Blade Runner 4K UHD (1982)

[jh901]

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

My point is the Atmos mix is wonderful despite the poor 5.1 review. Have you heard the Atmos mix on an Atmos set up ?

"Atmos set up"

Ordinary 7.1 surround will not become extraordinary by adding a few speakers and more processing. The room matters. Positioning of speakers and listening position matters. Amplification, both line stage and power, matters. There's no escaping the basics.

[jh901]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Audiophiles are the worst.

It's not just audiophiles though. It's anyone who's gained expertise in any given discipline and then dares to share. Totally the worst!

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by jh901

It's not just audiophiles though. It's anyone who's gained expertise in any given discipline and then dares to share. Totally the worst!

Glad we're on the same page...

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by jh901

"Atmos set up"

Ordinary 7.1 surround will not become extraordinary by adding a few speakers and more processing. The room matters. Positioning of speakers and listening position matters. Amplification, both line stage and power, matters. There's no escaping the basics.

I could listen to it on a toaster and the one cue with the unicorn would have stood out a mile

[jh901]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And as people keep repeating: it's not a matter of QUALITY.

What then? The mix itself? Small sound effect changes? Who's heard the "golden mix" in a proper screening room? None of us? Ok, but that's what the reference is. Else, we can rely on random commercial theater experiences from decades ago!

So, it is, in small part anyhow, a matter of quality and our own expectations for what reproduced sound is supposed to sound like.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by jh901

What then? The mix itself? Small sound effect changes? Who's heard the "golden mix" in a proper screening room? None of us? Ok, but that's what the reference is. Else, we can rely on random commercial theater experiences from decades ago!

So, it is, in small part anyhow, a matter of quality and our own expectations for what reproduced sound is supposed to sound like.

[CarlosMeat]

Originally Posted by jh901

"Atmos set up"

Ordinary 7.1 surround will not become extraordinary by adding a few speakers and more processing. The room matters. Positioning of speakers and listening position matters. Amplification, both line stage and power, matters. There's no escaping the basics.

No doubt. This title, however, should be judged on what it is. The deficiencies are discussed in detail with some probable encode issues as far as grain, and the 5.1 issues yet on the flip side the HDR is gorgeous and the Atmos performance is incredibly engaging and is the epitome of immersive.

[notops]

Originally Posted by jh901

What then? The mix itself? Small sound effect changes? Who's heard the "golden mix" in a proper screening room? None of us? Ok, but that's what the reference is. Else, we can rely on random commercial theater experiences from decades ago!

So, it is, in small part anyhow, a matter of quality and our own expectations for what reproduced sound is supposed to sound like.

Anyone with the 5 disc BD set can hear the Legacy mix on the disc with the Theatrical, International and Director's cuts, and in the original 2.0 surround, to boot. It's not like us purists are pulling our complaints about the Atoms mix out of our asses. The mixes are there for anyone to hear.

Your "golden mix" and screening room statements are silly because it's beyond easy for you to hear the original mix and not just rely on 'faith' that the Atmos is accurate (it is not).

[gates70]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Audiophiles are the worst.

To be fair, they are just as bad as videophiles pointing out that a pixel is out of place.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by gates70

To be fair, they are just as bad as videophiles pointing out that a pixel is out of place.

They do have a point- it's annoying when you get up to make popcorn and run into a stray pixel wandering the hallway.

[gates70]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

They do have a point- it's annoying when you get up to make popcorn and run into a stray pixel wandering the hallway.

Just kick that sucker out of the way!

[CarlosMeat]

Originally Posted by notops

Your "golden mix" and screening room statements are silly because it's beyond easy for you to hear the original mix and not just rely on 'faith' that the Atmos is accurate (it is not).

So I understand are you referring to the Atmos version through an Atmos processor and room ?

[notops]

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

So I understand are you referring to the Atmos version through an Atmos processor and room ?

Nope. I know the Atmos has an inferior downmix, but by most accounts, the Atmos mix played in the proper environments is still quite problematic in terms of revisionism (which is what I'm discussing here).

Also, if the Atmos mix ONLY sounds good in just Atmos and not the THD downmix, then it's an even more problematic mix.

Most people here loooove this disc and consider it to be flawless, but I see it as a series of missed opportunities on WB's part. Such a shame...

[Nothing371]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Audiophiles are the worst.

they're the bearded, craft beer drinking hipsters of the blu-ray.com forums.

[CarlosMeat]

Originally Posted by notops

Nope. I know the Atmos has an inferior downmix, but by most accounts, the Atmos mix played in the proper environments is still quite problematic in terms of revisionism (which is what I'm discussing here).

Also, if the Atmos mix ONLY sounds good in just Atmos and not the THD downmix, then it's an even more problematic mix.

Most people here loooove this disc and consider it to be flawless, but I see it as a series of missed opportunities on WB's part. Such a shame...

I disagree: Although the downmix has issues and I don't even think that is debated much the Atmos mix is both incredibly engaging and immersive with the best Atmos mixes out there. It is no doubt revisionist but ,as I said , so is the whole Final Cut UHD both in HDR and more so the massive color difference from all other versions. This makes it different to be sure and anything but problematic in an Atmos room, on the contrary it's spectacular.

[notops]

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

I disagree: Although the downmix has issues and I don't even think that is debated much the Atmos mix is both incredibly engaging and immersive with the best Atmos mixes out there. It is no doubt revisionist but ,as I said , so is the whole Final Cut UHD both in HDR and more so the massive color difference from all other versions. This makes it different to be sure and anything but problematic in an Atmos room, on the contrary it's spectacular.

Dude, all I've been talking about is the revisionism. Feel free to check my post history in this thread. I've complemented the immersiveness of the (down)mix several times. I've never tried to begrudge people's right to love the mix.

My point was, and continues to be, a startling level of revisionism. Sheesh......

[Geoff D]

Yeah, it's not getting through mate.

[notops]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Yeah, it's not getting through mate.

No shit

[CarlosMeat]

Originally Posted by notops

No shit

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

[Geoff D]

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