surprised by old movie reviews

[TheTenth]

I must say I like very much An American in Paris and Quo vadis, but why give them 3.5 and 3.0 for sound quality when they're mono? At least in the review state that it's a 3.5 comapred to movies of this age, but not compare them with 7.1 recent movies with moderate audio quality ... Or find a system showing 2 scores : one comparing to old movies and one comparing to newer 7.1 movies ...

[Beta Man]

Maybe the Mono-track wasn't worthy of a "5"

The Third Man is a mono track, and got 5's across the board........ so that shoots some holes in your theory of the audio being marked down simply because it's a mono-track....... Perhaps there are too many flaws in the mono tracks of the titles you listed.

[Jeff Kleist]

When I review something for the Bits, I only judge the movie against its likely potential. I'm not going to give a movie from the 30s a 20 for sound, but I will give it in the 17-18 dept if I think they've realized that potential

Judging against a modern film is pointless, it's asking why the spirit of st louis doesn't do better against an F-16.

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by TheTenth

I must say I like very much An American in Paris and Quo vadis, but why give them 3.5 and 3.0 for sound quality when they're mono? At least in the review state that it's a 3.5 comapred to movies of this age, but not compare them with 7.1 recent movies with moderate audio quality ... Or find a system showing 2 scores : one comparing to old movies and one comparing to newer 7.1 movies ...

No worries, I was judging the audio mixes against the potential of a "perfect" remastering, not how it might compare to more untouchable modern tracks. I actually prefer a good mono track over a flashy surround remix -- it's always more faithful in my opinion