U571 Incorrect Bass Levels (1 Viewer)

[Lewis Besze]

So, I would guess the DTS track is wrong. I have mentioned this a half dozen times, but no-one seems to care. So much for the pursuit of accuracy, I think the modern HTF member is just looking for "more bass" no matter how they get it.

The pursuit of accuracy is exactly my points,but that hasn't been presented yet now is it?
Vince no offense but the only guy who could convince me is the guy who mixed this,and personally compared the DVD to the HT master.And on top of that a third party should be able verify his[their]authenticity.[a magazine or reputable website could do that].
Till then this is only a claim,nothing more.
------------------
"You Hungarians always disagree"

 

[Sean Oneil]

David, good point about the T-Rex. I have often thought that myself. Most of the time, sound engineers are exagerrating the bass levels or just the sound FX in general (The Thunderous punches in the Indiana Jones films is another good example) but with U-571 we have sound FX (depth charges) which may actually fall short of real-life levels. I think that the engineers were trying as best they could to squeeze every last bit of bass onto that disc, to recreate the proper dynamics of the material without sacrificing the rest of the mix. The DTS track truly is one of the better (and probably more accurate) mixes out there.
[Edited last by Sean Oneil on August 11, 2001 at 08:13 PM]

 

[cafink]

Without a print master to compare to (which wouldn't matter anyway as the film has been remixed for HT), it's tought to make 100% assertions about WHICH of the 2 is wrong, so we have educated guesses.

If it's been remixed for the DVD, then aren't BOTH of them wrong?

 

[Vince Maskeeper]

quote: If it's been remixed for the DVD, then aren't BOTH of them wrong?[/quote]
Ahhhhhh, now there is a another interesting question!
My thinking on this is as follows:
The HT remix is actually a translation from one language to another. The sound environments are simply completely different; and there is certainly something to be said along the lines of "altering" the sound so if sounds the "same" in this new environment.
It's a question of intent. Unfortunately most people working on the discs, even the original engineers in most cases, are not nearly as picky as your average hometheaterforum members. I know that this concept of intent does come to mind of many engineers- but I have been suprised to see some folks that I've met and their attitudes of "close enough" when it came to big budget audio.
Anyway- in theory I think HT remixes are a really good idea. The levels are meant to be accurate- not just "loud". The intended communication of audio is greatly different in different playback environments- this is something I'm learning as I'm mixing my first movie. If respect is kept for this intent, I think a remix isn't just good, it's necessary!
So, again, they are both not "wrong" necessarily- rather both are a translations from another language. This translation requires an interpretation; and it is trusted that the original intent will be keep with complete integrety in the final output.
Is it? Who knows.
Interesting topic, regardless.
Vince
[Edited last by Vince Maskeeper on August 11, 2001 at 08:35 PM]

 

[Sean Oneil]

Yes. It is interesting. I would like to know if Ron or Parker could possibly pursuede the poeple who worked on this mix to come to the HTF for an online chat session.
I think the questions that would be asked and answered would provide a lot of insight to a lot of people (myself included) and go way beyond the scope of just this one title.
Does anyone else think that would be an interesting online chat?
[Edited last by Sean Oneil on August 11, 2001 at 11:48 PM]

 

[Rob Gillespie]

Whatever a depth charge sounds like in real life is irrelevent in this argument. Most film sound is created on a foley stage. It doesn't matter what a real explosion sounds like. What matters is how the DVD sounds compared to the original soundtrack. That's the only yardstick you can use to compare the two. It's not even worth comparing to the average theatrical presentation because there are SO MANY variables in involved. A controlled presentation in studio-quality surroundings would probably work, but how many of us have access to this Exactly.
As for which track on U571 is more accurate, I don't know. Vince's viewpoint may have weight, but there's so many things that can go right or wrong (or just different) when they prep the DVD it's anyone's guess.
And anyway, pairing the term "closer to reality" and the film U571 is a total joke.
------------------
Link Removed
"One does not simply walk into Mordor."
Link Removed

 

[Sean Oneil]

Whatever a depth charge sounds like in real life is irrelevent in this argument [……] It doesn't matter what a real explosion sounds like. What matters is how the DVD sounds compared to the original soundtrack. That's the only yardstick you can use to compare the two.

It may be irrelevant to you, but myself and a few others are trying to identify WHY there may be more bass in the soundtrack. I can almost guarantee you that the audio engineers were trying to recreate the sound FX as closely as they could to reality. That is pretty much what a sound engineer does, you know. If it does not matter what real life sounds like, then why not just insert the sound of a balloon popping when a depth charge goes? Or why not just do manual voice-over explosions like they did in some old Disney cartoons?
(This was hilarious B.T.W., as someone basically sat in front of a microphone and did they’re best to recreate the sound of an explosion by only using they’re voice -kind of like the SFX guy from the 'Police Academy' movies)
Heavy odds are, that you have never even heard the original soundtrack. A modern day original multi-channel digital master such as this needs to be heavily compressed when being down-mixed into DD or DTS -at home -in the theater –Anywhere outside of the studio.
I would bet that the bass in the original uncompressed master is even stronger than the theatrical DD and DTS tracks, or the DTS DVD, because the sound engineers would no doubt be pushing the limits of a far superior audio medium. So I would dare say that none of us have truly heard this soundtrack (or many others) in its full glory.
When you mix down and compress a dynamic state of the art master recording like this, something has got to give. Like it or not, the compression codec used and the bit-rate used does make a difference.
__________________________________________________ ____
The following paragraph is just a theory, nothing more
__________________________________________________ ____
The bass may have been extremely powerful in the original master recordings for this film. The studio engineers obviously attempted to re-create that bass as closely as possible to the original master recordings (as any GOOD studio engineer would) when they mixed-down into DD and DTS. When they ran the soundtrack into the DD codec at full throttle, the soundstage may have collapsed as a result because the DD codec was allocating so much bit-real-estate attempting to recreate the bass accurately. So they may have turned the bass down just a bit to keep the channel separation up to par. It is just a theory, nothing more. I never said it was fact, but knowing how the bit-allocation process works I assume it is possible.
Vince is probably right ...someone probably just screwed up and left the slider turned up too high or too low.
And when I used the word 'reality' in the same topic as U-571, I was not referring to the films portrayal of actual history -and I think you knew that

[Edited last by Sean Oneil on August 14, 2001 at 02:55 AM]

 

[David-alexander]

"And anyway, pairing the term "closer to reality" and the film U571 is a total joke."
absolutely agree with you. the opening disclaimer ( or was it at the end ?) is grossly insufficient.

 

[Rob Gillespie]

I still enjoyed the film though.

 

[David-alexander]

except for the German ship at the end: poor cgi.....

 

[frank manrique]

Oh, I don't know...but them depth charges sounded eerily realistic at fairly high levels when I first heard the soundtrack being reproduced by my system, one that include EIGHT SVS 46/16 subwoofers. Nearly soiled my pants!...
-THTS

 

[Sean Oneil]

EIGHT SVS 46/16

WoW!!! I would love to hear that.
[Edited last by Sean Oneil on August 14, 2001 at 02:56 AM]

 

[Sam Hatch]

With so many HT buffs slamming the ubiquitous 'Joe Six-Pack' as of late, it's amusing that the bass-fetishists who happen to love OAR but have no care for TBS (Theatrical Bass SPLs) are none other than...
Joe Twelve Inch!
Okay, so I can see how nobody's going to argue with that monicker...
------------------
"Negative. I am a meat popsicle."
[Edited last by Sam Hatch on August 12, 2001 at 07:03 AM]

 

[Lewis Besze]

With so many HT buffs slamming the ubiquitous 'Joe Six-Pack' as of late, it's amusing that the bass-fetishists who happen to love OAR but have no care for TBS (Theatrical Bass SPLs) are none other than

------------------
"You Hungarians always disagree"

 

[Lewis Besze]

With so many HT buffs slamming the ubiquitous 'Joe Six-Pack' as of late, it's amusing that the bass-fetishists who happen to love OAR but have no care for TBS (Theatrical Bass SPLs) are none other than

Great,now we reference to the mediocre bass that many theaters produce as the reference standard?
Don't think so!
I saw this movie in a large stadium theater,but the bass was nowhere near as articulate nor deep.It was a boomy mass,compare to my own set up.
And yeah you can call me Louie the 15"

------------------
"You Hungarians always disagree"

 

[Rob Gillespie]

Exactly Lewis. If I calibrated to the same level as half the films I see theatrically (not that I could do it, but we're talking theory here) then I may as well turn the sub off!

 

[Vince Maskeeper]

When they ran the soundtrack into the DD codec at full throttle, the soundstage may have collapsed as a result because the DD codec was allocating so much bit-real-estate attempting to recreate the bass accurately.

Just so you know, this is really unlikely. Bass freq require the LEAST amount of digital information to encode. In theory, a 20hz tone would only need a sampling rate in the neighborhood of 40hz to be properly captured, a sampling rate 1/1000 of what is used in standard digital audio.
I don't think there are any limitations to the codec as far as the ability to handle signal levels- certainly no issues I have been aware of (case in point, some of the bassiest DVDs have only DD tracks: TPM LD, The Iron Giant, Toy Story 2, Backdraft, Blade, Braveheart, Contact, Fight Club, Super Speedway... the list goes on and on)
I really think this was just a victim of Universals early problems with the DTS encoder. JP had a similar problem, and I think it's not too much of a jump to determine that it could have happened twice.
-Vince
------------------
http://www.musicianassist.com
AIM: VinceMaskeeper
Interested in moving into FRONT PROJECTION with huge 6-10 foot widescreen? Buy my whole HDTV-ready CRT based front projection system delivered, cheap! Click here

 

[RobertR]

quote: Dolby Digital is a bit-allocation format[/quote]
So is DTS.
I'd say that's a pretty big hole in your theory.
The attitude people have about bass is interesting. When people say a soundtrack has better bass, they almost always mean it has LOUDER bass. In other words, more bass = better bass, and vice versa. Therefore, if U571 has too much bass (compared to the original soundtrack), almost no one will complain, because more bass can never be "wrong", but too little bass will generate a FLOOD of complaints, even though it's no less "wrong" in dB terms.
------------------
[Edited last by RobertR on August 12, 2001 at 01:22 PM]

 

[Sean Oneil]

First, let me say that I am aware that bass takes the least amount of information to encode (or rather is simply afforded the least amount by most engineers) because it is much harder to hear bass distort than to hear mid-or high frequency sound distort. It still takes up bit space though. Also, I know about how the two codecs work. I just know that the bit-rate does make a difference. If you want to compare bit-allocation to bit-allocation with different bit-rates, just take the same recording and rip an MP3 at 128kbps and another at 192kbps. Which one sounds better?
All that aside, I have gone back and listend to this again and again, and I may be changing my position on which track is correct. I played some of the same scenes back to back at VERY high output levels. First the DD ...sounded absolutely brilliant. Directional effects were all spot on, fidelity and spaciousness were great as well. Bass level seemed just about perfect too. Not overdone at all, but not lacking where it needed to be. Then I played back the same scenes in DTS. Same fidelity, spaciousness, and directional effect perfection. Everything sounded great ..except now (after listening to the DD track first) the bass did seem slightly pumped up and over the top. Sounds like the gunshots had just a bit too much low end punch to them (kind of like on the new Die Hard five star) which made them sound just slightly 'off' and unrealistic. The DTS still has the edge slightly in clarity and channel seperation, but I think that I have changed my opinion and now agree with Vince that the DD track has the correct Bass levels.
[Edited last by Sean Oneil on August 12, 2001 at 05:27 PM]

 

[David-alexander]

guys..... I present you...... U-571 Belgian edition with a killer cover art....... and FULL RATE DTS !

note: the film has been encoded in a 1.78:1 anamorphic ratio, quite surprising. on the other hand, the image, without doing an A/B comparison, seems to not have lost much if at all. I have to compare. in fact, it fits well themovie too, something like DAS BOOT.
the sound: ouch, it beats the half rate dts of the region 1: you immediately notice the full bit rate, stunning. the envopment is total 360°, the bass are...... well, I won't even go there, I'm still shaking all over..... The dialogues however are a bit less clear than on the region 1 edition. slightly. compression is top notch. no pal speedup noticeable.
a friend brought it tonight and I will get mine tommorrow, will fit nice next to my Region 1 dvd ( which has slightly better depth and contrast however ).
stunning.