The Incredibles 4K UHD (2004)

[leniphotography]

So clearly many of you are furious over the Atmos track. I must admit that I found it pretty good. It was very engaging once I turned up the volume. Sure it could be better but I honestly liked it more than the older DTS track. As long as Disney doesn't s*** all over these films i will keep buying them because Disney seems to be wanting to phase out home video (Getting rid of multiple disc sets, eliminating disc art, being among the first to abandon 3D releases, etc) I was blown away when Disney announced their first 4K Blu-ray and speechless when The Incredibles was announced for 4K. With enough complaints I'm sure Disney will fix the audio issue, but I still support purchasing their home video releases. I don't want them to go strictly streaming 4K when they release their streaming platform. I DESPISE the idea of going only digital. It's okay as long as conditions are perfect, but should never replace discs.

In the end I don't think this release was all that bad. We're getting a 14 year old computer animated release on 4K Blu-ray. Yes, it could've been better but not by much. I just wonder if it's the way my system is set up but it sounded great to my ears and my husband's as well. It's one of the first times we truly heard the speakers above us by themselves.

[Sabre95]

I'll always be confused when a 4K picture review scores lower than a 1080p picture review when you're getting a higher resolution and HDR.

[cleeve]

Originally Posted by Sabre95

I'll always be confused when a 4K picture review scores lower than a 1080p picture review when you're getting a higher resolution and HDR.

That's because the scale isn't the same. A 3.5/5 for UHD PQ is not the same as a 3.5/5 for BD PQ.

Seems to me that a 3/5 UHD PQ roughly translates to a 5/5 BD PQ.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Sabre95

I'll always be confused when a 4K picture review scores lower than a 1080p picture review when you're getting a higher resolution and HDR.

You just have to remember it's a separate scale. Points scored in the NBA are not the same as points scored in high school.

[Sabre95]

Originally Posted by cleeve

That's because the scale isn't the same. A 3.5/5 for UHD PQ is not the same as a 3.5/5 for BD PQ.

Seems to me that a 3/5 UHD PQ roughly translates to a 5/5 BD PQ.

Ah I see. Makes sense now. Thanks!

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Sabre95

I'll always be confused when a 4K picture review scores lower than a 1080p picture review when you're getting a higher resolution and HDR.

Quite obviously a better format is judged by higher standards

[jh901]

Originally Posted by BigBlue10989

Or they value actual fidelity over dynamic range, like myself.

I'd say that my surround set-up puts audio fidelity first. Right? I mean, seems that fewer than 1% bother with audiophile designed Prepro and power amp. Epic difference in resolution. Bass traps and other passive acoustic treatment. No extra signal processing (digital EQ, room correction, etc).

[punisher]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

Yeah I might make the upgrade for the one if it drops in price by a LOT. While I like this movie this doesn't seem like it offers an upgrade nearly worth its current price tag

I used the 20% off ebay code the other day and picked up the disc only for 12 bucks shipped..I needed a few other things so I added the disc to make my order reach the magic 50.00 mark....I had no plans to buy the whole set of the same other discs all over again....

[BigBlue10989]

Originally Posted by jh901

I'd say that my surround set-up puts audio fidelity first. Right? I mean, seems that fewer than 1% bother with audiophile designed Prepro and power amp. Epic difference in resolution. Bass traps and other passive acoustic treatment. No extra signal processing (digital EQ, room correction, etc).

Of course, but my point is that in these forums, if there isn't teeth rattling LFE, or insane dynamic range, than the track is automatically considered terrible.

Some posters literally get mad that they have to turn the volume up.

[5150z]

Originally Posted by Nothing371

ok that doesn't explain the problem at all.

You're correct, it should not be a problem to simply turn the MV up to a level where the Atmos track sounds best to YOU. My issue, which I addressed in my disc review here last night is, why do the Disney audio engineers apparently master these Atmos tracks so low? If, in fact, that is the actual issue. I'm not sure we'll ever get an answer for that. And certainly lower than other studios do?

[Nothing371]

Originally Posted by 5150z

You're correct, it should not be a problem to simply turn the MV up to a level where the Atmos track sounds best to YOU. My issue, which I addressed in my disc review here last night is, why do the Disney audio engineers apparently master these Atmos tracks so low? If, in fact, that is the actual issue. I'm not sure we'll ever get an answer for that. And certainly lower than other studios do?

I'm still waiting to hear a detailed explanation for why the audio quality is poor other than "you need to really turn the volume up". I don't understand the audio problems beyond that, and most people have shown a lack of capability in describing them.

[SmartriX]

Playing devils advocate for a hot minute...

I wouldn't be surprised if it had something to do with their wide arching strategy of using one master version for all mediums, dvd, blu ray, 4k uhd, 4k streaming, 2k streaming, digital mobile streaming and their upcoming own streaming platform, cinema, living room, broadcast television etc.

AKA the dynamics feel subpar and LFE feels less just because overall volume is quieter and you need to turn it up to compensate compared to other studio releases... Something about the audio level meeting multiple standards and being best for the common denominator, being a large company and as wide reaching as they are today it has to do something with that I would wager.

Oldest standardizations stem from broadcasting, which absolutely should have been changed but lets not forget that most people do not have soundproofed rooms 100' across where they watch tv. The typical living room is a different sized space than a theater, and things need to be tailored to suit it. Ideally by the same person who did the theatrical mix.

And sometimes based solely on who's in charge of a department might be enough to sway creative direction in one particular direction, say to follow a certain set of mixing principles based on opinion or past experience...

This is a pretty old excerpt but this must be factored into the equation, if you ask me the answer lies between Disney being an old company and following practices such as below that they have been doing for far longer than most others and they are trying to adopt and streamline standard to reduce complexity of internal versions to use for distribution.

"""--A soundtrack that has been mixed for presentation in a large room such as a theater can be described as a theatrical mix. Theatrical mixes anticipate specified equalization playback curves and the greater dynamic range appropriate to a theatrical environment. This is in contrast to near-field mixes, which are intended for playback in smaller rooms, such as those found in homes.

According to Dolby, about 25 percent of studio movies--typically big budget, explosion-filled popcorn flicks--undergo a remixing process that is designed to "shrink" the sound for the living room setting. "When DVDs first started coming out, many studios started to recognize that their bigger action titles weren't translating well into the home environment," says Steve Venezia, director of production services at Dolby. "So a number of studios began to take bigger titles and tweak and remaster them using the same mixer who originally mixed the movie."

Creating this so-called "home theater master" involves simulating the smaller space of a living room using a near-field monitor, and mixing the movie to play back at an average volume of about 79 decibels. This is about a 6 decibel drop over the 85-decibel level that theatrical mixes are designed to be played at, but because the decibel scale is logarithmic, it represents a full 50 percent drop in volume.

Of course, playing a movie back at an average volume of 79 decibels (which is about the volume of a vacuum cleaner), can be troublesome with some scenes. "If you've got small kids, it's probably too loud," says David Gray, Dolby's vice president of production services--.

--Read more: The Problem With DVD Audio Mixes—And What To Do About It - Popular Mechanics"""--

**For all we know Disney has access to data that says 50% of consumers have soundbars now and 40% of consumers digest their medium via streaming or headphones in which case their mixes are optimized for that. Now I'm not saying that is factual but I'm stating the company is big enough to have the resources to determine that data and follow suit... - I don't agree with this approach and I of course would love better mixes just my two cents, food for thought if you will, feel free to disagree.

[jh901]

Originally Posted by BigBlue10989

Of course, but my point is that in these forums, if there isn't teeth rattling LFE, or insane dynamic range, than the track is automatically considered terrible.

Some posters literally get mad that they have to turn the volume up.

Ok, we generally agree that the home theater hobby has been over run with sub-bass fanatics. I won't even bother to comment further on this subject.

What Disney has done with Ragnarok and Black Panther is sabotage the highs and lows. Additionally, the surrounds and rear surrounds are underutilized. I'm only speaking to 7.1 in comparison to dozens of 7.1 or 5.1 from other studios. The contrast is clear.

Perhaps the 7.1 on this new release doesn't suffer the same?

In any event, it will stink if Avengers or Iron Man, etc are released on 4K with inadequate audio.

[avs commenter]

So this and A Wrinkle in Time only have HDR10 as opposed to DV. Is Disney only using DV for it's bigger releases?

[fighthefutureofhd]

I haven't noticed a clear contrast with audio between other studios and Disney. I'm not saying it's not there. I just haven't seen or heard it myself yet. It could be my setup (I won't deny that), but so far all the mixes have been about the same except for The Matrix.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by Nothing371

I'm going to need people to explain one thing for me regarding the Disney Dolby Atmos situation.

If all that is required for you to achieve a normal level of Atmos sound is for you to turn you volume up 8-10 notches, then what is the problem?

(serious question. I'm not looking to instigate; just trying to understand. I use a simple 2.1 soundbar and have little knowledge about Atmos setups.)

It's not just volume, it's the dynamic range of the audio itself that Disney seems to be compressing in addition to mastering the volume at a lower level. I'll let someone who knows more about audio take it from here, but even on headphones, I can hear a difference between a good track and an Atmouse one.

[SmartriX]

Originally Posted by jh901

Ok, we generally agree that the home theater hobby has been over run with sub-bass fanatics. I won't even bother to comment further on this subject.

What Disney has done with Ragnarok and Black Panther is sabotage the highs and lows. Additionally, the surrounds and rear surrounds are underutilized. I'm only speaking to 7.1 in comparison to dozens of 7.1 or 5.1 from other studios. The contrast is clear.

Perhaps the 7.1 on this new release doesn't suffer the same?

In any event, it will stink if Avengers or Iron Man, etc are released on 4K with inadequate audio.

I agree if Infinity War's track doesn't feel as epic as the scope of the film. I will add however that their color grading process has been super consistent up until guardians 2 and in my opinion, drab bland and boring, no real black value anywhere and they only recently started to change that and let the directors/editors/cinematographers have a bit more freedom instead of stamping the same consistent look one every film.

Based on that repeated history of ethics I wouldn't be surprised if the older mixes, in this case Iron Man, retain its older audio - assuming if the BD release for audio is meh for Iron Man then the 4k one will be too however Infinity War may present an opportunity for change - who knows?

[jh901]

Originally Posted by Nothing371

I'm still waiting to hear a detailed explanation for why the audio quality is poor other than "you need to really turn the volume up". I don't understand the audio problems beyond that, and most people have shown a lack of capability in describing them.

The entire surround experience is dulled. High frequencies. Low frequencies. Surrounds. Rear surrounds. Turn up the volume so dialog is matched, more or less to typical level, and voices, etc sound find, but the dynamic impact of action and special effects, etc is simply neutered.

[Zimmy]

What a crushing disappointment for a 4k catalog title I was really waiting for.

I will pour a glass of Rye and put in my Blu-Ray and watch it instead.

I realize it must be cost prohibitive to rescan in 4k but if you are charging $35+ shouldn't you be giving fans a reason to buy again?

It will be interesting to see how they handle Incredibles 2.

And don't get me started on the Atmos track. There is no way that every review of their titles calling the tracks weak doesn't get back to somebody in charge.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by jh901

There isn't a problem with Atmos exclusively. Forget about Atmos for a moment.

Please. Just. Forget about it.

DOLBY TRUEHD 7.1

^This is the problem.

No, it is not.

For one thing ALL Atmos tracks are Dolby TrueHD on UHD Blu-ray.
All Atmos tracks do not have these issues.

Second: Disney has been doing this to their DTS-MA tracks like on Avengers: Age of Ultron.

It's not the codec. It's the master.