Disney+ Audio issues with IMAX enhanced on Disney + (1 Viewer)

[John Wachter]

Last month I watched Shang Chi and the10 Rings on Disney +. 5.1 system here. When I looked at details before watching it listed the Imax enhanced version and also 4kUHD. I selected IMAX enhanced, and thought the audio was lacking. Little rear speaker action and not much from the subwoofer. I checked it against the theatrical 4K version, and the difference was like night and day. Lots going on in the rear channels and impressive sound from the sub.

Anyone have an idea why this would be?

 

[JohnRice]

Do you have a receiver that's IMAX Enhanced capable?

 

[John Wachter]

I have a Pioneer Elite VSX-LX104 which has Atmos (I don't currently use), DTS X etc but no mention of IMAX. But from what I understand, IMAX enhanced audio should be DTS X

 

[JohnRice]

Explanations of IMAX Enhanced are annoyingly cryptic. However, you do appear to need a certified receiver/processor to get whatever supposed audio benefits, according to the official web site.

The problem is, I've never seen anything anywhere that says anything meaningful about what it is. It's all very mysterious. I suspect it's just marketing bs.

 

[dpippel]

Disney+ is pushing the video benefits of "IMAX Enhanced," with titles that are so designated featuring any IMAX scenes in the film in their original theatrical 1.90:1 AR. There is no IMAX Enhanced audio available for any of these titles, per their FAQ:

"Please note that other IMAX Enhanced features and functionality are not currently available on Disney+."

So, whatever audio deficiencies there might be are probably errors on Disney's end.

 

[John Wachter]

Disney+ is pushing the video benefits of "IMAX Enhanced," with titles that are so designated featuring any IMAX scenes in the film in their original theatrical 1.90:1 AR. There is no IMAX Enhanced audio available for any of these titles, per their FAQ:

"Please note that other IMAX Enhanced features and functionality are not currently available on Disney+."

So, whatever audio deficiencies there might be are probably errors on Disney's end.

That would make the most sense.

 

[JohnRice]

Disney+ is pushing the video benefits of "IMAX Enhanced," with titles that are so designated featuring any IMAX scenes in the film in their original theatrical 1.90:1 AR. There is no IMAX Enhanced audio available for any of these titles, per their FAQ:

"Please note that other IMAX Enhanced features and functionality are not currently available on Disney+."

So, whatever audio deficiencies there might be are probably errors on Disney's end.

What a joke.

I'm more convinced than ever this is nothing more than another THX, licensing (mostly) scam.

 

[dpippel]

What a joke.

I'm more convinced than ever this is nothing more than another THX, licensing (mostly) scam.

Well, I have to disagree. The IMAX Enhanced titles on D+ do feature the very real addition of IMAX ratio 4K video, which IMO is a great tangible benefit. THX offered nothing comparable and was mostly just branding.

 

[JohnRice]

Well, I have to disagree. The IMAX Enhanced titles on D+ do feature the very real addition of IMAX ratio 4K video, which IMO is a great tangible benefit. THX offered nothing comparable and was mostly just branding.

Because they do license hardware as "IMAX Enhanced" which is completely unnecessary to take advantage of that benefit. Plus, those movies are probably all available that way on disc already, without the IMAX Enhanced moniker.

 

[dpippel]

Because they do license hardware as "IMAX Enhanced" which is completely unnecessary to take advantage of that benefit. Plus, those movies are probably all available that way on disc already, without the IMAX Enhanced moniker.

There are some similarities to be sure, but THX offered exactly nothing hardware-wise except for a preset "approved" surround setup on some "certified" receivers, which you could have easily set up yourself anyway. At least IMAX Enhanced audio is something real:

"IMAX Mode activates a variation of the DTS:X immersive audio format that closely matches the surround sound experience in IMAX cinemas. IMAX Mode can adapt to deliver immersive surround sound, including overhead effects from a variety of speaker setups."

Whether or not there's an actual benefit is debatable. As for the video that D+ is providing, it's the only streaming service where you can get that IMAX footage on those titles AFAIK. Whether or not they're available on disc with IMAX footage (many are not) is irrelevant IMO, since they're two different delivery pipelines that in many cases serve two different types of customers. If I wanted to, I could buy a single month of D+ for $8 and binge every IMAX Enhanced title on the service. That would save me a lot of money in disc purchases if I didn't already own the physical copies.

 

[JohnRice]

This could go on forever, but I've expressed my points and have better ways to spend my time.

 

[Wayne_j]

Disney have been limiting IMAX formatted films to Disney+ so not on disc, but again it is only a different aspect ratio.

 

[JediFonger]

dunno about modern thx… but traditional thx certificates require stringent quality before they stamp the logo on there.

the imax business is exactly what is being referred to as branding. imax is trying to make $ and will prostitute their logo on anything to make a buck. google liemax for examples

 

[Ashly Yeo]

Maybe this video from @TheFOMO is helpful for the IMAX Enhanced audio -

 

[TonyD]

The only thing I’ve noticed on audio is Any movie that has Atmos has a lower audio track and I need to turn it up. Denon.

 

[Deanmad]

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it is a duck. That is what the guy is in the above Fumo video. Imax enhanced is totally different from anything else you have seen or listened to. First the picture is vastly improved and the audio is sent not in higher volume but different bits of audio to your individual speakers. The problem with those who think it is a gimmick have not seen or listened on a complete imax enhanced system. You must have a imax enhanced projector or tv and a imax enhanced receiver. The problem was Sony did not make all the imax enhanced movies on disc as was promised. So you only had 8-10 disc to watch. However now that they put Bravia core on some of their newer flagship tvs you have a good number of imax enhanced movies to watch. If you still think it is smoke and mirrors go and buy the Sony a90j tv hook it up to a good imax enhanced receiver and you will see what you have been missing. Sure it’s expensive but you get what you pay for. Remember you get nothing for free.

 

[Carlo_M]

Late to thread and a lot to unpack...

Let me start with the OP's complaint about Shang Chi...a movie I love and have now watched on Disney+ and 4K UHD. Sadly I missed it in theaters because something was circulating around the world at the time, or something like that so I'm going to consistently lean on the caveat that perhaps this was the way it was released theatrically. I'd love to hear from those who saw it on the big screen.

The Shang Chi soundtrack is highly compressed IME. And by that, I mean it feels like "Night Mode" is enabled, you know that feature in AVRs for late night viewing, that turns up the lower volume sections and brings down the high volume sections so you can still hear the dialogue at low volumes and not wake up your spouse/partner? I find this to be true of both the Disney+ and the UHD Atmos soundtrack. No other MCU title I've sampled on Disney+ has this feeling of "Night Mode" that I can tell.

I live in an apartment complex with shared walls. I don't run at reference levels, but I like to listen to my movies at a good clip during the daytime and early evening hours. For just about any action movie, there comes a time in the movie (often many times) where explosions kick in, or a thumping music cue comes on, and it makes me wince a little wondering if I'm upsetting the neighbors.

Those moments never arrives for Shang Chi. If I have it at the volume where dialogue and normal passages are at the volume I normally listen at for other movies...when explosions, fight scenes, or loud music cues kick in, the volume seems like it goes up only a few dBs.

Now that I recently added a separate dedicated power amp into my signal chain (Outlaw 7000x) my 4ohm mains are more alive than ever. Turns out they're really power hungry speakers and revisiting a lot of my favorite action movies they sound more alive than ever.

But not Shang Chi.

---

With regards to the "benefits" of the IMAX aspect ratio, especially concerning MCU movies...I think I've come to the conclusion that the way Christopher Nolan uses IMAX scenes in his movie (as a creative/artistic choice) and the way the MCU movies use it are fundamentally different. It seems that MCU movies are using it more to fill the new 1.90 IMAX aspect ratio that theater chains have been implementing to try and entice audiences back into theaters. Nolan wants the extra resolution of true IMAX film, along with the much taller/squarish true IMAX film aspect ratio. I think he used the 1.43:1 AR in many (all?) of his films that use IMAX, and shot "safe" so that it could be reproduced in the "less tall" IMAX showings in theaters.

I was just watching Avengers Endgame the other night (hey, I said I was putting the 7000x through its paces) and on some of the extra features it shows the monitors the Russo Brothers were using while filming endgame. They clearly have two rectangular guides on the monitors that represented the 1.90:1 and 2:35:1 aspect ratio and clearly weren't shooting on IMAX film stock like Nolan does.
There's a pic I took of it. So for most (all?) of the MCU movies you do get more top and bottom information which can convey information you didn't have before. Check out Vincent Teoh's fantastic video comparison and commentary here:

He also noticed that there's a tone mapping difference in the 1.90 vs. 2.35 versions of Black Panther (the 1.90 version overall is brighter than the 2.35 version, regardless of whether that 2.35 version is the Disney+ or the UHD version).

Going back and forth on multiple titles, the extra top/bottom does occasionally convey cool additional information. For examples there are a few scenes when a character in the foreground is the focus of the scenes and on the 2.35 version you see people standing behind them but obviously are not integral to the shot, and all you see is their torso...but in the 1.90 version you see "oh that's Thor, but he's not saying or doing anything and is out of focus". So could you argue "hey I like knowing that's Thor", sure. But could you also counter-argue that it's really not important to see his face because it's out of focus anyway since he's in the background and also you could tell it was Thor due to the uniform? Also yes.

And I'm sure this is not a universal truth to the MCU movies, but in looking at the Russo films, they clearly are composing with an eye towards 2.35 knowing a large portion of the audience will see it that way in theaters. There is a certain composition to the 2.35 versions, where closeups feel more intimate, and the loss of top/bottom picture information feels less like "I may be missing out on things" and more "I'm focusing in on what's important and what I want the audience to focus in on visually and emotionally.

But even with the Russos that's not necessarily universally true. Vincent Teoh's video has a great example of when Bruce is trying to get Hulk to come out and in the 1.90 version you clearly see him rub his hands together which does add to the comedic effect of the scene (and Mark's performance) which is largely cut off in the 2.35 version.

---

Ultimately I think this is a masterstroke for Disney. They know most average consumers will opt for Disney+ over physical media. They know disc aficionados will still want the highest bit rate and the pride of ownership and being able to watch without having to be connected online. By restricting the IMAX versions to D+, as well as it seems Dolby Vision (most recent MCU disc releases seem to be HDR only), they've gotten a percentage of disc owners like me to also subscribe to their D+ service.

You know what they say when it comes to gambling: the Mouse always wins.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

The IMAX versions for the MCU films, when they started making those variants, were originally designed and intended for 3D exhibition, and the extra height was helpful working in tandem with the 3D to create more immersion.

That there are 2D IMAX variants at all started as a quirk of the American market, which has more or less rejected 3D. So they started running them in 2D domestically a few years ago, whereas internationally for the most part it’s 3D only.

The combination of the IMAX aspect ratio shifts plus 3D in a giant sized theater is enormously effective for me. It reminds me of actually reading comic books in my youth, where the size of the panels would change throughout. I get a real thrill watching the films presented that way.

Christopher Nolan films his IMAX scenes according to the shooting philosophy developed by IMAX going back to their documentary shorts. The IMAX Corporation suggests that filmmakers break up the screen height in thirds, and to frame the vital action in the middle third (which roughly corresponds to a 2.40:1 frame anyway) allowing the top and bottom of the frame to fall into peripheral vision.

The idea with IMAX auditoriums vs standard ones is that the angle and positioning of seating is supposed to be closer, so that you’re really immersed in that middle area of the frame, but also that the rest of the screen more or less fills your POV. It’s more about creating a sense of immersion than it is about meticulously crafted framing.

Some filmmakers frame for IMAX specifically and just ensure that a 2.40:1 crop will look fine, while others do the opposite and merely protect the area outside 2.40:1 to ensure that nothing not meant to be seen is captured. With the Guardians films, James Gunn has spoken about how he actually writes the IMAX framing and 3D effects into the scripts so all of that is wholly part of his conception of the movie. Scott Derrickson, on the other hand, said that for Doctor Strange that he framed for 2.40:1 and left the shifts up to Marvel’s post production people to determine when to use the effect. For the Russo Bros films, they used an IMAX Digital camera and always knew that that was the (forgive the pun) endgame. I think for their films, it’s most effective for Infinity War because the extra height really allows them to emphasize how much bigger Thanos is relative to the rest of the characters. The 1.90:1 framing for that film feels like the right one to me. When I saw it in IMAX 3D, it was stunning. On 3D disc, it’s the 2.40:1 version and it seems very tight by comparison.

The larger your home screen is and the closer your viewing distance, the better chance you have of replicating the wow factor. Watching something like Guardians of the Galaxy in 2D on my 55” TV set doesn’t really show off the intended effect. But put the same movie on in 3D on my 120” projection screen, and the wow factor is back.

 

[JediFonger]

re: disney 4k uhd discs, only last jedi & black panther have dolby vision at the time of this post. the rest of the discs are hdr10 only!!!!

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

re: disney 4k uhd discs, only last jedi & black panther have dolby vision at the time of this post. the rest of the discs are hdr10 only!!!!

And here's a comment from Steve Yedlin the DP of The Last Jedi.