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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » CP-55 and CP-65 -- Major Differences? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: CP-55 and CP-65 -- Major Differences? Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 09-12-2003 09:33 AM                     What are the key differences between a CP-55 and a CP-65? While you're at it...are they similar?  |  IP: Logged Paul G. Thompson The Weenie Man Posts: 4718 From: Mount Vernon WA USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 09-12-2003 10:44 AM                     I understand the CP-65 is much easier to interface with a digital processor such as the DA-20 or the DTS-6D. Ihave heard people swear AT the CP-65, and some swear BY them. on the other side of the coin, I have heard some swear AT the CP-55 and some swear BY them. The CP-55's we had appeared to be very reliable. So, I would swear BY them.  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 09-12-2003 11:10 AM                     The CP-55 does not have internal SR cards, it requires CAT 180s in an SRA-5. The CP-65 has two internal CAT 350 SR cards.  |  IP: Logged Aaron Sisemore Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day! Posts: 3061 From: Rockwall TX USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 09-12-2003 11:24 AM                     The CP55 only has a 4-channel aux mode, and must be modified to handle 6-channel aux sources (Like digital plyers) The CP55 uses a 222 A-type NR card but can be modded to take the 222SR/A card or can be interfaced with a SRA5 adapter to get 'real' SR from 280T's. The CP65 has a 6 channel aux mode and all the hardware to provide split surround and subwoofer EQ and control right out of the box. quote: The CP-65 has two internal CAT 350 SR cards. I have NEVER seen any CP65 with Cat 350 cards. All I have seen had the Cat 222 SR/A NR card in them. -Aaron  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-12-2003 12:00 PM                     THe CP65 also supports format 42 70mm when the two extra NR cards are installed  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 09-12-2003 12:48 PM                        quote: Aaron Sisemore I have NEVER seen any CP65 with Cat 350 cards. All I have seen had the Cat 222 SR/A NR card in them. I have heard (mainly in this forum) that the CAT 222 SR/A cards don't track as well as the 350s do. [ 10-20-2005, 02:14 PM: Message edited by: Jack Ondracek ]  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 09-12-2003 01:43 PM                     Aaron wrote: quote: I have NEVER seen any CP65 with Cat 350 cards. All I have seen had the Cat 222 SR/A NR card in them It is exactly the opposite with me, all the 65s I have seen have had 350s, I have never seen a 222 SR/A. The 65 was offered in several configuration, including: A mono version. Why is difficult to imagine, I suppose It gave an upgrade path to a future stereo installation, which a 364/E2 didn't. An 'A' only version with a Cat. 222 only. An SR and A version with a 222 and two 350s An SR and A version with a 222 SR/A, I assume this was cheaper. An SR and A version with four channels of 'A' for magnetic with a 222 SR/A and two Cat. 300s All of these are listed by Dolby, but all the 65s I have seen have been the 222 + 2x350 version. I have no idea how many of each version were sold. Paul wrote: quote: Ihave heard people swear AT the CP-65 Any idea why they don't like them? I thiink they were the best processor Dolby made, unless you need something special like more than two projectors, magnetic followers, full support for all 70mm formats etc. I haven't used the 100 or 650, but I prefer the 65 to the 50, 55, 45 or 500. I haven't used anything other than a 65 for recently. Quite recently Dolby were still offering two versions of the 65, I don't know if they still are, but these were only available to studios and dubbing theatres. Dolby refused to supply to anyone else. I don't know why.  |  IP: Logged Peter Hall Master Film Handler Posts: 314 From: London, UK Registered: Dec 2000 posted 09-13-2003 08:04 AM                        I dont believe that the CP65 has achieved CE certification, and with a pile of holes, an internal power supply and a flip down lid it'd unlikely to. You could debate the virturs of CE till you're blue in the face, as I doubt if anyone in reality has experienced a CP65 generating any sort of electrical noise - so be it though... Steven - doesnt Croydon have a 222SRA ?? You are right - the CP65 Mono was a de carded version for sites intending to upgrade - the only one we've seen was at the Irish Film Institute, which came as A type Mono. (Now upgraded to SRD)..  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 09-13-2003 11:20 AM                    The original version of the 65, equipped for SR but not for 70mm, had the 222 (2 channels of A on one card) and 2 Cat.350's (1 channel each of SR). The 70mm version (basically just for Format 42) had the 222 and Cat.300's (1 channel each of A or SR) in place of the 350's. to allow for 4 channels of A. (I guess at the time the idea of 70mm SR was too mind boggling to contemplate.) Later when the 222 SR/A card came out (2 channels of A and pseudo SR on one card) the standard 65 came equipped only with one of those cards and the original version with "real" SR (Cat.350's) became the model 300 and was recommended for studio use, etc. Going back to that original version, I once questioned a Dolby official why the basic SR version didn't simply route optical Lt/Rt through Cat.300's (1 channel each, SR or A) and dispense with the 222 card entirely, adding it only for the 70mm version for the 2 extra channels of A. This would seem to be a much more efficient and less costly way of building the box. I was told it was internal politics at Dolby, the folks who made the 222 card not wanting to lose the bulk of their sales.  |  IP: Logged Darren Briggs Master Film Handler Posts: 371 From: York, UK Registered: Dec 2001 posted 09-13-2003 03:56 PM                        The CP65 can't do 70mm SR correctly, and can't do split surrounds, (Format 43) Switching from 4 channel Mag to 6 channel is a pain, due to the jumpers on the back that dissconect the Optical Preamp stage. A switch card was avalable to do this when you press Mag though. Also to switch from Dolby 70mm to Non Dolby 70mm requires a jumper change on the back All in all you need to add a pile of other electronics at it to do 70mm with no hassle. External NR is the way to go. Future Projections from London helped mod our CP65 to be able to handle any 70mm format and they even supplied external Dolby NR units for A type or SR. Works a dream. Not in a huge rush to switch it out for the CP200 i have waiting in the wings.  |  IP: Logged Martin Brooks Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 900 From: Forest Hills, NY, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 09-13-2003 04:36 PM                        quote: The CP65 can't do 70mm SR correctly 70mm SR?? What's that? What format is that and what films were released in that format?  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-13-2003 04:40 PM                     the Harris restoration of Lawrence of Arabia had 70mm SR prints Far Away had a 70mm SR print the Toronto print of hamlet was 70mmSR some of the new 2001 prints are 70mm SR Also the CP200 is far more versitile than the cp65 with any mods is anyday  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 09-13-2003 08:05 PM                     quote: 70mm Dolby SR? What format is that? It's just 70mm with SR noise reduction applied to the mag tracks instead of A-type. 70mm SR actually has greater headroom (+/-22db) than that of 16-bit digital (+/-20db). For a good part of the 1990's many film productions had their 5.1 audio tracks put on 35mm full coat mag six-track printmasters with Dolby SR noise reduction. Now pretty much everything is done in 20-bit or 24-bit digital for archiving. I watched "Born on the Fourth of July" in 70mm SR at the Ziegfeld theater in New York. It sounded a lot better there than the version you find on DVD. "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" is another that had a few 70mm Dolby SR prints (I saw the one booked at Loews Astor Plaza). It should also be noted that Dolby SR theatrical made its debut in 70mm on two special prints of "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home" (billed as 70mm Dolby Spectral Sound in the Los Angeles ads). I'm sure there were some innacurate ads for 70mm Dolby SR listings. So I'm unsure about SR being on the 70mm prints of "The Godfather III," "Total Recall," "Air America," "Mountains of the Moon" and "The Doors" just to name a few. Didn't Dolby sell the 70mm-capable version of the CP-65 as a "CP-65 300"? Two add in cards is all that makes the difference?  |  IP: Logged Per Hauberg Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 883 From: Malling, Denmark Registered: Jul 2000 posted 09-13-2003 11:00 PM                        quote: Didn't Dolby sell the 70mm-capable version of the CP-65 as a "CP-65 300"? Two add in cards is all that makes the difference? I my papers it is called "CP65 (70)" - and yes, that's all. Local tech mounted a small printcard in my 65, so that both jumper functions can be done from switches in the front, but he told me, this switch card was not available from dolby as original stuff, because, they wanted us to buy CP200. Remember also the words from the manual and the flyer about CP65: Theatres who run 70mm frequently should chose CP200 - which was not available at that time either (summer 1992). CP 65 have been working very fine all these years, both screen 1 with MPU-1 (+ dts + ex) and the standard version in screen 2 (sr and dts only). Only 70mm SR print, I have been running was "Spartacus", from which I got the feeling, that something was not done right. 70mm Dolby A prints sound terrific, but Spartacus was very hissy - no good sound at all. Shouldn't the difference between A and SR normally be like the same on 70 as on 35. I could live with that, but this great one sounded as if I was using kitchen speakers . Per  |  IP: Logged Martin Brooks Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 900 From: Forest Hills, NY, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 09-14-2003 12:08 AM                        Maybe I'm having a memory lock, but I never realized that SR was used on 70mm mag prints. At least I don't think I did. But thanks for the info. Were they still considered formats 41, 42, 43? I'm in the middle of another research project requiring the use of the NY Times on microfilm. Next time I'm in the library, I'll recheck the ads for these films because I really don't remember SR being used in the ads for any 70mm presentation in NYC. I did however also see many of the shows that Bobby Henderson saw: "Born on the Fourth of July" at the Ziegfeld and "...Last Crusade" at the Astor Plaza. Also saw "Godfather III", "Total Recall" and "The Doors" in 70mm in NYC, but I don't remember where. I think I remember the sound on "The Doors" being pretty superb, but I don't remember the sound on "Godfather III" being anything special. What's interesting is that I went back and checked my film/format lists and of the films mentioned, "Born on the 4th of July", "...Last Crusade", "...Voyage Home" and "Mountains of the Moon" do not appear to have been included on Dolby's list of 70mm films. But maybe they fell off the Dolby list precisely because they were in SR. Born, Crusade and Mountains were however on the "in70mm.com" list of 70mm films. My notes on the "The Doors" is unclear, but they seem to indicate that while The Doors was released in 70mm mag, it wasn't necessarily Dolby (or maybe it was Dolby, but discrete and not baby boom). But I'll recheck the ads. Were any of the films mentioned Split Surround? I also saw the restoration of "Spartacus" and I'm sure the source materials weren't that great. What do you expect for a restoration? By the way, as I've posted elsewhere, the Ziegfeld seems closed. I don't know whether it's temporary or permanent. I believe the last show was a revival of "The Way We Were." I know that some years back, Disney wanted to buy the Ziegfeld from Clearview, but Clearview didn't want to sell. It would be a real loss if the Ziegfeld has indeed closed.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.