|
|
Author
|
Topic: Dolby SR cards
|
|
|
Louis Bornwasser
Film God
![](/ubbmembers/3063.jpg)
Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005
|
posted 07-27-2005 02:20 PM
It is true that, relative to the cat 280t or cat 350, the cat222sr/a is not as good. However, I believe that, unless you have exceptional acoustics, amplifiers, bi-amped speakers, super tweaked reverse analog reader, etc, you are OK to go with the 222sr/a.
Dolby took a few liberties with that one, but, in all but the most impressive installs, it is just not that noticable on optical.
Film-tech is noted for taking the "high road." In this case it is a factory approved conversion, fully supported by Dolby and has been accomplished by thousands of cinemas; it is better than A.
Louis
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster
![](http://www.film-tech.com/ubbmembers/72d.jpg)
Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 07-27-2005 07:40 PM
quote: Louis Bornwasser It is true that, relative to the cat 280t or cat 350, the cat222sr/a is not as good. However, I believe that, unless you have exceptional acoustics, amplifiers, bi-amped speakers, super tweaked reverse analog reader, etc, you are OK to go with the 222sr/a.
Louis,
Its not always easy to hear the 222's problems in general in an average film but if you make a comparison between a 222 and a pair of 280T's on even a decent system with a good analog mix and use the same reel of film for the comparison it hits you like a brick, most noticable is that its alot more edgy sounding and there other artifacts you will hear that are not too nice either.
quote: Louis Bornwasser it is better than A.
Or should we say its A is better than its SR......
Actually the Panastereo is the best solution and by far the best sounding SR out there... yes, as good or better than the 280T's are. And may be less expensive than the 222 card is. I wouldn't hesitate to install the Panastereo unit. The Panastereo CSP{-1200 is by far the best sounding processor on the market today.
Mark
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
![](http://www.film-tech.com/ubbmembers/268e.gif)
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 07-28-2005 09:01 AM
Louis,
The Cat 222SR/A while will provide some simbilance of SR noise reduction it tracks VERY poorly. One need not have a good system to hear how bad it truely is. In fact, my problems with the 222SR/A is customer driven. It really does sound bad and has no business having the "SR" name on it. It should have said what it is Double-S.
As to cost, the Cat. 222SR/A is not a cost effective solution for SR either. It lists for nearly $1,995.00 (more than two Cat. 280s).
Louis, in case you didn't know. The Panastereo SR35 costs less than the Cat. 222SR/A and installs just like the Dolby SRA-5. It is truely the best and most economical choice in 2005.
While there are many variables in an optical soundtrack nowadays...I prefer the Cat. 280 to all others, including the CM353 from what I've heard. I have Cat. 280s in some Panastereos and CM353 in others. One of these days, I'm going to experiment with one channel Cat. 280 and one CM353...if they are tracking properly...everything, including the 2:4 decoder should work just fine...if not, there is something amiss.
Also, I've found the differences in sound quality between the Pana and Dolby cards is more dramatic with optical, an inherently noisy medium, versus magnetic.
The above being said, I can't claim to have done the listening tests that I've done on the 222SR/A verus real SR...that was pretty damn conclusive by all listeners and very apparent.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
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.
|