Pre-Order The Sea Chase (1955) (Blu-ray) Available for Preorder (1 Viewer)

[Josh Steinberg]

Steve is right. We don't want the studios decoding mixdowns and then trying to pass them off as discrete.

I'm not at all saying I'd want them to. I was merely curious what the process for doing so would have theoretically entailed.

 

[Mark-P]

I'm not at all saying I'd want them to. I was merely curious what the process for doing so would have theoretically entailed.

I'm sure it would be simple as pie and cost them next to nothing to do. But they don't do it for the same reason that they don't upconvert standard definition and call it HD.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Again, was not asking why they didn't. Not sure why that remains unclear.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Let's calm down! If you're asking for what the process is and how much it costs then I only know a few here that can answer that question if they so desire.

 

[Robert Harris]

Right, I'm not questioning or complaining about Warner's decision to put it out as they did.

I'm just asking, as matter of curiosity, if they had decided to decode it to 4.0 or 5.1 on their end rather than having the consumer do it, what kind of an expense and effort would that have been on their end?

(This isn't a precursor to me calling Warner cheap for not doing it. I'm just curious what kind of an effort in time and cost it would have been for Warner, had they elected to do it.)

Possibly it's best explained this way:

As I've noted in the past, audio formats are merely buckets, into which data is placed.

A 2-track Dolby-encoded mag track, which was the basis for the optical SVA (stereo variable area) system, c. 1976, was an extraordinary achievement, especially as government agencies were beginning to make the application of mag striping problematic.

It's also something that's relatively easy for people to understand, as they read the back of Blu-ray packaging.

Most can understand 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.1 and 7.1.

If the studios were to do the de-coding, instead of allowing your processor to do the deed, what would one then call it?

There's now a chain of tech history involved.

"The original 4.0 mix for this film, was encoded to 2-track Dolby in 1994. In 2016, it was de-coded, and will now play as something akin to 4.0, but not really."

It's no longer 2-track Dolby, nor is it anything else.

The pity is that whomever made the decisions, given to the tech staff 35 years ago, didn't choose to archive as an x-copy of the original format, and then create a second full-coat mag, as Dolby.

The problem becomes the cost of full-coat mag stock, essentially doubling the needed budget for those elements, and thereby reducing the number of stereo tracks that could be saved.

Also, keep in mind, that at that time, most stereo home video formats were playing either Dolby or AC-3.

If 35mm prints were to be struck, they would also use the Dolby.

So, where is the fiscal upside to achieving the goal of archiving thousands of rolls of original tracks, as many of the originals were going VS?

 

[RolandL]

A little off topic but, I copied the MGM HD broadcast of The Alamo (1960 version) to DVR a while ago. Even though my receiver showed 5.1 DD only the left and right speakers were active. When I changed the receiver to 2.0 Dolby Surround, all five speakers were active and the dialog was now panning correctly. MGM HD audio is always 2-channel for all movies.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Let's calm down! If you're asking for what the process is and how much it costs then I only know a few here that can answer that question if they so desire.

I'm sorry if I appeared not to be calm, my apologies. Yes, that is exactly the question I was asking. If no one wants to answer it, that's fine, but thank you for understanding what my question was.

 

[Stephen PI]

I'm sorry if I appeared not to be calm, my apologies. Yes, that is exactly the question I was asking. If no one wants to answer it, that's fine, but thank you for understanding what my question was.

I thought the PROCESS was covered in previous posts.
COST. No idea exactly but Warner could easily do it, but as I said before, it is a step that is unnecessary. Cost would be trivial when they can easily invest millions into various projects.

 

[Matt Hough]

I finally dug this out of the To-Watch pile and gave it a spin tonight. I'm not sure I've ever seen it before. None of it seemed very familiar, and there were enough unique things about it that it should have been recognizable if I had ever seen it before. I enjoyed the movie even though no one on this German ship seemed the least bit German in any way, shape, or form.

Be that as it may, it still had some suspense, some melodrama, and I enjoyed the stereo sound on the disc.

 

[Robin9]

I enjoyed the movie even though no one on this German ship seemed the least bit German in any way, shape, or form.

I agree. I still enjoy the film but I agree.