Posts: 601
Threads: 44
Joined: 2021 Jul
Thanks: 452
Given 484 thank(s) in 241 post(s)
Country: 
(2021-08-19, 07:48 PM)spoRv Wrote: FYI: Dolby Surround (as any other matrix encoding/decoding techniques) is NOT a lossless procedure: if you input your 4 channels into a DPL encoder, then the result Lt-Rt (Left total and Right total) in a DPL decoder, the final 4 channels, albeit very similar (how much depending on the quality of the encoder/decoder used) will never be identical.
This could be a reason why there are 2.0 tracks instead of 4.0 (4.1 or 5.1) tracks.
At the same time, if you want to hear a Dolby Surround track as much as possible similar to the one heard in a cinema at the time, it's better (IMHO and other's) to decode it with a good Dolby Pro-Logic decoder (Dolby SDU4 for example, as it uses the same chip found in cinema decoders) instead of let the new Dolby Surround Upmixer take care of it. I guess you could argue what's better/more authentic, the 4.0 mix before encoding or 2.0 Dolby mix. I'd probably side with the 4.0, though I'd be curious to hear the difference in person.
(2021-08-19, 07:52 PM)ac3 Wrote: i remember when i had an AV reciever it didnt route bass to the subwoofers in 1.0 or 4.0 no matter what i did. it still doesnt in vlc
with kodi and ffdshow doing the decoding i need to go into the LFE options on ffdshow for bass to work on those formats.
i imagine they matrix it or remix it to 5.1 so consumers dont get pissed off when the subwoofer isnt doing anything
not sure why they keep releasing mono movies in 1.0 as well .
least when it's 2.0 the lfe works in pro logic. It's gotta be something in your settings not right, I never had an issue with this on my setup.
Posts: 173
Threads: 12
Joined: 2018 Aug
Thanks: 14
Given 76 thank(s) in 46 post(s)
Country: 
2021-08-19, 09:19 PM
(This post was last modified: 2021-08-19, 09:47 PM by ac3.)
Maybe not u but for the avg consumer with a home theater in a box. anyhow I'm not saying I'm right about anything here just guessing
deleted user
Unregistered
Thanks:
Given thank(s) in post(s)
More authentic: 2.0 decoded with SDU4. Because film prints did not have 4.0. They had 2.0 which was decoded. It can make a difference. Think of a song that was added to the two front speakers. After matrixing and dematrixing, some of the song's content will come out of the center and back center. Whereas in the raw 4.0, it would come only out of the left and right front speakers.
However I think it would be pretty nice if we could get the raw 4.0 mix more often in addition to the matrixed 2.0. It wouldn't necessarily be theatrically accurate, but it wouldn't exactly be inaccurate either and an interesting different way of experiencing the movie.
Maybe they just don't have them anymore in some cases. I've heard anecdotes that sometimes collectors of Cinema DTS discs are approached by studios because they lost the original mix.
Posts: 7,153
Threads: 601
Joined: 2015 Jan
Thanks: 1081
Given 1466 thank(s) in 963 post(s)
Country: 
Agree with Tom: most authentic is 2.0 LOSSLESS decoded with SDU4 or another Dolby cinema decoder.
Second to that, the 4.0 LOSSLESS result of the previous one, for anybody that have not that decoder.
Posts: 2,052
Threads: 56
Joined: 2016 Dec
Thanks: 162
Given 1011 thank(s) in 614 post(s)
Here's a link to an article detailing, among other things, the process of putting together a Dolby Stereo matrixed soundtrack, including monitoring the mix in the studio
https://www.in70mm.com/news/2015/mixing/index.htm
Posts: 7,153
Threads: 601
Joined: 2015 Jan
Thanks: 1081
Given 1466 thank(s) in 963 post(s)
Country:
Great link! 
Posts: 601
Threads: 44
Joined: 2021 Jul
Thanks: 452
Given 484 thank(s) in 241 post(s)
Country:
(2021-08-20, 08:11 AM)zoidberg Wrote: Here's a link to an article detailing, among other things, the process of putting together a Dolby Stereo matrixed soundtrack, including monitoring the mix in the studio
https://www.in70mm.com/news/2015/mixing/index.htm
Exactly the information I was looking for!
Posts: 848
Threads: 202
Joined: 2019 Aug
Thanks: 1230
Given 1152 thank(s) in 382 post(s)
Country: 
2021-08-24, 10:52 AM
(This post was last modified: 2021-08-24, 10:52 AM by alleycat.)
(2021-08-19, 04:45 PM)stwd4nder2 Wrote: So if every DS mix stems from a 4.0, why isn't it more common for the 4 channel mix to be released on BD over the 2 channel DS? Or even as 5.0 with mono surrounds. I'd assume it would be more accurate to the original theatrical presentation then matrixed audio on a modern processor.
You are starting to see 4.0 tracks on blu ray but it’s not common. Tremors, Predator, Robocop, Suspiria etc. Of course they aren’t guaranteed to be original mixes.
Posts: 2,052
Threads: 56
Joined: 2016 Dec
Thanks: 162
Given 1011 thank(s) in 614 post(s)
For every person that rejoices the original audio being included on recent releases there's about a million complaining it's not been remixed into Dolby Amos, such are the times we live in
deleted user
Unregistered
Thanks:
Given thank(s) in post(s)
(2021-08-24, 11:30 AM)zoidberg Wrote: For every person that rejoices the original audio being included on recent releases there's about a million complaining it's not been remixed into Dolby Amos, such are the times we live in
Controversial opinion: I'd love for them to do both on every release. And not just audio, video too. Always include 2 discs. One with the original unaltered perfectly preserved theatrical release. And one where they go so crazy with remastering it makes George Lucas feel whoozy.
I'd love to see a remaster of the original trilogy with modern state of the art digital effects on a 300 million USD budget where they just go crazy on every single shot. As long as the original is preserved as well and given equal respect.
|
