Master and Commander 4K UHD (2003)

[Dr. T]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

LFE content has been mixed into main channels historically and still is today, whether by necessity or choice.

No, it would chew up dynamic range.

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

Back in the '70s and '80s, LFE was mixed into the main channels.

In the 70s Dolby put the baby boom track on the discrete channels 2 and 4 of the six-track audio of a 70mm print. Previously those channels were Left-Center and Right-Center. Previously there wasn't a boom channel. This evolved into the LFE.

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

When LFE became a discrete optional channel, mixers would still put LFE into the main channels; it was designed as a supplement to be used strategically and not a replacement.

This is half correct. They would not put LFE into the main channels because, as established, it would cut into the headroom. You are correct when you say the LFE is a supplement. In a discrete digital system the main channels are full range 20Hz-20kHz while the LFE is frequency limited from 20Hz to 120Hz. This is why multichannel systems, while six-track, are referred to as "5.1". Five full-range channels and one frequency limited channel.

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

Besides, what you're quoting is from quarter of a century ago. The setup I have now and the technology has dramatically evolved from what I had even ten years ago. Your stance disregards how modern playback systems use bass management to intelligently redirect low frequencies from all channels to subwoofers, making strict separation of LFE and main channel bass less necessary. This allows for more user control over how to handle bass too, so I don't see why this is a bad thing.

The research has been done and this is all settled. It doesn't matter that it was done 25 years ago. Frequency response hasn't changed. This is why Atmos systems are still described as 5.1.2. Five full-range channels, a frequency limited LFE channel and now two overhead channels. And yes I know channel configurations can change, I was only using that layout as an example.

I have to wonder if you're confusing low frequencies in the main channels with LFE. These are different things. As you pointed out, the LFE is a supplement, while the main channels can also go down to 20Hz. But I question any professional who says they put LFE into the main channels. That would be the wrong thing to do. As established, this decision would cut into the headroom of the main channels and reduce dynamics, the very thing the LFE is used to enhance.

[PatrynXX]

The sound seems to be a major bad issue. So probably won't buy it till they fix that problem...

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by Dr. T

I have to wonder if you're confusing low frequencies in the main channels with LFE. These are different things. As you pointed out, the LFE is a supplement, while the main channels can also go down to 20Hz. But I question any professional who says they put LFE into the main channels. That would be the wrong thing to do. As established, this decision would cut into the headroom of the main channels and reduce dynamics, the very thing the LFE is used to enhance.

I see now that I misused the term LFE in my post, and should have used the term low frequency content instead. The people I spoke to probably never used the term in such a manner, but I'm relying on memories of conversations instead of something written down. I've never claimed to be an expert on this kind of stuff either, although I'm much more interested in it now after blindly believing reports that turned out to be completely false.

Originally Posted by Dr. T

The research has been done and this is all settled. It doesn't matter that it was done 25 years ago. Frequency response hasn't changed. This is why Atmos systems are still described as 5.1.2. Five full-range channels, a frequency limited LFE channel and now two overhead channels. And yes I know channel configurations can change, I was only using that layout as an example.

My posts aren't questioning the technical design of modern formats or challenging established audio science, but rather concerning how playback of audio at home and sound processing has changed and evolved over time in addition to mastering. Just like with the image, home video audio tracks seem to be in a constant state of change.

As with the image side of things, there's usually no reference for the intended theatrical track available for the public to use as some sort of benchmark. Like with Amadeus where the remastered track used the 4-track printmaster (which the 70mm prints were sourced from) as a mix reference instead of previous home video mixes as they didn't reflect the mixing decisions of the theatrical track. We only really have home video tracks to judge other tracks by, but 99% of the time, there is no guarantee that these tracks reflect the mixing decisions of the theatrical track. For example: I've compared the audio from a print of Top Gun to LD (done at an archive so everything was done professionally), DVD and Blu-ray tracks... and they all sounded noticeably different from each other in terms of dynamics and how different elements were mixed.

[Zack83]

Originally Posted by Zack83

Just got updated to between August 26th and Spetember 24th. Oof...

Down to September 5th now! Fingers crossed.

[tronicb0t]

In stock at The Movie Room.
https://www.themovieroom.com/collect...ay-digital-usa

[SimonTC]

Originally Posted by PatrynXX

The sound seems to be a major bad issue. So probably won't buy it till they fix that problem...

Well on my disc it's not. Seems some people are just complaining about super low bass that's on the dvd not being there but it wasn't on the bluray either.

[KcMsterpce]

My subwoofer has this little dial on the back called "gain", and when I increase it, it like, increases the volume of the LFE. When I lower it, it makes it have less bass boom.
I turn it down when I watch BF 2049, Dune, or Nolan movies, but turn it up for some other movies. Usually it's at the same spot 80%+ of the time.

I guess I could like, get up off the couch, walk to the subwoofer (oy, already getting tired just thinking about it!), and increase the bass when I watch this.
Ugh.

[punisher]

if your AVR has bass /speaker management, you can increase the volume of your sub via your remote and stay on the couch..lol

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by KcMsterpce

My subwoofer has this little dial on the back called "gain", and when I increase it, it like, increases the volume of the LFE. When I lower it, it makes it have less bass boom.
I turn it down when I watch BF 2049, Dune, or Nolan movies, but turn it up for some other movies. Usually it's at the same spot 80%+ of the time.

I guess I could like, get up off the couch, walk to the subwoofer (oy, already getting tired just thinking about it!), and increase the bass when I watch this.
Ugh.

They're not talking about the amount of bass (gain) but rather the range of it particularly in the ultra-low end. Turning up your sub is not going to magically replace low end information that used to be there. That's like saying you can add high end frequency response from little home theater in a box or soundbar speakers compared to full range ones by just making them louder.

[Kylo_Ren]

I don't have the old blu ray to compare.

Is the standard blu ray included in this steelbook the same transfer as the old blu ray or is it newly remastered as well?

[Dr. T]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

My posts aren't questioning the technical design of modern formats or challenging established audio science, but rather concerning how playback of audio at home and sound processing has changed and evolved over time in addition to mastering. Just like with the image, home video audio tracks seem to be in a constant state of change.

Home playback really hasn't changed that much. Audio (on disc at least) has gone from lossy to lossless and with Atmos and DTS:X more channels have been added, but a basic principle like bass management hasn't changed.

[Techlet]

Originally Posted by PatrynXX

The sound seems to be a major bad issue. So probably won't buy it till they fix that problem...

It's really not. And almost certainly not something for which Disney would offer replacements.

An actual issue resulting in a replacement program would be something like Titanic's missing dialogue in the Atmos mix.

To be clear, this release is not missing an LFE channel.

[sidetracked1]

Originally Posted by PatrynXX

The sound seems to be a major bad issue. So probably won't buy it till they fix that problem...

It's only a major issue if you're someone who really cares about that specific kind of bass so deep you actually feel it instead of hear it, for things like explosions. And you have to have equipment capable of reproducing those frequencies to have a chance of hearing/feeling the difference.

If you aren't focused on 'feeling' the booms, and/or you don't have higher end audio gear for LFE, then - like most of us - you won't be bothered.

[pikwik]

I thought the sound was mostly good, sometimes very good (in Atmos 7.4.2). It's not reference quality, but I was satisfied.

All the talk about the sound had me concerned, but it was the picture quality I was disappointed with. Just kind of dull overall. Had to double check to make sure I didn't accidentally put in the blu-ray.

Excellent film, though.

[Zack83]

Originally Posted by pikwik

i thought the sound was mostly good, sometimes very good (in atmos 7.4.2). It's not reference quality, but i was satisfied

7.4.2?

[Techlet]

Originally Posted by Zack83

7.4.2?

4 subwoofers as god intended.

[Dubliner1]

Of all the DVD's and Blu-rays discs I have owned over the years, the blu-ray of 'Master and Commander' and the dts-ES Discrete 6.1 version of 'The Haunting' (1999) DVD were the 2 standouts I will always remember...

Sad about the audio on M&C...hoping for a future release of 'The Haunting' on 4K with the audio done correctly.

[dlb99]

Originally Posted by pikwik

I thought the sound was mostly good, sometimes very good (in Atmos 7.4.2). It's not reference quality, but I was satisfied.

All the talk about the sound had me concerned, but it was the picture quality I was disappointed with. Just kind of dull overall. Had to double check to make sure I didn't accidentally put in the blu-ray.

Excellent film, though.

Did you compare against the Blu-ray? Do you feel it is negligible upgrade?

[RobertR]

Originally Posted by pikwik

it was the picture quality I was disappointed with. Just kind of dull overall.

If you want bright and colorful, watch another movie. M&C was never meant to "pop" with bright, exciting visuals. It doesn't depict a Caribbean pleasure cruise.

[bbeck]

Originally Posted by captainsolo

So we’re still stuck with either using the DVD or an import Australian BD for the original audio.

Originally Posted by 400TX

I had no idea we antipodeans were so blessed. I'll be interested in comparing both when my 4K arrives. What's the go—the Aussie release has the unfiltered bass?

Originally Posted by accountsareapain

The Australian BD (I know of) is just Fox and should be literally the same disc as the British BD or the Spanish BD (and the Nordic BD?), and I doubt it has different (or that different) video or English audio encodes than the American BD. Are you sure about this?

This rumor about the Australian BD having the unfiltered LFE track has persisted for quite a while. Someone in the old M&C BD thread stated it with authority several years ago, and based on that I imported the Aussie disc and felt smugly confident that I was listening to the superior lossless track. Another person asked me for a rip of the audio so they could analyze it, and it turned out to be identical to the U.S. release.

So despite M&C being a three-studio production, you're not going to find a BD release anywhere in the world with the unfiltered LFE track. I don't know where people got the idea the Australian disc was better, other than maybe Peter Weir is Australian and maybe he pulled some strings to protect the sound mixers' original intent in his home country? Keep in mind that same old BD thread on this site also promulgated another rumor that Weir was actually the one behind the filtering for whatever reason, but I'm pretty sure he hasn't publicly commented on it.

I love this movie dearly, and it looks like I'll never have a reason to give up that Collector's Edition DVD I bought on release day over 21 years ago.