Lawrence of Arabia (1962)

[Farge-TV]

I had seats exactly in the middle, but it's difficult to estimate the distance. The cinema is quite small, and I was seated in row 6, so I would guess mabe 8 or 10 meters from the screen. The screen is quite large for such a small room, and I'm guessing that it's 8 to 10 meters, as well.

The sound was actually a little strange. The dynamics were fantastic, but all the high-range sounds were quite distorted at high volumes, which was very noticeable when the score kicked in. I thought that the magnetic track was worn, but I experienced the exact same problem when I watched Patton, so I'm assuming that the problem was with the equipment. Perhaps the magnetic reading heads are worn? I don't know.

They also had the volume quite high, and significantly higher than I would have had it at home. (But that's part of the charm, except for the mentioned distortion.)

[Mogwai]

The 70mm version they ran in Oslo didn't have magnetic soundtrack. I talked to the projectionist, and he told me they used a DTS CD synchronised to the picture.

I guess that means the print was made for the 40th anniversary in 2002, because the Robert A. Harris restoration from 1989 used Dolby SR (as mentioned on the end credits of the 70mm print)

[Farge-TV]

Really? Then I wonder what the cause of the distorted sound was. Did you watch it as well?

[garyrc]

Originally Posted by Farge-TV

... The dynamics were fantastic, but all the high-range sounds were quite distorted at high volumes, which was very noticeable when the score kicked in. I thought that the magnetic track was worn, but I experienced the exact same problem when I watched Patton, so I'm assuming that the problem was with the equipment....

They also had the volume quite high, and significantly higher than I would have had it at home. (But that's part of the charm, except for the mentioned distortion.)

Originally Posted by Mogwai

The 70mm version they ran in Oslo didn't have magnetic soundtrack. I talked to the projectionist, and he told me they used a DTS CD synchronised to the picture.

I guess that means the print was made for the 40th anniversary in 2002, because the Robert A. Harris restoration from 1989 used Dolby SR (as mentioned on the end credits of the 70mm print)

Originally Posted by Farge-TV

Really? Then I wonder what the cause of the distorted sound was. Did you watch it as well?

Thanks to both of you!

Here are my guesses:

• Lawrence was a more difficult than average soundtrack. The music is probably meant to be very bright, and may have been successfully so in the original run in 1962.
  
• When a magnetic soundtrack (in this case, a master) is damaged by a magnetic field the most noticeable effect is a roll off of very high frequencies -- which would produce an effect the opposite of what Farge noticed -- but I truly believe that I have noticed that magnetic fields can produce an increase in harmonic/intermodulation distortion as well.
  
• To my ears, digital is a harsher, shriller medium than magnetic. All of the original magnetic soundtracks I have heard seem "warm" with a few exceptions, and Lawrence was one of those exceptions, although still effective. In the theater, with mag tracks, in 1962, I, as a very young audiophile, noticed that it was just a bit harsh. Since dubbing studio and theater speakers of those days (both Altec and JBL) tended to begin their roll off at about 12K (although the harshest sound is usually below 12K, somewhere between 1K and 8K in the ear's most sensitive range) any "hash" and additional stridency at the very top of the audio spectrum could have been masked in those days, and unknown to even the filmmakers, but clearly audible to us today. Transferring it to digital could have been the final blow.

The reason I asked about the audio in the first place was that the Blu-ray sounds a little harsh in places, but I wouldn't consider it to be "quite distorted" ... too bad the DTS you saw was.

I agree that high -- orchestra level, or even a little higher -- SPL is "part of the charm," in a 70 mm roadshow production. That's a tradition that started with the modestly named The Miracle of Todd-AO and Oklahoma!, both in 1955. That's why it's so important to have low distortion.

It will be interesting to see how one of the really warm soundtracks from a 70 mm production (Around the World in 80 Days, Oklahoma!) will sound if transferred to DTS, especially if they use an updated DTS format.

[Farge-TV]

Interesting information!

I have never really had any negative experiences with DTS (or other digital formats) versions of old soundtracks before, but something may have happened in the conversion, for all I know.

The last film that I watched during the 70 mm festival was Interstellar (I wanted to watch some new 70 mm productions as well as classics), and the sound was actually quite harsh and a little distorted then as well. The harshness was not as severe as on Lawrence of Arabia, but still noticable.

So I suspect that the sound system in that theatre is partly to blame, and that Lawrence of Arabia will sound better in other setups.

[garyrc]

Originally Posted by Farge-TV

Interesting information!

I have never really had any negative experiences with DTS (or other digital formats) versions of old soundtracks before, but something may have happened in the conversion, for all I know.

The last film that I watched during the 70 mm festival was Interstellar (I wanted to watch some new 70 mm productions as well as classics), and the sound was actually quite harsh and a little distorted then as well. The harshness was not as severe as on Lawrence of Arabia, but still noticable.

So I suspect that the sound system in that theatre is partly to blame, and that Lawrence of Arabia will sound better in other setups.

Too bad about Interstellar

Some theaters are harsh sounding. The old Coronet in San Francisco had wonderful, dynamic, warm sound from the time it was equipped for 70 mm (Oklahoma! in Todd-AO in 1955) up through 80 Days, Porgy and Bess, Ben-Hur, and the rest ... but ... when they put in a new sound system for Star Wars in 1977, it was harsh -- a knife in the ear. It was not only the music that was overly bright, but the sound C3PO made. The room acoustics were identical, of course. Only the sound system and the movie itself were different. Maybe the filmmakers tried to push the envelope on the treble? Close Encounters was not quite as bad in 70 mm in the same theater.

When they re-released Star Wars in insulting, milky, 35 mm over a decade later it went back to the same Coronet theater. This time the mix was too dull, rather than too bright. Somewhere in-between would have been fine. I called Lucasfilm and found a guy who agreed with me, and he said I should complain to Fox post production. I said, "Fine, give me their email." He said, "Fox post production doesn't have email yet."

[Farge-TV]

You called Lucasfilm? That's what I call initiative!

I accept that not all theatres can have good bass reproduction, as bass is very difficult in accoustics, but treble is a lot easier to handle.

Another aspect that comes to mind is that horn speakers often sound harsh at loud volumes, and i guess that a lot of theatres use horns, since they are cost-effective in terms of amplifier power. I don't know if that is the case for that specific theatre.

[garyrc]

Originally Posted by Farge-TV

You called Lucasfilm? That's what I call initiative!

I accept that not all theatres can have good bass reproduction, as bass is very difficult in accoustics, but treble is a lot easier to handle.

Another aspect that comes to mind is that horn speakers often sound harsh at loud volumes, and i guess that a lot of theatres use horns, since they are cost-effective in terms of amplifier power. I don't know if that is the case for that specific theatre.

You spell theater the old way -- theatre -- just as I used to, so you must be old , or British? The Blu-ray.com spell check has never heard of "theatre." I fought the good fight to preserve "theatre," "aesthetics," and so many other words, phrases and meanings. Finally the new meaning of "Epic" finished me off, so I joined the crowd.

Over-stressing any speaker at SPLs beyond its low distortion limits is a problem, but former soundtracks heard in that theater were quite loud, just as loud as Star Wars, with no problem, with the old horns (probably JBL, but possibly Altec; Todd-AO equipped the theater, and JBL made speakers for that process). Ben-Hur was especially loud, and the fanfare trumpets sounded undistorted and gorgeous (even though Plutarch said that the real Roman trumpets sounded like "the braying of an ass." Even though some people like direct radiators, and some people like horns, anything but a horn loaded midrange/tweeter would probably be blown out at the power needed to produce the loud passages in a large theater.

The more I think about it the more I think the initial sound track for Star Wars itself was the problem. Later movies were not as harsh at the Coronet.

A separate issue is that the mid bass (say, 80 through 200) was never as clean through the direct radiator woofers and subs, nor did it have the authority of the old bass horns. We have louder and deeper bass now (below the old roll-off at 35 - 40, down to as low as 5 Hz in a few theaters, with a few movies), but it doesn't have the clean impact of the horns.

In 1962, Lawrence was a tiny bit harsh, but the midrange was balanced by a very aggressive, clean bass.

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Farge-TV

I had seats exactly in the middle, but it's difficult to estimate the distance. The cinema is quite small, and I was seated in row 6, so I would guess mabe 8 or 10 meters from the screen. The screen is quite large for such a small room, and I'm guessing that it's 8 to 10 meters, as well.

The sound was actually a little strange. The dynamics were fantastic, but all the high-range sounds were quite distorted at high volumes, which was very noticeable when the score kicked in. I thought that the magnetic track was worn, but I experienced the exact same problem when I watched Patton, so I'm assuming that the problem was with the equipment. Perhaps the magnetic reading heads are worn? I don't know.

They also had the volume quite high, and significantly higher than I would have had it at home. (But that's part of the charm, except for the mentioned distortion.)

I would presume that the audio problem was based upon one of two problems, or perhaps both.

The print probably did not have the requisite audio test loops delivered with it, as most have not survived.

Also, if the print, which is Dolby SR, was played in another format, for example, Dolby A, the track might have a tendency to not replicate well in the high end.

RAH

[Farge-TV]

Thank you for the information, Mr. Harris!

According to another poster, this copy of Lawrence of Arabia didn't use the magnetic track at all:

Originally Posted by Mogwai

The 70mm version they ran in Oslo didn't have magnetic soundtrack. I talked to the projectionist, and he told me they used a DTS CD synchronised to the picture.

I guess that means the print was made for the 40th anniversary in 2002, because the Robert A. Harris restoration from 1989 used Dolby SR (as mentioned on the end credits of the 70mm print)

Do you believe that information to be accurate? And if so, would it be safe to assume that the problem was with the equipment, and not with the copy itself?

[Farge-TV]

Originally Posted by garyrc

You spell theater the old way -- theatre -- just as I used to, so you must be old , or British? The Blu-ray.com spell check has never heard of "theatre." I fought the good fight to preserve "theatre," "aesthetics," and so many other words, phrases and meanings. Finally the new meaning of "Epic" finished me off, so I joined the crowd.

Over-stressing any speaker at SPLs beyond its low distortion limits is a problem, but former soundtracks heard in that theater were quite loud, just as loud as Star Wars, with no problem, with the old horns (probably JBL, but possibly Altec; Todd-AO equipped the theater, and JBL made speakers for that process). Ben-Hur was especially loud, and the fanfare trumpets sounded undistorted and gorgeous (even though Plutarch said that the real Roman trumpets sounded like "the braying of an ass." Even though some people like direct radiators, and some people like horns, anything but a horn loaded midrange/tweeter would probably be blown out at the power needed to produce the loud passages in a large theater.

The more I think about it the more I think the initial sound track for Star Wars itself was the problem. Later movies were not as harsh at the Coronet.

A separate issue is that the mid bass (say, 80 through 200) was never as clean through the direct radiator woofers and subs, nor did it have the authority of the old bass horns. We have louder and deeper bass now (below the old roll-off at 35 - 40, down to as low as 5 Hz in a few theaters, with a few movies), but it doesn't have the clean impact of the horns.

In 1962, Lawrence was a tiny bit harsh, but the midrange was balanced by a very aggressive, clean bass.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts! I suppose that if most or all theatres use horns, then horns themselves cannot be the general reason. I have, however listened to specific horn speakers that sound harsh, so this theatre might have "bad" horn speakers.

As for my age and nationality, I'm neither old nor British (I'm 29 and from Norway), but we're taught British English in school, and I lived for a year in London, so I suppose that's the reason for my spelling of "theatre". I also use British English spelling of other words, such as "colour"/"harbour", and "civilisation".

[Early Memphis]

Originally Posted by Farge-TV

... As for my age and nationality, I'm neither old nor British (I'm 29 and from Norway) ...

[pred895]

A fantastic Set , and One of the most amazing blu-ray views i ever had !!!
My Unboxing >>

Lawrence of Arabia - 50th Anniversary Limited Collector's Edition / Blu-ray + CD Unboxing - YouTube

[Martin_31]

Decided to buy it off of the Amazon sale. The total was $42. I think it's deal. Can't wait when it's in my hand.

[Poya]

Meh. I'll just import the Japanese Mi4K edition. Better picture.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by Poya

Meh. I'll just import the Japanese Mi4K edition. Better picture.

Ι don't know what to do.
Get the barebones japanese disc or this..

[solovoyager]

Originally Posted by pred895

A fantastic Set , and One of the most amazing blu-ray views i ever had !!!
My Unboxing >>
Lawrence of Arabia - 50th Anniversary Limited Collector's Edition / Blu-ray + CD Unboxing - YouTube

Nice unboxing! I've watched this before on Youtube and damn, that is a very nice set for a great movie. Tempted to purchase it at it's present $38.99 price at Amazon. Just don't know if I can deal with more big sets, editions, collections. If there ever was a set/collection I would display (though I'm not a displayer up to now) this would be the one. Love that Lawrence of Arabia cover artwork on this collection/edition (that painted Lawrence artwork would make a cool tattoo imo or car decal/magnet).

Also have been spending a lot on BD's for awhile now. My bungalow is on the verge of becoming an Ultimate Collector's Edition Bungalow (without slip).

[MifuneFan]

R.I.P. Omar Sharif

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/mo...od=nytnow&_r=5

[Joce]

R.i.p

[EgbertSouse]

FYI - B&N has this set as part of the 50% Classic Film sale they are running now. I found it in store and got it for $34.55 + tax (47.99 sale price + 20% coupon + 10% member discount). Pretty good price for a great set.