Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.


Photo
DVD Reviews

HTF REVIEW: The Sound of Music - 40th Anniversary Edition



  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#1 of 79 OFFLINE   Michael Osadciw

Michael Osadciw

    Screenwriter



  • 1,329 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 2003
  • Real Name:Michael Osadciw

Posted November 13 2005 - 04:42 PM


Michael Osadciw

THX/ISF Professional Video Calibrator

Video Contributor

CANADA HiFi Magazine


#2 of 79 OFFLINE   Mike Frezon

Mike Frezon

    Studio Mogul



  • 32,977 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 09 2001
  • LocationRensselaer, NY

Posted November 13 2005 - 05:11 PM

Thanks, Michael!

One of the great films of all time. For your enthusiasm it seems like Fox has "gone all out". I know there have been questions, but it sounds like you were generally pleased.

I'm guessing since my viewing area is much smaller than yours, some of those issues won't be issues at all. Posted Image

Although in Mr. Harris' thread on TSoM, there was some doubt about whether a new high-def transfer was, indeed, used for this release. I'm glad you could confirm that it was.

There's Jessie the yodeling cowgirl. Bullseye, he's Woody's horse. Pete the old prospector. And, Woody, the man himself.Of course, it's time for Woody's RoundUp. He's the very best! He's the rootinest, tootinest cowboy in the wild, wild west!


HTF Rules | HTF Mission Statement | Father of the Bride

Dieting with my Dog & Heart to Heart/Hand in Paw by Peggy Frezon


#3 of 79 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 8,126 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted November 14 2005 - 12:49 AM

Michael... What leads you to believe that this transfer is based upon a restored film element? RAH

"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#4 of 79 OFFLINE   Paul Linfesty

Paul Linfesty

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 216 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2001

Posted November 14 2005 - 03:45 AM

I'm a little confused by this, because from a variety of different sources I have gathered that SOM was originally a 4.0 mix (L,C,R,S) and that the 70mm 6-track prints were created by "spreading out" the three stage channels to five (combining L and C for the LC and C and R for the RC channels, with volume reduced for both). In such cases, were new 6-track masters created, or is this type of mix done on the fly, at the time the individual print was sounded?

#5 of 79 OFFLINE   DaViD Boulet

DaViD Boulet

    Lead Actor



  • 8,805 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 1999

Posted November 14 2005 - 05:12 AM

Thanks for this wonderful and very detailed review.

Ugh...now I'm tempted to get this new DVD knowing that, while not perfect, it does represent an improvement over the previous version which was very difficult to tolerate on my projector.

I also look forward to clarification on the nature of the source for this new DVD. Let me commend Fox for the presentation of the historic mix properly presented in the best manner possible in 4.0 DD on this disc (though DTS would have been welcome).

One thing I noticed...the color, contrast, and general look of the screen shots for this DVD (Ron's original post) look very much like the captures from DVDReview's very first look at the HD transfer prior to the first DVD compression job. That leads me to suspect that the image on this DVD could have resulted from a more faithful adaptation of that original film-tape transfer versus the previous overly-processed DVD.

Despite the "sharper" look of the old DVD...if you want to see how the new image clearly has more real image detail...look at the stripes in Julie's dress in that opening shot. They get muddled from the HF ringing in the old DVD but come through distinctly in the new image (details in her face are so much more natural in this new version). It's definitely an improvement...(but I wonder how much better it ought to look)...

Thanks to Ron for taking these screen captures from this thread:

http://www.hometheat....hreadid=244309



Old DVD, New DVD, cap from film-tape article (SD/LD):

Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image


One more:

Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Be an Original Aspect Ratio Advocate

Supporter of 1080p24 video and lossless 24 bit audio.

#6 of 79 OFFLINE   Jeff Whitford

Jeff Whitford

    Screenwriter



  • 1,267 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1998

Posted November 14 2005 - 05:27 AM

I'll stick with the original thanks.
Jeff Whitford
Hometheater Guru ?

#7 of 79 OFFLINE   Damin J Toell

Damin J Toell

    Producer



  • 3,762 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 07 2001
  • Real Name:Damin J. Toell
  • LocationBrooklyn, NY

Posted November 14 2005 - 06:05 AM



You mean DVDReview.com. Posted Image

DJ

#8 of 79 OFFLINE   DaViD Boulet

DaViD Boulet

    Lead Actor



  • 8,805 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 1999

Posted November 14 2005 - 06:24 AM

corrected... :b
Be an Original Aspect Ratio Advocate

Supporter of 1080p24 video and lossless 24 bit audio.

#9 of 79 OFFLINE   Jefferson

Jefferson

    Supporting Actor



  • 979 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 23 2002

Posted November 14 2005 - 10:20 AM

I wont use the word "forced", but will say i am compelled to buy this release because of the new interviews/commentary/reunion, etc. Those choice bits alone are worth my buying it. Julie is my favorite thing.

#10 of 79 OFFLINE   Mike Frezon

Mike Frezon

    Studio Mogul



  • 32,977 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 09 2001
  • LocationRensselaer, NY

Posted November 14 2005 - 11:54 AM

Hey Jefferson!

"Compelled" is a good word. I'm falling on the side which thinks that much like Ben-Hur and Wizard of Oz, the end result of TSoM will be an improvement. And, that even though the many experts here at the HTF are critical of much of the authoring of the disc, its going to look a lot better than the 5-Star. And, as you noted, there's always the new extras to help rationalize things a bit further! Posted Image

My system is not near up to the standards of the reviewers and others here at the forum...but the 5-Star TSoM is one of the few discs that even I would look at and be greatly disappointed. I'm hoping this fixes that!

The question now is...do I feel "compelled" to go after Oklahoma! and State Fair?! Posted Image

There's Jessie the yodeling cowgirl. Bullseye, he's Woody's horse. Pete the old prospector. And, Woody, the man himself.Of course, it's time for Woody's RoundUp. He's the very best! He's the rootinest, tootinest cowboy in the wild, wild west!


HTF Rules | HTF Mission Statement | Father of the Bride

Dieting with my Dog & Heart to Heart/Hand in Paw by Peggy Frezon


#11 of 79 OFFLINE   RobertSiegel

RobertSiegel

    Screenwriter



  • 1,086 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2004

Posted November 14 2005 - 12:11 PM

Wow, after seeing these comparisons, the new one looks much more fuzzy, but definately cleaner (less that darn enhancement) and details are much better. Could that sharpness from the previous version have been all enhancement? If it was they succeeded in sharpness but that probably caused the very things we all hated about that transfer. After studying the posted frames, though, the new version looks much better. Look at Julie's dress, the detail of the stripes is there now. Too bad they couldn't get rid of that halo on the right side of her face, I assume they could have. So, again Fox has gotten another 20.00 out of me (actually 14.99 at Target). m I'll definately be awake so I can get to Target at 9am, and spend the rest of the day with my Sony VPL-11ht projector.A good watching at 110" will show what the disc really holds. Can't wait for the HD version. When this movie comes out in HD, I hope to have enough saved for Sony's V-100 projector that just came out, with fullo hd resolution. I'll have to go without food for a while, though. I am buying only necessities now on dvd, because hi-def is sooooooo close, and I am tired of double/triple dipping..

Classics on Blu-ray is what it is all about!


#12 of 79 OFFLINE   RobertSiegel

RobertSiegel

    Screenwriter



  • 1,086 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2004

Posted November 14 2005 - 12:12 PM

I forgot to ask, for those that have the disc, how is the fidelity of the soundtrack? I always felt the high end was never that great before on the last dvd or any previous.

Classics on Blu-ray is what it is all about!


#13 of 79 OFFLINE   Yumbo

Yumbo

    Screenwriter



  • 2,243 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 1999

Posted November 14 2005 - 12:16 PM

based on the opening mountai n shot, the EE is abound aplenty...not our favourite thing Posted Image

this is on the 50" plasma. colours seem to be ok.

will do a PJ test later.

Posted Image for now.

#14 of 79 OFFLINE   DaViD Boulet

DaViD Boulet

    Lead Actor



  • 8,805 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 1999

Posted November 14 2005 - 02:01 PM

Yes and Yes.
Be an Original Aspect Ratio Advocate

Supporter of 1080p24 video and lossless 24 bit audio.

#15 of 79 OFFLINE   TedD

TedD

    Supporting Actor



  • 698 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 09 2001

Posted November 14 2005 - 02:19 PM

Sharpness <> Detail. Two totally different concepts, frequently confused by those transferring from film to video and mastering said video. In my opinion, while the new version is not the EE disaster of the previous release, there is a significant lack of real detail in the video source due to the state (really the lack thereof) of the art at the time the film element was scanned. In the new edition, they lifted as much as possible of the sharpness from the transfer as they could while still maintaining an acceptable level of perceived "detail" in the image. Obviously, some think that the retained detail is not sufficient. A "new" issue that has surfaced that was previously hidden by excessive EE is a color misregistration issue, possibly created by the film to video transfer, or by the color correction process. So we have moved from a total disaster to a so-so effort when SOM is viewed on a large screen. While I'm glad for the improvements, I am sad that it still isn't as good as it could have been. I guess we should be thankful it's not the disaster that the Todd-AO "Oklahoma!" turned out to be. If you like R&H and want to see what the detail level of the transfer could have been, watch the 1962 version of "State Fair". Ted

#16 of 79 OFFLINE   RobertSiegel

RobertSiegel

    Screenwriter



  • 1,086 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2004

Posted November 14 2005 - 04:06 PM

One would think that this being as important to Fox as Wizard of Oz is to MGM (and Warner), EXTREME CARE would have been taken, especially since they never got the transfer of this movie right. They certainly have made enough money from the video sales alone to take the film and correct every frame. I am hearing the scratch remains in the opening scene, and the halo around Julie in the opening scene. To me, there just is no excuse anymore wuith the wonderful transfers we are seeing. I am still excited. If it's better, I am happy for now until the blu-ray version, which hopefully will be the finale, the long awaited beautiful transfer of my favorite movie, which I yhave seen over 300 times since 1965. I've been reading that this transfer was taken from the negative.(?)....well, if there is any movie that Fox has made repeated prints from it's this one, perhaps this is the best that remains from the negative which, considering the movie is so popular (with all of its reissues and 70mm special showings),many runs were made and it simply faded some and was worn. But if this is the case, couldn't digital work be done, or would the result be like the previous dvd?

Classics on Blu-ray is what it is all about!


#17 of 79 OFFLINE   TonyD

TonyD

    Who do we think I am?



  • 16,605 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 1999
  • Real Name:Tony D.
  • LocationDisney World and Universal Florida

Posted November 14 2005 - 04:08 PM

i'm wondering about this question from mr Harris. "Michael... What leads you to believe that this transfer is based upon a restored film element? RAH "
facebook.com/whotony

#18 of 79 OFFLINE   Michael Osadciw

Michael Osadciw

    Screenwriter



  • 1,329 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 2003
  • Real Name:Michael Osadciw

Posted November 14 2005 - 07:00 PM

Tony Watch this space for an update. Mike

Michael Osadciw

THX/ISF Professional Video Calibrator

Video Contributor

CANADA HiFi Magazine


#19 of 79 OFFLINE   Yumbo

Yumbo

    Screenwriter



  • 2,243 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 1999

Posted November 14 2005 - 07:52 PM

ok comparing THX and Anniversary editions, adjusted the Marantz player. setups can affect results greatly. they seem to be the same print, same dirt specs on both. THX: Lots of EE, high contrast, less detail, lots of colour shifting. Strobing effect obvious during opening credits. LFE flag. Anniversary: Less EE, lower contrast, more detail, slight strobing. No LFE flag. Better colour. Slight centre channel strain. I'd favour the Anniversary edition, though the soft halo glow scenes can be jarring. Projection at 185" is acceptable. Will check the 50" plasma player settings. I switched players 3 times on PJ and compared 10 chapters. enjoy! time to test War of the worlds!

#20 of 79 OFFLINE   Scott Kimball

Scott Kimball

    Screenwriter



  • 1,500 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2000

Posted November 14 2005 - 11:51 PM

I'm going to have to buy... I avoided the last release. Wish they had done a better job, though. -Scott





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: DVD Reviews

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users