Ever decide not to watch a DVD because it was only DD 2.0? (1 Viewer)

[Jim Williams]

Sometimes I will decide not to watch a DVD because it was only DD 2.0 and not DD or DTS 5.1 or 6.1. When I think about it I feel silly but I do it anyway. Have you ever done the same thing?

 

[Eric Peterson]

Not a chance!

In fact I watch a lot of MONO DVDs. I don't see any reason to not watch a movie based on the soundtrack. In fact, I would do the opposite, if the movie was originally 2.0 and was remixed to 5.1 or better - I will almost always watch the original version.

 

[Patrick McCart]

It's sad if you can't enjoy a movie or TV show because it doesn't fill up your speakers.

Enjoy the movie for what it is, not for how pretty it looks or sounds on DVD (Well, at least if it's a well done DVD. Don't avoid cleaned up mono tracks! Love mono like it's your best friend!)

I'll actually listen to 5.1 remixes if they're done well. I've found the remixes on Some Like It Hot and Gone With The Wind are pretty boring, so I stick with the mono. However, the 5.1 mixes for Singin' In The Rain and Snow White are wonderful!

 

[Martin Fontaine]

Nope, if the movie was made in Mono or 2.0 I won't mind watching it that way with DPL2. But if a 5.1/DTS Track is available, I will use it.

As for the argument that remixing a soundtrack violates integrity in the same way as P&S, I'd say that if classic movies were made in mono (Or 2.0) it was mostly because back then, there was no such thing as surround sound. I doubt there are any movies that uses mono or stereo sound deliberatly with no intention from the filmake for the movie to be heard in surround. I don't think kicking in DPL2 would reduce the intended effect.

And also, one of my DVDs has a problem on the 5.1 track and that the 2.0 track (With DPL2) sounds better! Given that this movie (Black Swan (2002) - Not to confuse with the 1942 Movie of the same name, it's not a remake BTW) is a low budget independant film, I would not be surprised that it was originally made in 2.0 and that they put a 5.1 track on the disk just because 5.1 sound sells more DVDs I suppose. Also another positive point for that movie is that it supports Pan&Scan On The Fly (And even mentions it on the case)

 

[greg_t]

Very well said.

 

[Paul_Stachniak]

^^ I agree.

I also don't like 5.1 remixes, as they tend to suck, and prevent the original from being available.

 

[Xenia Stathakopoulou]

As long as i like the movie, what audio they give it is a minor factor for me.

 

[GregK]

Yep.

Years ago I picked up the "How the West Was Won" DVD from my local library. I owned the laserdisc, which had a Dolby Surround mix-down of the original 7-channel mix. I had figured for the 'new DVD format' MGM (now distributed by WB) would now tack on a 5.1 down-mix of the original 7 channel master, which is still in good shape. Finally I could hear the discrete multi-channel audio of HTWWW in my own home. NOPE.. Same old 2-channel audio mixdown. The video looked close to my LD.. so I passed.

 

[GerardoHP]

No.

 

[Jason Walstrom]

C'mon there have got to be some movies that have a 2.0 or stereo track that you are just waiting for them to re-master in 5.1 or something. I for one can't wait for a newly remastered Blade Runner in 5.1. I haven't bought the existing dvd for this reason. But will I buy a movie in mono or stereo or 2.0 if I know most likely there will never be a remaster in 5.1 or better? Yeah, sure.

 

[Paul D G]

I held off buying Fright Night a number of times because of the 2.0 audio, but only because I knew that there was a 5.1 mix in Germany. Eventually gave in.

I admit to a small feeling of disappointment when a DVD I want is only 2.0. But that's mostly because the 5.1 setup is still a novelty to me and I want to experience a full effect whenever I watch a movie.

-paul

 

[Adam_S]

Nope. Besides a good stereo mix can almost always sound better than mediocre 5.1 up mix, not to mention that you can generally play stereo at reference and not suffer severe hearing loss (I'm exaggerating). for example, City Lights PCM stereo track.

on a similar note, I discovered first hand (for the first time) what people mean when they say a well mastered CD. I popped in a CD I'd gotten to like when I was away at school, and turned it on to play in the background while I did something else. Since my sisters had fiddled with the settings, I didn't realize that for the first time the settings were correct for CD playing and had been defaulting to one of the reciever sound modes (which it confusingly called standard, a sort of 2 channel only pro logic), this was essentially the first time I listened to a CD on a good sound set up without processing, and it was amazing! I actually stopped what I was doing and just sat down and Listened, floored at how incredibly good it sounded.

Adam

 

[Edwin-S]

No.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Lord No!

I concur with many here, if it's a film I love, I will not hesitate to both purchase and watch it in DD 2.0, doesn't bother me in the slightest.

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

What if Lord Of The Rings: Extended only had a 192 kbps Dolby 2.0 stereo mix?

Ah! See?!

No, seriously, for certain older films, a DD 5.1/DTS 5.1 remix can be interesting. The best part about it is usually the higher bit-rate and 448 kbps of the Dolby 5.1, rather than the reconfiguring of the tracks to surround. In short, more 'kick'. Or 'punch'. Or...

But for older, non-surround films, originally presented in mono or 2-track stereo ect, Dolby 2.0 is absolutely fine.


Gordy

 

[SteveP]

I heard the HOW THE WEST WAS WON mixdown may be missing tracks 2 and 4.

The title is mastered from heavily cropped 35MM elements and needs to be redone from the three-panel elements (in good shape--a new print was recently struck for showing in September at the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood).

Joe Caps here is pretty upset that Universal just released THOROUGHLY MODERN MILLIE as well as some Fox CinemaScope titles in 2 channel mixdowns instead of the 4.0 originals.

 

[JonZ]

Never!!!!

You dont need a 5.1 soundtrack for everything, and I cant imagine not watching a movie I like just becuase the sound is only in stereo


2.0 is fine for some movies.Do u really need a 5.1 soundtrack for a film that has people doing nothing but talking for 2 hours?

 

[Charlie Essmeier]

NO.

I can't figure out why so many people insist upon the correct aspect ratio while also insisting on a modified soundtrack.

Charlie

 

[Scott Strang]

Sounds like P&S for audio.

 

[Scott Strang]

City Lights PCM stereo track

In fact there should be more releases with linear PCM tracks.