APOCALYPSE NOW: digital surround not comparable to original laserdisc's 70mm surround (1 Viewer)

[YANG]

Although lots of hard work had been put on to this title for DVD release,the remaster of 5.1 surround sound does not sound as strong as what we had heard from the laserdisc release.I am referring to the non-AC3 laserdisc release.

I had tried to listen over and over again to the "RIDE OF THE VALKRIES" attack scene over and over again,making comparison to both DVD and laserdisc release,from the lift-off to the napalm bombing...LASERDISC still sounds the best!With deeper solid bass!

 

[Michael Reuben]

I am referring to the non-AC3 laserdisc release.

That's a 2-channel PCM mix. You're comparing apples to oranges.

M.

 

[Lewis Besze]

That's a 2-channel PCM mix. You're comparing apples to oranges.

 

[bill lopez]

YANG I agree with you! I had that laserdisc and sold it to get the dvd. A lot of people in this forum said the dvd sounds better than the laserdisc though. The scene that sticks in my mind is when the tiger jumps out. On the laserdisc even though I knew what was going to happen the tiger roar makes me jump.On the dvd it's like nothing.

 

[Chris Shelly]

Hello,

I got Apocalypse Now Redux for Christmas and finely watched it yesterday. I found the Dolby Digital audiotrack lacking myself. Other then the split surrounds I noticed no benifit over the widescreen laserdisk release. The dynamic range was also lacking.

What I would like to see is a version of the film using the 70mm 6 track magnetic converted into Dolby Digital with the full dynamic range that Dolby Digital can provide. The laserdisk release used the 70mm magnetic tracks to and converted them into 2 ch Dolby Pro Logic matrix. Other then the split surrounds you get everything. I never had the opportunity to see AN Redux in the theater so I don't know if it was also lacking. It could just be a bad audio transfer. It could also be that the limitations of DD really show up in a dynamic movie like AN. Even worse compression limitations of DVD. I just remembered that its 202 minutes in length on a single DVD so it is most likely highly compressed.

Chris

 

[Mick Wright]

This thread reminds me of Widescreen Review circa '98.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

You'll also get this story from the Dec, issue of DVD & Laser Disc. He 'feels' the same way. As do most people about a DTS DVD against the same titles DTS LD. Wish it wasn't so. As DVD promised better than CD sound, and rarely delivers. Check a CD soundtrack against the DVD for yourself.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Quote:

Not on my system. A highly detailed and immersive surround field, thunderous impact where necessary, and the dialogue was the clearest I've ever heard it, even during the Valkyries sequence. If this is a "bad audio transfer", let's have more of 'em.
M.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

What would be the point? You'd be comparing completely different

transfer rates? Right?

 

[Karl Englebright]

"The point would be the industry promoted DVD to have better than LD video & better than CD sound. Are we just supposed to close our eyes & ears and except it?"

__________________________________________________ __________

Well, they delivered on the video part. On the CD part, what would you consider better? I consider the ability to provide 5.1 sound better than the 2 channel sound a CD can provide.

 

[Michael Reuben]

transfer rates? Right?

Nope. Mixes.

M.

 

[Chris Shelly]

Hello,

Actually Dolby Digital is not a very good format. We like it because it provides 6 channels of (okay 5.1) discrete audio. But from a sonic standpoint it can be very horrid. Some soundtracks just don't sound good with Dolby Digital. DTS uses less compression and should provide much better sonic capabilities. Even a good analog presentation can be better. As an example I work in a Dolby Digital equiped theater. We are playing "Lord of the Rings". The first staff screening we had we played it in Dolby Digital. The soundtrack was intense and the surrounds were very well mixed but then it sounded like something was always missing. Since we closed early on Christmas Eve and we had a staff party. I decided to have another screening. this time I ran LotR in Dolby Stereo SR. Other then going back to mono surrounds the presentation was sonicly superior.

For the most part I like Digital but I would like to have a choice and that is one thing I don't like about DVD.

Chris

 

[Michael Reuben]

Chris --
FYI, the variant of Dolby Digital used on most 5.1 DVDs has a data rate 40% greater than what is used in theaters. And data rate is only one of many factors.

For the most part I like Digital but I would like to have a choice and that is one thing I don't like about DVD.

There's always VHS!
M.

 

[Chris Shelly]

Hello,

Yeah you are correct. The mix is about 99% of it. It has been debated many times if people can hear the difference between the different compression ratio's. I can't remember what compression theaters use but I am pretty sure it is higher then on DVD because they have to fit the soundtrack between the sprocket holes. Another problem as the print ages the error rates go even higher to the point it will not play anymore.

As for VHS no thanks. The HiFi tracks on a VHS tapes can sound really nice but I have yet to have a pre-recorded tape that did not have loads of problems. I have recorded laserdisk on VHS and I could not hear the different between the the two.

Chris

 

[Michael Reuben]

I can't remember what compression theaters use but I am pretty sure it is higher then on DVD because they have to fit the soundtrack between the sprocket holes.

Theatrical DD is 320kb/ps. The soundtrack on Apocalypse Now Redux (and on most recent 5.1 DVDs except those from Warner) is 448kb/ps.

M.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

Nope. Mixes.

M. are you saying the transfer rates are the same for DVD & LD, just the "mixes" are differant?

 

[Michael Reuben]

If you consider it "meaningless" for the reason that DVD comes out on top, I will bring to your attention that that is the point, to keep 'tabs' on DVD.

I didn't say the comparison was meaningless; I said it was "frequently . . . meaningless", and I gave two reasons:
1. With fewer and fewer execptions, DVDs and LDs are not sourced from the same transfers, which means that the comparison can't measure the technical capabilities of each medium to represent a professional video master.
2. Both DVDs and LDs are intermediate representations of an original that's often left out of the comparison: the film. So while reviewers may find discrepancies between a DVD and an old LD, it's often not clear which one was "correct". (A recent example is Manhattan.)
This isn't to say that comparisons between LD and DVD can't be useful, but only so long as the person comparing them respects the inherent limitations of the process. Many reviewers and posters do not, which is why I find such comparisons frequently meaningless (again, Ed, that's "frequently", which isn't the same as "always").
But this thread was originally about sound. The simple fact remains that a DD 5.1 soundtrack (on DVD or LD) and a 2-channel PCM soundtrack cannot be anything but different mixes. As such, they can be meaningfully compared for matters of taste and artistic expression. But from a technical point of view -- i.e., assessing the ability of a format to reproduce a soundtrack -- the comparison is of little use, because there's no way to know whether one's preference is attributable to the mix or the format.
M.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

Both DVDs and LDs are intermediate representations of an original that's often left out of the comparison: the film.

I don't see this with better reviewers, who bring up seeing the film as their referance point. Which is both good and bad. First off memory or lack there of. As well as poor showings of the film in a theater. As the LotR post support. It's where & when you see it. Quess we must count on the director or DoP to supervise the transfer. Any supervise LD & DVD transfers that don't match up come to mind? Snow White was supposed to take a hit over it's 'new' look'!

M., did not mean to miss quote you, as I quoted all that you had written after my quote.

 

[Robert George]

Just for the record and for reference, it should be noted that Walter Murch, one of the best sound men in the business and the original sound designer for Apocalypse Now, personally remixed the the 5.1 track used on the last LD reisssue and first DVD release, as well as the 5.1 track on Redux.

Good, bad, or the same, this is clearly the intended soundtrack mix of the filmmakers. Obviously the older matrixed 2-channel Dolby Surround mix is different, but it should not be considered definitive.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

Thanks, G!