Mono DVD's: What were they thinking? (1 Viewer)

[Ed St. Clair]

I never want to hear it in its 'original' mono again, ever

I know what you mean, but you don't want to go there.
Love the 5.1 too death, that's your prerogative.
However, we can not dismiss the "ORIGINAL" mono soundtrack.
If the studio wishes to remix for mulit-channel, OK by me.
However, we ALL must commit to preserving the "ORIGINAL" work.
As stated previously, mistakes can & are made in remixes.
The Ten Commandments, Jaws, Batman The Movie, and all, suffer from 'butchered' soundtracks.
Do not allow studio's too 'abandon' the "ORIGINAL" soundtracks, ever!
And how would you even know you preferred the 5.1 mix, if you had never heard the "ORIGINAL"?
So, we need the "ORIGINAL" soundtracks for history, art, & reference.
Done.

 

[Chad R]

Okay, then keep this in mind. JAWS was made in the age of stereo. It was available but wasn't mixed into stereo as it wasn't considered an A movie (proof of that was the lack of 70mm prints) and they studio didn't want to spend the money.

So when JAWS 2 came around it was a foregone conclusion that it would be a hit (not sure about 70mm prints) and was made in the age of Dolby Stereo but was still mixed in mono.

This wasn't a case of a director not wanting stereo and the studio not ponying up the cash--there was a decision that stereo wasn't needed and mono mix would suffice.

I also don't understand the idea that stereo equals better sound. All it offers is more directional sound to try and imitate a live performance. If you have a good center speaker and the recording is clean a mono track can sound robust and full. 5.1 is neat and truly does place you in the middle of the action, but all this really relates to is direction--not quality.

 

[MarkHastings]

The basic complete 5.1 systems that you purchase in stores, the standard of quality of the center channel doesn't usually come close to the performance of the L/R speakers

And don't even think about a Bose center cube.

 

[Gary->dee]

Steve C, I envy you! I'm sure that 5.1 Conan disc is amazing.

Now on to Ed's post:

I also don't understand the idea that stereo equals better sound. All it offers is more directional sound to try and imitate a live performance. If you have a good center speaker and the recording is clean a mono track can sound robust and full.

Chad do you appreciate music and the role it plays in movies? Do you know the power of a great score? Mono does a great injustice to movie music and music in general. In my humble opinion, of course.

 

[Carlo_M]

Okay I see the sarcasm bug has reared its head, so I will just add this for clarity's sake (for those not in on it):

When people say "original theatrical presentation" that obviously means an ideal form of it. Minus the flawed projector, scratched screen, nicks and blemishes from repeated playback, etc.

Again, in the cases where perhaps there are multitrack masters available, and the studios decide to make a new 5.1 mix, that's fine with me (again with the caveat the original version be preserved).

But again, can we blame the studios for not taking this extra step? Furthermore, who are we to say that these said masters exist and are in good shape to do a 5.1 mix? Have we been in the studios' vaults? Seen a master tape? Just because it may have been in Dolby Surround on VHS or LD doesn't mean that those were taken from good sources and are fit for inclusion in a current DVD. Perhaps those were gimmicky mixes and the studios chose discretion over valor and included the original only on the DVD. There are too many factors that come into play to simply say "why don't studios make more 5.1 remixes?"

Mono does a great injustice to movie music and music in general. In my humble opinion, of course.

Well I guess I better junk all those great jazz and blues CDs I have that are recorded in mono. I didn't know how bad they were until you offered this tip! Thanks for the heads up! Goodbye Robert Johnson and Ella Fitzgerald, hello DVD-Audio of Christina Aguilera!

 

[Patrick McCart]

When people say "original theatrical presentation" that obviously means an ideal form of it. Minus the flawed projector, scratched screen, nicks and blemishes from repeated playback, etc.

Amen.

 

[Edwin-S]

Okay I see the sarcasm bug has reared its head, so I will just add this for clarity's sake (for those not in on it):
------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know about the others but I wasn't trying to be sarcastic. I just don't like someone saying that I don't like film unless I watch film with the sound format from the initial run: a run that may or may not be the best sonic presentation of the film. A lot of the older films that I saw as a kid in the theatre were played in mono because that is what the theater was equipped with, not necessarily how the film was recorded initially. Now I'm not a fan of those films because I want to hear them reproduced in something other than mono?

And speaking of being sarcastic:


------------------------------------------------------------
Well I guess I better junk all those great jazz and blues CDs I have that are recorded in mono. I didn't know how bad they were until you offered this tip! Thanks for the heads up! Goodbye Robert Johnson and Ella Fitzgerald, hello DVD-Audio of Christina Aguilera!
------------------------------------------------------------
These comments were more cutting and sarcastic than anything else said in this thread.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

. I just don't like someone saying that I don't like film unless I watch film with the sound format from the initial run: a run that may or may not be the best sonic presentation of the film.

Not the original *run*, but the original *mix* - as done by the artists who made the film. If the film was mixed in and for a mono presentation, the primary track on the DVD should also be mono (they can throw in a stereo surround remix also, if it'll mean more sales).

Since it's nearly impossible to duplicate the original balance between dialogue, music and effects (which is what would get screwed up the most if the "add a stereo music track to mono film" remix talked about in this thread happens) in a 20-years later remix by people who had no involvement with the original work, the safest route is to leave it alone.

 

[jonathan_little]

The reason why I was saying it would have been nice to have a DD 2.0 option for Citizen Kane is so I can get more bass from my main speakers (My center just doesn't cut it). I hardly doubt that many HT center speakers can replicate the original "Theatrical" experience.

If you don't want to modify your setup to "no center," just put your receiver in stereo mode. The sound is "processed" to some extent whether it's 1.0 or 6.1. If you have a receiver that somehow mangles the sound when the center channel is off or in stereo mode, I think it's time to find a new receiver.

Citizen Kane is six decades old. What type of center speaker do you have that can't reproduce this soundtrack adequately? (Because I'd like to avoid it.) I'm just surprised to see somebody mentioning that they notice some sort of processing that "screws up the audio" yet at the same time puts up with a center speaker that can't reproduce a 1941 soundtrack correctly. *shrug*

 

[Edwin-S]

Not the original *run*, but the original *mix* - as done by the artists who made the film.
------------------------------------------------------------

Okay. I don't know if I'm on the same wavelength as some of the other people posting about this issue. The problem lies with what the "original" mix was and how is it determined that it is the original mix? Just because the film might have played initially in mono, doesn't mean that the "original mix" was actually mono. The original mix could have been multi-channel stereo which was then downmixed because most theatres at the time might have only been equipped for mono playback.

This is how I feel about it:

1) if it was originally recorded as mono only, then it should remain mono.

2) if the "original" mix was multi-channel stereo downmixed to mono AND the elements are in good enough shape, then re- mixing for 5.1 should not be precluded just because it intially played in mono. The mono track should be included on the disc, along with the the "new" mix.

3) anything recorded in 5.1 Dolby or DTS would, of course, be reproduced as such.

This is probably a stupid question but have any of the 70mm versions of films been released on DVD or have all the releases been only 35mm prints? There is, apparently, a 70mm version of "Zulu" which has a six track stereo soundtrack, but the version that MGM is releasing is a 35mm print with a mono track. Why not put the 70mm version out on disc?

 

[Damin J Toell]

The original mix could have been multi-channel stereo which was then downmixed because most theatres at the time might have only been equipped for mono playback.

If there were not going to be any release prints featuring multi-track sound, then the original mix would've been mono. Why would filmmakers have created a multi-track mix if it was known that it would never be released?

I think the situations in which people desire the mono mix as the original mix are because that was the one and only mix ever created for the film at the time it was made.

DJ

 

[Edwin-S]

Why would filmmakers have created a multi-track mix if it was known that it would never be released?
------------------------------------------------------------

Because there would have been some theatres in larger cities equipped to play such tracks? The majority of theatres, however, would have had mono setups. Look at FANTASIA, that film was recorded multi-track even though almost all theatres were not equipped to play it. IIRC, Disney, actually outfitted selected theatres with the appropriate sound equipment in order for the movie to be played.

 

[Damin J Toell]

Because there would have been some theatres in larger cities equipped to play such tracks?

But if the distributor was never going to release any prints containing muti-track soundtracks, the existence of such theatres wouldn't've been a factor. Multi-track mixes cost money to produce and cost more money to put on prints for distribution. If the distributor didn't intend to release multi-track sound prints, there would've been no reason to create multi-track sound mixes. Just because theatres with multi-track sound capability existed, it doesn't mean multi-track soundtracks were created for most films.

DJ

 

[James Reader]

Gary>Dee wrote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, we can not dismiss the "ORIGINAL" mono soundtrack.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Why not? Is it an endangered species soon to go the way of the Dodo?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, we ALL must commit to preserving the "ORIGINAL" work.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Really? I didn't know I was part of a DVD archive that must preserve original works. I guess the studios are depending on us too.
quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do not allow studio's too 'abandon' the "ORIGINAL" soundtracks, ever!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I hardly think that's the case. These days studios have a much better sense of preserving things than they used to have.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, we need the "ORIGINAL" soundtracks for history, art, & reference.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


You forgot 'to save the world!'.

Well of course when we talk about preserving the original soundtrack we don't mean taking it upon ourselves and our DVD collection to archive Hollywood's greatest films for all eternity. Of course the Studios should be doing this, and nobody suggests otherwise.

But there is no point in the Studios archiving the original soundtracks if they're not going to release them to the public, is there?

Personally, I think it is a crime that Jaws' Acadamy Award winning soundtrack is not on the DVD release and therefore, has in effect been 'officially' replaced with the new remix, which uses all-new foley effects, not included on the original soundtrack. And if this doesn't trouble you, or anyone else reading this, then I really must question your commitment to film as an art form and not just simple entertainment.

 

[Damin J Toell]

Personally, I think it is a crime that Jaws' Acadamy Award winning soundtrack is not on the DVD release and therefore, has in effect been 'officially' replaced with the new remix, which uses all-new foley effects, not included on the original soundtrack. And if this doesn't trouble you, or anyone else reading this, then I really must question your commitment to film as an art form and not just simple entertainment.

It doesn't trouble me as much as it might otherwise, since I have the original mono mix in nice PCM on my LD.

DJ

 

[Lyle_JP]

Damin,

I hope you have one of the two THX Jaws boxed sets, otherwise, you still don't have the original award winning mono mix. On the first letterboxed disc, some music playing in a couple of the beach scenes had to be replaced due to rights issues. Only the THX laserdiscs had all the proper music clearances (and the new DVD, but they made so many other sound changes it doesn't matter).

-Lyle J.P.

 

[Damin J Toell]

I hope you have one of the two THX Jaws boxed sets

Yup! I've got the CLV set, but thanks for the details.

DJ

 

[Edwin-S]

I dunno. To me there would have been a transitionary period somewhere in there. With the advent of television, movie studios had to start looking at avenues to differentiate their product so they developed "widescreen". Why would the same not apply to audio?

During the fifties and sixties the cost of recording stereo had to have been coming down. Films might have started being recorded in stereo, even though the distribution channels lagged in upgrading their equipment, because the equipment became cheaper and more prevalent. The result would have been stereo soundtracks without a ready market having to be downmixed to mono.

The very same thing is occurring right now. Directors and studios are starting to experiment with shooting digital, even though most of the distribution channel is not equipped to project digitally. Theatres in larger centres are equipping themselves to do digital projection but in relative terms the market for digital projection is small; however, studios are starting to allow filmmakers to shoot digital regardless of that fact.

I cannot see why the same would not have applied to audio production.

 

[Damin J Toell]

With the advent of television, movie studios had to start looking at avenues to differentiate their product so they developed "widescreen". Why would the same not apply to audio?

During the fifties and sixties the cost of recording stereo had to have been coming down. Films might have started being recorded in stereo, even though the distribution channels lagged in upgrading their equipment, because the equipment became cheaper and more prevalent. The result would have been stereo soundtracks without a ready market having to be downmixed to mono.

I'm not sure what you mean by "recording" in stereo. Films are generally recorded in mono, as it were, since there's usually just a single microphone used to pick up the dialogue during filming. Films aren't recorded in stereo. The film can only become multi-track as a result of the mix made in post-production. And it's unlikely that a multi-track soundtrack would've been made if the distributor had no intent of ever releasing it. Mono tracks weren't mere downmixes of stereo tracks, they were created unto themselves for release. Simply downmixing a stereo track to mono would cause all sorts of terrible phasing problems and make the sound a mess.

DJ

 

[Edwin-S]

I'm not sure what you mean by "recording" in stereo. Films are generally recorded in mono, as it were, since there's usually just a single microphone used to pick up the dialogue during filming.

Mono tracks weren't mere downmixes of stereo tracks, they were created unto themselves for release. Simply downmixing a stereo track to mono would cause all sorts of terrible phasing problems and make the sound a mess.
------------------------------------------------------------

Hmmm. Okay. It seems I am misunderstanding the process by which soundtracks are recorded.