-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quagmire
Don't you just love how John Beresford is a Junior Member here, whereas you and I are "site newbies". How long has it been since you thought of yourself as a site newbie?
Q
Yo Q,
I think I was a newbie back in December of 1997. To my recollection I have not been one till now. Maybe you and I are getting younger and will end up back in the egg when it is all said and done.
Sir Terrence
-
John; that is a good way of putting it and as such you are on the road to understanding.
-
John...
You said: "...but I do not understand why the marketing of the disc reads 2.0 channel mono to begin with; why mix on two channels if the result is mono? Then why not mix two channel stereo at that point?"
First of all, I think you're right to just accept the packaging as is. It really isn't something worth getting all that worked up over. I actually get more upset when studios release fairly recent movies with only DPL soundtracks instead of remixing for true 5.1 surround; especially when they later release a "special edition" version of the movie with a remixed 5.1 soundtrack. Bill Murray's, "Ground Hog Day" is one such example, and although the movie isn't exactly a rollercoaster ride of sound effects, I would prefer to have the 5.1 mix. It's like penalizing those who like a particular movie and buy it early.
As far as your question regarding, "why not mix for stereo at that point?", as I said in an earlier post, the original soundtrack IS MONO and would require reworking of the soundtrack to make it stereo. Just placing the mono track in the two front channels does not require any rework of the original soundtrack. As for the earlier part of your question, "why mix on two channels if the result is mono?", I'm sure this is just a judgement call and besides, as I've said already, this really isn't a remix of the original soundtrack. Some may just feel that the track sounds better reproduced through the two front speakers and that for those with DPL systems, the sound will collapse to the center channel speaker anyway.
Q
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quagmire
You said: "...but I do not understand why the marketing of the disc reads 2.0 channel mono to begin with; why mix on two channels if the result is mono? Then why not mix two channel stereo at that point?"
First of all, I think you're right to just accept the packaging as is. It really isn't something worth getting all that worked up over. I actually get more upset when studios release fairly recent movies with only DPL soundtracks instead of remixing for true 5.1 surround; especially when they later release a "special edition" version of the movie with a remixed 5.1 soundtrack. Bill Murray's, "Ground Hog Day" is one such example, and although the movie isn't exactly a rollercoaster ride of sound effects, I would prefer to have the 5.1 mix. It's like penalizing those who like a particular movie and buy it early.
As far as your question regarding, "why not mix for stereo at that point?", as I said in an earlier post, the original soundtrack IS MONO and would require reworking of the soundtrack to make it stereo. Just placing the mono track in the two front channels does not require any rework of the original soundtrack. As for the earlier part of your question, "why mix on two channels if the result is mono?", I'm sure this is just a judgement call and besides, as I've said already, this really isn't a remix of the original soundtrack. Some may just feel that the track sounds better reproduced through the two front speakers and that for those with DPL systems, the sound will collapse to the center channel speaker anyway.
Q
Q and John,
I think each studio's sound department makes the decision on whether a mono soundtrack sounds better decoded through a DPL processor, or through the discrete center channel sans DPL processing. Thats the key to as why there are some titles that are 1.0 and big fat mono 2.0.
As far as making repurposing mono soundtracks to stereo, that would be title dependent, and based on whether the movie made money for the studio during its theatrical release. Doing this means going back to the original music,effects and dialog stems and completely redirecting the effects, and panning of the music. Not cheap or easy.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quagmire
You said: "...but I do not understand why the marketing of the disc reads 2.0 channel mono to begin with; why mix on two channels if the result is mono? Then why not mix two channel stereo at that point?"
First of all, I think you're right to just accept the packaging as is. It really isn't something worth getting all that worked up over. I actually get more upset when studios release fairly recent movies with only DPL soundtracks instead of remixing for true 5.1 surround; especially when they later release a "special edition" version of the movie with a remixed 5.1 soundtrack. Bill Murray's, "Ground Hog Day" is one such example, and although the movie isn't exactly a rollercoaster ride of sound effects, I would prefer to have the 5.1 mix. It's like penalizing those who like a particular movie and buy it early.
As far as your question regarding, "why not mix for stereo at that point?", as I said in an earlier post, the original soundtrack IS MONO and would require reworking of the soundtrack to make it stereo. Just placing the mono track in the two front channels does not require any rework of the original soundtrack. As for the earlier part of your question, "why mix on two channels if the result is mono?", I'm sure this is just a judgement call and besides, as I've said already, this really isn't a remix of the original soundtrack. Some may just feel that the track sounds better reproduced through the two front speakers and that for those with DPL systems, the sound will collapse to the center channel speaker anyway.
Q
Your Q-Ship,
Thank you, and happy thanksgiving to all....
You're right; I do get more upset when a film I REALLY like isn't remixed for 5.1 surround and we only get a Stereo Surround mix; this has happened for me with DVDs like "Halloween II" (Universal; 2.0 Stereo Surround), "John Carpenter's Christine" (Columbia/TriStar; 2.0 Stereo Surround), "Falling Down" (Warner Bros; 2.0 Stereo Surround), "Boyz N The Hood" (Columbia/TriStar; 2.0 Stereo Surround)....this list can get longer.
I am always upset when they dont remix a certain film for 5.1; they can do it for old classics like "Halloween" and "The Fog" but they cant do it on others!?
-
John Beresford = TLADINY (see the similarities)
come one guys, can't you see the same type questions, answers, confusion, more questions, more confusion and on and on...
-
Confucious Say...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarheel_
come one guys, can't you see the same type questions, answers, confusion, more questions, more confusion and on and on...
Come on guys, can't you see....blah blah blah...wah wah wah....the post is coming to a close Tarheel, because we all agree that mono soundtrack labeling is confusing and we're just going to leave it be.
|