Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
maxmercy

Transformers: Age of Extinction Discussion and Poll - CLOSED

Transformers: Age of Extinction  

31 members have voted

  1. 1. Execution?

    • 5 Stars
      12
    • 4 Stars
      10
    • 3 Stars
      9
    • 2 Stars
      0
    • 1 Star
      0
  2. 2. Recommendation?

    • Rent
      15
    • Buy
      16
    • Avoid
      0


Recommended Posts

That is a pretty adequate description.  It also appears that 'professional' reviewers think that is the best way to mix films.  If they could have just expanded the dynamic range on the track and not mix for the lowest-common-denominator HTIBs out there, this could have been awesome.  The sound design in this TF was almost as good as TF2.

 

JSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was told to put my 6 year old brain on and let the numbing effect of 10 subwoofer drivers and awesome looking robots that I want in real life to lull me into a trance. I enjoyed it. I thought it was LOADS better than the storyline of TF3, but TF1 is still my all-time fave of the franchise (thus far at least). I am glad that as big a flop as it did domestically, our asian counterparts seemed to eat it up so they will continue on the road of another installment methinks... It was my first run with the new nearfield HST-18's and some of the sweeps most certainly did NOT disappoint. Effects all over they place, and some neato visuals. I can pretty much forget about plot if the movie is visually entertaining. I just focus on other areas of the screen as opposed to the stupid one-liners they toss in there to create humor for the younger folks. I did find it funny that marky mark razzed the irish dude the whole time, considering his upbringing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ethan and I watched this on Saturday and we both loved it. Yah it has the typical cliches for the father/daughter relationship and it's not winning any Oscars, but we watched it at -5 from reference and Ethan has tinnutus and it didn't bother him at all. I did har the clipping especially in the center but besides that it sounded pretty damn good. The bass of course could've been lower, but it was still a fun watch. The video though was hands down the BEST I've ever seen. I bought the IMAX 3D version and it was gorgeous. Besides Oblivion it's not even close. It looked amazing in 3D too. I told Dave to buy it because he rented it and I think there's gotta be a difference in the discs. I have an Epson 2030 and even on that it looked stunning.

 

I agree with Toe. I thought this one had the best sound yet.

 

Btw can anyone explain to me why a Transformer would choose to look Asian or like an old fat army general who smokes cigars?? That really irritated me for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Btw can anyone explain to me why a Transformer would choose to look Asian or like an old fat army general who smokes cigars?? That really irritated me for some reason.

 

Because Michael Bay said so.

 

JSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice find, thanks very much for posting that :)

 

Might fend off a worsening of the tinnitus... lol

 

3 hours of 100dB just for a film is ridiculous - what about the kids' ears?  :mellow:

 

I only play at -15 or below with the kids, and I have yet to take them to a cinema, but they do make 2 sizes....

 

JSS 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, I play lower, about 10-15 dBs lower than reference and only if EQ'd and calibrated correctly.  I find it funny after running auto EQ -15 MV is ear piercing at times and then when I use my NanoAvr and calibrate correctly MV 0 is even tolerable with TF4!  Barely though.  Tonight I will run Godzilla with the corrections, I will just load the biquad file from Maxmercy and let you guys know.  I already use TF2 corrected as my go to, the intro alone is just awesome! 

 

That's because AutoEQ assumes you will playback with lots of headroom, and tries to correct too much, and makes many generalizations.  Run a sweep at any RCA out with AutoEQ on and off, and be astounded at where AutoEQ adds boost where it shouldn't....Audyssey is pretty good, but still has its limitations....it sometimes adds 9dB to suckouts trying to correct them in vain, eating up precious headroom....no amount of 'fuzzy logic' is as good as running several sweeps and figuring out what you can and can't correct.  Some of the new FIR solutions out there can 'correct' all kinds of things, but only for a very specific location in the room.  The hard part is figuring out what changes can make the most seats sound as good as possible and preserve headroom.  Every room will have its problem areas.

 

JSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think Audyssey's choice of target curve(s) is poor.  A flat response (or one with a -3 dB roll-off at 10 kHz) is way too bright for most systems, in-room.  The reason has to do with a combination of the room's reflection profile and the way we perceive those reflections and the way we calibrate our systems.  Audyssey's idea of reference in this respect is actually harmful, and I say that having used (and enjoyed) the consumer version of Audyssey MultEQ XT for 2 years.  That's how long it took me to learn enough to confidently figure out that they are wrong.  ;)

 

I use sine-sweep measurements and Audyssey Pro iteratively to get a response with a gradual roll-off across the spectrum.  I'm still making tweaks to my target curve (and will probably continue to do so as my room and equipment evolve), but only after listening to a wide variety of material over and extended period of time.  I'm an engineer (not in the audio field) who'd rather calibrate to a scientifically validated standard, but unfortunately, I have not found any suitable standard.

 

One thing I really hate about Audyssey is that (as best as I can tell) it arbitrarily limits target curve adjustments to +/- 3 dB.  I believe they argued this is done "in the name of safety" to keep people from "boosting 20 dB at 10 Hz on a ported sub", but it is a serious limitation for me already.  I could care less if they limited only the boost because it's attenuation that I need most anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Audyssey has changed A LOT in the last 5 yrs. It used to be able to apply +/- 9dB, and would only apply cuts, then boost the entire signal for 'volume equivalence'. This resulted in infrasonic boosts of up to 9dB, and folks without proper high passing on subs (ESP higher order alignments) found out what clipping and clanking sounded like at not-so-loud listening levels...

 

Those with Audyssey products made in ~2007-2008 timeframe still have that +/- 9dB capability...

 

JSS

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only play at -15 or below with the kids, and I have yet to take them to a cinema, but they do make 2 sizes....

 

JSS 

TBH I'm not sure I'd take them to a cinema - why bother when your own system sounds a million times better, is not full of other people's screaming kids, and doesn't have 20 minutes of damn adverts at 1000000000dB before you can watch the film!  Not to mention the price of popcorn nowadays..

 

 

Bah humbug!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think Audyssey's choice of target curve(s) is poor.  A flat response (or one with a -3 dB roll-off at 10 kHz) is way too bright for most systems, in-room.  The reason has to do with a combination of the room's reflection profile and the way we perceive those reflections and the way we calibrate our systems.  Audyssey's idea of reference in this respect is actually harmful, and I say that having used (and enjoyed) the consumer version of Audyssey MultEQ XT for 2 years.  That's how long it took me to learn enough to confidently figure out that they are wrong.  ;)

 

I use sine-sweep measurements and Audyssey Pro iteratively to get a response with a gradual roll-off across the spectrum.  I'm still making tweaks to my target curve (and will probably continue to do so as my room and equipment evolve), but only after listening to a wide variety of material over and extended period of time.  I'm an engineer (not in the audio field) who'd rather calibrate to a scientifically validated standard, but unfortunately, I have not found any suitable standard.

 

One thing I really hate about Audyssey is that (as best as I can tell) it arbitrarily limits target curve adjustments to +/- 3 dB.  I believe they argued this is done "in the name of safety" to keep people from "boosting 20 dB at 10 Hz on a ported sub", but it is a serious limitation for me already.  I could care less if they limited only the boost because it's attenuation that I need most anyway.

 

Not necessarily very scientfic, but if you must run Audyssey, it can fix the tonal balance:

http://kvalsvoll.blogspot.no/2014/05/how-to-make-audyssey-room-correction.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, you need to hear the EQ version of ROTF, it is not close IMHO.  No clipping engines and explosions at all in comparison and all the sweeps in TF4 seem to be very short and stop abruptly.  The others had less sweeps but they lasted longer and kept going.  I agree about the picture, super clear.  I watch TF4 end battle 3 times a day everyday as my son loves it.  I watch it at 15-20 dBs below reference and the clipping is actually easier to hear.  It becomes disappointing after a while knowing it was not needed.  I will challenge you Adam, Watch this movie again at -5 and then put in the new X-men and watch it at reference with the bass hot and let me know what you think!  You see, X-men is much cleaner and you can watch it louder than normal(bass) and it still sounds cleaner than TF4.  I watched X-men at reference with subs 10 dBs hot and it was awesome!  Great movie as well.  I watched EoT and X-men back to back and it was a treat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those with Audyssey products made in ~2007-2008 timeframe still have that +/- 9dB capability...

 

JSS

 

My Denon 3313CI with MultEQ XT definitely boosts by up to 9 dB to reach the target EQ curve it tries to correct to.  I don't believe it corrects below 20 Hz, but too much 20 Hz could definitely kill a ported sub.  Thankfully, all my strong boosts are well above the bass range.  The +/- 3 dB I mentioned in my previous post are the limits placed by Audyssey Pro on the custom target EQ curve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting article, and for the most part consistent with my own experience.  Unfortunately, the tone controls in my AVR are not available with Audyssey turned on

 

On the Marantz and Denon (I have both) the graphic EQ is disabled, but you can still use the simple bass, treble tone controls.

It is of course very possible that this is different on other avr brands.

 

I don't use Audyssey, so this article was written while doing some testing, seeing as many does prefer to use Audyssey, I must know how it works on the speakers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Denon 3313CI with MultEQ XT definitely boosts by up to 9 dB to reach the target EQ curve it tries to correct to.  I don't believe it corrects below 20 Hz, but too much 20 Hz could definitely kill a ported sub.  Thankfully, all my strong boosts are well above the bass range.  The +/- 3 dB I mentioned in my previous post are the limits placed by Audyssey Pro on the custom target EQ curve.

 

I emailed Chris Kyriakis about the 'Unintentional Audyssey ULF boost' back in 2009, and newer Audyssey products do not boost below 20Hz as they used to, AFAIK.

 

The boost was simply due to the level-matching done by Audyssey.  It applied cuts above 20Hz, but then boosted the whole curve to match volume with the un-EQ'ed response, sometimes as much as 9-10dB.  The result was devastating to some subwoofers not prepared for it.  I had to add a second highpass to deal with it with my old horn subs.

 

JSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The boost was simply due to the level-matching done by Audyssey.  It applied cuts above 20Hz, but then boosted the whole curve to match volume with the un-EQ'ed response, sometimes as much as 9-10dB.  The result was devastating to some subwoofers not prepared for it.  I had to add a second highpass to deal with it with my old horn subs.

Your room probably had one or more tall broad peaks that Audyssey was trying to knock down.  The advice to "use EQ only for cuts and not boosts" can fail spectacularly if the level is re-calibrated after the EQ is applied.  Audyssey still does this, in my observation.  Maybe they have some kind of safety check for the sub, or maybe they started using a shelf filter to keep the bottom end from getting raised too much.

 

When I did my custom EQ, I paid very close attention to headroom, and because I ended up with a lot more cut than boost and the need to increase the overall level, I used a shelf filter to counteract the effects of the higher level on the ULF output.  I actually used PVA data from this site to estimate how much headroom I needed.  (Huge thanks!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For folks with vented or horn-loaded systems, it could be bad. Most sealed systems liked not having to use as much LT correction, if they had the headroom.

 

JSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite sure what to make of this one. It sure was a bass assault but sometimes less is more. I love a film that slams but I felt like I already got that in spades from earlier films in this series most notably Revenge of the Fallen. Maybe that's why I didn't really get blown away as it wasn't anything new here. There were many sweeps and the like but nothing visceral that really felt like raw unbridled power being unleashed. I'm not complaining about it being a bass heavy film as it was still fun but lacked detail and although this sounds strange weight. Sure was loud though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This one didn't have as much in the lower octaves for some of the lower-SPL effects.  The BassEQ version fixes that to a certain degree, but only so much.

 

JSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys watch the part at 1:57 in this video and tell me what's wrong with his comment-

 

http://watchfilm.us/watch/variety-artisans-big-robots-big-sounds-transformers-age-of/WBETntbtcTA

 

Because that's exactly what happened when i watched it last night. Greg P. Russell mixed part 3 better. There's too much droning bass in AOE.

 

Not just bass though. The overall mix sounded compressed. Dialog was a little muffled at times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the loudest film I have measured.  It is the equivalent of ~100dB over nearly 3 hours.  It is compressed/limited to the point of clipping, nearly everywhere.  Too bad.  The clowns who say they watch this at 10db over reference over and over will be continually asking their grandchildren "WHAT?".  

 

JSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...