What's new

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

Aaron Silverman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 22, 1999
Messages
11,411
Location
Florida
Real Name
Aaron Silverman
Cameron obviously wanted to use the MOST VERSATILE AVAILABLE sound format. That's why the new edition has 5.1 sound and not 2.0!
 

Brett G

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Apr 11, 1999
Messages
147
Greg Yurkovic,
So it appears you are a purist? Why then will you not purchase Robocop unless it is the director's cut? That is not the way it was originally in the theaters. I would think the new MGM DVD would be the closest to representing what was originally shown in theaters.
This is my point. I don't understand why purists want director's cuts, but not new remixes supervised by the director. I don't see how either are different. Do people not realize how much involvement a director has in the soundtrack (especially James Cameron)?
-Brett
------------------
Link Removed
My DVD's
 

Michael Reuben

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 12, 1998
Messages
21,763
Real Name
Michael Reuben
quote: If Cameron wanted a stereo track, why isn't there a stereo track on there?[/quote] He wanted stereo in 1984. As indicated on the first page of this thread, there were reports of a contemplated remix as early as 1991. By that point, we were just entering the era of multi-channel digital sound, and that's probably why the remix was delayed.
Remixing for stereo with today's technology would be a pointless exercise in quaintness.
M.
[Edited last by Michael Reuben on October 03, 2001 at 05:08 PM]
 

Ken Seeber

Supporting Actor
Joined
Nov 5, 1999
Messages
787
My SO pointed out something else missing from the new "Terminator" SE: Arnold's penis!
She used to enjoy the clarity of the original Image release because of the scene where the nude Arnold walks over to the punks to take their clothes. She was always very impressed with...well, you know.
On the new DVD she claims that shadows have been added to obscure part of what was visible in the original release.
I'm not entirely convinced she's right, but I'm not about to study Arnold's crank frame-by-frame.
 

Michael Reuben

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 12, 1998
Messages
21,763
Real Name
Michael Reuben
On the new DVD she claims that shadows have been added to obscure part of what was visible in the original release.
OK, that's it! Who has the recall petition??
M.
biggrin.gif
 

cafink

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 1999
Messages
3,044
Real Name
Carl Fink
Carl, I was not speaking for the vast majority in that statement, I was speaking to US, the hometheater crowd who do think that changing the OAR of a film is doing harm. I think it's fairly obvious what I meant.
That's exactly my point. Why weren't you speaking for the vast majority? Their opinions don't count in this matter?
 

Rob Tomlin

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2000
Messages
4,506
I don't understand how this thread has turned into a discussion about "purists" and comparing a new sound mix to pan and scan, or directors cuts.
The term "purist", as it is being applied in this thread, is apparently someone who does not believe in altering the original soundtrack, period! Reviewing this thread, there really don't appear to be many people here that are saying that.
Besides, if someone were truly a "purist" as that term is being used here, why would they even bother listening to the 5.1 remix?
What I, and others (although I don't claim to speak for others)are saying, is that this particular 5.1 remix gets a thumbs down because they have gone overboard with it. They have added too much. They have changed the feel/mood of the original movie. This is not a good thing, IMO.
So, even if I am not technically a "purist" when it comes to remixed soundtracks (I believe improvements could have been made to the Terminator soundtrack in a much more conservative way), I still think that this particular re-mix has strayed too far from the original mono soundtrack, to the point of being downright distracting, and even "gimmicky".
Thus, I agree with the original topic starter...thumbs down!
icon13.gif
 

Michael Reuben

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 12, 1998
Messages
21,763
Real Name
Michael Reuben
I don't understand how this thread has turned into a discussion about "purists" and comparing a new sound mix to pan and scan, or directors cuts.
That's simple, and it's happened before. While there are some who do not like the new mix because (to borrow your phrase) "they have gone overboard with it", there are others (including me) who do not share that evaluation and feel that the original feel/mood hasn't been changed, and may even have been enhanced.
This is fundamentally a difference of taste, and while differences of taste can be debated, it's virtually impossible to prove them right or wrong. What inevitably happens in these threads about remixes, though, is that one or more people who dislike a new mix want to reach beyond matters of taste for some sort of "objective" justification for their views. And that's usually when the thread goes downhill.
M.
 

Matt_Stevens

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 3, 2000
Messages
747
quote: The fact of the matter is there is just no pleasing everyone.[/quote]
I disagree. When I heard that the original mono mix was to be included, I was thrilled. I didn't give a damn about the 5.1 remix. If it sucked, whatever. Well, I put the DVD in and immediately found that the mono mix was very thin and sounded nowhere near as good as any other release prior. Even the VHS sounded better. The new DVD's mono soundtrack distorts at high volume levels and has no bass to speak of.
Tonight I brought the DVD, my VHS tape and a rental copy of the first DVD release to a friends and did a blind listening test. No picture, just sound, and I ran some scenes, comparing all three, not telling the four participants which one they were listing to. I made sure the volume level was the same for each, so that no track would sound louder than another.
In EVERY CASE, they put either the VHS tape or the first DVD on top. The new DVD was always last. This just confirmed my impression and doing this proves (to me at least) that I am not just bitching and being a pain in the ass.
Had the new DVD's mono track sounded like the VHS tape, the older DVD or the laserdisc (which was damn good mono), then I would be a happy camper. But now I have a DVD with a transfer that is as good as anything I have ever seen, but with a bassless mono track that I cannot turn up to acceptable levels.
The 5.1 track's replacement of gunshots with sounds that are not even close to the original is so distracting to me, I am unable to forget about it. The missing music just intensifies it. When I see a film I like just once, I will forever remember the music and the sounds. It's just a gift I have (maybe a curse these days). Most people are not like this. They see a film and forget. I do not and the alterations of soundtracks are particularly hard for me to handle. When done right (Paramount is best at this), they actually are pleasing. When done wrong, they are a real downer.
Question: Would anybody be complaining if the 5.1 track were not missing those music cues and had sound effects that were not different from the originals? If the gunshots and other signature sound effects sounded the same? I doubt it very much.
------------------
www.deceptions.net/superman
[Edited last by Matt_Stevens on October 03, 2001 at 09:48 PM]
 

Reginald Trent

Screenwriter
Joined
Feb 18, 2000
Messages
1,313
Some people don't want anything new included on DVDs with the possible exception of anamorphic enhancement. I say this because this thread reminds me of the one a year or so ago about inclusion of the audio track heard during TV broadcast. Because some people do not want to play profanity with certain audiences. Those opposed were up in arms stating that it should not be included under any circumstances even though the original audio track was also on the same DVD.
Like I said some people just do not want anything new included.
BTW Perhaps this might help some handle the T-1 DVD soundtrack better. Look at it as if these are the INTENDED soundtracks for the DVD version. Even though it differs from the INTENDED version for VHS and LD.
wink.gif

[Edited last by Reginald Trent on October 03, 2001 at 10:15 PM]
 

Rob Tomlin

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2000
Messages
4,506
This is fundamentally a difference of taste, and while differences of taste can be debated, it's virtually impossible to prove them right or wrong. What inevitably happens in these threads about remixes, though, is that one or more people who dislike a new mix want to reach beyond matters of taste for some sort of "objective" justification for their views. And that's usually when the thread goes downhill.
Very well said. And I guess that is pretty much what I was getting at...i.e., why cant this thread simply be a discussion of which mix is better, based on our individual preferences, instead of using arguments making analogies to Pan and Scan or Directors Cuts? I think that was the original intent at the beginning of this thread, not to discuss whether doing a new mix is proper, but whether THIS one was done right!?
 

Dan Hitchman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 11, 1999
Messages
2,712
I give the new soundtrack a B+ If I were in Gary Rydstrom's shoes I'd have kept the dialog tracks (restored) and everything else would have been brand new: foley, sound effects, music (by Brad Fidel), etc. (kinda like Das Boot). This would have been as kick ass a soundtrack as the newest digital movies, with a 24 bit DTS-ES Discrete 6.1 encoding.
I'd have still placed the original mono track on the disc for the "purists" of course.
To keep it mono, though, would have been a mistake. You want one and two to match up as closely as possible.
Dan
------------------
Stop HDCP and 5C-- Your rights are at risk!
 

Kwang Suh

Supporting Actor
Joined
Sep 4, 1999
Messages
849
Yeeesh. All I know is that I like this DVD, and I enjoy the 5.1 mix. Sorry, but if you feel bad that I enjoy it, it's your own fault.
 

Sean Oneil

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 19, 2001
Messages
931
I loved the new mix. I thought it was perfectly subtle, and the gunshots may not have sounded as BIG as the old mono track at times, but they sure sounded more realistic. They also tended to sound more correct in relation to the environments that they were being fired within (a gunshot fired outdoors no longer has a huge boomey echo to it, etc...). The music was much more immersive, and the track always seemed to have more 'life' to it. The new 5.1 track still 'feels' like the original Terminator track to me, and I felt it enhanced the film.
Based upon everything I had read on the web about this new mix before having the chance to listen to it myself, I was expecting a disaster.
I was pleasantly surprised.
 

Karl Englebright

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Feb 9, 1999
Messages
122
Why is this thread getting so heated? Don't they provide the mono soundtrack also? If you prefer the original mono soundtrack,then by all means watch the movie that way!!!
It sounds like providing the 5.1 soundtrack didn't affect the quality of the video so by all means go ahead and include for those that want to listen to it.
Just listen to the one you prefer! Isn't it nice to have a choice?
 

Rob Tomlin

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2000
Messages
4,506
If you prefer the original mono soundtrack,then by all means watch the movie that way!!!
Don't worry, we will!
Does that mean that we can't discuss the merits of the new 5.1 remix? This is a discussion forum about Home Theater isn't it?
 

Karl Englebright

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Feb 9, 1999
Messages
122
Actually Rob I was agreeing with one of your posts:
"why cant this thread simply be a discussion of which mix is better, based on our individual preferences, instead of using arguments making analogies to Pan and Scan or Directors Cuts? I think that was the original intent at the beginning of this thread, not to discuss whether doing a new mix is proper, but whether THIS one was done right!?"
My "Why is this thread getting so heated" question was actually a comment about people arguing if a new mix is "proper", rather than stating why they like or not like the new Terminator mix. Sorry if I was too vague...
 

Matt_Stevens

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 3, 2000
Messages
747
Why is this thread getting so heated? Don't they provide the mono soundtrack also? If you prefer the original mono soundtrack,then by all means watch the movie that way!!!
The problem is, and this has been mentioned numerous times throughout this thread and others... The included mono soundtrack is lacking in bass, suffers from distortion and sounds vastly inferior to the original mono track on the first DVD version, the laserdiscs, and even the VHS versions. That is not acceptable. We now have a choice of watching an inferior, non-anamorphic transfer along with a damn good mono soundtrack, or watch a superior transfer, but with a mono soundtrack that sounds aweful. Or, the remix, which many of us can't stand.
It just amazes me that so much effort was put into this release, but yet they couldn't even get the stupid original soundtrack right. It's infuriating to those of us who hate the remix.
And no, I do not hate all remixes. I like 90% of them. The 90% that sound like the originals, only in 5.1. The other 10% don't sound anything like the originals and it is terribly distracting.
------------------
www.deceptions.net/superman
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,749
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top