Boxoffice-Febuary.1998

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SPECIAL REPORT: Cinema Sound 1998 hy John F. Allen Motion picture sound is critically important in setting the emotional atmosphere ofa film. Sound alone is often the determiningfactor in knowing if a scene is a comedy or tragedy. Obviously, the better the theatre's sowxd presentation, the better thefilm works. Ifsound is, as some insist, more than half the show, how can exhibitors best exploit itspotential? In this issue, BOXOFFICE contributing writer John F. Allen concludes hisfour-part series ofarticles exploring the current state ofmovie theatre sound andproviding valuable guidance. Part one of this special four-part series, published in the April 1997 issue, was devoted to the common industry practice of using loudspeakers too small for their tasks and to the negative impact that this has on the presentation of digital soundtracks. Part two (July 1997) covered the deficiencies vs. the requirements of surround speakers and subwoofers, as well as the true amplifier power needs of digital motion picture sound systems. Part three (Nov. 1997) departed from equipment issues to describe how sound systems are routinely and often radically mistuned due to the inaccuracy of the measurement techniques relied upon by today's technicians. The obvious point of this series has been to explore the often deficient "state of the art" exhibited in the majority of theatre sound systems as well as to suggest what can and should be done to bring these installations up to par. Without proper and competent attention to the aforementioned matters, no sound system can fxjssibly be coasidered capable of meeting the extraordinary demands of both digital and analog motion pictures, let alone motivating patrons to return more often. Yet even such attention would not be enough. Among other things, there are still far too many weaknesses in the way that sound levels are set as well as in the quality of the maintenance performed after the initial in.stallation. I'll discuss the latterfirst. MAINTENANCE The sound system maintenance provided by this industry's (rather overworked and often under-appreciated) technicians needs to be dramatically improved. This is not at all due to either the quality of these technicians or their IF THEY KNEW WHAT YOU WERE MISSING Part Four: Conclusion WHY TODAY'S MOTION PICTURE SOUND SYSTEMS FAIL TO MAKE THE GRADE AND WHY THEY CAN'T SOUND BETTER commitment to theirjobs. Rather, the improvement required is in the areas of training and, especially, the quality of the equipment provided to the technicians. An accurate, stable and easy-to-read real-time analyzer is the primary sound instrument technicians must use. Over the years, I have been constantly amazed at some of the absolute junk I have seen technicians struggle with over the years when attempting to align sound systems. Try as they do, technicians cannot be certain of the accuracy of the results they obtain when their real-time analyzers have been purchased on the basis of price instead of performance. The sound-pressure-level (SPL) meters typically employed are often nothing more than the unreliably calibrated $40 units available at most shopping centers. Can anyone really take such equipment seriously at professional levels? To be certain of my own work, I use an Ivie IE-30 real-time analyzer with Ivie's handmade model 1134 random incidence microphone. I also carry a Bruel and Kjaer microphone caUbrator that I use every day to ensure the accuracy of sound-pressure-level measurements. Barring a recording level problem, all of my sound systems operate with their faders at their normal positions and the sound levels in the auditoriums are correct. No technician, it seems to me, should be expected to deliver quality work unless he or she carries equipment equal or superior to this. Indeed, I insist that technicians servicing my sound .systems be equipped with IE-30s I've calibrated. If they wish to carry their own microphone calibrators, I personally check these units as weU before they are placed into service. As a result, we have achieved very consistent and accurate levels throughout our installations around the world. When necessary, I have provided this equipment to my clients at a substantial disanint, becau,se I consider it imperative they have it When checking out sound systems not calibrated with reliable equipment, I typically find that the slit-loss correction is often set too high, resulting in excessively bright sound. I also find that the sound levels can be anywhere from 2 to 10 dB high. Even worse, these level discrepancies are not consistent. Not all channels in a sound system are off by the same amount. Imagine what audiences must endure when surround levels are 6 dB too high, subwoofers are 10 dB too loud and the speakers are either being or have been destroyed. Movie theatre technicians typically have learned their trade by apprenticeship. It seems to take about two years before one is "comfortable" in the field. In addition, some manufacturers have offered valuable training seminars to instruct technicians in the proper ways to
: must I \ available I I soundtracks ! become I I ; A I I I I I 1 lam read levels) to theatres for the most routine matters, such as an exciter lamp replacement or something being unplugged, or even the improper lacing of a projector. Often, technicians are not allowed to perform propermaintenance. When equipment of poor quality keeps breaking down and ought to be replaced, technicians are told to keep it going somehow, even though they know it wiU continue to fail. All this gives technicians too little time to do their jobs. Presentation quality suffers. Unfortunately, I have also encountered some examples where technicians did not follow manufacturer instructions and left a mess. Recendy, I visited a theatre with one of my installations and discovered that half the subwoofers were turned off. The subwoofer level (playing through the other half of the subwoofers that were working) was 10 dB too high. Surround levels are almost always set incorrectly in this theatre. Wires have been cut. Short-circuits have been introduced and left in place. I could goon, but I won't. That particular theatre simply gets terrible service and always has. Frankly, it being in Los Angeles, of all places, I expect better. SETTING SOUND LEVELS One of the most frustrating problems with modem cinema sound systems is measuring, setting and maintaining proper levels. I cannot say how many theatres actually play films at their correct levels. I can say, however, that far too many are too loud, and even more (I suspect) are too soft. We do know that, in a large number of theatres, films are much too loud if they are played at the "standard" fader settings. Once this happens, it becomes anyone's guess where the fader should be—and often the guess is wrong. As we know, the volume controls, or faders, on cinema sound processors are supposed to be set at "7," or "0.0" for SDDS. When sound system levels are calibrated at these fader positions, the fihns are supposed to play at the correct level when the faders are left at these positions. Yet, when one looks around at the fader settings in operating theatres, we very often see Dolby faders at around "4 1/2" to "5 1/2" and SDDS faders at "-5" to "-10." The sound levels might be normal, or near so, but the faders are set anywhere fkim 4 to 10 dB below the positions where the sound systems were calibrated. What's going on? Acnially. this is a complicated problem brought about, among other things, by a combination of poor measurement techniques, improper sound system setup procedures, room acoustics and even loud trailers. Let's look at a typical Dolby-based installation first. Quite often, we find that we are forced to run the fader at "5" or "5 1/4," rather than '7," for Dolbyencoded features, and at "4 1/4" or "4 1/2" for DTS-encoded features. Those represent sound-level calibration errors of about 6 dB for the Dolby films and about 8 dB for DTS. Those are very large errors, and very common ones. It means that, when the technician's SPL meter reads 85 dB with pink noise, a fihn will actually play at 90 to 91 dB. DTS films would run at 92 to 93 dB. These are excruciating levels. tew years ago, I SOUND IS THE KEY a quote in one of the audio periodicals I receive that said in part, "If bad audio w/as lethal, sound systems would be the leading cause of death. "This was not aimed specifically at movie theatres but at the audio world in general. Frankly, there is much truth being said. Beyond live unamplified concerts, where does one go to enjoy high-quality, natural, undistorted sound? Certainly not to very many movie theatres. Certainly not Broadway shows. From the three-inch speakers of our own television receivers to virtually every public address system that assaults us on a daily basis, we are constantly subjected to one form or another of distorted and unpleasant sound. Yet those attending the live, often sold-out concerts are willing to pay as much as 1 times the cost of a movie ticket for the enjoyment (and relief) of listening to clear, undistorted (beautiful) music. not entirely certain how many in this industry are genuinely aware of how much of a motion picture's soundtrack is held back from the audience's ears due to overlooked and misunderstood deficiencies in cinema sound systems. Upon hearing what I'll call a "real sound system" for the first time, one industry veteran described it as the difference between driving a $1 50,000 sports car and a 20-year old station wagon with four fiat tires. My four-part series, which concludes with the accompanying article, has been a comprehensive attempt to enlighten BOXOFFICE readers about the depth of the situation as well as the magnitude of the potential, before improvements in home delivery systems completely surpass the moviegoing experience. FUTURE ALTERNATIVES By 2001, the world of home entertainment will be dramatically transformed with the introduction of digital television including six channels of digital sound. New distribution systems wil I be estabi ished. With even the most modest of home theatre loudspeakers, such receivers will easily eclipse the presentation quality of all but the best motion piaure theatres. Indeed, the sound format alone is virtually the same that theatres are trying to implement now. The window of opportunity to |X)sition ourselves in front of these alternative developments is shrinking daily. In toth sound and picture, the cinema remain the unequaled leader in presentation quality. To do this, the motion picture theatre experience needs to be virtually reinvented. Fortunately, the tools to do so are today. Digital sound recordings, combined with some ofthe truly spectacular motion picture being mixed today, are providing this industry with the opportunity to a new, less expensive and widely available source for wonderiûl experiences in sound. This potential must be realized. THE BOTTOM LINE The bottom line of my four-part series is indeed the bottom line: Great sound is marketable. Unfortunately, this industry seems to be unable to truly deliver and exploit the marketing potential of really great sound. As in the rest ofthe audio world, the latest fad can be substituted for genuine knowledge and technical know-how. Some I have spoken with just can't bring themselves to believe that sound quality' can be so effective a draw to their theatres. They express genuine surprise, even skepticism, when I tell them of the audience response and attendance increases of 25 to 300 percent experienced in some of the theatres I and others have done over the years. But ask yourself this: When have consumers not responded positively to quality and value? With ail the current alternatives competing for entertainment dollars, let alone those in the near future, too many theatres continue to be operated with inadequate sound systems. After 60 years, the principal characteristic of cinema sound systems remains the 1930's "honky" quality that makes the actors sound as though they are speaking in a trash can. Films can be played in the wrong formats or at the wrong levels. Defertive equipment is sometimes allowed to go unrepaired. And there are still far too many mono theatres. Such situations can and slx>uld be corrected. Where mediocrity exists it breeds more mediocrity, and we simply cannot afford to allow it. Excellence isn't just good for the soul, ifs good for business. In its pursuit, we not only improve ourselves but profits as well. Both are good. If people didn't love beautiful sound, they wouldn't spend hundreds—sometimes thousands—of dollars on stereo systems in their cars, let alone their homes. There wouldn't be a hi-fi or home theatre industry. There wouldn't be a recording industry. Motion picture soundtrack albums would not exist. In my opinion, entertainers who fail to take advantage of the public's attraction to high-quality sound are underestimating their customers and limiting the potential of their business. Simply installing digital processors and putting the word "digital" on the marquee doesn't accompi ish more than underwhelming audiences when the theatre's sound system doesn't deliver. Strong statements? Maybe. But the gap between the sound quality I hear in so many theatres and what I know can be achieved is surely testimony to something. JFA — February, 1998 39
Page 1 and 2: # # THE BUSINESS MAGi MW 1 OF HE SU
Page 3 and 4: têaMeêe The finest booth monitor
Page 5 and 6: SPECIAL REPORT: CINEMA SOUND 1998 I
Page 7 and 8: JBL Cinema Sound. Sunosf The Sound
Page 9 and 10: D I G IT A L 1,200 Dolby Digital Fi
Page 11 and 12: Remarkable. Reliable Reasonable. (S
Page 13 and 14: ^M .52 i ^ 3 ? t P
Page 15 and 16: ighten Up! Project;ion System Analy
Page 17 and 18: NOT ALL DIGITAL SOUND SYSTEMS ARE E
Page 19 and 20: February, 1998 19 66. FAST, CHEAP &
Page 21 and 22: February, 1998 21 Sneak Preview ^^^
Page 23 and 24: ' Fphmarv 1 00« '>'« talked about
Page 25 and 26: 5 The SioFe of Sound R E n T E C Ci
Page 27 and 28: . February. 1998 27 I FORWARD PLANN
Page 29 and 30: ..OOUOOOTOMAKEOURPo,^^^^^^ .^^' ^^^
Page 31 and 32: tor parent, EI Segundo, Calif.-base
Page 33 and 34: dl© m(Q){t ksm(B &o) *' WARNING -
Page 35 and 36: ^mmm^^ If your theater management s
Page 37: I I I I I INTL. CINEMA EQUIPMENT (s
Page 41 and 42: February, 1998 41 POV: PERSPECTIVES
Page 43 and 44: February, 1998 43 Frazier has added
Page 45 and 46: R P. — In Memory Of — 'TETE^^ G
Page 47 and 48: INTERNATIONAL NEWS BRIEFS NORTHERN
Page 49 and 50: 1 INTERNATIONAL NEWS BRIEFS PACIFIC
Page 51 and 52: — — — — February. 1998 (11-
Page 53 and 54: — — — — REVIEWS OSCAR AND L
Page 55 and 56: — — REVIEWS TOMORROW NEVER DIES
Page 57 and 58: — — s — — REVIEWS FLUBBER i
Page 59 and 60: STUDIO FEATURE CHART — FEBRUARY 1
Page 61 and 62: 7 7 BOXOFFICE Independent Feature C
Page 63 and 64: HOME RELEASE CHART My'jf^'i
Page 65 and 66: . I , Pinkston I TX j j ! plain. !
Page 67 and 68: QSC Professional Anplifiers supply

Boxoffice-Febuary.1998

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?