Posted by pinecone at dialup-0230.dublin.iol.ie on August 24, 2001 at 09:39:42:
In Reply to: One reason why geeks like SDDS (see below) posted by Fry on August 24, 2001 at 00:30:10:
We did NOT do a separate 5-behind-the-screen SDDS mix for JSBSB
(nor have a ever, even on a Sony picture).
The truth is that for sound quality alone, SDDS is the best
SOUNDING format for cinema release, squarely beatting Dolby
Digital, DTS, and old-school analog Dolby SR. This is mostly
because the datarate (bandwidth) for SDDS is much higher than the
I recently checked prints for JSBSB, having the opportunity to
compare the results in all four sound formats. Lo and behold, SDDS
sounded best hands down.
Unfortunately, SDDS is the format most prone to technical problems
due to print attrition. Specifically, because SDDS is located on the
outer edges of the sprocket holes on a 35mm print, these areas are
more subject to scraping, shreading, and the like than Dolby Digital
(located in between the sprocket holes) or DTS (on a separate
It is not uncommon for an SDDS track to experience many dropouts
(reverting to the analog backup soundtrack) after only 2 weeks of play.
Since Cinema DTS (versus Home Theater DTS-- two different
beasts) interleaves the Subwoofer with the Surround channels, I
would choose Dolby Digital for the best compromise of fidelity and
... though I hate what AC-3 compression does to rain and crowd
sound effects in the surrounds....
Post a Followup