Blade Runner 4K UHD (1982)

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And if you don't like the revisionism no matter how 'awesome' it sounds?

Not to excuse anything, but Blade Runner does kind of have a reputation to uphold as Hollywood's revisionism poster child.

[notops]

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

Except who doesn't know this was revisionist....what's the point ?

The point is that you didn't read post #4145 very carefully, since that was the one I was responding to. He was talking about people having to rely on decades-old theatrical experiences to know what the original mix was supposed to sound like (at least, that's what I got out of it). I said that the legacy mix was easily available to hear and compare to. That's it.

[CarlosMeat]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And if you don't like the revisionism no matter how 'awesome' it sounds?

Then you have a valid argument. However, go back half the posts were about how it sounds poor even from people who literally have never heard the Atmos mix in an Atmos environment...my point here.

I fully understand not liking the revision in and of itself as I also said before the incredibly teal treated FC bugs me terribly yet I've let go due the HDR and immersive audio advantages.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Not to excuse anything, but Blade Runner does kind of have a reputation to uphold as Hollywood's revisionism poster child.

Then it has fulfilled that promise handsomely with the UHD. Still doesn't mean I have to like it though when they could so easily have included the prior mix, something that Warners took to doing almost immediately AFTER releasing Blade Runner. That's what annoys me the most: "Hey, let's include a DTS-HD 5.1 backup on all these new-release Atmos movies from now on, despite them not needing them because the Atmos IS the original mix!". I mean, WTF?

Warners have since switched to providing a user-selectable (not a hidden embed) DD 5.1 mix to provide the OG mixes e.g. Superman & The Matrices and I'd have taken that all day long on Blade Runner. Just squeeze on one more 640kb/s DD 5.1 track...

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

Then you have a valid argument. However, go back half the posts were about how it sounds poor even from people who literally have never heard the Atmos mix in an Atmos environment...my point here.

I fully understand not liking the revision in and of itself as I also said before the incredibly teal treated FC bugs me terribly yet I've let go due the HDR and immersive audio advantages.

internet forums in microcosm: people arguing about something but who are actually having competely separate arguments.

[notops]

Originally Posted by jh901

Which BR did you grow up with, exactly?

I'm not interested in Atmos, but rather sound QUALITY. I'm among the few on this forum with an audiophile engineered Pre-pro (and yes, line stage pre amplification matters, not to mention better hi-res PCM D/A conversion). The 7.1 is terrific, yes, and it's different than what I first experienced on VHS or DVD back in the 90s. Our home theaters are WAY better now. The sound and image quality in mine beats typical commercial theaters. I don't want the BR that I grew up with! I want to experience the film as those in the business would have in a private studio screening room.

You are aware that a 2.0 stereo surround track on a VHS, a LaserDisc, a DVD, and even a Blu-Ray are an exact replica of the optical 2.0 stereo surround mix you would have heard in a theater, right?

So, to answer your question, I grew up watching and listening to it on VHS, LaserDisc, DVD and finally the 2.0 mix on the Archival Disc in the BD set.

Guess what? They all sounded the same. Plus, they all sounded exactly like what a brand-new print in a Dolby equipped theater in 1982 would have. There's no big mystery about how it was originally mixed.

[CarlosMeat]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

internet forums in microcosm: people arguing about something but who are actually having competely separate arguments.

True and my fault for sure.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by notops

You are aware that a 2.0 stereo surround track on a VHS, a LaserDisc, a DVD, and even a Blu-Ray are an exact replica of the optical 2.0 stereo surround mix you would have heard in a theater, right?

So, to answer your question, I grew up watching and listening to it on VHS, LaserDisc, DVD and finally the 2.0 mix on the Archival Disc in the BD set.

Guess what? They all sounded the same. Plus, they all sounded exactly like what a brand-new print in a Dolby equipped theater in 1982 would have. There's no big mystery about how it was originally mixed.

Um not always by a long ass shot

[notops]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

Um not always by a long ass shot

Um, do explain, since I'm comparing them to mid-quality optical tracks, not magnetic

[Bent Wookiee]

I understand the frustration with the Atmos fold-down not working correctly (that was a miss), but to knock it for "revisionism" makes absolutely no sense to me, since neither the video nor audio in the FC were "original" anyway. Not sure how those changes can be fine and these can't. Of course, even if that mix were included then people would be crying about the lack of the VHS mix or something.

For me, the Atmos mix is fantastic and the only one I'll be listening to in my room for the foreseeable future.

[notops]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookiee

I understand the frustration with the Atmos fold-down not working correctly (that was a miss), but to knock it for "revisionism" makes absolutely no sense to me, since neither the video nor audio in the FC were "original" anyway. Not sure how those changes can be fine and these can't. Of course, even if that mix were included then people would be crying about the lack of the VHS mix or something.

For me, the Atmos mix is fantastic and the only one I'll be listening to in my room for the foreseeable future.

Glad you like it, but some of us don't. I'm also not a big fan of the color changes in FC (both BD and UHD, since they do differ) but that was not the topic at hand. The audio was.

I find it quite amusing the hypocrisy around here (no, I'm not referring to you), since nobody jumps on the countless people who say the same thing about the revisionist mix on The Terminator, but treat this mix like a little Faberge Egg that cannot even be questioned .

[Bent Wookiee]

Originally Posted by notops

I find it quite amusing the hypocrisy around here (no, I'm not referring to you), since nobody jumps on the countless people who say the same thing about the revisionist mix on The Terminator, but treat this mix like a little Faberge Egg that cannot even be questioned .

Hypocrisy is certainly well stocked around here, but I don't see The Terminator example as an equivalent. I mean, if they put out another version of The Terminator with a different audio track in like 2009 and then did another version recently with a new track/mix yet again, sure.

I guess my point is that the FC had audio changes from the DC or TC, so to claim "original" on the FC just doesn't make sense. But again I get that people who don't have an Atmos setup got boned on this release which is very unfortunate.

[notops]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookiee

Hypocrisy is certainly well stocked around here, but I don't see The Terminator example as an equivalent. I mean, if they put out another version of The Terminator with a different audio track in like 2009 and then did another version recently with a new track/mix yet again, sure.

I guess my point is that the FC had audio changes from the DC or TC, so to claim "original" on the FC just doesn't make sense. But again I get that people who don't have an Atmos setup got boned on this release which is very unfortunate.

It's a matter of preference. Simple as that. I don't like the exaggerated sfx. I've never tried to begrudge people their right to like the mix, so I cannot understand why my mix preference is getting so many folks' panties in a bunch. But, hey... internet.

[Bent Wookiee]

Originally Posted by notops

It's a matter of preference. Simple as that. I don't like the exaggerated sfx. I've never tried to begrudge people their right to like the mix, so I cannot understand why my mix preference is getting so many folks' panties in a bunch. But, hey... internet.

Absolutely, no argument from me re: personal preference. Do whatever works for you! It just seems so weird to me that some people (not you) are going to war on "original" hill with this, when that hill doesn't exist.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Audiophiles are the worst.

It drives me nuts sometimes but I try to remember videophiles probably look just as crazy to non-videophiles. "It's sharpened? Isn't that good? What's wrong with you?"

[BNex99]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookiee

I guess my point is that the FC had audio changes from the DC or TC, so to claim "original" on the FC just doesn't make sense.

As others have stated repeatedly, the 5.1 created for the Final Cut in 2007 is the original audio for the Final Cut.

And because the Atmos track on the UHD of the Final Cut is so significantly different from the audio that was originally created for the Final Cut (no matter what kind of system you're playing it through), it's disappointing that the '07 track was not included.

It's really as simple as that.

[notops]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookiee

Absolutely, no argument from me re: personal preference. Do whatever works for you! It just seems so weird to me that some people (not you) are going to war on "original" hill with this, when that hill doesn't exist.

My major issue with the Atmos mix is that it does some unnecessary things.

Let me explain:
The FC on BD has a 5.1 remix on it that is extraordinarily faithful to the original (with the exception of the added footage included in the street chase which sounds way more modern and spread out).

I assumed the Atmos mix would simply build on the BD mix and tastefully apply some elements to the overhead channels. I assumed wrong. They exaggerated so many things that, while immersive, it just got revisionist AF for me. Yet, I'm totally cool with the FC mix on the BD, so I don't feel like I'm being completely unreasonable with my preference.

[Bent Wookiee]

Originally Posted by BNex99

As others have stated repeatedly, the 5.1 created for the Final Cut in 2007 is the original audio for the Final Cut.

I don't think anyone wasn't aware of that. It just doesn't mean anything. The Atmos track is thus the original audio for the UHD release of the Final Cut. So now what?

My point is that you can like or not like the Atmos mix for any reason you want. I sincerely don't care either way. But if your position is built on being against revisionism you might want to reevaluate.

[BNex99]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookiee

I don't think anyone wasn't aware of that. It just doesn't mean anything. The Atmos track is thus the original audio for the UHD release of the Final Cut. So now what?

Now we let it go.

[notops]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookiee

I don't think anyone wasn't aware of that. It just doesn't mean anything. The Atmos track is thus the original audio for the UHD release of the Final Cut. So now what?

My point is that you can like or not like the Atmos mix for any reason you want. I sincerely don't care either way. But if your position is built on being against revisionism you might want to reevaluate.

You're being too black and white about revisionism. There is, like all things in life, nuance. Many 5.1 mixes are revisionist. Not a big deal. For some of us Blade Runner fanatics that know the soundtrack like the backs of our hands, the revisionism is taken to a bit of an extreme in several spots in the Atmos. Again, nuance. Just relax and let people like what they like. None of us who don't like it are trying to make you feel small for liking it.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by notops

Um, do explain, since I'm comparing them to mid-quality optical tracks, not magnetic

Quite a few are down mixes, more are near field mixes.
The earlier you go back the less this happens, but even some 90s LD's PCM tacks have more bunch than a modern mix due to them being the original cinema mix.
But its rare even then.

Originally Posted by BNex99

As others have stated repeatedly, the 5.1 created for the Final Cut in 2007 is the original audio for the Final Cut.

And because the Atmos track on the UHD of the Final Cut is so significantly different from the audio that was originally created for the Final Cut (no matter what kind of system you're playing it through), it's disappointing that the '07 track was not included.

It's really as simple as that.

Yup