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

[Jon Robertson]

If a director or filmmaker specifically wants a 5.1 remix, which they supervise and approve (such as the DVD versions of The Conversation, The Last Temptation of Christ, Picnic at Hanging Rock, Monterey Pop and Monty Python and the Holy Grail to name but five examples), then that's all well and good. I suspect most HTF members would be entirely approving, now that it had the director's approval. Yet, dare they tamper with the picture in any way (can you say Evil Dead and Apocalypse Now?) all hell breaks loose. Why? The creation of a final soundtrack (even a mono track) is just as, if not more complex and intricate than composing a visual frame, so changing either will seriously affect your response to the film. So why the uproar for one and not the other?

If the studio takes it upon themselves to remix it (presumably in an attempt to sell more home cinema setups) then that is clearly a bad thing. I did a double take when I saw that the 1953 film From Here to Eternity had been remixed into 5.1 DTS for the new Superbit edition. However, all credit to Columbia for also including the mono soundtrack.

Most HTF members will generally say "Well, that's fine, because the original is still available". If one takes this to its logical conclusion, then why should anyone object to a separate pan-and-scan version included on the disc?

Just a thought.

 

[James Reader]

If a director or filmmaker specifically wants a 5.1 remix, which they supervise and approve (such as the DVD versions of The Conversation, The Last Temptation of Christ, Picnic at Hanging Rock, Monterey Pop and Monty Python and the Holy Grail to name but five examples), then that's all well and good. I suspect most HTF members would be entirely approving, now that it had the director's approval. Yet, dare they tamper with the picture in any way (can you say Evil Dead and Apocalypse Now?) all hell breaks loose. Why?

Well personally speaking, I would let loose all hell if the original mono/stereo release was not included on the DVD as an alternative soundtrack.

Generally speaking when visuals are changed in film, there is no option to see the original via branching/angles.

See the BBC 'Doctor Who' DVDs for 'Caves of Androzani' and 'Ark In Space' where the viewer has the choice of viewing the original 'poor quality' effect or the new 'remastered/reshot' effects from a selection on the main menu (I understand this uses the Angles feature).

Of course, new edits are harder due to the fact that Seamless Branching has never been used to it's full extent (I seem to remember reading even discs like 'The Abyss' and 'T2' don't use Seamless Branching as laid down in the DVD spec).

While I don't approve of any 'tempering' with a film once it is released (so-called 'Director's Intent' or not) I don't mind as long as the original is always available. If this means angles, mono soundtracks, seamless branching, 2 disc sets, or 2 seperate SKU's then so be it.

 

[Joe Caps]

Some films actually were recorded in stereo on the set. Almost all of the Fox stereo films beginning with The Robe and continuing through From The Terrace (1960) Were recorded live stereo with three microphones on the set. Stereo recording and mixing was not that expensive. What was cost prohibitive was the cost of making magnetic stereo prints, which also wore out quickly. Stereo prints were very expensive, pre- dolby.
Worse is when DVD companies blow things up to 5.1 when a four channel stereo track already exists.
One of my favorite films, Camelot - was remixed from scratch, for DVD. the orignal sound recorder and mixer (academy nominated for this film) told Warners they did not have the correct soundtracks to do this =- but Warneres did't give a damn - they went ahead and remixed the film anyway. They had the nerve to do this with another classic that won the award for best sound - Ben Hur. The dVD sound is a pale reflection of what was heard in the theater and on the laserdiscs.

 

[Carlo_M]

Thank you Joe Caps! Now we have concrete examples of what can, and DOES go wrong with 5.1 remixes.

Again I think we're all playing a bit with semantics here. I don't see many posts where the original mix has to be the *only* track on the DVD. If the filmmakers want to make a 5.1 remix, fine, but please included the original mix! Also, don't forget the thread header "mono dvds, what were they thinking?" Perhaps they were thinking to include the original soundtrack when the movie was released? If there were a multitrack master and it was still available and viable then by all means use it and present it on the DVD, even if many theaters were only equipped to do mono at the time. But as Joe pointed out, many of these stereo prints wore out quickly and were expensive to make.

So the original question still stands: are the studios to be criticized for putting out a mono DVD for a film that was originally shown that way? Es[ecoa;;y (as Joe has pointed out) when many of the multichannel track mixes and masters may not have survived?

 

[Chad R]

Didn't answer my question. All stereo adds is directionality--a properly recorded and mixed mono track still has all of the glory of the soundtrack just devoted to one speaker. So long as that speaker is a good one than nothing is lost. The mono track on my JAWS LD is just glorious, the dynamic range is wonderful and it sounds smooth. Nothing is lost by it. (the score to Jaws 2 is similarly wonderful). The only complaint I would have is that mono soundtracks are presented on DVD in a half rate dolby digital instead of a nice PCM track.

So explain to me how mono does injustice to a great score. Can you not hear every instrument? Just because you can't hear instruments across a soundstage does not mean the socre is not effectual.

 

[Douglas R]

All stereo adds is directionality--a properly recorded and mixed mono track still has all of the glory of the soundtrack just devoted to one speaker......So explain to me how mono does injustice to a great score. Can you not hear every instrument? Just because you can't hear instruments across a soundstage does not mean the socre is not effectual.

Well I don't agree with that at all. You do not hear every separate instrument in a mono soundtrack as you do with one in stereo. It seems to me that stereo music is so vastly superior to mono that there is just no comparison - who wants to listen to mono music if you can have it in stereo. As others have said, the music in the R2/R4 CONAN sounds so much better than the mono version that after hearing it in stereo you simply don't want to hear it any other way. I think that perhaps this issue comes down to how much you enjoy and appreciate film music.

 

[Carlo_M]

I think that perhaps this issue comes down to how much you enjoy and appreciate film music.

Yes - in that if you truly appreciate music it doesn't matter how many channels it's presented in - it is the music and not the technology that is appreciated. (see Vince's wonderful statement earlier in this thread: The films are not here to serve the technology- rather the technology should serve the films.

If you need the 5.1 / stereo / whatever in order to enjoy a score, perhaps it is you who doesn't appreciate the music as much as someone who can enjoy it as originally presented in mono, without the need of gimmickry? Doesn't feel so good to be on the other end of the pointed finger? Then let's stop questioning who is the "true music/score lover" and agree to this: if the mono is all that is present or workable, then it should be the only track on there. If they can make a workable 2.0-5.1 track from multitrack masters, then the studio can choose to do so (but aren't necessarily required to); but include the original track as well. We are all lovers of film and their music. Regardless of playback medium.

 

[Patrick McCart]

If the studio takes it upon themselves to remix it (presumably in an attempt to sell more home cinema setups) then that is clearly a bad thing. I did a double take when I saw that the 1953 film From Here to Eternity had been remixed into 5.1 DTS for the new Superbit edition. However, all credit to Columbia for also including the mono soundtrack.

Why couldn't they just give a 2.0 DD and 2.0 DTS track? All that wasted space taken up by the DD and DTS 5.1 tracks could have gone for the video.

Who exactly are they making the DTS track for?

 

[SteveP]

1953 ads for FROM HERE TO ETERNITY advertise "STEREOPHONIC SOUND"--which in certain first-run venues did pre-date the introduction of CinemaScope.

 

[Claes Ljunghorn]

1953 ads for FROM HERE TO ETERNITY advertise "STEREOPHONIC SOUND"--which in certain first-run venues did pre-date the introduction of CinemaScope.

35mm CinemaScope prints of FHTE were made by cropping and blowing up the academy aperture. The Swedish Film Institute has one of those prints, but I don't know if it contains any kind of stereo sound. It might be "Perspecta", but i'm only guessing now...

 

[MarkHastings]

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*

Ha ha, cute. You mean to say that most center speakers can produce the same responsiveness as the mains? I doubt that everyone who gets into home theater has enough room for a huge center speaker? I've invested in Infinity speaker...now I'd LOVE to be able to spend the money (and have the space) for a center speaker that is equal in size and responsiveness as my mains, but I just can't do that.

And if my $200 center speaker isn't adequate enough for Home Theater, then I think it is a GREAT injustice to expect everyone to spend hundreds and thousands of dollars on each individual speaker...remember, DVD works great for HT Enthusiasts, but its main target audience is the general consumer (except for Superbit which specifically states it is marketed toward high end systems). I'd have no issues if the DVD market was only geared toward top end equipment. If the DVD studio thinks that the average consumer has a $500-$1,000 center speaker, then they need to fire their marketing strategist.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

One certainly doesn't need to spend $500 to $1000 for a center speaker that goes down to 50 or 60 hz and blends well with your subwoofer. Unless your mains are $1000-$1500 each, and in that case you shouldn't be blinking at $500-$1000 for a center, because your other 5 (or more speakers probably cost $3000-$5000 or more.

 

[Gary->dee]

So explain to me how mono does injustice to a great score. Can you not hear every instrument?

Right, that would be it. There's issues of sound separation. Whenever you lump every sound together to come out of a single speaker or audio track there's a lot lost in terms of being able to clearly hear the music as it was performed. That's besides also including sound effects and dialogue for a mono movie. Chad, I'm not about to attempt to go further in depth with the pro's and con's of stereo vs. mono music.

I'm as much a lover of music as movies and believe that music shouldn't be heard in mono when the true performance of the score is very much a stereo experience. Mono is the equivalent of sticking an orchestra or musician in a small closet and drilling a single hole in the door to listen to the music.

 

[Joe Caps]

There were many films recorded and exhibited in stereo in 1953 before the introduction of Cinemascope.
From Here to Eternity is certainly one of them. Some were glorified mono with stereo effect bounced around in certain scenes. War of the Worlds was done this way and a few scenes in Shane.
Other films in full stereo (most of which are lost now) were Salome, Calamity Jane, 5000 Fingers of Dr. T, Miss Sadie Thompson. Most studios did not keep their stereo tracks from the pre cinemascope era. These were the earliest films released to television and the studios needed storge space, so junked many of these. The sound was NOT on the actual print but was run on a separate projector interlocked with the film.
Warners erased almost all of their stereo films in themid sixties. Luckily a collector found mint stereo prints through other collectors in the early nineties and a program was implemented to have these prints sent to Hollywood to be duped and preserved. Many of these stereo tracks showed up onlaser including Eastof Eden, Rebel without a cause, Helen of Troy, Land of the Pharoahs, Battle Cry. However several key Warner films still have not been retrieved including Damn Yankees, Giant, Auntie Mame and others.
Universal has SOME of their early scope stereo tracks but is missing Time to LOve and a Time to die, This Earh is Mine and a few others.
Fox has most of their tracks. the few they were missing they later found and in some cases lost again!
This si because the tracks were pulled and sent to post production houses to transfer for video for cable. Whenthey were sent back to the vault they were not properly marked and Fox couldn't fins them when they went to remaster.
ONce found, but now missing are
In Love and War - 1958 - great war and romance film with Robert Wagner and Dana Wynter. First shown in the 80s on Cinemax in mono. later remastered and shown in gorgeous stereo. just remastered in letterbox for Fox Movies and its back to mono again!
Foxs musical the BestThings in LIfe are Free was stereo on Cinemax and now a remaster is on in mono only.
Fox still has not located athe stereo for Adventures of a Young Man with its wonderful Franz Waxman score.
Manybe someday.

 

[MarkHastings]

One certainly doesn't need to spend $500 to $1000 for a center speaker that goes down to 50 or 60 hz and blends well with your subwoofer.

But how about ones where the soundtrack doesn't use the sub? I guess I should consider replacing my center. It's frequency range is 100-20,000Hz. I assumed I'd only need it to produce dialogue tracks, but I guess I was wrong. :frowning:

My Infinity CC-1 Center

 

[Cees Alons]

????

Mark, what are you trying to say? If there is no LFE signal in a specific soundtrack, the sub apparently isn't used for that. But your bass management will still go on using the sub for the lows of your center speaker. Your system will be adequate to produce the whole spectrum like it always does.

Cees

 

[MarkHastings]

Yet, dare they tamper with the picture in any way (can you say Evil Dead and Apocalypse Now?) all hell breaks loose. Why? The creation of a final soundtrack (even a mono track) is just as, if not more complex and intricate than composing a visual frame, so changing either will seriously affect your response to the film. So why the uproar for one and not the other?

I didn't hear any complaints when Disney released an all digital tranfer of their 3D films (A Bugs Life, Monsters Inc., etc.). Every theater used film to display these movies. In fact, the movie on DVD is almost 'better' than what you saw in the theaters, so why is it ok that improved video technology is better, but improved sound isn't?

Also, Star Wars Ep.2 may have been shown in a few digital theaters, but I don't hear any complaints from people who own the DVD (that saw the movie in a non-digital theater).

If done correctly, I don't see how a mono to stereo soundtrack is going to affect your response to a film. By that statement alone you can argue that watching the video on anything smaller than a 50 foot theater screen will also affect your response to the film. This is just something that has to be expected with home video. Trying to recreate an EXACT experience from the theater is such a pointless battle.

 

[MarkHastings]

Mark, what are you trying to say? If there is no LFE signal in a specific soundtrack, the sub apparently isn't used for that.

Isn't that true for a DD 1.0 soundtrack? I assumed that all speakers (including the sub) won't recieve a signal.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Isn't that true for a DD 1.0 soundtrack? I assumed that all speakers (including the sub) won't recieve a signal.

Not if you have bass management set up correctly. The sub should be receiving frequencies below whatever crossover point is set for the other speakers. Some receivers/processors only have a single crossover setting for the entire system. Others allow you to set different crossovers for different speakers. For example, my system has the center speaker crossed at 120Hz; anything below that on a mono track gets routed to the sub.

M.

 

[Cees Alons]

Mark,

You may want to read this little article in the Primer section of our Basics Area.
I have to immodestly confess I wrote it myself, but it explains the use of a subwoofer in a HT-system and how (relatively) inexpensive mains and center speakers can provide a full audio spectrum in your room - provided you own a sub.

Cees