Jump to content

TimVG

Members
  • Posts

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by TimVG

  1. Isn't there a regional BD that does rock the full bandwidth? I recall something like this, but I'm really unsure.

     

    R2 Spanish track.. Even better bass than the R1 DVD, if someone check if that bass is primarily in the LFE channel, perhaps it could be mixed by replacing the LFE channel on the English track if all other levels remain equal.

     

    Or you could simply rip the BD and mix it with the DVD audio..

  2. An update: I was able to fix this problem by playing with the gain knob and gain switches on the back of the amplifier. Is there a standard way to match gain levels throughout a given system, preferably not a very difficult way :-). The only issue now is clipping the minidsp input at high levels. Decreasing the input level means I have to either boost the sub level somewhere else or decrease the output of the other speakers in the AVR.. Any tips would be very appreciated

    • Like 6
  3. Is it plausible that power cycling in a LG 14k clone can be caused by clipping the input signal?

     

    I just fired up two of my DIY subs on one channel of a 14k which, with heavy material would cause the amp to power cycle, swapping the channels didn't make a difference. The funny thing is it never does this with my captivators, the levels on my minidsp are much lower with them as they're more sensitive and place in a corner as opposed to the DIY subs which are against the front wall for the time being. I tried upping the sub gain on the receiver and cutting back on my minidsp which did seem to make a difference. Tomorrow I'll try setting the jumper in the minidsp to 0,9v instead of the 2v it's on now.

     

    I don't think anything is wrong with the amp as it works just fine for the rest of the time.

     

    Thoughts?

  4. Tim... we've all had this conversation many times... the bolded part is the crux of the issue... we can debate over and over who we should cater for, but my first concern is theatrical distribution.

     

    Most enthusiast on here have way better ULF than us.. above 18Hz you'd hear the difference in our rooms that would justify their costs.... you're talking about 15 cycles, and I'm talking about the other 20,000. :)

     

    And when you say "we" I'm curious how many people, as a percentage of HT owners, have <18Hz capability in rooms designed to handle such frequencies properly you think are out there?

     

    Bosso and I got into a discussion about this on AVS.... the cost and effort (not to mention alleviating bleed between rooms (even those that are fully floated) for what we (read: most colleagues I've talked with) see as a minimal increase in benefit over what we have now isn't worth it...

     

    Again... let me be clear.. I'm not slighting the want/desire/passion for ULF... I'm just stating my personal opinion about what I need to focus on in helping to create a sound track, and knowing what a majority of theaters (as well as a great majority of HT's) are capable of, and what the business realities are vs. what returns we would see...

     

    The rooms where Randy Thom mixes those films with the great ULF aren't any more capable than most other dub stages... he is a fantastic designer and sculpts the ULF to get the subs he does have in his room/dub stage to act a certain way..

     

    Could others do it? Of course, and some do similar based on what you guys see on your graphs..

     

    It's not easy, as everybody would do it with the consistency he does (and even with my vocal comments about the subject, I'd do it more if I had access to an easy tool to create it, even knowing I couldn't hear it but understanding that it would have an impact on the track...)

     

    We do remaster for DVD/BR a lot more now a days (doing one tomorrow in fact...)

     

    I will be using Genelec 1031's and a Genelec 18" sub... that's better than 99% of what people have in their homes... are we supposed to go more specialized than that for a fraction of the audience that would benefit from it? (and again see my point above about SPLing subs...)

     

    But there is a simpler response to your position of "we know it can be done..."

     

    I agree.. I don't ever HP filter the LFE, and most people I work with don't either... if it isn't there from the get go, however, I don't seek it out.

     

    Just my personal .02...

     

    Thank you for your reply Marc

     

    I agree that all of the bandwith is equally important, no arguments there. I've been to studios with full Harbeth 40.1 setups (at $7000 a piece it's the finest monitor I've ever heard) and can attest to the quality.

     

    I'm sure there are many valid arguments why monitoring below, let's say 20hz, is not worth it in studios.

    Let it be space issues, bleeding to other rooms, cost, ..

    But why not give it a shot with one room? With the new upcoming surround formats, it's a matter of time before the LFE is going to be revised, no? I can definitely see theaters making use of lower extension, perhaps not through more capable subwoofers, but through tactile transducers for example.

     

    I agree people with that kind of bandwith available are hard to find, but then again, why introduce lossless audio on blu-ray? Why introduce 4K? Not many people will be able to enjoy the full effect either.

     

    You say it's very hard to design and implement ULF with the available hardware, would you yourself for example be more comfortable implementing it if you could monitor it better?

     

    My main argument is, ULF is already being implemented in, and obviously being filtered from, certain movies. Why not give an honest chance to monitor it better? I think the only result can be a better mix in the end. Even with a capable system nobody is stopping anyone from filtering and putting all the energy between 30-60hz if he feels like it. I'm just saying, there is nothing to lose, only to gain.

     

    Best

     

    Tim

  5. I just watched TDKR. I liked the movie itself.

    About the sound: Was it bad? Not at all. Could have it been a whole lot better? No doubt.

     

    Some issues: apart from the aggressive (harsh) mix, the bass, although present and used with abbudance sounded very bloated and monotonous. I can definitely put the graphs in perspective. Less (mid)bass and some ULF could (would) have done wonders for this one. You begin to wonder about stuff when Tom Danley's firework recording has more feel to it than a nuclear bomb exploding in TDKR.

    Another issue I had was Bane's voice. OK, they dubbed it over, but did they have to make it so apparent? Not only was his voice twice as clear as the other characters' it was also twice as loud which was really annoying to me. But as this is Data-Bass I'll go back to just that, and I'm going to go out on a limb here. But if this is the result from using 30hz ported subs at the mixing facility, they need to upgrade their equipment. I'm sorry to be blunt, but does anyone find it normal that we, the amateurs, have better, more capable equiment, than the people making multi-million dollar movies?

     

    I can understand the argument that these movies are mixed for commercial theaters. But don't BR/DVD home released get a different mix anyway? Even if that's not the case, a lot of movies have been released with the exact properties a lot of people here are looking for, so we know it can be done.

     

    It's a shame really, so much potential in some of the latest releases, and it's all wasted on what appears to be a loudness war. I wish some of the guys in charge could experience something like WOTW or HTTYD or any other 4+ star movie vs TDKR or The Avengers in a capable theater, and then have them say they liked the latter presentation better.

     

    I watched the movie Brave yesterday, apart from one scene there wasn't much below 30hz either, but at least it was a good presentation. I'd take that above TDKR anyday.

×
×
  • Create New...