez

[hank alrich]

Grammar Police wrote:

"johnn" wrote:
for a typical movie theatre with 5.1 sound system, what is the typical
SPL level ?

Hmm. "SPL level" Is that like "The La Brea Tar Pits"? Or "ATM machine".
I'll check with the Department of Redundancy Department, down at Lake Lago.
;-)

First, buy a life.

--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam

[Mikey]

"Rick Ruskin" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Sep 2007 22:05:11 +0800, "johnn"
wrote:

for a typical movie theatre with 5.1 sound system, what is the typical SPL
level ?

Too loud most of the time. Especially during the previews.


Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://liondogmusic.com

And too soft during the spoken passages crucial to the plot (if there is a
plot).

Mikey
Nova Music Productions

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 07:24:05 -0700, Rick Ruskin
wrote:

for a typical movie theatre with 5.1 sound system, what is the typical SPL
level ?

Too loud most of the time. Especially during the previews.

Your natural, kind-hearted spirit is betraying you. It's
actually WTF! TOO LOUD.

Of course everything is these days, but this is a you-pay
gig. And that bites.

Thanks, as always,

Chris Hornbeck
"The camera is an instrument that teachs one how to see
without a camera" -Dorothea Lange

[Peter Larsen]

Mikey wrote:

[someone asked]

for a typical movie theatre with 5.1 sound system, what is the
typical SPL level ?

Too loud most of the time. Especially during the previews.

And too soft during the spoken passages crucial to the plot

No, it is as it should be, you're just temparily deaf.

(if there is a plot).

Plot - ancient, used to describe the distance between two markers wide
enough apart for the 7' fleet to pass. advanced Se also:
comp.sys.linux.advocacy. /advanced

Mikey
Nova Music Productions


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[William Sommerwerck]

And too soft during the spoken passages crucial to the plot...

No, it is as it should be, you're just temporarily deaf.

I've been complaining for years that the dialog levels are too low -- 3dB to
6dB too low.

The first time I noticed this was almost 30 years ago. Superman saves Lois
as she falls from the helicopter.

"Don't worry, miss. I've got you."

"murph glurb muggle rix fixo blork" was her reply. (In case you didn't know,
she says "You've got me? Who's got you?"

This applies to commercials, too. It took me a dozen viewings before I
figured out that the guy was saying "What if this continues?"

[Scott Dorsey]

William Sommerwerck wrote:
I've been complaining for years that the dialog levels are too low -- 3dB to
6dB too low.

The first time I noticed this was almost 30 years ago. Superman saves Lois
as she falls from the helicopter.

"Don't worry, miss. I've got you."

"murph glurb muggle rix fixo blork" was her reply. (In case you didn't know,
she says "You've got me? Who's got you?"

In most cases this is because the theatre owner has never done a proper
B-chain alignment and the level of the center channel is much too low
compared with the front sides and the surrounds.

This applies to commercials, too. It took me a dozen viewings before I
figured out that the guy was saying "What if this continues?"

I think commercials in movie theatres are offensive, personally, and they
just get worse and worse too.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[William Sommerwerck]

This applies to commercials, too. It took me a dozen viewings before
I figured out that the guy was saying "What if this continues?"

I think commercials in movie theatres are offensive, personally, and they
just get worse and worse too.

Agreed, but I was talking about commercials on TV.

[Richard Crowley]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote ...
This applies to commercials, too. It took me a dozen viewings before
I figured out that the guy was saying "What if this continues?"

I think commercials in movie theatres are offensive, personally, and
they
just get worse and worse too.

Agreed, but I was talking about commercials on TV.

Not just commercials. I was viewing the commercially-released
DVDs of the first season of "Numb3rs" and some of the dialog,
particularly interior scenes (in the FBI office, etc.) is unusually
mushy. It is almost as if they were merely recording a "guide track"
with the intention of ADR, and then decided to save money and
not do the ADR after all.

[[email protected]]

Not just commercials. I was viewing the commercially-released
DVDs of the first season of "Numb3rs" and some of the dialog,
particularly interior scenes (in the FBI office, etc.) is unusually
mushy. It is almost as if they were merely recording a "guide track"
with the intention of ADR, and then decided to save money and
not do the ADR after all.


I just noticed something like this when I rented
the The Da Vinci Code on DVD. Couldn't
hardly understand the dialog in some cases because
the volume was low and seemed not very
distinct.

In the bonus sections they showed some behind-the-scenes
and I noticed that the boomed mic was 6-8 feet off
the characters when they were engaging in dialog.
Isn't it hard to get crisp dialog with the mic that far
off?

[Oleg Kaizerman]

depends on the location , camera angles , boom as you know have to be out
the frame
in some cases it become as the secondary sound to mix with the radio mics
only abit open the sound
in most cases the actors backed up with lavalieres so you have close
micking as well
in good soundproof studio or extremely low nose locations 6 feet is
something that you can work without any problem as long the actor doesn't
mumbles or look down

In the bonus sections they showed some behind-the-scenes
and I noticed that the boomed mic was 6-8 feet off
the characters when they were engaging in dialog.
Isn't it hard to get crisp dialog with the mic that far
off?

[Laurence Payne]

On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 03:44:14 -0700, wrote:

I just noticed something like this when I rented
the The Da Vinci Code on DVD. Couldn't
hardly understand the dialog in some cases because
the volume was low and seemed not very
distinct.

In the bonus sections they showed some behind-the-scenes
and I noticed that the boomed mic was 6-8 feet off
the characters when they were engaging in dialog.
Isn't it hard to get crisp dialog with the mic that far
off?

Often the dialogue is recorded only as a reference. They re-record in
a studio later.

[jeff c]

On Sep 8, 5:35 pm, "Richard Crowley" wrote:
"William Sommerwerck" wrote ...

This applies to commercials, too. It took me a dozen viewings before
I figured out that the guy was saying "What if this continues?"

I think commercials in movie theatres are offensive, personally, and
they
just get worse and worse too.

Agreed, but I was talking about commercials on TV.

Not just commercials. I was viewing the commercially-released
DVDs of the first season of "Numb3rs" and some of the dialog,
particularly interior scenes (in the FBI office, etc.) is unusually
mushy. It is almost as if they were merely recording a "guide track"
with the intention of ADR, and then decided to save money and
not do the ADR after all.

LOL... I find myself ocassionally saying "Escuse me" or What? in
conversation... now I find myself saying it to the screen.

BTW the average 35 year old caucasion male starts to lose hearing
around the 2k range as a normal part of aging... women and other
ethnicities start losing it a few years later... 2K is where "Voice"
gets it's intelligibility. I'm 50 and have been doing sound in one
form or another for 34 years...I have witnessed a great number of
people willingly expose themselves to ear damaging SPL's... My theory
is that the last three generations of humanity have been exposed to
noise levels that the speciecs was not designed to endure... since
"Showco" went out with a half million watts of midrange in the 70's so
that people could hear "Rock and a Roll"...it's amazing that so much
of the current generation can even hear themselves thinking. I have
tried to practice "Sonic Hygine" (earplugs) since I started... I Still
have a perfect 2.5k ringing in my ears sometimes....

I wonder how many deftone fans are now sound editors... I wonder how
many of us have had our hearing checked recently.... 6 years for me.
I wonder how much longer dialog will be relevant...

Ramble over...and out,

Jeff

[vin]

Very important point from Jeff. I simply stopped watching movies in
cinemas. Very very selective, last film was A Prarie Home Companion.
If i HAVE to go, I carry earplugs. No need to hear anything anymore in
most films, within the first 10 minutes, all is clear as to what will
transpire. Since this is the way with these films, I would rather not
spend money and time and effort going to a cinema to experience them.

Overall noise figures in city life are debilitating. Be it Bombay or
New York.

-vin

[[email protected]]

2K is where "Voice"
gets it's intelligibility.

Consonant sounds are up to 12K (for sibilance). In reinforcement I
often reduce 2 or 2.5 K to reduce harshness, while keeping everything
above 4K flat for intelligibility. 2K is the frequency at which the
human ear is most sensitive.

[jeff c]

On Sep 10, 8:31 pm, wrote:
2K is where "Voice"

gets it's intelligibility.

Consonant sounds are up to 12K (for sibilance). In reinforcement I
often reduce 2 or 2.5 K to reduce harshness, while keeping everything
above 4K flat for intelligibility. 2K is the frequency at which the
human ear is most sensitive.

I said 2k as a generalization.... should have been 2k-8k maybeee...

12k is where extremely nellie boys, young girlz, and cymbals get their
intelligibility.... geeze, generate a 12k tone and listen to it....
Never had a problem with the bell sytems 200-4000 freq range on a
phone....not much sibilanssse but enough consonants to undersand what
is being said. I spent years with a third octave spectrum analyzer in
the 70-80s.... most stuff is getting rolled off at no more than 12k in
the real world... 20-20k is a big fat falshood perpetrated by stereo
marketers...when you dealing with the flethcher munson curve in the
response of the human ear...what does flat really mean??? Maybe one
day we will each get our own hemholtz resonator tuned for our tastes
and hearing ability...until then it's going to suck for some...

J

[[email protected]]

I agree that hearing 20 -20K is a myth. In looking at program on a
spectrum analyzer I've found that there's very little energy below 50
or above 12K, but the concept of being flat well beyond program
material kind of validates the desirability for 20-20k....

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:
I agree that hearing 20 -20K is a myth.

Why? I could hear 22KC as a child, and I can still hear 18KC today. Now,
I can hear a 1KC tone a lot more easily than I can hear an 18KC tone or
a 36C tone, but that doesn't make the usable range a "myth."

In looking at program on a
spectrum analyzer I've found that there's very little energy below 50
or above 12K,

What program material, created how? I can hand you off a percussion ensemble
with lots of energy below 50C and above 12KC. On the other hand, for spoken
word, you won't find anywhere near as wide a range. Depends on the source,
and humans are designed to deal with sounds from widely varying sources.

but the concept of being flat well beyond program
material kind of validates the desirability for 20-20k....

In the analogue world where most things were minimum phase, it was considered
a reasonable expectation that a system would be designed for an octave wider
usable _frequency_ response on either end, in order to get the _phase_
response within the passband to be reasonable. However, these days we don't
have to deal with that quite so much with digital processing, where systems
can be flat right out to the edge of the passband and then drop abruptly.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

On Sep 11, 5:49 am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
wrote:
I agree that hearing 20 -20K is a myth.

Why? I could hear 22KC as a child, and I can still hear 18KC today. Now,
I can hear a 1KC tone a lot more easily than I can hear an 18KC tone or
a 36C tone, but that doesn't make the usable range a "myth."

In looking at program on a
spectrum analyzer I've found that there's very little energy below 50
or above 12K,

What program material, created how? I can hand you off a percussion ensemble
with lots of energy below 50C and above 12KC. On the other hand, for spoken
word, you won't find anywhere near as wide a range. Depends on the source,
and humans are designed to deal with sounds from widely varying sources.

Be careful about spoken word spectrum. While we have the abominable
precedents being set by telcom the actual spectrum can be 100 Hz to 15
KHz. Some consonants have significant energy above 12 KHz. Take the
German zwei. A voice actress speaking had a spectrogram showing the
leading consonant with energy starting at 7 KHz going to 16 KHz,
peaking around 12 KHz. Downsampling experiments developed a noticable
lisp when bandlimited to 5 KHz.

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
we organize chaos
http://www.bsstudios.com

[[email protected]]

On Sep 5, 6:24 am, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Wed, 5 Sep 2007 22:05:11 +0800, "johnn"
wrote:

for a typical movie theatre with 5.1 sound system, what is the typical SPL
level ?

Too loud most of the time. Especially during the previews.

Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WAhttp://liondogmusic.com

I agree. I don't visit movie theatres much anymore unless wearing
hearing protection. Even if the theatre kept the SPL limited to 85 dBC
SPL, that is quite loud, actually. But it doesn't appear so because we
have been exposed to even louder events on a regular basis.

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
we organize chaos
http://www.bsstudios.com

[jeff c]

On Sep 11, 9:20 am, wrote:
On Sep 11, 5:49 am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

wrote:
I agree that hearing 20 -20K is a myth.

Why? I could hear 22KC as a child, and I can still hear 18KC today. Now,
I can hear a 1KC tone a lot more easily than I can hear an 18KC tone or
a 36C tone, but that doesn't make the usable range a "myth."

In looking at program on a
spectrum analyzer I've found that there's very little energy below 50
or above 12K,

What program material, created how? I can hand you off a percussion ensemble
with lots of energy below 50C and above 12KC. On the other hand, for spoken
word, you won't find anywhere near as wide a range. Depends on the source,
and humans are designed to deal with sounds from widely varying sources.

Be careful about spoken word spectrum. While we have the abominable
precedents being set by telcom the actual spectrum can be 100 Hz to 15
KHz. Some consonants have significant energy above 12 KHz. Take the
German zwei. A voice actress speaking had a spectrogram showing the
leading consonant with energy starting at 7 KHz going to 16 KHz,
peaking around 12 KHz. Downsampling experiments developed a noticable
lisp when bandlimited to 5 KHz.

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
we organize chaoshttp://www.bsstudios.com

And then again Chartruessss... has plenty of energy above
20k...))) we're talking film dialog here and why it is so often
unintelligible and not the sonic nuance of a Stradavarius Violin...
granted not overly apparent harmonics, supersonic freqs, etc do effect
overall sound quality... but I don't think that is why the dialog is
not understood above the ambience...

I guess my real point is that in this "Deaf Generation" a large
segment of the general population has a big hole in their ability to
hear at 2k or therebouts at normal listening levels.... Oops, i said
"normal listening levels"... who knows what that is...I do have to
remind myself that listening to dialog at high SPls in headphones is
not an accurate representation of what an audience might do or
want.... one of the things I really like about ppm metering is that I
can get a decent idea of S/N ratios visually... knowing that certain
frequency's at certain levels have a masking effect, might help some
editors figure out why know one can understand what the actors are
saying... And then again, mumblers like dusty make it a challenge
for anyone...

J... apologise if i sound ****y... I'm in a rotten mood. my bad!

[Peter Larsen]

wrote:

Be careful about spoken word spectrum. While we have the abominable
precedents being set by telcom the actual spectrum can be 100 Hz to 15
KHz. Some consonants have significant energy above 12 KHz. Take the
German zwei. A voice actress speaking had a spectrogram showing the
leading consonant with energy starting at 7 KHz going to 16 KHz,
peaking around 12 KHz. Downsampling experiments developed a noticable
lisp when bandlimited to 5 KHz.

trap

Samplerate?

Microphone?

/trap

bobs

Bob Smith


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Peter Larsen]

wrote:

I agree. I don't visit movie theatres much anymore unless wearing
hearing protection.

Movies not seen for fear of hearing damage, re-issue CD's not bought for
fear of digital remastering .... the industry has a problem, or at the
very least a challenge, to overcome.

Bob Smith


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[[email protected]]

On Sep 12, 2:46 am, Peter Larsen
wrote:
wrote:
Be careful about spoken word spectrum. While we have the abominable
precedents being set by telcom the actual spectrum can be 100 Hz to 15
KHz. Some consonants have significant energy above 12 KHz. Take the
German zwei. A voice actress speaking had a spectrogram showing the
leading consonant with energy starting at 7 KHz going to 16 KHz,
peaking around 12 KHz. Downsampling experiments developed a noticable
lisp when bandlimited to 5 KHz.

Samplerate?
Microphone?


Initial sample rate was 44.1 KHz 24 bit. Target was 11 KHz 16 bit,
hence the 5 KHz bandlimiting.

Microphone was never disclosed, though I asked. Recording was a voice
actress at Planet Sound.

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
we organize chaos
http://www.bsstudios.com

[Peter Larsen[_2_]]

wrote:

Samplerate?
Microphone?

Initial sample rate was 44.1 KHz 24 bit. Target was 11 KHz 16 bit,
hence the 5 KHz bandlimiting.

Initial samplerate limits detectable components to 21.5 kHz

Microphone was never disclosed, though I asked. Recording was a voice
actress at Planet Sound.

Undocumented microphones generally limit detectable components to 17 kHz.

Which is to say that you know nothing about the upper frequency limit of the
white noise components in speech based on that recording.

Bob Smith


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[jeff c]

On Sep 12, 9:33 am, "Peter Larsen" wrote:
wrote:
Samplerate?
Microphone?
Initial sample rate was 44.1 KHz 24 bit. Target was 11 KHz 16 bit,
hence the 5 KHz bandlimiting.

Initial samplerate limits detectable components to 21.5 kHz

Microphone was never disclosed, though I asked. Recording was a voice
actress at Planet Sound.

Undocumented microphones generally limit detectable components to 17 kHz.

Which is to say that you know nothing about the upper frequency limit of the
white noise components in speech based on that recording.

Bob Smith

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

Maybe it's irrelevant idiots increasing the S/n ratio...bla bla
bla,.... I thought the thread was about why dialog is unintelligble in
sound for picture and ridiculous SPL's in theaters... not about K9
hearing and who can **** higher up the tree with their bandwidth...
maybe I didn't "Hear" or understand... Oy!

another musical great New Orleans, "WilliamTurbinton" or Willie T,
passed yesterday...as has Jazz legend "Joe Zawinul" this week...a
great loss in the world of sonic candy...

Maybe in films they intentionally mask the dialog with ambience as to
not stress out the writers... or infer anything they are saying is
relevant....

[[email protected]]

On Sep 12, 6:33 am, "Peter Larsen" wrote:
wrote:
Samplerate?
Microphone?
Initial sample rate was 44.1 KHz 24 bit. Target was 11 KHz 16 bit,
hence the 5 KHz bandlimiting.

Initial samplerate limits detectable components to 21.5 kHz

Microphone was never disclosed, though I asked. Recording was a voice
actress at Planet Sound.

Undocumented microphones generally limit detectable components to 17 kHz.

Which is to say that you know nothing about the upper frequency limit of the
white noise components in speech based on that recording.

Bob Smith

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

Well, the practical matter was that the original recording sounded
proper to the German client and the varsious downsampled versions
lisped. I spent hours fabricating sounds, sometimes sample by sample,
to achieve a 5 KHz bandlimited version that was acceptable. Of course
this whole diversion could have been avoided had the original target
playback system supported a higher sample rate.

If the situation were to be repeated, what microphone, preamp, A/D
converter and sample rate would pass muster in your opinion?

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
we organize chaos
http://www.bsstudios.com

[Peter Larsen[_2_]]

jeff c wrote:

maybe I didn't "Hear" or understand... Oy!

I am open for that option ... O;-) ... I haven't read all in this thread,
but it seems realistic that the properties of the sense of hearing should be
of interest in the context of what movie theatre spl concerns are about:
hearing damage.


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[[email protected]]

On Sep 12, 7:10 am, jeff c wrote:
On Sep 12, 9:33 am, "Peter Larsen" wrote:

wrote:
Samplerate?
Microphone?
Initial sample rate was 44.1 KHz 24 bit. Target was 11 KHz 16 bit,
hence the 5 KHz bandlimiting.

Initial samplerate limits detectable components to 21.5 kHz

Microphone was never disclosed, though I asked. Recording was a voice
actress at Planet Sound.

Undocumented microphones generally limit detectable components to 17 kHz.

Which is to say that you know nothing about the upper frequency limit of the
white noise components in speech based on that recording.

Bob Smith

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

Maybe it's irrelevant idiots increasing the S/n ratio...bla bla
bla,.... I thought the thread was about why dialog is unintelligble in
sound for picture and ridiculous SPL's in theaters... not about K9
hearing and who can **** higher up the tree with their bandwidth...
maybe I didn't "Hear" or understand... Oy!

Having a fair amount of direct experience with voice playback systems
in 30+ languages, it is a bit of a hot button for me when dialog isn't
reproduced adequately. Lot's of folks like to quote the telcom 300 ~
3400 Hz bandwidth as all that is necessary for voice reproduction.
This is inadequate to support many of the consonant sounds in most
languages properly. Yet many think this is the last word on the topic
and blissfully produce voice recordings that sound terrible and fairly
unintelligible.

another musical great New Orleans, "WilliamTurbinton" or Willie T,
passed yesterday...as has Jazz legend "Joe Zawinul" this week...a
great loss in the world of sonic candy...

Truly great losses. I did get to see Gerald Wilson and Buddy DeFranco
at Jazz Pt. Townsend over the last couple of years.


Maybe in films they intentionally mask the dialog with ambience as to
not stress out the writers... or infer anything they are saying is
relevant

You may be on to something there.

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
we organize chaos
http://www.bsstudios.com

[jeff c]

On Sep 12, 11:13 am, wrote:
On Sep 12, 7:10 am, jeff c wrote:



On Sep 12, 9:33 am, "Peter Larsen" wrote:

wrote:
Samplerate?
Microphone?
Initial sample rate was 44.1 KHz 24 bit. Target was 11 KHz 16 bit,
hence the 5 KHz bandlimiting.

Initial samplerate limits detectable components to 21.5 kHz

Microphone was never disclosed, though I asked. Recording was a voice
actress at Planet Sound.

Undocumented microphones generally limit detectable components to 17 kHz.

Which is to say that you know nothing about the upper frequency limit of the
white noise components in speech based on that recording.

Bob Smith

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

Maybe it's irrelevant idiots increasing the S/n ratio...bla bla
bla,.... I thought the thread was about why dialog is unintelligble in
sound for picture and ridiculous SPL's in theaters... not about K9
hearing and who can **** higher up the tree with their bandwidth...
maybe I didn't "Hear" or understand... Oy!

Having a fair amount of direct experience with voice playback systems
in 30+ languages, it is a bit of a hot button for me when dialog isn't
reproduced adequately. Lot's of folks like to quote the telcom 300 ~
3400 Hz bandwidth as all that is necessary for voice reproduction.
This is inadequate to support many of the consonant sounds in most
languages properly. Yet many think this is the last word on the topic
and blissfully produce voice recordings that sound terrible and fairly
unintelligible.

another musical great New Orleans, "WilliamTurbinton" or Willie T,
passed yesterday...as has Jazz legend "Joe Zawinul" this week...a
great loss in the world of sonic candy...

Truly great losses. I did get to see Gerald Wilson and Buddy DeFranco
at Jazz Pt. Townsend over the last couple of years.



Maybe in films they intentionally mask the dialog with ambience as to
not stress out the writers... or infer anything they are saying is
relevant

You may be on to something there.

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
we organize chaoshttp://www.bsstudios.com

I'm sure that whatever frequencys get from the Shoeps capsule to the
bitstream have plenty of blissfull frequency's... I know enough, to
know it's probably more important where the back of the mic is pointed
than the front... I do know that a s/n ratio of 10db between voice and
wide band ambience sorta sucks ass... What I don't know is why is it
that Studio post ops can't figure out what is acceptable S/N ratio in
film dialog.

I work mostly ENG or EFP shoots where there is little or no noise
control... I have to know when it is an unnaceptable level of suckage
cause most of my work gets broadcast as recorded...generally a lot
better than some of the so called "Feature" films that have sweetning
budgets larger than my annual income.

I just figure most folks are stuck on stupid and can't figure out how
to care...

[[email protected]]

On Sep 12, 10:04 am, jeff c wrote:

What I don't know is why is it
that Studio post ops can't figure out what is acceptable S/N ratio in
film dialog.

Or worse, that it's acceptable to mp2 the video for a webcast with the
audio data compression at 22:1 to 30:1 to get filesize down. Nothing
like hearing ENG carefully recorded just totally trashed out in post.
Hey, it's just audio. Everytime I hear that it pushes a hot button.
What's a newscast without audio?

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
we organize chaos
http://www.bsstudios.com

[jeff c]

On Sep 12, 1:19 pm, wrote:
On Sep 12, 10:04 am, jeff c wrote:

What I don't know is why is it
that Studio post ops can't figure out what is acceptable S/N ratio in
film dialog.

Or worse, that it's acceptable to mp2 the video for a webcast with the
audio data compression at 22:1 to 30:1 to get filesize down. Nothing
like hearing ENG carefully recorded just totally trashed out in post.
Hey, it's just audio. Everytime I hear that it pushes a hot button.
What's a newscast without audio?

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
we organize chaoshttp://www.bsstudios.com

Agreed... if audiences were not so dumbed down in their expectations,
things might be different. A lot of stuff slides by these days and I
guess if people keep buying whatever their selling nothing will change
for the better. Ignorance IS bliss...until a storm comes and the
electricity goes off, and the water rises...

[Richard Crowley]

"Richard Crowley" wrote...
"William Sommerwerck" wrote ...
This applies to commercials, too. It took me a dozen viewings before
I figured out that the guy was saying "What if this continues?"

I think commercials in movie theatres are offensive, personally, and
they
just get worse and worse too.

Agreed, but I was talking about commercials on TV.

Not just commercials. I was viewing the commercially-released
DVDs of the first season of "Numb3rs" and some of the dialog,
particularly interior scenes (in the FBI office, etc.) is unusually
mushy. It is almost as if they were merely recording a "guide track"
with the intention of ADR, and then decided to save money and
not do the ADR after all.

Apparently, I'm not the only one...

http://www.comics.com/comics/arlonja...-20070917.html

(originally posted by Jay Rose in r.a.m.p.s)

[Peter Larsen]

Richard Crowley wrote:

Apparently, I'm not the only one...

http://www.comics.com/comics/arlonja...-20070917.html

All I get is an empty green screen, somewhat lighter in tone than the
one you would get from a chip-ram issue on an Amiga.

(originally posted by Jay Rose in r.a.m.p.s)


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Richard Crowley]

"Peter Larsen" wrote ...
Richard Crowley wrote:

Apparently, I'm not the only one...

http://www.comics.com/comics/arlonja...-20070917.html

All I get is an empty green screen, somewhat lighter in tone than the
one you would get from a chip-ram issue on an Amiga.

Then you need to fix your browser. Wonder what else
you aren't seeing? :-)

[Peter Larsen]

Richard Crowley wrote:

"Peter Larsen" wrote ...
Richard Crowley wrote:

Apparently, I'm not the only one...

http://www.comics.com/comics/arlonja...-20070917.html

All I get is an empty green screen, somewhat lighter in tone than the
one you would get from a chip-ram issue on an Amiga.

Patience solved it, it was a bandwidth issue, fortunately I didn't have
to open the ADSL modem and push the Agnus chip back in place because it
had crawled up from its socket ... O;-)

Then you need to fix your browser. Wonder what else
you aren't seeing? :-)

It is IE 6.0 and this here ME box is broken so that updating IE
consistently fails. I could probably fix it with a lot of registry and
file name editing, the problem is that the short filenames are lost
because I had to restore a backup made from windows 2000, which has a
different view on short filenames. No, not even Windows is Windows
compatible ... o;-) ... however my choice was either to use that backup
or loose the entire installation.


Kind regards

Peter Larsen