Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 32 of 32
  1. #26
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    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

  2. #27
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Margate, Florida
    Posts
    614
    John; that is a good way of putting it and as such you are on the road to understanding.

  3. #28
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    223

    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

  4. #29
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    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.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  5. #30
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    126
    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!?

  6. #31
    ride a jet ski Tarheel_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    661

    Lightbulb 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...

  7. #32
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    126

    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.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Indiana Jones Trilogy, my comments some rebuttals
    By Sir Terrence the Terrible in forum Home Theater/Video
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-25-2003, 12:14 PM
  2. Mono DVD Soundtracks
    By John Beresford in forum Favorite Films
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-24-2003, 05:49 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •