Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: The 3D trend continues . . . 3D sound

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Ground Level » The 3D trend continues . . . 3D sound (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: The 3D trend continues . . . 3D sound

Joe Elliott
Master Film Handler

Posts: 497
From: Port Orange, Fl USA
Registered: Oct 2006

posted 07-30-2011 09:13 PM

Here it is in all it's glory

Barco Auro 3D sound

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-30-2011 09:19 PM

Joe, we are supposed to post the text as well in the event the site changes the URL. So here it is, again, in all its glory....

quote:
Auro-3D is the next-generation 3D sound format for the cinema industry. Developed by Galaxy Studios and powered by Barco, Auro-3D turns conventional cinema audio into a fully immersive 3D sound experience, with sounds coming from all around and above the listener.

100% compatibility with existing standards
Auro-3D improves the audio experience by making intelligent use of the headroom in today's audio standards. This means that the current formats and channels can still be used for content generation and distribution. No changes to SMPTE standards or the DCI specifications are required. As an exhibitor, you will still receive 1 DCP containing the movie content – your Auro-3D decoder will simply extract the extra sound information from the existing 5.1 or 7.1 track files, when present.

Commercially viable Auro-3D can easily be installed in new-built or existing theaters, in most cases utilizing components from your current audio system. According to your speaker layout, simply adding height speakers can bring real 3D audio to your theater. Moreover, Auro-3D sound processing is similar to, and compatible with, existing set-ups.

A unique differentiator Auro-3D creates a unique differentiator – allowing you to maintain your premium 3D revenues and differentiate yourself from the competition.

Forgive me if I comment on the last line, but this is how I think they can market the new Auro 3D sound -- "Here at Acme Theatres, we differentiat ourselves from our competition -- we have a unique sound differentiator -- it's called BULLSHIT."

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 07-30-2011 09:25 PM

Another product doomed to fail.

| IP: Logged

Joe Elliott
Master Film Handler

Posts: 497
From: Port Orange, Fl USA
Registered: Oct 2006

posted 07-30-2011 10:49 PM

Yeah . . . sorry about that. I was in the middle of researching some projector info. when I ran across that, so I was just posting it real quick, and then continued on with my research.

Do they realize human hearing does not distinguish sounds above or below the median plane? We look up when we hear an airplane, because we know from the sound that they are flying, and we look down when we hear a crunch, because we know we just stepped on something expensive.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 07-30-2011 11:49 PM

At the Dolby "Surrounded" meet, several film-makers when asked about the "future of sound," said they wished for more surround channels.

| IP: Logged

Aaron Garman
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: Toledo, OH USA
Registered: Mar 2003

posted 07-31-2011 12:00 AM

Ugh, this is what happens when marketing students graduate and come up with new ways to make money.

The key to great cinema sound is not any 3D gimmick or more and more channels, but proper equalization, good equipment, and proper maintenance.

I know, I'm Captain Obvious!

AJG

| IP: Logged

Jim Cassedy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1661
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Dec 2006

posted 07-31-2011 12:41 AM

Do you have to wear glasses? [Roll Eyes]

- - or stick some kind of 'sound polarizers' in your ears?

Just shoot me . . . .

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 07-31-2011 06:32 AM

The b--- s--- continues! Louis

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-31-2011 06:55 AM

A great movie sound designer, in my opinion, told me when I asked about "more surrounds" something to effect that more surrounds was mostly an exercise in masturbation. Too much use of surrounds takes attention off the screen, which is where he thinks the sound should be concentrated. I agree with him.

Personally, I would have 5-screen channels before I would want the second surround channel...definitely 5-screen channels before the 3rd or 4th surround channel.

-Steve

| IP: Logged

Bruce Hansen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 847
From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-31-2011 09:22 AM

Next: 3D soft drinks. As you drink it, little explosions go off in the cup, and throw soft drink all over your face. WOW! (And yes, special glasses are required, to keep the stuff out of your eyes).

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 07-31-2011 12:01 PM

Aren't we up to 4D yet? Perhaps we should all reequip for 5D?? Louis

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 07-31-2011 01:08 PM

I agree about this being a product doomed to fail. I don't like the idea of a processor that is artificially creating new channels of sound and doing all sorts of steering tricks to supposedly liven up the mix. A movie should only call attention to the surround channels when it has been specifically mixed to do so.

Audio editing tools are far more powerful and capable than ever before. Mixing and sound panning moves shouldn't be all that much different in principal when applied to something like a 10.2 channel sound field versus that of a 5.1 field. New software gives the sound editor a graphical representation of the sound field. He can visually pan a specific sound element to different points in the room and do so on the time line. It's not as labor intensive as fiddling with a bunch of levels for each specific channel. The mix with more audio channels is simply going to make the audio imaging more subtle and seamless. There's little desire from Hollywood movie productions to do this, even though such a thing is practical.

Digital cinema supports up to 16 channels of audio. Some of those are special use channels, but sound mixes with up to 12 discrete tracks can be supported. Channel assignments are already reserved to allow 5 stage channels as well as 4 or more surround channels. Ceiling surround can be implemented.

If a movie production really wants to create a 10-track or 12-track mix they can do so already and at least get the mix delivered to key theaters without very much work. Unfortunately sound just isn't nearly as popular as it was in the 1990s and earlier. I think movie productions are trying to gear things so they'll be more compatible in the home environment, and that typically means no more than 5.1 channels (and HDTV levels of image resolution).

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-31-2011 03:46 PM

While DCinema did provide for up to 16-channels (of which over half of them are now spoken for) they did NOT deal with how to mix down a more sophisticated track into the required 5.1 (the defacto standard). Thus, a Surround 7.1 mix does not play in a 5.1 theatre without information being completely lost (the rear surrounds living on channels 11 and 12). At least Sony had, in their processors, the inherent ability to mix down an 8-channel into 5.1 in the event the theatre did not have all 8.

-Steve

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 07-31-2011 04:20 PM

How hard would it be to implement a down-mix feature with existing digital cinema servers? It might take as little as a software update.

Honestly the companies that sell digital cinema products should already be working on something like this to get rid of the need to carry dual audio tracks in 5.1 and 7.1 on the digital cinema print. With a more elaborate audio track (like 10.2) theaters would need the ability to select the channels their hardware can play and have the server down-mix according to those limits.

| IP: Logged

Harold Hallikainen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 906
From: Denver, CO, USA
Registered: Aug 2009

posted 07-31-2011 05:39 PM

Would a down mix be the responsibility of a server, or of a processor. I'm leaning towards it being the processor's job since it now has to decide what to send to rear surround speakers when 5.1 content is played versus 7.1DS (more of an up-mix).

Would it be possible to come up with a uniform down-mix that works well for all content, as opposed to having the producer make separate packages for each sound format?

Harold

.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.