The Terminator: SE 5.1 Audio Track -- Thumbs Down! (1 Viewer)

[Inspector Hammer!]

Something just occured to me, where were all the audio purists when the new 'Die Hard' dvd's came out? Those films were originally Dolby Stereo when they were released not DD or DTS, why didn't anyone complain about those films? I realize that they have the original Dolby Surround tracks on them, but, like 'Terminator', are compressed compared to their LD counterparts, so, why no complaints?
Could it be that even the audio purists here liked the new DD and DTS tracks on the dvd's for those films? Hmmmmm interesting! I mean, do they watch the 'Die Hard' dvd's in Dolby Surround instead of DD or DTS, because that was thier ORIGINAL audio format? I for one can't wait to see what they say about this!
------------------
God bless the USA and the men and woman of our military and their families!
[Edited last by John Williamson on October 05, 2001 at 07:42 PM]

 

[Brett Cameron]

John,
Die Hard 1 and 2 were released in Dolby Stereo, 6 Track Dolby Stereo on the 70mm prints. The dvds have the same soundtracks(4.1 disguised as 5.1). By the way I do like the new 5.1 mix on The Terminator.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Yes Brett, HOWEVER, those films were presented in theaters in Dolby stereo, if the audio purists only want what was presented at the theater, then they should all have a problem with the DD and DTS tracks on the dvd's of those films, but evidentally they don't, i'm curious as to why this is. If they're so hard up for original theatrical audio presentations only, then why didn't they complain about these dvd's?
------------------
God bless the USA and the men and woman of our military and their families!

 

[StevenW]

Count me as another who LOVES this new 5.1 track. That original mono track is CRAP compared to the new track.

 

[AJ Johnson]

No thumbs down for the 5.1 soundtrack...it was well done and I thought it flowed well with the movie. However, I still prefer the old mono soundtrack on the older DVD because it still sounded great for being mono and it stayed true to the film. One thing that I didn't like about the 5.1 soundtrack was the new gunshots...man they were weak. In the old mono version the Terminator's gun packed a punch when he pulled the trigger as did Reese's shotgun blasts. This new 5.1 mix made those gunshots sound like a P38 or something. It was kind of distracting but I got over it quick.
------------------
http://www.angelfire.com/sk/hitman1/AJtheatercover

 

[Steve Enemark]

Yes Brett, HOWEVER, those films were presented in theaters in Dolby stereo

Huh?

Are you saying DIE HARD's 70mm soundtrack was never played in theaters? You lost me with that one...
------------------
"Always make the audience suffer as much as possible" - Alfred Hitchcock

 

[GerardoHP]

Huh? Are you saying DIE HARD's 70mm soundtrack was never played in theaters?

Of course they were, wherever the films were released in 70mm, which they were.
------------------
Gerardo

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

The 'Die Hard' films were presented in theaters in 4 channel Dolby stereo, the theatrical version of Dolby Pro-logic.
------------------
God bless the USA and the men and woman of our military and their families!

 

[Brian Harnish]

I got my copy of The Terminator: SE today (along with Citizen Kane...yeeehaaaww!!) But this review doesn't concern Citizen Kane.
What I think regarding the audio:
Personally, I was rather impressed with the new 5.1 mix until the gun shots (Terminator's killing of the first Sarah Connor; Kyle's rifle in Technoir; Terminator's killing of Ginger; Terminator's Uzi 9mm in TechNoir, etc.) occurred. I simply could not stand the sound rape that occured with the gunshots! Since many people have commented on how awesome the original Mono track on the previous Terminator DVD sounded, I am starting to get a slight sense of buyer's remorse for the Special Edition. However, I am still very glad that MGM included the mono track despite it being highly compressed at a lower bitrate. I am fond of the old gunshots (loud and punchy with a slight echo), and probably may not get used to the sound rape that occurred in the 5.1 mix (despite it being VERY GOOD throughout the rest of the DVD). The silencers added to the gunshot effects stick out like a sore thumb and ruin the moments that are mentioned above and below.
Another change that occurred in the 5.1 mix are the plasma shots from the guns attached to the machines in the future battle sequences. This IS the first Terminator after all, and the plasma laser sounds from Terminator 2 do not fit in the new soundtrack. Next time, I hope that directors re-releasing their films as SE's consider adhering to consistency (even if they feel that new effects may make the movie better). Making sound effects that were done ten years after a film does not allow enough room for improvement. IMO, it may actually end up making the film worse (since the effects don't go with the image being projected onto the screen).
Overall, the 5.1 mix is still very good and if you prefer it, you can feel confident that you're listening to a very well done track. However, for those that prefer the way the original mono mix sounded (with the original sound effects intact), you will be in for a disappointment.
As for the picture on this DVD, I am stunned. IMO, this is as close to a reference transfer of a movie of this age as you can get. No edge enhancement at ALL!! At LAST a Terminator movie done right!! Some scenes do seem slightly softer (like within the TechNoir club), but it is negligible. No one should even notice the softness unless they are *REALLY* looking for it. This is truly a pristine DVD (despite the changes in the 5.1 mix) and I implore those that are fans of this movie to get it! You'll never view a better version of this film (until it's released on HD-DVD, of course!).
------------------
- Brian
My DVD Collection
Want Sliders on DVD? Then please SIGN the petition!

 

[Adam Barratt]

The 'Die Hard' films were presented in theaters in 4 channel Dolby stereo, the theatrical version of Dolby Pro-logic.

In some theatres, but to reiterate what has already been said by several here, the first two films were also presented theatrically with six-track 70mm soundtracks.
That makes the discrete soundtracks presented on the DVDs perfectly acceptable from a 'purist' standpoint as they recreate what was heard in theatres/what was intended to be heard by the soundtracks' creators.
Adam

 

[Rob Gillespie]

I have a case of Chzech Budvar downstairs. Anyone fancy a bottle?

 

[Don Peskin]

Guess I'm just partially anal, because I really liked the 5.1 soundtrack. My only problem was the vocals seemed to be recorded a little low. I had to raise the volumn on my receiver more than usual to hear the vocals, otherwise I thought it was the best conversion from mono to 5.1 I've heard.
For those who don't like changes from the original movie, I suppose you don't like Director's cuts, etc. either since they change what your originall saw.
Do you think if he didn't have more money to work with and the technology available at the time, he wouldn't have done a 5.1 track to begin with?
To me this is the best of both worlds. Those who insist on the original mono track get it, those who want more get it too. Why complain?

 

[Matt_Stevens]

Holadem said: quote: We finally have a long wanted classic here, with new DD sound PLUS the original mono track... AND PEOPLE STILL FIND A WAY TO BITCH.
Not that anybody should care, but this is the first time I have actually been disgusted by a discussion on this forum.
[/quote]
Well, excuse me, but that attitude is not conducive to a friendly discussion. It's downright rude. I, for one, do not care that you are disgusted, especially since you have no reason to be. Those of us commenting on this should not be insulted by other members.
My complaint, and the complaint of many others, is that the mono soundtrack on this DVD is severely compromised and vasty inferior to the mono soundtrack on ANY other version of this film, be it DVD, LD or even VHS. We are not talking about a slight difference. It's night and day. So much so that some major online reviewers have mentioned it.
This is absolutely a valid complaint. I would be as happy as a pig in shit if the mono soundtrack on the SE DVD sounded as good as the first DVD, or the Laserdisc, or even the stupid POS VHS tape! But it DOES NOT.
With the laserdisc and the first DVD, I could put my Receiver into a quasi-stereo mode and spread the sound across the front 3 channels without any distortion in the sound. I cannot do this with the new DVD. It distorts. The speakers crackle. The mono on this DVD is shite.
By the way, to the DIE HARD people. I saw it in 70mm. The multi-track surround sound was incredible. I think the 5.1 track is the first version of the soundtrack to capture the theatrical experience I remember.
------------------
www.deceptions.net/superman
[Edited last by Matt_Stevens on October 06, 2001 at 09:34 AM]

 

[Michael Reuben]

After reading so many comments (here and in reviews) about the superiority of the mono mix on the original Image DVD, I got curious about the encoding. It's been suggested that the mono soundtrack on the new disc sounds bad because it's been encoded at 192kbps. Well, I just ran the output from the mono track on the 1997 Image DVD through my processor, and the results are interesting.
The earlier DVD was also encoded at 192kbps. So while compression may be part of the problem, it's certainly not all (or even most) of it.
There is a difference, though -- one that may help account for the observation that the mono track on the new disc is lacking in bass. The mono track on the new disc is encoded as 2.0, with identical left and right. So is the 1997 Image disc. But the Image disc also uses the LFE channel, whereas the new disc does not.
I haven't been able to determine where or how much the LFE channel kicks in on the Image disc, but finding it there started me wondering: Where did it come from? I very much doubt that any source material available to Image for The Terminator in 1997 contained separate LFE; there hadn't been any remixing done at the time. Earlier in this thread, several people observed that the Image mix seemed "overcooked". The presence of this mysterious LFE channel certainly suggests that the soundtrack for the Image release was manipulated in some fashion.
Of course, I can't comment on the LD or VHS versions.
M.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Double post.
[Edited last by Michael Reuben on October 06, 2001 at 04:06 PM]

 

[Chad R]

Escuse me, but what are you talking about? We are saying that the mono track on the new release is inferior in every way to the mono track on the first DVD, the laserdisc (both of them) and the VHS tape. It doesn't take a degree in rocket science to determine this. Just ears. Listen and you will hear how the mono track on the SE is lacking in bass, suffers from distortion and sounds plain old terrible compared to the other versions.

What I was saying is that we can't compare previous home editions to the present mono track and say they are correct when the new one isn't. We are arguing for the most correct representation of the theatrical track, and there's no guarantee the old LD, VHS or original DVD are any better at that. It's been already discussed here that the old Image DVD had pumped up bass, and that would be just as bad as changing the sound effects if we're going to be particularly purist.
I do think the previous soundtracks have been played with, Cameron himself said that since the 90's they've always done something to the track to make it more acceptable to present audiences, so I don't feel we can hold up previous video versions as a template for thow the film does sound.
Mono is not just limiting sound to one speaker. Optical mono on film prints also limits the frequency range. So this lack of bass that is missing isn't really missing in my opinon, it was just added to the last LD's and DVD.
I listened to the film in mono on this new DVD. I had no problem with it. I used to have both the old THX LD and Image's DVD, and the new version doesn't sound horrible in comparison. Sure it sounds a bit tinny, and there's some hiss. But that's what I expect from mono.
P.S. Anyone feel as if there's like 5 different sides being aruged here? We got people discussing the difference between mono and stereo, the differences in mono, the morality of changing films, etc.

 

[Keith_R]

I just watched the new version and I'm going to put it simply. I like the DVD and I like the new 5.1 track more than the mono the only complaint I have with the 5.1 is the gunshot sounds.
------------------
-Keith-

 

[Edwin-S]

I would like to know if anyone has heard any distortion in the dialogue from the centre channel in the 5.1 mix? there have been several points in the film where distortion in the higher frequencies seems to occur. I am trying to decide if the problem is the soundtrack or whether my centre speaker has a dying driver. The mono mix sounds kind of flat but it has been a long time since I saw this film theatrically, so it is hard to say if the mono sound on the DVD is an accurate repro. of the original track.
------------------

 

[Rob T]

I thought the audio track was pretty damn good.

 

[Norm]

Maybe Cameron pumped up the gun shots for the mono, and realized that they were to loud and fake sounding for 5.1. I have a hard time believing Cameron turned down the gun shots for no reason. I also noticed that the scene is in slight slower motion, than normal speed which could be one reason they changed it, it seems distorted not just lower, as if your hearing it in slow motion.
If its for every gun shot, I have not listened to the whole DVD yet, but I still think Cameron must have done it for a reason.
------------------
Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation
http://apacure.org/

[Edited last by Norm on October 07, 2001 at 11:16 AM]