|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Author
|
Topic: Why Dolby EX seems to be going nowhere
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 06-04-2002 10:58 PM
I was going to post this in response to another comment in the "article about digital projection" thread, but it is too far off topic --but an interesting topic on its own.Dolby Digital, DTS and even SDDS have all been used on many hundreds of films in just the last ten years. In a single year any of these formats will be featured on more than 120 major releases in North America alone. Dolby Digital Surround EX on the other hand seems to be getting less use than 70mm mag did during the 1980's. Why? I don't think it is really a knock against George Lucas, THX or Dolby Labs. It is just that the marketing on this is TERRIBLE. C'mon, how confusing can a group of people possibly make one format? First, you have the movie release advertising. It is never clear a film is a Dolby EX enhanced title until you see the logo crawl up the screen on the end credits (if it is even used). But you built up your newspaper ads a few days ago and may already have the morning paper while you are checking the print you just built. The one sheets rarely ever carry the EX logo. The poster art on stack seems to add it in a week or so after the film has already been released (if it is ever done at all). Even if you know a film is going to be Surround EX enhanced, can you really use the logo? What is proper use of the DD-EX logo? Dolby seems to say it is OK for a DTS equipped theater running a SA-10 processor to pop in that DD-EX logo. But if you have a CP-500 with a DTS-ES unit hooked up to it (or even a Smart unit), you can't use the tag. So that's kind of silly for both DTS-ES and DD-EX formats. The mistake Dolby and THX made was in not coming up with a totally separated "Surround EX" logo that had nothing to do with the Dolby Digital icon. DD-EX implies the show is playing an enhanced Dolby Digital audio track (not DTS or SDDS which may actually be the case). A generic Surround EX term would have also been able to work as an umbrella for all the extended surround systems and their various combinations of digital sound formats they are enhancing. In the end, the whole thing is a totally confusing mess. And with the newspapers seemingly unable to get regular digital sound notifiers right in the ads, how are they going to work Surround EX into that? The situation is just as maddening in home theater --if not more so. Dolby's marketing rules do not allow for any use of the Dolby Digital Surround EX logo on any home theater hardware or DVD release packaging. But they will allow items like "Dolby Surround EX 5.1" to be spelled out in regular type on the box. That just doesn't make much sense. Instead, we have "THX Surround EX" emblazoned on high priced THX receivers (which now have the tinge of Creative Labs Soundblaster computer speaker association). So many theater workers try to explain to movie fans that THX is not a sound recording format. But this baloney makes it sound like that. Let's see, my DVD has in tiny print "Dolby EX 5.1" but my receiver has "THX Surround EX" ---I don't think I have the right format! I bought the wrong DVD! Well, you get the point. Even though DTS seems to be doing something more sensible, such as allowing the DTS-ES logo to be used in movie end credits (finally) as well as appearing on home theater hardware and some software (the DVDs themselves), things have not been very consistent. First, some of the DVDs carrying DTS-ES 5.1 matrix audio don't list it. Then there are way too few DTS-ES 6.1 Discrete DVDs. The real bone I have to pick regarding DTS-ES is in audio video receivers and surround controllers. I've talked to people who have been screwed by salespeople who basically lied in saying the receiver did full 6.1 when it only did 5.1 matrix Center Surround. Pioneer Electronics is very culpable in some of their decidedly misleading ads. There's too many phoney-baloney claims coming from manufacturers stating "6.1" or even "7.1" when it is really only 5.1 Matrix CS. What should be done? In theaters the Dolby Digital Surround EX logo should only be used when an SA-10 processor is enhancing real Dolby Digital playback. DTS-ES should only be listed when their processor is enhancing a DTS track. All other odd combinations mixing formats and ES/EX processors should use a generic Surround EX term. Well, I think just going with the fully generic "Extended Surround" would be good enough. In home theater, Dolby and THX need to hammer out a singular Surround EX logo and go with that alone, especially if the Dolby Digital Surround EX logo is only going to be allowed for use in theaters. Any use of "6.1" in association with a Dolby Digital based EX track needs to be banned outright in all advertising. Even Dolby says it is just 5.1. The THX Surround EX logo needs to be canned. DTS needs to crack down on manufacturers making "6.1" claims when their products don't support full DTS-ES Discrete 6.1 decoding. Well, crap. I think I've lost all hope. My explanation of the problem and "solution" is just to long winded for any lay-persons to fathom. With that, we may see 5.1-EX and Discrete 6.1 disappear.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Joe Redifer
You need a beating today
Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99
|
posted 06-05-2002 02:47 AM
How can you get 7.1 when all of the source material is mostly 5.1 and 6.1 at the very best? You cannot add a discrete channel and matrixing simply does not count. I guess I will just never trust Denon, then. Thanks to your post, I will now never ever buy a Denon product!Bobby, I agree with what you have written. I think the situation is simply this: Dolby EX is an afterthought. DTS-ES was quickly created as an answer to Dolby EX. The home versions were offered as a marketing ploy to sell receivers since it was a simple technology to bring to consumers. I believe that neither Dolby nor DTS really care much about the format. It is hardly revolutionary and therefore not worth the marketing dollars and effort it would take to really educate people about it. And if the format died, would you really miss it? It's just Pro-Logic, dude!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evans A Criswell
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1579
From: Huntsville, AL, USA
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 06-05-2002 10:01 AM
quote: And make sure that the box office staff know what they are doing. If someone rings up and asks what sound format the performace of blah blah at 6pm is playing in, the box office should know.
Fortunately, most theatres have something in the box office that lets the people working there know that movies are in which auditoriums, and which sound format each is in. One time, though, that must have not been the case: There is one 8-plex (Carmike 8, Decatur) in my area that has only one auditorium with DTS and all others have pretty crummy (sometimes very crummy) sounding analog systems. When I went to see Tarzan back on June 18, 1999, Tarzan was showing in two different auditoriums. When I bought my ticket, I asked if the 5:15 showing was in the DTS auditorium and the girl selling the tickets had no idea what DTS was, so I asked if it were in auditorium 2, and she didn't know. Sigh. I bought a ticket for the 5:15 and it was the one in the DTS auditorium. If I remember correctly, the actual conversation went like this: Me: Is the 5:15 Tarzan in the DTS auditorium? Her: DTS? (with a very confused look). Me: OK, well, is the 5:15 in auditorium 2? Her: I don't know. Her (after a pause): We still have the 5:15. (????) Me: OK, I'll take one for the 5:15. If it hadn't been the right one, I would have just waited 30 minutes and gone into the other one. How can a person working in a theatre be so dumb? ------------------ Evans A Criswell Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 06-05-2002 06:09 PM
Joe, I agree with your judgment that Surround EX is just a workaround. It is a pretty jerry-rigged workaround at that. At least what DTS offers in ES 6.1 Discrete is a real improvement, if it is only a small one.I would not call Denon's extra speaker outputs and signal manipulations "marketable" 7.1. It is just blown up 5.1 (or 6.1 in the case of an authentic DTS-ES receiver playing a real DTS-ES 6.1 disc). It is the same laughable hooey the electronics companies tried making everyone swallow years ago when they were claiming their Pro-Logic Surround receivers were 4-channel or 5-channel when they were really only 2-channel matrix. I would also say Dolby Labs is opening up a different can of worms when it comes to Dolby Pro-Logic II, which features two slightly different logos where the Dolby Digital and Dolby Surround icons are included. Both marks look essentially the same but have very different results. I've beat the drum about 10.2 Surround before. For any real "next generation" improvement in movie theater sound to happen, new formats are required with more than just the regular 5.1 to 7.1 channels. It may not have to be full 10.2. It could be 9-track or 10-track. But all channels of sound must be discrete and mastered at lower levels of data compression (if any compression is used at all). And if such a system is developed, I really hope they think carefully about how to market it.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|