Infrasonic

26 minutes ago, SME said:

The X-curve effects alone probably kill 4-6 dB of headroom.  Taking into account room size effects, and for all practical purposes, a cinema track has only a little more headroom, per channel, than typical music releases.  On the plus side, cinema mixes do have more channels plus LFE to work with.

 

Ummm......  no.

I'd have to double-check with my friend but... I think the X-curve is no longer a thing in modern cinema mixes.

Afaik, that stopped in the 90's/2000's when sound started being delivered in uncompressed PCM.

We have better screen materials these days and better compression horn technology.

12 minutes ago, maxmercy said:

BB and TDK were not nearly as bad as the ‘epiphany’ Nolan had with TDKR and nearly every film of his since...while I can appreciate the ‘wall of sound’ effect, it is best used sparingly for even greater effect.

JSS

Yeah. It's definitely been his MO since TDKR.

Quote

PS - If the biggest warp effect in ST:Into Deafness was unclipped (It was!), you KNOW good sound can be unclipped as well.  While I completely understand the ‘flat tops’ for effect, I cannot abide slamming into 0dBFS with reckless abandon and literally clipping away information.  Put the flat tops at -0.1dB and watch your signal levels to avoid losing information.  Or use analog compression or soft limiting.

But it has been said before: “What can I say?  Director’s Intent is Director’s Intent.”

Hey... don't think I don't agree with you.

But if that's what the guy wanted it to sound like, who am I to argue?

Well.... that's a good question! Let's argue about it.

Usually this particular subject revolves back to dialog intelligibility and Nolan has had plenty of very mainstream news about that sort of thing with all his past movies since TDKR.

Christopher Nolan is excellent at story telling but dude-bro needs to get his hearing checked or something.

Well.... it was intense.

As A/V nerds we may scoff at the thought of this Satan-bred, pure-evil stuff called "clipping" but like it or not, it did have the desired effect. It's fucking loud. It's harsh. I'd imagine it was on that beach...and in all the various marine vessels...and in the Spitfires being shot at.

All his films are mixed like this. Would expect nothing different from Nolan.

On 11/27/2017 at 12:50 PM, Electrodynamic said:

....measured very well in ULF/LFE but, to me, the audio sucked. There, I said it.

 

Nothing to be ashamed of.

A flat PvA is no indication at all that the rest of the mix will sound good whatsoever.

1 hour ago, ITR said:

I used them lasers.

Were they attached to sharks, at least?

1 hour ago, Ricci said:

Welcome to the forum...

Just to clarify...These specs are pulled from what driver?

What jumps out at me is...

 .... Very odd set of design tradeoffs IMHO.

 

Yes, indeed. I'm sure there is a good reason why they chose this specific driver for the task. But also...

1 hour ago, ITR said:

The one that is in PB16-U.

...wasn't this an under-hung driver? IIRC, the sealed version of this system used an over-hung version of the driver. Should definitely change some paramters...

...but just doesn't seem like an optimal driver for the alignment.

Welcome to DB, ITR. Good stuff.

Interesting.

What device was used to derive those parameters, ITR?

Had not got T5 yet on video but will eventually. People love to poop on Michael Bay and T5 has serious issues but in a hobby for A/V..... T5 brings it. Interested in the Atmos track and if it is (better be) a remarkable improvement from T4's barely-Atmos track.

And yes... let's bring back the days when 20hz was cool cuz it still is, imho.

Titanic IS a great movie.

Hey... I could be wrong.

Thought it was awesome, on all levels. Can't wait to get my hands on the UHD. Counting the days already...

On 10/10/2017 at 7:02 AM, minnjd said:

Just saw Blade Runner 2049.  I don't know who did the sound design but it sounds like they took some cues from the Transformers movies.  There are a lot of loud, groaning bass sounds when ships fly around and the music score is almost entirely comprised of massive low end metallic drones.  Explosions and guns had some really good punch to them as well.  so it's got a lot of bass.  The theater I saw it in is probably good down to the low 30's so no clue if there's subsonic stuff going on or not, but given the intensity of the higher level bass I'm gonna venture a guess that it's filtered.

The movie itself was pretty good, but not perfect.  Visually it was spectacular.  It shares some common threads with the original but it is definitely it's own movie.  It's far darker and more oppressive visually.  It sounds different, and while there are hints of Vangelis in the score, most of it is comprised of thunderous foghorn blasts that seem determined to wake the dead.  It also feels very different.  Blade Runner was a small story set in a big world.  2049 visits a lot more of this world and feels more apocalyptic in it's scope.

On 10/10/2017 at 8:22 AM, MikeDuke said:

Agree on all points regarding audio, video and the movie itself minnjd for Blade Runner 2049.  

Ya'll crazy. This was wonderful A/V all around (saw in Dolby Cinema) and I can not wait to get it on UHD/BD to watch at home.

This will probably rate well in bass too. It's time will come.

I'd wonder how clipped the Shuttle Launch sfx track on the two Telarc music cd's I have. One in DTS 5.1, the other in DSD 5.1 audio.

I bet it's all clipped.

Isn't the Danley fireworks clipped even?

I had to turn down my subriser for Skull Island.

May need to revisit it. I think I watched it too loud or something. My sub system went bonkers when the two soldiers are on the hillside and Kong shows up for the very first time. Was scrambling for the volume it seemed like some of the heaviest bass hits were clipped or distorted or something. Something was off. Usually movies like this sound epic.

Alien:Covenent on the other had was epic and reference quality all the way.

Heheh. Yeah, I know what you mean. I believe you when you say it is better. Just poking fun a lil at your post. You're a very smart guy and knowledgeable but it almost seemed like nothing short of perfection wasn't good enough. Do don't that to yourself. You'll never be happy.... but, it sounds like you are so ignore me.  

Sometimes the constant "improving" can have a detrimental effect on the enjoyment of the HT room. I had to learn to love it even with the warts and all!

Yeah but does it sound good?

I've seen every Nolan movie in IMAX since The Dark Knight. Every movie has sounded like this. So I expected this kind of sound. People go in to a Nolan movie expecting something else. I don't feel sorry for these people. The guy is pretty consistent. Fool me once...fool me twice...

It is loud and I liked it loud.

3 hours ago, minnjd said:

Just read a depressing article.  A guy at a site I follow is a big Nolan fan and he drove 500 miles to see Dunkirk in 70mm.  That's pretty cool, but he then went on to say two of his favorite audio demo discs were The Dark Knight Rises and Interstellar due to their 'incredible sound.'  

To be fair, the sound is pretty "incredible". It's just a description that can be taken many a-ways...

Nolan likes a big 'wall-of-sound' coming at you. That's his style. Not much surround use. Lots of bass. Powerful bass. The best bass? No. Powerful? Uh, yeah. Sure we can nitpick it and say it sounds, "flat, bloated, compressed, ..." whatever. That stuff is all true but it doesn't stop it from being true that it is also.... "incredible". That's just one man's words for it. Doesn't have to be yours too.

I saw Dunkirk and it was a fantastic film. The mix, ehh... it was what it was. LOUD! I can complain or enjoy the ride.

I'm going to enjoy the ride.

8 hours ago, minnjd said:

Well I've read two reviews of 'Dunkirk' that specifically mention extremely loud and deafening sound effects.  Sounds like Nolan hasn't learned his lesson from the feedback to Interstellar.

There is no "lesson to learn" for Nolan. The sound is exactly how he wants it, unfortunately.

Still.... looking forward to it. I can handle some good ol' fashioned "loud and deafening" IMAX sound.

Don't we all wish we had a field like that? Damn.

Outdoor theater!

Oh man. My OCD will have a field day filling all the "empty spaces" with subwoofers.

The JBL-based mains I believe have never flinched once at anything. Bad sounding recording have come in and gone out equally bad sounding but... that's not the same thing.

Yeah... I barely tickle those things.

The sub system is a bit different. I do a moderate amount of signal shaping and I like spirited levels, when I can.

Uhh...honestly, I still can't tell if it's just my house making awful noises or the sub system. Occasionally I'll hear a bad sound like suspension bottoming or something. I am WAY underpowered actually so I sort of doubt it. I think it's the house. Or maybe amp clipping? The lights never come on, ever. Gosh, even the signal lights barely light up. At least at "normal" levels.

That being said, there is still tons of headroom left over (especially >30hz). As far as I can tell, anyway.

Well that's cool to know.  Unless, mine are a bit older and the ones I have only go down to 5hz.  Either way, I get a nice shake and shudder on my chair with the really low stuff  .

How well they extend below 5hz has more to do with your signal chain (and it's all-inclusive rolloff) than how old your version of Crowson is.

 

Sound Quality = (BL²/Res) / (LE/Res) 

Nice list and I tend to agree with you on this one!

But... there has got to be more to it than these numbers. "Quality" is not just a fixed number of electro-mechanical properties.

Simple build quality and performance of moving parts has an effect on SQ, wouldn't we agree?

A TD18h+ sound great on paper but what if it had a loud suspension and made tons of vent noise (doesn't have a pole vent but...anyway)?

So... I agree but you know what I mean too. There has got to be more to it than that list alone.

It is subjective for sure. I have some opinions on it that I've slowly developed but even those are tainted with the measurement data. I spend a lot of time trying to look at the measurements and figure out why I think something sounds better. Whether that holds true for anyone else is debatable.

 

If you are asking whether the BMS sounds better than the DS series...I can't say. I haven't heard them head to head in the same type of cab with the same content in the same room. I'd expect them to sound more alike than different assuming the final frequency response is close.

Bolded = that is exactly the sort of thing I'd like to talk about here.

But, yes, on the 2nd part. Was wondering if you feel there is a notable SQ difference from all these top-tier bass drivers. It's something worth noting.

Is it a touchy subject?

Don't you like to touch... subjects?

Sound quality = subjective and that is frowned upon by some.

I know it's a touchy subject here but....

Sound quality?