-

Jump to content



Photo

7.1 DVDs


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
23 replies to this topic

#1 of 24 Bruce_S

Bruce_S

    Second Unit

  • 322 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2001

Posted September 29 2002 - 07:49 AM

Are there any dvd's encoded w/7.1 yet? If so, which titles?
I guess, soon the studios will be 're-releasing' movies in that format.


thanks,
bruce

#2 of 24 Geoff_D

Geoff_D

    Supporting Actor

  • 890 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 18 2002

Posted September 29 2002 - 11:12 AM

FYI, any "7.1" amps you see are simply taking the existing centre rear channel and splitting it into two, which is mainly on THX-spec amps (it's a THX requirement for EX/ES playback). This also true for most cinema EX/ES installations as well.

Unless I'm very much mistaken, and there's a new format out in the States on dvd that hasn't made it to Britain yet, there's no such thing as 7.1 dvds. But I could be wrong. There is an eight-channel cinema sound format, Sony's SDDS, but this has not (yet!) been released on any home video formats. High-end Yamaha amps can also drive an extra pair of fronts specifically for the company's own DSP sound enhancements, but this doesn't need specially encoded software.

#3 of 24 Jason Adams

Jason Adams

    Supporting Actor

  • 631 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2002

Posted September 29 2002 - 11:47 AM

Quote:
There is an eight-channel cinema sound format, Sony's SDDS, but this has not (yet!) been released on any home video formats


Well yeah, but the problem is that SDDS is uncompressed, and would be insane to put on DVD just yet.


#4 of 24 Jeff Kleist

Jeff Kleist

    Executive Producer

  • 11,286 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 04 1999

Posted September 29 2002 - 11:58 AM

Sony has publically stated they have no intention of bringing SDDS to the home. It's already too crowded with DD/DTS

There will not be anything other than DD EX/DTS ES for a VERY VERY long time to come

#5 of 24 Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted September 29 2002 - 03:19 PM

Quote:
Are there any dvd's encoded w/7.1 yet?

There is no 7.1 format for home video.

Quote:
SDDS is uncompressed,

No it isn't. SDDS uses the same ATRAC compression scheme used in Sony's minidisc format.

M.
COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists

#6 of 24 Adam Barratt

Adam Barratt

    Screenwriter

  • 2,344 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 1998

Posted September 29 2002 - 10:06 PM

DVD permits up to eight channels of PCM information, although there are no DVD players equipped with the necessary internal processing to implement this, and of course no software. Considering the space this soundtrack would consume, we will never see them on DVD-Video.

MPEG came the closest to actual 7.1-channel sound on DVD, and there are domestic processors (Meridian make several off the top of my head) available that will actually output true 7.1 (five front, two rear plus LFE; the same configuration as SDDS-8) if they ever come across an MPEG 7.1 soundtrack. Again, there is no software, but these systems are otherwise ready to go 7.1 today.

Adam

#7 of 24 Geoff_D

Geoff_D

    Supporting Actor

  • 890 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 18 2002

Posted September 30 2002 - 06:57 AM

Quote:
There will not be anything other than DD EX/DTS ES for a VERY VERY long time to come.


Call me crazy, but with high-capacity, high-definition optical disc formats just around the corner, and with people like Tomlinson Holman touting his 10.2 system around, I think that an extra centre rear channel (or two) is but the start.

#8 of 24 Johnny G

Johnny G

    Supporting Actor

  • 791 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 12 2000

Posted September 30 2002 - 07:02 AM

what is Logic 7 from Lexicon as used on Fellowship of the Ring DVD?

#9 of 24 LennyP

LennyP

    Supporting Actor

  • 587 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2002

Posted September 30 2002 - 08:15 AM

10.2? You gotta be kididng me. What you gotta hang yourself up in the air and place a couple of speakers below as well? Yeah! Why don't you do that! And tape a subwoofer to each of your ears directly with duct tape, that should rock! Posted Image Posted Image
Top: 1-10 | 11-20 | Complete Archives | Discs: 1397
New R1: Cube SE | Cube² | Noir Vol.1 | .hack//Sign Vol.1 | RahXephon Vol.1 | Assassins | Judge Dredd | One Hour Photo | Unfaithful

#10 of 24 MikeEckman

MikeEckman

    Screenwriter

  • 1,087 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 11 2001

Posted September 30 2002 - 08:30 AM

I dont understand how a .2 LFE would work. The whole point of LFE is to be non-directional, so it wouldnt matter where you put the other sub. If all you wanted was more bass, you can just daisy chain another sub onto your existing one...you woudlnt need an actual second .1 channel to accomplish that.

And I can understand two front center channels, but what would be the point of two rear center channels, what percentage of DVDs already out would actually accurately have the proper imaging for 4 surround sound channels? I can understand 3, but an additional rear center just sounds excessive.

Just my .02.
Mike Eckman
Chicago Heights, IL
Music Webpage: http://www.metalreviewcentre.com
Car Webpage: http://www.metalrevi...com/transam.htm

#11 of 24 GregK

GregK

    Supporting Actor

  • 956 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 22 2000

Posted September 30 2002 - 08:52 AM

Quote:
what is Logic 7 from Lexicon as used on Fellowship of the Ring DVD?

This indicates the 2.0 Surround track is L7 encoded, meaning if you have a Lexicon or HK receiver with Logic 5 or 7 decoding, you can matrix decode the split surrounds. L7 encoded tracks are supposed to be Dolby Surround compatible. Now one may ask "why encode the 2-channel track in L7?", as anyone with a Lex or HK receiver will also be able to playback the superior (discrete) DD 5.1 track.


But back to the subject of "7.1", don't discount the overhead "height" channel just yet. Dolby and at least one major film have dabbled with this additional channel already.

#12 of 24 DaveBB

DaveBB

    Supporting Actor

  • 792 posts
  • Join Date: May 24 1999

Posted September 30 2002 - 09:19 AM

Quote:
But back to the subject of "7.1", don't discount the overhead "height" channel just yet. Dolby and at least one major film have dabbled with this additional channel already.

Posted Image ??? What film is that ??? Posted Image


#13 of 24 Damin J Toell

Damin J Toell

    Producer

  • 3,761 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 07 2001

Posted September 30 2002 - 09:57 AM

Quote:
??? What film is that ???


We Were Soldiers is the one that I know of....

DJ

#14 of 24 Jordan_E

Jordan_E

    Screenwriter

  • 2,233 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 03 2002

Posted September 30 2002 - 11:02 AM

I read that online as well and thought, "If they somehow manage to make that for home theaters, my wife will kill me trying to hang speakers from the ceiling!" Posted Image
And you believe, at heart, everyone's a killer...

#15 of 24 Dave E H

Dave E H

    Supporting Actor

  • 829 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 23 2002

Posted September 30 2002 - 11:28 AM

Oy 10.2? I guess my HT right now could handle two more speakers, but that's pushing it. 7.1 works ok in my space and I could put small speakers in the other part of the room, but no room for other full-range speakers.

#16 of 24 John_Berger

John_Berger

    Screenwriter

  • 2,489 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 01 2001

Posted October 01 2002 - 02:41 AM

I'm sorry, but this incessant desire for more and more channels is really starting to get ridiculous.

No one can deny that 5.1 is better than 2.

I have a difficult time believing that 6.1 is so unbelievably better than 5.1. (Oooh! A center rear! Wow! Posted Image )

Now 7.1 or at least 5.1.1 (the extra .1 for height) is a very intriguing prospect. Yes, adding a height channel will certainly produce a more enveloping environment and create a 3D environment that the current 2D configurations cannot provide.

But 10.2 is just bizarre.

Am I missing something or is my practical side simply winning out over my "ooohs and aaahs" side?

#17 of 24 Geoff_D

Geoff_D

    Supporting Actor

  • 890 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 18 2002

Posted October 01 2002 - 07:28 AM

EX (I refuse to call it 6.1) isn't the most earth shattering experience, more a subtle enhancement than anything else. But I'm still glad I've got it. And as for two centre rears, studies have shown that when sounds emanate from directly behind the viewer, the brain can interpret these sounds as coming from the front. (Which is why we are told to put our rears at the sides of the room, rather than the back).

THX recommend two centre rears set at an angle, rather than a single rear speaker, to combat this odd psycho-acoustic effect. But it's still the same centre signal split into two. And Dolby obviously don't have the same hang-ups as THX, as they're certifying single-rear channel amps left, right, and err...centre. Posted Image

And regarding 10.2, hey, I'm just the messenger. In case you're interested, Holman's system consists of five fronts (Left, right, centre, and a mid left and mid right to go between the left and right fronts and the centre), two front height channels (one left, one right) three rears (Rear left and right, plus a single rear centre), plus two subs. Practical? Not for the average HT nut on this forum. But one day, one day...

#18 of 24 Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted October 01 2002 - 07:33 AM

Quote:
EX (I refuse to call it 6.1)

Bravo! Posted Image

M.
COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists

#19 of 24 Jeff Kleist

Jeff Kleist

    Executive Producer

  • 11,286 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 04 1999

Posted October 01 2002 - 07:44 AM

I think the point of the ".2" is to have a seperate sub for front and rears

#20 of 24 Damin J Toell

Damin J Toell

    Producer

  • 3,761 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 07 2001

Posted October 01 2002 - 08:07 AM

Quote:
No one can deny that 5.1 is better than 2.


That depends on what you mean by "better."

DJ


Back to Archived Threads 2001-2004



Forum Nav Content I Follow