2 channel audio for old movies

[chandna]

Hi
One quick question
I have been asked by some of my clients to author old movies.
They have only 2 channels of audio.
No 5.1 or DTS HD
Are you technically wizards members are ready to accepts Bluray Disc with 2 channel of audio?

I have only 2 options
1. I give 2 channels as uncompressed audio
or
2. create a fake 5.1 only if members of this forum insist for 5.1
or
3. Ask them to wait till the members of this forum are ready and ask for such titles with 2 channles of audio?

[pro-bassoonist]

Good afternoon,

I personally prefer original uncompressed 2-channel audio over upmixed 5.1 tracks whenever possible. This is what the serious labels do for classic films -- LPCM 1.0, LPCM 2.0, DTS-HD Master Audio 1.0, DTS-HD Master Audio 2.0, etc.

Examples:

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-L...-Review/10203/

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-T...y-Review/1195/

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/La-nu...y-Review/8974/

Pro-B

[kailashu]

Originally Posted by chandna

Hi
One quick question
I have been asked by some of my clients to author old movies.
They have only 2 channels of audio.
No 5.1 or DTS HD
Are you technically wizards members are ready to accepts Bluray Disc with 2 channel of audio?

I have only 2 options
1. I give 2 channels as uncompressed audio
or
2. create a fake 5.1 only if members of this forum insist for 5.1
or
3. Ask them to wait till the members of this forum are ready and ask for such titles with 2 channles of audio?

Please maintain the original soundtrack. Thanks! Plus most of the receivers will be able to dish out a 5.1 out of 2.0 audio. My preference is maintaining the original soundtrack.

[bugsnest]

Agee with Pro-B and Kailashu - preserve the original soundtrack in an uncompressed form

[vveksuvarna]

Originally Posted by chandna

Hi
One quick question
I have been asked by some of my clients to author old movies.
They have only 2 channels of audio.
No 5.1 or DTS HD
Are you technically wizards members are ready to accepts Bluray Disc with 2 channel of audio?

I have only 2 options
1. I give 2 channels as uncompressed audio
or
2. create a fake 5.1 only if members of this forum insist for 5.1
or
3. Ask them to wait till the members of this forum are ready and ask for such titles with 2 channles of audio?

Hi Chandna,

Thank You putting your faith in us to consult us for the right decision.

I would say a restored uncompressed 2.0 is a must.

Besides that, If they have original sound elements, It is worth recreating 5.1/6.1/7.1

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Snow-...-Blu-ray/5220/

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Pinocchio-Blu-ray/754/

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-G...-Blu-ray/6859/

Regardless of the limitations of the theatrical presentation, you can have a DTS HD MA 7.1 mix for the bluray release,

Thats exactly how the older films get a surround mix.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/2001-...y-Blu-ray/511/

It is most important they give you the original multi track recordings, and not just whats printed on the 35mm.

Originally Posted by kailashu

most of the receivers will be able to dish out a 5.1 out of 2.0 audio.

Receiver processed surround is even worse than multi-sampled (fake) surround.

Once again, request them to provide you with all kinds of original source materials - and most importantly the original film negative to work with.

and It is a good idea to master at 4k than 2k. Field tests show that capturing at a higher resolution does make a difference on how your 1080p compression looks.

Also, It would be beneficial for you, since it is an undebatable fact that eventually we will have 4k home video.

If the studios are hesitant to give you the negatives - this would be a good counter argument to make to make them realize the importance and the longevity of the master.

Hope that helps.

[mrbrat_Boy]

Thanks for asking our opinions. I think i agree what the other members have posted. Maintain the soundtrack even it is only 2.0 channel uncompressed.

Thanks Mr. Chanda for asking.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by vveksuvarna

I would say a restored uncompressed 2.0 is a must.

Originally Posted by vveksuvarna

...and It is a good idea to master at 4k than 2k. Field tests show that capturing at a higher resolution does make a difference on how your 1080p compression looks.

Also, It would be beneficial for you, since it is an undebatable fact that eventually we will have 4k home video.

1. You are wildly misinterpreting/misunderstanding what is being asked -- transferring and restoring are two very different animals.

2. Full 4K restoration for Bollywood "classic" films has not been attempted yet. And it is unrealistic to expect that it will be any time soon; especially for the type of films I assume the OP is referring to

3. It is anything but an undeniable fact that eventually you would have 4K film content distributed in the same manner and to the same extent 1080p film content is. And chances of that happening within Bollywood, in the foreseeable future, are next to none.

Pro-B

[vveksuvarna]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

1. You are wildly misinterpreting/misunderstanding what is being asked -- transferring and restoring are two very different animals.

1. The product in question is an old film. I can guarantee you the film is not in perfect condition since negatives face colour loss over time. even the more stable kodak filmstock which came in the 80's shows considerable quality loss. Hence, plainly scanning or telecine'ing the footage isnt a recommended option. Which is why I was so explicitly specific in my suggestions.

I understand the nature of transferring films is different than that of restoration. My concern is, the film will be transferred without restoration.

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

2. Full 4K restoration for Bollywood "classic" films has not been attempted yet. And it is unrealistic to expect that it will be any time soon; especially for the type of films I assume the OP is referring to

2. It hasn't been attempted yet - and there is no reason why it shouldn't begin now. Films from all countries and industries are valuable and must be treated as just as such. Mr. Chandna is forerunner in the Indian Bluray Industry, and has shown credible improvement to feedback - hence, setting an example for all other authoring houses. He strives to deliver a quality product, and I merely am trying to guide him to my best capacity. The older films from the Indian Film Industry, regardless of the language, are highly respected films, many have gone unnoticed - such as The Music Room / Jalsaghar by Satyajit Ray. This film was unknown to many, until Martin Scorsese took it upon himself to restore this classic. It is sad that, the Indian Film Industry never recognised the classic until Mr. Scorsese did.

I did get a chance to see The Music Room in its full restored glory with an introduction by Mr. Scorsese on the difficult nature of the restoration, and I only wish that from here on all classics be treated with utmost care and precision.

Criterion, Kino, The Film Foundation & BFI cant do all the hardwork for every film in the world. It is only right that we start taking care of our own films, before it gets too late. I still recommend Mr. Chandna to take all the necessary steps to preserve the film, and I dont see a reason it is unrealistic.

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

3. It is anything but an undeniable fact that eventually you would have 4K film content distributed in the same manner and to the same extent 1080p film content is. And chances of that happening within Bollywood, in the foreseeable future, are next to none.

Pro-B

3. Since your location is marked X, I cant really tell where you reside. Assuming you haven't lived in India, I would like to bring to your notice that the country has gone through 3 format changes in the past decade.

VCDs-DVDs-Blurays

Considering India's prompt adoption to bluray, I dont see why 4k would be ignored when introduced in the industry.

Secondly, 4k displays have been making an appearance at CES and NAB for the past 2 years. That is only a sign of assurance, of what is to come next.

It maybe a while, it is infact on its way,

2k displays are already being sold in Japan, and expected to hit the american market soon.

All I am saying is, negatives are highly delicate objects, they wear with each use - It is only fair that the studio makes the most of the technology available to us, before the negative degrades further with age. Restoring at 4k is a small price to pay for such a long term investment.

Lastly, I would like to remind everyone of Snow White which was 1st restored in 4k back in 1993, when hard drive sizes were laughable.

[kailashu]

^^^^Not sure how much of a difference you will see between a 4k and a 1080p on a 50" display. I doubt you'll see any day and night difference. May be if you buy a 108" TV that might make the difference between a 4k and a 1080p.

[vveksuvarna]

Originally Posted by kailashu

^^^^Not sure how much of a difference you will see between a 4k and a 1080p on a 50" display. I doubt you'll see any day and night difference. May be if you buy a 108" TV that might make the difference between a 4k and a 1080p.

I remember seeing 42" 480 & 720P displays when they 1st came out - they looked great.

But we saw further improvement with 1080P.

I am confident that High bitrate 4K would look fantastic.

As long as the source is true high bitrate 4k and not upscaled.

[Shiaedoeu]

2.0 all the way. Forget upmixing.

[aatmaaraam]

Originally Posted by kailashu

^^^^Not sure how much of a difference you will see between a 4k and a 1080p on a 50" display. I doubt you'll see any day and night difference. May be if you buy a 108" TV that might make the difference between a 4k and a 1080p.

I think vveksuvarna means to say that the negatives need to be taken care of & more you use them, more wear & tear. So its better to restore it at properly 4K so that it becomes future proof & can be preserved properly.

[Cool]

I personally think that DTS-HD Master Audio 2.0 will work best.

[vveksuvarna]

Originally Posted by aatmaaraam

I think vveksuvarna means to say that the negatives need to be taken care of & more you use them, more wear & tear. So its better to restore it at properly 4K so that it becomes future proof & can be preserved properly.

Exactly

[sanjay0864]

Originally Posted by chandna

Hi
One quick question
I have been asked by some of my clients to author old movies.
They have only 2 channels of audio.
No 5.1 or DTS HD
Are you technically wizards members are ready to accepts Bluray Disc with 2 channel of audio?

I have only 2 options
1. I give 2 channels as uncompressed audio
or
2. create a fake 5.1 only if members of this forum insist for 5.1
or
3. Ask them to wait till the members of this forum are ready and ask for such titles with 2 channles of audio?

It's good to see atleast someone care about what the customer wants. Thank you once again, Mr. Chandna for setting an example for others in the Indian video industry to follow.

Regarding the topic of discussion, am I the only one here to notice that something is not right with this scenario. If it is 'older' non 'surround sound' movies that we are referring to, where in the world are the '2' channels coming from? The original audio track of almost 'ALL' old movies, was single channel 'mono'. I hope we are not referring to some kind of pseudo 2 channel audio. Anyhow, bottom line is, the only correct way to present the audio is in it's original uncompressed form. Thus, the way to go, would be 'DTS-HD MA 1.0' or 'LPCM 1.0'. Please, for the love of god, NO PSEUDO/FAKE 5.1 crap.

[sanjay0864]

Originally Posted by vveksuvarna

2k displays are already being sold in Japan, and expected to hit the american market soon.

The current ATSC HD standard | 16:9 (1.77:1) | 1920 x 1080, is only slightly different from 2K. Which comes in two variaties, simply to account for the two major aspect ratios used by the movie industry, ie.
Digital Cinema 2K | 1.85:1 | 1998 x 1080
Digital Cinema 2K | 2.39:1 | 2048 x 858
Therefore, I seriously doubt that 2K will ever be adopted as a home standard. 4K on the other hand is inevitable and the only question is, not if, but rather when. Personally, I would say atleast not for another 5 - 8 yrs. Simply because the consumer electroncis industry has it's plate full with first of all getting HD established all over the world and then the new baby, 3D.

Regarding, the nedd for restoration and preservation, not that I disagree with anything that you have stated, but I think you are misunderstanding the scope of Mr. Chandna or any authoring company's job. The authoring company is given the final master and they are not involved in the process of how and the mastering is done. Thus Mr. Chandna's question was simply related to his options when encoding the final audio. His dilemma being, should he maintain the original 2.0 audio, although I think it's probably 1.0 audio, or make a pseduo/fake 5.0 mix by encoding the 1.0 channel in all 5.0 channels. His compnay is neither equiped to do sound mixing from the original stems nor has been entrusted with that job. In fact that in itself is a speciallised job handled by other companies.

[vveksuvarna]

Originally Posted by FreakMan09

i agree with sanjay completely but i think if space is available on the blu-ray it wouldn't hurt to include a 5.1 mix along with the original uncompressed audio. It would give consumers more options because some people don't mind having a surround sound mix and some actually prefer it, but no matter what the original audio has be maintained and should have priority.

A surround mix should be created only when all original recorded track elements exist.

[vveksuvarna]

Originally Posted by sanjay0864

The current ATSC HD standard | 16:9 (1.77:1) | 1920 x 1080, is only slightly different from 2K. Which comes in two variaties, simply to account for the two major aspect ratios used by the movie industry, ie.
Digital Cinema 2K | 1.85:1 | 1998 x 1080
Digital Cinema 2K | 2.39:1 | 2048 x 858
Therefore, I seriously doubt that 2K will ever be adopted as a home standard.

The current HDTV standard is 16:9/1.78:1

and the TVs being sold in japan support a resolution of upto 2160P, hence 2K compatible.

However, the new trend in Europe is 21:9 TV's, Phillips is about to launch the super widescreen TVs in the United States this summer.

[sanjay0864]

Originally Posted by vveksuvarna

A surround mix should be created only when all original recorded track elements exist.

+1
Just to clarify, under no circumstances should the same mono channel be encoded to all channels to get some pseudo/fake 5.0 There is nothing worse than listenign to dialouges coming from all directions. But, I would not mind a true 5.1 mix, created from the original audio stems. Problem is, I don't think there is a single movie that you can find the original audio stems for. Forget about the old mono classics, I seriously doubt that the original audio stems of even the big budget 6 track sterephonic movies have survived. What else can you expect from an industry, where the producers of the biggest blockbuster ever, "Sholay" did not find it worth the expense to maintain even a single good print, let alone the original negatives. A few years back when the Indian government funded, Film Federation of India was given the task of collecting noteworthy Indian films for archiving, they were shocked to find out, that there is not a single print in the world that one consider complete.

[sanjay0864]

Originally Posted by vveksuvarna

and the TVs being sold in japan support a resolution of upto 2160P, hence 2K compatible.

However, the new trend in Europe is 21:9 TV's, Phillips is about to launch the super widescreen TVs in the United States this summer.

These are just niche products and not accepted as a standard by either the software or consumer electronics industry. I seriously doubt, they will ever become a standard and or mainstream.