my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Dolby SR cards

Author Topic: Dolby SR cards Matt Fields Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 545 From: Ohio, United States Registered: Jun 2005 posted 07-27-2005 08:41 AM                     I have some CP-55's I want to upgrade to SR. I have gone through the previous posts on the subject, and the general concensus is to either use the Panastereo SR adapter or something from Dolby itself. Here is where I get confused. I am going to stay away from the 222 SR/A card that every seems to think sucks. What are the best options from Dolby? Thanks for your help.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-27-2005 09:14 AM                     Dolby has no "new" options at the moment. Their offering was the SRA-5 with a pair of Cat. 280T cards loaded. Alternatives were the Ultra Stereo SRM-10 and the SMART SR1+...each of which would have had to have Dolby Cat. 280s loaded. Both of these units are now out of production as well. The only new high-quality SR solution for the CP55 is the Panastereo SR35 adapter.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 07-27-2005 02:20 PM                        It is true that, relative to the cat 280t or cat 350, the cat222sr/a is not as good. However, I believe that, unless you have exceptional acoustics, amplifiers, bi-amped speakers, super tweaked reverse analog reader, etc, you are OK to go with the 222sr/a. Dolby took a few liberties with that one, but, in all but the most impressive installs, it is just not that noticable on optical. Film-tech is noted for taking the "high road." In this case it is a factory approved conversion, fully supported by Dolby and has been accomplished by thousands of cinemas; it is better than A. Louis  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 07-27-2005 03:33 PM                     Secondhand Dolby SRA5 units are readily available, and quite cheap, though the Cat. 280 cards are expensive. Is there any reason not to go this route if you have a 55 or 200?  |  IP: Logged Matt Fields Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 545 From: Ohio, United States Registered: Jun 2005 posted 07-27-2005 07:19 PM                     The speakers are JBL, the system is bi-amped, the sound reader is the B.A.C.P. reverse scan, the amps are Smart. The aucostics are okay I guess, basic rectangle room, sound fold on the walls. Would I get hearable improvement from the 280 or 350?  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-27-2005 07:40 PM                     quote: Louis Bornwasser It is true that, relative to the cat 280t or cat 350, the cat222sr/a is not as good. However, I believe that, unless you have exceptional acoustics, amplifiers, bi-amped speakers, super tweaked reverse analog reader, etc, you are OK to go with the 222sr/a. Louis, Its not always easy to hear the 222's problems in general in an average film but if you make a comparison between a 222 and a pair of 280T's on even a decent system with a good analog mix and use the same reel of film for the comparison it hits you like a brick, most noticable is that its alot more edgy sounding and there other artifacts you will hear that are not too nice either. quote: Louis Bornwasser it is better than A. Or should we say its A is better than its SR...... Actually the Panastereo is the best solution and by far the best sounding SR out there... yes, as good or better than the 280T's are. And may be less expensive than the 222 card is. I wouldn't hesitate to install the Panastereo unit. The Panastereo CSP{-1200 is by far the best sounding processor on the market today. Mark  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 07-27-2005 08:59 PM                        The issue is that the man has a CP=55 and he needs to add SR, I assume inexpensively. One reasonable solution is to just use the 222sr/a card. Granted there are many possible solutions, some better than others. I, too, can hear the difference, in absolute terms, between the sr/a card and the 289t/300/350 card. He did not ask to purchase an entire new processor. Louis Louis  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-27-2005 10:03 PM                     Louis, quote: Mark Gulbrandsen Actually the Panastereo is the best solution and by far the best sounding SR out there... yes, as good or better than the 280T's are. And may be less expensive than the 222 card is. If you read again I didn't suggest he buy a whole new processor, just the Panastereo add on. We all know the CSP1200 costs ALOT more than a 222 SRA card! I merely mentioned that the Panastereo CSP-1200 processor was the best sounding unit available out there to vouch for its sound quality. He will be much further ahead going the Panastereo add on route. I will add that factory approved or not the 222 SRA sucks to a very large degree! Mark  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-28-2005 09:01 AM                     Louis, The Cat 222SR/A while will provide some simbilance of SR noise reduction it tracks VERY poorly. One need not have a good system to hear how bad it truely is. In fact, my problems with the 222SR/A is customer driven. It really does sound bad and has no business having the "SR" name on it. It should have said what it is Double-S. As to cost, the Cat. 222SR/A is not a cost effective solution for SR either. It lists for nearly $1,995.00 (more than two Cat. 280s). Louis, in case you didn't know. The Panastereo SR35 costs less than the Cat. 222SR/A and installs just like the Dolby SRA-5. It is truely the best and most economical choice in 2005. While there are many variables in an optical soundtrack nowadays...I prefer the Cat. 280 to all others, including the CM353 from what I've heard. I have Cat. 280s in some Panastereos and CM353 in others. One of these days, I'm going to experiment with one channel Cat. 280 and one CM353...if they are tracking properly...everything, including the 2:4 decoder should work just fine...if not, there is something amiss. Also, I've found the differences in sound quality between the Pana and Dolby cards is more dramatic with optical, an inherently noisy medium, versus magnetic. The above being said, I can't claim to have done the listening tests that I've done on the 222SR/A verus real SR...that was pretty damn conclusive by all listeners and very apparent.  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 07-31-2005 07:13 PM                     Edit: this won't work, so don't be mislead (see Steve G's post below)! Also, keep in mind that Dolby Cat. 280 cards (not T, so they must be modified by cutting the jumper) appear readily available on the used market. That means a Pana+280 solution might be quite cost-effective. --jhawk [ 07-31-2005, 10:46 PM: Message edited by: John Hawkinson ]  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-31-2005 10:23 PM                     The Cat. 280s will NOT fit the SR-35. Though the CM353 uses essentially the same pin-out and a CSP1200 can accept the Cat 280s...the SR35 will not physically accept the Cat 280s nor have the 24V power rail. The CM333 and CM353 SR modules run on +/-15V rather than a single 24V rail. The CSP1200 has the +24 rail available as well for the Cat 280.  |  IP: Logged Matt Fields Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 545 From: Ohio, United States Registered: Jun 2005 posted 08-13-2005 10:06 PM                     I ended up finding a good deal on some used SRA-5's last week and bought them. It will be interesting to hear the differnce once I get them installed... also, on the quotes I got from my supplier, the Panastereo Adapter was 150 bucks cheaper then the 222 sr/a card.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.