KHARTOUM is Dolby Surround not DD 5.1 (1 Viewer)

[Stephen Pickard]

I would like to set the record straight on a few things. First, below I have made a list of all the format abbreviations that I can presently think of and what they represent.

1) 1.0 or 1/0 Center Channel mono

2) 2.0 or 2/0 a) L/R Mono

b) L/R Stereo

c) L/R Stereo (Lt/Rt, two-channel matrix track w/encoded center & mono surround.

3) 2.1 Left, Right & Surr. IMHO does not exist, unless you still own a two-channel decoder from the pre prologic era. The center which was mixed equally into the L/R would be reproduced as a 'phantom' center channel.

4) 3.0 or 3/0 Discrete Left Center & Right only.

5) 4.0 or 3/1 Discrete Left Center Right & single channel mono surround

6) 3/1L Same as above with Sub channel (L or .1)

7) 5.0 or 3/2 The five represents total full range channels, the .0 represents no sub. The 3/ is the three screen channels Left Center Right and /2 is L/R Stereo / Mono surrounds.

8) 5.1 or 3/2L is the same as the above with a sub channel.

 

[Michael Coate]

3) 2.1 Left, Right & Surr.

"2.1" would mean LEFT and RIGHT screen channels plus a .1 LFE channel, wouldn't it? Correct if I'm wrong, but I think you meant to state: 2/1.

Also, many in the industry use "3/2.1" to denote "5.1" rather than "3/2L.," and this is how the audio formats present themselves when using the audio display mode on many DVD players.

 

[Stephen Pickard]

I have never heard of a two-channel format that has a separate sub channel.

The professional decoder made by Dolby, model 562 clearly identifies 5.1 as 3/2L.

 

[Stephen Pickard]

Michael, you are correct, I should have made it 2/1, which I have just found out that there is a home video format of 2/1. But I have never heard of a 'theatrical' format or any title that I can recall that utilised 2/1.

 

[BillM]

Interesting thread here.

First lets get back to the original Issue.

Stephen indicated that he was expecting the KHARTOUM DVD to have the original 4 track stereo dub, meaning he was hoping to see a DD 3/1 discrete - not an LT/RT ProLogic track.

Dolby has gone to a lot of trouble to make an encoder that can duplicate a multitude of Film Audio Formats. This is an opportunity for studios to release there product with the best possible (and most like the original) sound track.

Though the channel output format is the same there is a big difference between a discrete track and a matrixed track.

Second the statement by Michael Warner

It's a Dolby Digital 3.0 mix consisting of left, right, and surround channels. The surround channel is mono so both rear speakers are outputting the same audio. The left and right front channels are discrete but any audio meant to be heard from the center is collapsed to the center speaker the same way that a DD 2.0 Mono mix is typically heard only from the center speaker even though it's ostensibly a two-channel mix.

Makes absolutely no sense to me. Perhaps he can clarify?

3/0 is Left - Center - Right.

2/0 Mono is 2/0 mono.

How are the left and right collapsed discreetly?

Please help me!!!

WM

 

[Damin J Toell]

How are the left and right collapsed discreetly?

i asked earlier in the thread, but he hasn't explained why he gets sound information collapsed to the center channel. unless he's got DPL or another decoder kicked in, it shouldn't be happening. He says Khartoum has a 2/1 track with discrete L, R, and S channels, but somehow information is collapsing to C anyway. He must have a decoder running in order for this to be happening. Given the existence of this mysterious collapsing, i think perhaps it's a 2-channel Dolby Surround track (as Stephen has asserted) and his DPL decoder is giving him matrixed C and S audio. 2-channel Dolby Surround tracks have what looks like a 2/1 configuration when displayed on receiver front panels (look to Roger Dressler's post in this previously-mentioned thread for the reason why - "So when it came time to find a way to distinguish 2/0 programs with 2/0 Surround encoded content, we adopted the "2/1" pattern so as to illuminate the S light, thereby trying to show the 2-ch signal is surround encoded."), so perhaps that is the source of some confusion.
DJ

 

[Michael Warner]

I'll try to answer the above questions but I'm beginning to feel like I'm just banging my head against the wall. All I can attest to is what my equipment is telling me. I'm running an Onkyo 595 with DPLII engaged. Dolby 2.0 Surround mixes show up as "2/0". This confusion-inspiring DD 3.0 mix shows up as "2/1".

Hopefully everyone can go out and get the disc and report back their own findings as all I can reiterate are the facts as I see them on my system. I may well be wrong -- and it certainly wouldn't be the first time -- but at this point we really need some more reports from the field to straighten things out as all the talk of what is possible in the world of Dolby audio does nothing to answer the question of what audio mix the "Khartoum" DVD is sporting.

 

[Damin J Toell]

I'm running an Onkyo 595 with DPLII engaged.

Why do you review DVDs that have discretre sound with DPLII engaged?

DJ

 

[BillM]

Michael,
Does the DPLII engage automatically (bitstream flag) or do you do it manually? If DPII is not engaged are you getting audio in L-R-Surr only?
Perhaps this track was encoded improperly!
Correctly (to original Road Show Format) it should be 3/1 - no PL flag
Reality (because the studio is lazy) 2.0 Surround (PL flag on).
Was incorrectly encoded (make this a double :frowning: :frowning: ) 2/1.
If it is 2/1 someone needs to learn how to use the Dolby 569.
Are there any other odd settings?
Thanks for the clarification.
I have to agree with Damin, that you need to revise your review to reflect this issue!
Again - Verrry Interrresting.
WM

 

[Stephen Pickard]

Damin, in response to your enquiry about should two disrete channels (left and right) collapse to the center. The answer is that only the 'common' information in the two channels falls to the center position provided the balance is set correctly and you are sitting in a position directly in between the two speakers, this center position is known as the 'phantom' channel. With a stereo signal you get the illusion of three channels, with a two channel signal with identical information (mono), you only get the illusion of one channel in the phantom center, with the illusion of nothing coming from the L/R speakers, when in actual fact this is where the audio source is originating from.

You are probably wondering to yourself how thw common or center information ends up in the left and right channels.

Before multi-track (more than two channels) audio became a reality in the home, two-channel stereo was the standard for many years. Many, certainly as much as ninety percent, were mixed down from three channels or more. To make it possible for these multi-tracks to be heard at home, two discrete channels were created and whatever information was intended for the center, that channel was 'split' and 'assigned'or mixed to the left and right channels by exactly fifty per cent and also dropped in level by three or four decibels, this is to prevent the level from 'adding up' when reproducing as a phantom channel. This two channel mix is not discrete as the left channel now has fifty percent of the center information, and likewise with the right channel. This center information is known as the common information because the left and right channels are different from one another (discrete). So when you are sitting in front of your speakers in exactly the center position facing the phantom channel, only the common information will collapse to the center, the discrete information stays where it is. In a prologic decoder, the prologic circuitry takes that common information and sends it to a speaker which is placed centrally between your two speakers. The 'steering' circuitry does it's best to keep any information (left, right and out-of-phase signals) out of the center. Provided the frequency response and head azimuth alignments are set up correctly, channel crosstalk (bleed-thru from other channels) is kept to a minimum.

Listening to this same recording in the form of a discrete three channel set-up, where you have no common information in the left or right, the listening experience is improved dramatically.

This was the reason for my disappointment with "KHARTOUM", the same listening experience occurs because the 2/0 bitstream which is an Lt/Rt, a mixdown from the discrete 4/0 or 3/1 master original mix.

 

[Damin J Toell]

Damin, in response to your enquiry about should two disrete channels (left and right) collapse to the center. The answer is that only the 'common' information in the two channels falls to the center position provided the balance is set correctly and you are sitting in a position directly in between the two speakers, this center position is known as the 'phantom' channel. With a stereo signal you get the illusion of three channels, with a two channel signal with identical information (mono), you only get the illusion of one channel in the phantom center, with the illusion of nothing coming from the L/R speakers, when in actual fact this is where the audio source is originating from.

Stephen,

If all you mean is that proper speaker placement can make it sound as if certain sound is coming from the center, I'm all with you. But what i was responding to from Michael Warner was his statement that certain sound was (as I read him) actually eminating from the center speaker, not simply that there was an illusion of a phantom center channel. As we've since found out, this is because he was running his DPLII decoder.

DJ

 

[Michael Coate]

Michael Warner said:

Hopefully everyone can go out and get the disc and report back their own findings

Okay, finally received a copy....

I checked on three separate systems and each time the English-langauge track displays as 2.0, supporting the claim made by Stephen Pickard in his initial post. The 2.0 signal was checked on both the DVD player audio display function as well as on the audio receiver. I can list the system brands and models used, if anyone requests.

In addition, although we all know disc details noted on jackets can be incorrect or misleading on occasion, "Khartoum" appears to be labeled correctly: "English: Stereo Surround" (the typical billing MGM elects to use for "Dolby Digital 2.0 Surround," "Dolby Stereo," "Lt-Rt," matrix-encoded stereo," "four-channel stereo," etc. The additional-language Spanish track also is 2.0).

So, where does this leave us???

 

[Damin J Toell]

So, where does this leave us???

It leaves us where we started: the disc has a matrixed version of the original 4-track 70mm mix. Presumably, a discrete mix would've been preferrable. But, oh well.

DJ

 

[BillM]

I also picked up a copy.

Michael Coate is on the money!

2.0 Surround - PL bitflag ON

Too Bad,

WM

 

[Damin J Toell]

For anyone still curious, DVDFile's review (which may be old, but I just noticed it today) confirms that the disc has a surround-encoded DD 2.0 track.
DJ

 

[Douglas R]

I just had the misfortune of reading DVDFile's review. The comments on Charlton Heston are not only grossly insulting but utterly ridiculous. What is it about Heston that inspires such venom in people? The reviewer can't even spell his name right!

 

[Justin Doring]

The reviewer's comments speak volumes about him and his abilities as a critic. Just when you thought DVD File couldn't sink any lower...

 

[Maurice McCone]

couldn't agree more, that this review and reviewer - Mike (something), is a disgrace.
He clearly doesn't like or possibly understand historical epics, doesn't like Mr Hestons politics and according to his review thinks there is too much talking in Khartoum.....duhhh!
I checked this reviewers biography on DVDfile and it states this as background to Mike...
"Mike's most recent film is the award-winning ShowChickens, the saga of a young boy who has to battle levitating poultry, international chicken espionage and heinous tobacco-chewing zombies to win the affection of a sassy young chicken-raising maiden.
Aside from making films, Mike enjoys reading, writing, arithmetic, traveling and (honestly) trying to convince everyone he meets that Jar Jar Binks is AWESOME."
...enough said