A Few Words About A few words about...™ Oklahoma! -- in Blu-ray (2 Viewers)

[Robert Crawford]

What wrong with the sound in the Todd-ao Blu? It's awful...and the image is so perfect..it makes even more noticeable.

Nothing wrong with the sound of my BD.

 

[Steve Tannehill]

Nothing wrong with the sound of my BD.

People are incapable of turning the volume up...

 

[Will Krupp]

Anyone that "thinks" they could make a direct comparison between the two, is just fooling themselves.

All I asked was which of the two was CLOSER to the original look.

 

[Techman707]

What wrong with the sound in the Todd-ao Blu? It's awful...and the image is so perfect..it makes even more noticeable.

Although I watched the Todd/AO Blu-ray of "Oklahoma" for picture quality, for health reasons, I have yet to be in a good position to enable me to evaluate the sound quality. Your description of the sound quality being "awful" isn't really specific enough of what to look for.-LOL However, I read comments on MANY older films that were originally released beginning in the 50's as 4 track magnetic stereo (and even some that were originally released as optical Perspecta Sound, including the 1954 "stereo" re-release of GWTW). What I think we all need to remember is that these films are NEVER going to have the sound quality of today's movies. Even with all the digital tools available, there's just so much that can be done.....and for the most part, they have done an EXCELLENT job tweaking the sound on many of those classic film's sound tracks.

As for my own opinion of older film sound quality In theatres, the BIGGEST disappointment for me was when they struck new 70mm "Dolby prints" for ALL 70mm re-releases and castrated the "left center" and "right center" channels and replaced them with "bass enhancement". Anyone who has ever seen a 70mm movie on a properly aligned (EQ and levels) system knows WHY they HAD "left center and "right center". You could close your eyes and follow a person that was speaking as they walked across the screen and you could literally point to where on the screen they were with your eyes closed. If the EQ was good, you couldn't tell where the handoff was from speaker to speaker it was so smooth. The BEST thing that Dolby did was to FINALLY get that academy curve removed. Without any Dolby processor, that alone made all the difference in the world.

 

[AnthonyClarke]

The sound on the new ToddAO version is excellent. But it is set at way too low a level, meaning volume has to be cranked up way further than for most discs .. in fact, more so than on any other disc I have.This is an error.
It makes it impossible to toggle between soundtrack and the commentary track as one has to waste time lowering volume levels before doing so, or being blasted out of the room .. and then having to lift volume levels again when switching back. A bit of elementary care in setting levels would have proudced a far better result for everyone. I expect this fault will be remedied if/when they ever get around to issuing a new pressing.

 

[Techman707]

.......I only realized this the other day and have been trying to figure it out myself but it's kind of driving me crazy so here goes (please bear with me):



Which one is right?

........Is it a subtle version of the dreaded "soap opera" effect? There is NO frame interpolation so that's not the issue.

Since you seem to be very agitated with everyone that answers you for some reason, I'll just answer exactly what you want and NOTHING MORE. However, when you previously posted that you had already asked for a second opinion BEFORE you posted your question on May 14th. When you originally asked the question you said: "I only realized this the other day and have been trying to figure it out myself but it's kind of driving me crazy so here goes (please bear with me):" To me, myself doesn't indicate getting a second opinion.

In answer to your question about the 1955 30fps "look". It did have a slight resemblance to the dreaded "soap opera effect". The most striking thing about seeing 70mm 30Fps is that there is absolutely NO FLICKER, which might account for the slight Soap Opera Effect.

 

[Will Krupp]

Since you seem to be very agitated with everyone that answers you for some reason, I'll just answer exactly what you want and NOTHING MORE. However, when you previously posted that you had already asked for a second opinion BEFORE you posted your question on May 14th. When you originally asked the question you said: "I only realized this the other day and have been trying to figure it out myself but it's kind of driving me crazy so here goes (please bear with me):" To me, myself doesn't indicate getting a second opinion.

In answer to your question about the 1955 30fps "look". It did have a slight resemblance to the dreaded "soap opera effect". The most striking thing about seeing 70mm 30Fps is that there is absolutely NO FLICKER, which might account for the slight Soap Opera Effect.

Yes, I was trying to figure out "myself" which one was closer to the original look. Since my partner has no real interest or concern as to which "look" the film would have had in 1955, he wasn't much help beyond confirming that they looked different. Is that clear to you, now, Perry Mason?

Now this will be my last word on the subject because quite frankly I'm sick to death of it...my agitation stems not from people answering my question (which they did DAYS ago, and very nicely) but from one poster who simply answered me by saying I probably wasn't really seeing any difference, and now from you, whose sole answer was akin to "video is never gonna look like film and you're fooling yourself if you think it will" which is completely out of left field. not helpful, and not an assumption I ever made. When I pointed out to you that I was only asking which look was "closer," you're on me for being agitated and pulling a quote to, I don't know, call into question whether I really asked for a second opinion at all. Thanks for nothing.

 

[Steve Tannehill]

This thread is getting very tiresome and has gone way off topic...

 

[Techman707]

Yes, I was trying to figure out "myself" which one was closer to the original look. Since my partner has no real interest or concern as to which "look" the film would have had in 1955, he wasn't much help beyond confirming that they looked different. Is that clear to you, now, Perry Mason?

Now this will be my last word on the subject because quite frankly I'm sick to death of it...my agitation stems not from people answering my question (which they did DAYS ago, and very nicely) but from one poster who simply answered me by saying I probably wasn't really seeing any difference, and now from you, whose sole answer was akin to "video is never gonna look like film and you're fooling yourself if you think it will" which is completely out of left field. not helpful, and not an assumption I ever made. When I pointed out to you that I was only asking which look was "closer," you're on me for being agitated and pulling a quote to, I don't know, call into question whether I really asked for a second opinion at all. Thanks for nothing.

You're quite welcome! Good Luck.

 

[Mike Frezon]

This thread is getting very tiresome and has gone way off topic...

Yes, sir. Enough with the back-and-forth.

Let's get back on track, fellas.

 

[WilliamMcK]

Just to put a word in for those of us who ARE disappointed in the sound quality... I should mention that at least in my case it's not about the volume... yes, the volume has to be raised for this disc... and when you do, the music sounds pretty glorious -- however, the performers' voices seem constricted -- the music sounds rich, expansive and immersive... the voices sound as if they're coming from a far narrower and inferior sound system... It's disconcerting! I readily admit that I do not have a sophisticated sound system (a two speaker analog Bose "Cinemate") -- so it's quite possible that the mix on the blu-ray is sabotaged by my system... however, I have no similar issue with any of my other blu-rays. If Fox was going to use a mix that would only be appropriate for a sophisticated high-end sound system, they should have at least included an alternate track that would sound "right" for lower-end models...

 

[Mark Booth]

What wrong with the sound in the Todd-ao Blu? It's awful...and the image is so perfect..it makes even more noticeable.

Sounds terrific on my system. I just had to crank up the master volume about 10db more than normal.

Mark

 

[JPCinema]

Yes, " the performers voices sound constricted"
I had 8 friends over to watch it...and the comment was..."Ken what's wrong with the sound?"
I wish the Todd-ao version had the sound of the Cinemascope version.

I put on my old laser disc of the Todd-ao version and it sounds wonderful!!

 

[Rob_Ray]

Just to put a word in for those of us who ARE disappointed in the sound quality... I should mention that at least in my case it's not about the volume... yes, the volume has to be raised for this disc... and when you do, the music sounds pretty glorious -- however, the performers' voices seem constricted -- the music sounds rich, expansive and immersive... the voices sound as if they're coming from a far narrower and inferior sound system... It's disconcerting! I readily admit that I do not have a sophisticated sound system (a two speaker analog Bose "Cinemate") -- so it's quite possible that the mix on the blu-ray is sabotaged by my system... however, I have no similar issue with any of my other blu-rays. If Fox was going to use a mix that would only be appropriate for a sophisticated high-end sound system, they should have at least included an alternate track that would sound "right" for lower-end models...

This is exactly how it sounds on my system and I only have a generic 5.1 sound system. The music sounds fine (although I'd say the laserdisc sound is a bit richer) but the voices may as well be coming from a old transistor radio.

 

[bigshot]

I had absolutely no problem with the dialogue, but I have a very good center channel speaker.

 

[john a hunter]

Yes, " the performers voices sound constricted"
I had 8 friends over to watch it...and the comment was..."Ken what's wrong with the sound?"
I wish the Todd-ao version had the sound of the Cinemascope version.

I put on my old laser disc of the Todd-ao version and it sounds wonderful!!

Oklahoma has a superb soundtrack. It was transferred at a lower level than usual to preserve the full dynamic range. All you need do to experience this is to have a setup that can deal with this dynamic range-amps and speakers. Fox have raised the bar and should be praised for doing so!

 

[Mark Booth]

I had absolutely no problem with the dialogue, but I have a very good center channel speaker.

Ditto!

Mark

 

[Robert Crawford]

I had absolutely no problem with the dialogue, but I have a very good center channel speaker.

Same here with my Paradigm Studio speakers.

 

[AnthonyClarke]

I agree with the notes about hte clarity of the dialogue .. it's all there, crisp and clear. It's the fact that it has to be cranked up so much, at variance with the commentary track, which bugs me. I've tried it with my Quad system which pumps out approx 150 watts per channel into handmade UK Neat speakers ... I just think they've gone overboard in placing it at an absurdly low level. Yes, we can adjust for it. but we shouldn't have to be setting such high amp output for standard volume levels. I have plenty of audio sources -- DVD-Audio and full orchestral SACDs -- which certainly match or exceed Oklahoma for overall dynamics, but NONE of them demand these output settings.

 

[rsmithjr]

Oklahoma has a superb soundtrack. It was transferred at a lower level than usual to preserve the full dynamic range. All you need do to experience this is to have a setup that can deal with this dynamic range-amps and speakers. Fox have raised the bar and should be praised for doing so!

I understand this theory but I don't think that the evidence supports it. If the volume is low to support a wide dynamic range without compression or distortion, then there should surely be times when the volume rises to a high level. In 3 watchings, the level never gets very high.

I am certainly able to crank up my system to allow the volume to be adequate but barely.