Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: All things considered, which digital format would you get?

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » All things considered, which digital format would you get? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: All things considered, which digital format would you get?

David Koegel
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:15 AM

As a budding home projectionist and collector, my main reason for getting into 35
mm is for the sound, from the noise reduction possible (Dolby A), to stereo to the
surround sound. Why else put up with the weight and storage issues? Okay,
besides the superior picture quality. But I do want to go digital at some point.
There are a couple of issues for me in selecting the "correct" one:

a) cost
b) availability of prints with my digital format
c) reliability (staying in digital mode)
d) compatibility with my projector, either the I have now or will get later.

I'm currently running a Super Simplex, with plans for acquiring a second
projector. If none of these digital readers will be adaptable to the Super, I will
upgrade to one that is, though the Century SA's that Brad recommends sure aren't
cheap, else I haven't found the right place to shop.

In this forum and elsewhere, I've seen pros and cons of all of the formats. I hear
that DTS is the cheapest to get into and has the best chance of holding up, as only
minimal information is pulled off the print for disc tracking. But then, you gotta get
the DTS discs for the prints, which is not necessarily a piece of cake.

DD and SDDS have all the digital info you need on the print, but I've heard that
with well worn prints, this information gets harder and harder to read. Which of
these two holds up the best in this regard?

Lastly, which of the formats is on the most releases? Since I haven't won the
lottery (yet), I can hardly buy the readers for all the formats.

I won't even go into the area of which has the best sound, as that has got to be
very subjective, though I believe DTS uses the least amount of data compression
(at least that's the case in laser discs and supposedly in the upcoming DVDs with
DTS).

So, what to do?

Greg Mueller
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:16 AM

I'd stick with Dolby Digital. Everything is on the film, no little records to get lost or
ruined or obtained in the first place. Also there's Dolby's "clout". Long after all the
competition has gone the way of the Dodo, Dolby's still gonna be there. As far as
sound quality, Dolby Digital produces better sound than you are capable of
hearing, I guarantee it. Someone else said to get the Dolby Digital penthouse. If
you have a car load of money, or can't get anymore hardware into your sound
head or want to transport the reader from projector to projector, that's the way to
go. However Compoment Engineering or Kelmar equipment costs far less and are
just as reliable. (They use Dolby's own components). While talking with a local
theater manager about the variety of systems they have, he let slip that they were
having to run one of their prints in SR (which they didn't like to do) because the
CD's that came with the film were defective. Another case I heard of the wrong
CD's were shipped with the film. Or how about no CDs with the film. Here's
some interesting trivia. As well as all of the channels of discrete sound info in the
Dolby Digital field, there is also Rev update info. As you play the film the digital
info in the fields updates the Dolby Digital decoder software!

Joe Redifer
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:16 AM

I myself really do enjoy Dolby Digital, but if you choose to go with that format, I
must suggest a penthouse reader. They retail for $2750, but the grief it will save
you is worth it. Please let me explain why:

The basement, inboard, or soundhead Dolby Digital readers are a real pain. They
can have problems stemming from vibration of the projector (mainly a problem on
Christie's cheap projectors, not on a Simplex such as yours) to the normal amount
of wow and flutter present at the sounddrum causing error rates to increase and
the system to "F"--or fail intermittently without cutting out to SR. Also, the LED
on a basement reader is supposed to be set at exactly 4 volts. Every 4 months or
so you will have to go in with a multi-meter and re-adjust because the voltage will
slip downwards. This is with the Kelmar readers. With the white light Component
Engineering readers, you have to worry about replacing the bulb from time to time
and you will be lucky if you get an error rate of "4"---ever. Usually they run with
an error rate of 5 to 6. And with a lossy format such as Dolby Digital, any
information you lose is very very bad. It is true, however, that I have had my
Kelmar SR-D basement reader achieve and hold a perfect "0" error rate on a
perfect print. But now they are all pretty much messed up and nobody has messed
with them to cause those problems. Just wear and tear. In short, they require
much more care than a Cat. 701 penthouse reader, which has a constant LED
with no bulbs to change.

As for the sound, turn up Dolby Digital on a quiet scene and just listen. The
surrounds hiss, and it's not the studio master. Turn up the same scene in
DTS---no hiss. But if you want the biggest selection of digital prints, Dolby is the
answer.

Brad Miller
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:17 AM

I must agree with Joe on everything he pointed out.

Specifically, basement SRD readers aren't worth a crap. I have had nothing but
bad reports from them. Many theaters I know of are not even using the SRD
system because they can't (and neither can Dolby) get them to work properly. On
the other hand, I have never found a penthouse reader to fail or fault! Plus, should
you change projectors down the road, you aren't out another basement reader.
You can just mount your old penthouse reader on your new projector!

As to the number of prints and occasional non-availability of DTS discs, Dolby
will always be the winner. My solution, get DTS and SRD...and toss the SDDS in
the trash. At least we all agree that system is a joke.

Greg Mueller
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:17 AM

Good God, where have you been? Component Engineering has not used light
bulbs for years. Don't you think it's a little drastic to condem a line or lines of
readers because of crappy wow and flutter from the projector? I agree that
certain projectors have pretty bad sound heads, but that's hardly the fault of the
sound reader. It is fact broght to light by the sound reader. It is however, a good
reason to use a penthouse. Voltage slipping downwards is the LED aging all
LEDs age, all LEDs have a finite life span, all LEDs fail.

David Koegel
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:18 AM

I'm enjoying this discussion very much so far. Brad, will ALL projectors take the
same penthouse reader? Specifically, will such a reader fit my Super Simplex and
future unknown (probably an XL or Century SA you are so fond of) projectors?
And if I want both DTS and SRD at some point, is the DTS time code reader
also flexible in this regard or is it more projector specific?

And will a Penthouse reader get in the way of the reels, specifically the 6000'
reels, meaning that a platter system will have to come sooner for me rather than
later? (I do ask a lot of questions, eh?)

Brad Miller
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:19 AM

Yes. You can mount a digital penthouse reader on any projector (you just might
need to order a special plate). The standard mounting plate will work on Century,
Simplex, Ballantyne, etc.

You can stack all 3 digital readers on top of a projector if you want to. I have an
SRD reader with a DTS on top of my Century which you can see pics of in the
warehouse.

As to the 6000' reels, the only restriction you will have is your ceiling height! The
upper reel arm just mounts on top of the newly mounted penthouse. If you look at
mine, I am completely out of ceiling, but by bending the feed arm back, I can still
run 2000' reels.

Greg Mueller
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:19 AM

The one thing that you have inadvertantly said correctly is that Dolby penthouses
are idiot proof. The single biggest problem with sound equipment is "teknitans" in
the field. If they would leave their hands off the equipment and quit tring to "make
it better" with their monkey wrenches, things would work just fine. But what you
get is these guys who insist on getting there hands in there and adjusting stuff. (it's
called playing with it) Not knowing what they're doing in the first place all the can
do is make it worse. The line that is hardest to understand is that "Dolby can't get
it to work right either" what?

Brad Miller
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:20 AM

Yes. Agreed. I call them tinkerers.

I have some friends who run theaters that have the Kelmar and the Component
Engineering basement SRD readers in them. They have never played a film in
SRD because the films won't track. According to what they said, they had a
Dolby technician come out to adjust it and couldn't make it right. In all instanes
they were using DA20s and either Christie or Simplex projectors. Now I KNOW
the Christie soundhead design leaves little to be desired, so that I can
understand...but the Simplex? Interesting to point out, people I know running
basement readers in Centurys don't have a tracking problem! Your thoughts?

Greg Mueller
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:20 AM

I reread your post and have a question. Why would your friends call a Dolby
Tech to come out and make a Component Engineering assembly work? Why
would Dolby even come out to try to make a CE assembly work? Why wouldn't
they simply call CE? That's kind of like taking a Dodge to a Ford garage, don't
you think? If your friends are still unable to run Dolby Digital on their basement
reader, by all means have them call the right people to get help. I'm sure the
problem can be fixed easily.

Brad Miller
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:21 AM

I don't know. I will have to call them back up and ask again what model/brand
basement reader they are using and make/model projector it is in. I'll get back to
you on that. Just repeating what I was told.

Greg Mueller
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:21 AM

If it's a Christy it's not our stuff, we don't make for them.
We ran into a bizarre tracking problem with the Simplex, in one of our first installs.
This was back in the light bulb days (pre red LEDs) as long as the lamphouse was
off it would track. When the lamphouse was turned on the film would zoom off to
the inboard (I believe). Talk about weird! Of course it was somehow are fault???
Our techs spent days trying to figure it out. Then The Simplex boys were brought
in and they couldn't figure it out. It turned out that the sound drum/pinch roller was
to blame. Simplex had made an alteration to that area and then altered it back but
didtn't tell everyone so some of their components were mismatched. Don't even
ask me why the lamphouse had any effect. Real twilight zone stuff. I think that plex
is still using that same visable light through the fiberoptic tube digital lash up.
Another interesting aside. Our first reverse scan analog LEDs were infrared.
Also back in those days (I think the opening film at that plex was "The Might
Ducks") there were some problems getting the digital fields printed on the film in
the right location. The correct distance from analog to digital field is .109 If the
digital field is in the wrong place, the reader obviously has problems. This has
been a few years and things have been corrected. Of course people do make
mistakes and you do have problems from time to time.

Brad Miller
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:22 AM

Don't get me wrong, Greg. I have worked with the Component Engineering
basement reader with a Simplex (see pics of the Blockbuster screening room) and
they track at 0, 1 and 2 on the error card.

However, I know SO many people who have nothing but hell with "basement"
readers, that I cannot recommend them to anyone. My biggest beef with them is it
prevents mobility from one screen to another (for those who aren't blessed with
SRD in every auditorium).

So who makes the Christie basement reader? That is the most commonly
"complained" about unit.

Greg Mueller
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:23 AM

Must be Kelmar, but then I think I remember a discussion one time someone
saying something about Christe doing their own. I don't know, is the real answer.
One thing that make adjustment a little tedious is there are 4 dimensions to screw
up in. A much more time consuming and exacting alignment proceedure than the
old days of simple analog tweeking and there are so many more hands that get to
handle the readers between manufacturer and the end user. I've gotten to hear
some stories that make you want to hit your forehead with the palm of your hand.
The killer is it's really easy once you seen it done a couple of times and have the
right equipment.

Joe Redifer
unregistered

posted 05-30-1999 01:23 AM

The Christie readers are made by Kelmar I believe. They can work phenomenally
well but they just do not have any consistancy. And Chrisite Inc is not really doing
anything to improve the readers (Kelmar is a subsidiary of Christie Inc, I think).
Calling Christie about the problem is like telling the wall. Christie has a history for
not really supporting their products anyway. My advice...don't buy Christie! Even
a Strong-manufactured Century is 10 times better.

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.