What's new

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
26,274
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
Adding to potential confusion, there is a whole generation or two of Onkyo receivers (and possibly other brands sharing a similar build) that cannot decode DTS-HD MA 2.0 tracks into anything other than L/R stereo. It’s a limitation of their chipset and processing. They can handle matrixed surround (or mono for that matter) just fine when it’s PCM, Dolby TrueHD, regular Dolby and regular DTS, but not DTS-HD MA. There’s nothing on the receiver to indicate that it can’t do that, though, so if you don’t know about that shortcoming you might never find out about it and just assume you’re hearing what you’re supposed to.

Separately, many of the studios and labels no longer accurately indicate on the packaging or disc menus what the track is meant to be. It’ll just say “2.0” or “2.0 stereo” which doesn’t provide the end user the detail they need to know whether or not it should be decoded as surround. In the DVD era, disc producers were much clearer about applying descriptions like “2.0 Dolby Surround” to make the provenance of the track clear.

It’s unfortunately a perfect storm of receiver quirks and incomplete labeling that has both experts and ordinary users not hearing things properly and unaware of what they’re missing.
 

sbjork

Supporting Actor
Joined
Aug 1, 2020
Messages
720
Real Name
Stephen
Adding to potential confusion, there is a whole generation or two of Onkyo receivers (and possibly other brands sharing a similar build) that cannot decode DTS-HD MA 2.0 tracks into anything other than L/R stereo. It’s a limitation of their chipset and processing. They can handle matrixed surround (or mono for that matter) just fine when it’s PCM, Dolby TrueHD, regular Dolby and regular DTS, but not DTS-HD MA. There’s nothing on the receiver to indicate that it can’t do that, though, so if you don’t know about that shortcoming you might never find out about it and just assume you’re hearing what you’re supposed to.

Separately, many of the studios and labels no longer accurately indicate on the packaging or disc menus what the track is meant to be. It’ll just say “2.0” or “2.0 stereo” which doesn’t provide the end user the detail they need to know whether or not it should be decoded as surround. In the DVD era, disc producers were much clearer about applying descriptions like “2.0 Dolby Surround” to make the provenance of the track clear.

It’s unfortunately a perfect storm of receiver quirks and incomplete labeling that has both experts and ordinary users not hearing things properly and unaware of what they’re missing.
Hell, VHS tapes were clearly labeled Dolby Surround, especially in the VHS Hi-Fi era. My first surround system used a Mitsubishi Hi-Fi deck, feeding a Yamaha Dolby Surround receiver. Worked like a charm. There was rarely any confusion or doubt, because everything was labeled properly. I think I had one or two MGM VHS tapes that weren't labeled as Hi-Fi even though they were, but those were the exception, not the rule.

Television broadcasts were often labeled as surround in their closing credits, too. Yet people today think that shows from that era were stereo only. Anyone who watches any of the Timmiverse animated series from that era, like Batman or Superman, and doesn't have their decoder engaged, is missing out.

I've always hated the Dolby Stereo/Ultra Stereo nomenclature for that reason. Yes, the mixes are matrixed into two channels, but they were never intended to be listened to that way. Dolby Surround was a better name.

I'm not surprised by studios not caring enough to identify things correctly, but I am disappointed in the boutique labels that do the same thing. They should know better.
 

Bobby Henderson

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 28, 2001
Messages
165
True Romance was released theatrically in 5.1 -- both DTS and Dolby Digital.

Incorrect. True Romance was released theatrically on Sept 10, 1993. 35mm release prints only had Dolby Stereo optical. No digital audio formats at all. Warner Bros distributed the movie. At that time Warner Bros was only supporting the Dolby Digital format on some of their releases, such as The Fugitive and Demolition Man that year. Oliver Stone's Heaven & Earth was supposed to be released with both DTS & Dolby Digital audio, but I'm pretty sure that ended up being Dolby Digital-only. It debuted in limited release on Christmas of 1993 and was released wider early in 1994.

Movie releases didn't start supporting two or more digital audio formats until the Summer of 1994, starting on June 10 with the release of Speed (DTS-SR•D) and City Slickers II (DTS-SDDS). Other big hits like True Lies (DTS-SR•D-70mm SR mag) and Forrest Gump (DTS-SR•D) followed. Warner Bros' first release supporting SR•D and DTS was Natural Born Killers that Summer. The following year, 1995, some studios started supporting all three digital audio formats. Die Hard With a Vengeance was the first (via two print inventories, some with SR•D-DTS and others with SDDS). Mortal Kombat was another with multiple inventories. True Quad Format prints (SR/ SR•D/DTS/SDDS on the same print) didn't start appearing until that fall. One print of Strange Days that I personally inspected had some reels with quad format tracks and other reels lacking SDDS data. Studios like Warner Bros and Disney went through a SR•D-SDDS phase of release policy. Interview with the Vampire was initially advertised as a SR•D-DTS release, but then switched to SR•D-SDDS. WB went quad format with Twister in 1996. The Mouse House finally went quad format with Con-Air in 1997.
 

sbjork

Supporting Actor
Joined
Aug 1, 2020
Messages
720
Real Name
Stephen
Incorrect. True Romance was released theatrically on Sept 10, 1993. 35mm release prints only had Dolby Stereo optical. No digital audio formats at all. Warner Bros distributed the movie. At that time Warner Bros was only supporting the Dolby Digital format on some of their releases, such as The Fugitive and Demolition Man that year. Oliver Stone's Heaven & Earth was supposed to be released with both DTS & Dolby Digital audio, but I'm pretty sure that ended up being Dolby Digital-only. It debuted in limited release on Christmas of 1993 and was released wider early in 1994.

Movie releases didn't start supporting two or more digital audio formats until the Summer of 1994, starting on June 10 with the release of Speed (DTS-SR•D) and City Slickers II (DTS-SDDS). Other big hits like True Lies (DTS-SR•D-70mm SR mag) and Forrest Gump (DTS-SR•D) followed. Warner Bros' first release supporting SR•D and DTS was Natural Born Killers that Summer. The following year, 1995, some studios started supporting all three digital audio formats. Die Hard With a Vengeance was the first (via two print inventories, some with SR•D-DTS and others with SDDS). Mortal Kombat was another with multiple inventories. True Quad Format prints (SR/ SR•D/DTS/SDDS on the same print) didn't start appearing until that fall. One print of Strange Days that I personally inspected had some reels with quad format tracks and other reels lacking SDDS data. Studios like Warner Bros and Disney went through a SR•D-SDDS phase of release policy. Interview with the Vampire was initially advertised as a SR•D-DTS release, but then switched to SR•D-SDDS. WB went quad format with Twister in 1996. The Mouse House finally went quad format with Con-Air in 1997.
I'll stand corrected, then. I'd forgotten that Warner stuck to Dolby Digital at that point, so when I read elsewhere that it was DTS as well, I didn't question that.

But when I reviewed the U.K. version of Arrow's release last year, I thought that I had checked the end credits to verify if there was an original 5.1 track, and saw a Dolby Digital logo there. Unless I imagined it, or I'm confusing it with something else. I'd have to wait until I get home tonight to look at the end credits again. As we all know, memory sucks.
 

JoshZ

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
2,243
Location
Boston
Real Name
Joshua Zyber
I'll stand corrected, then. I'd forgotten that Warner stuck to Dolby Digital at that point, so when I read elsewhere that it was DTS as well, I didn't question that.

But when I reviewed the U.K. version of Arrow's release last year, I thought that I had checked the end credits to verify if there was an original 5.1 track, and saw a Dolby Digital logo there. Unless I imagined it, or I'm confusing it with something else. I'd have to wait until I get home tonight to look at the end credits again. As we all know, memory sucks.

I just cued up my copy of the UK release from Arrow. Both the theatrical cut and director's cut have the same credits.

(Forgive the blurriness. This is a quick cell phone photo off a TV screen.)

trueromance.jpg
 

Chewbabka

Second Unit
Joined
Feb 15, 2020
Messages
308
Real Name
Joe
I've always hated the Dolby Stereo/Ultra Stereo nomenclature for that reason. Yes, the mixes are matrixed into two channels, but they were never intended to be listened to that way. Dolby Surround was a better name.

Hell, even Arrow’s packaging reads “Original uncompressed stereo audio and DTS-HD MA 5.1 surround audio”.

Misleading for the uninitiated, indeed.

Another Arrow release with a great 2.0 mix is Flash Gordon. Blows the 5.1 mix on the same disc out of the water.
 

Bobby Henderson

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 28, 2001
Messages
165
It's likely True Romance had a 6-track print master created during its original post production phase. Mag print masters would be created in post production and the 6 channel variety would keep the options open for 70mm mag audio release prints or digital audio on 35mm. If a 6-track mag print master was made for True Romance was it originally a 5.1 mix or really a 4 channel layout with one or two extra sub-bass tracks? Lots of older movies have had original 4.0, 4.1 or 4.2 mixes "blown up" to 5.1 layouts later for home video formats.

Back in 1993 I was a bit surprised there were no Dolby Digital prints of True Romance when it was first released. To be fair, Dolby Digital-equipped theaters were pretty rare at that time. 70mm equipped booths were more common, but 70mm mag prints, even back then, were really expensive. When Dances With Wolves was released late in 1990 I was really surprised it went out only in 35mm Dolby SR. There must have been some intentions to order at least a few 70mm prints for its original theatrical release, particularly its early limited run shows, but the idea got nixed.
 

OliverK

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2000
Messages
5,733
There is NO fine detail, but it’s pretty and film-like.
I am thankful to everyone involved for resisting the urge to try and create a more detailed look via excessive digital manipulation. Let people add sharpening in their own setups if they feel the need to do it.
 

titch

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
2,277
Real Name
Kevin Oppegaard
I am thankful to everyone involved for resisting the urge to try and create a more detailed look via excessive digital manipulation. Let people add sharpening in their own setups if they feel the need to do it.
Arrow Video's 4K UHD track record is unblemished. Their head of technical services and restoration, James White, deserves to be mentioned in the same league as Grover Crisp and George Feltenstein.

 

OliverK

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2000
Messages
5,733
Arrow Video's 4K UHD track record is unblemished. Their head of technical services and restoration, James White, deserves to be mentioned in the same league as Grover Crisp and George Feltenstein.

Last movie I remembered from them before True Romance was the very underwhelming The Far Country but looking at their output that one seems to have been an outlier. The vast majority of their releases are indeed very impressive and worthy of praise and they also show how it can be sustainable to release certain titles that do not sell in big numbers - even on UHD.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,744
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top