logo Sign In

Info Wanted: Is there 5.1 surround sound on the Despecialized Editions? — Page 2

Author
Time

Just as a note, for my German DeEd I did create a GOUT-synched version of the Blu-ray audio... so it definitely is possible, if you don't mind the different mix and an SE sound-effect here or there.

Author
Time

A better bet would be to use the 1997 version.  Unlike the DVD and Bluray, the first version of the SE used the original mix and added changes on top of it, so it still sounds more like the way it is supposed to, but has many flashy additions in the surrounds.  It isn't as dynamic as the 70, but not bad.  If you want a blend of both styles this is probably the best way to get it.

At one point I did consider editing the '97 mix to synch with the original version of the movie, but I decided that my efforts would be better spent elsewhere.  There's a very slight, vague possibility that I might someday do it, but I could never bring myself to do that for the newer mixes.

Surround usage aside, the 70 has better bass than any of them.  ;)

Author
Time

So, do you have any plans to run your ESB and ROTJ purist mixes through the improved surround decoding process?

(Please?!)

Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here

Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Moth3r said:

I can't see how anyone could not be blown away by the power in hairy_hen's 70mm recreation for Star Wars. You should particularly listen to the dynamic range during sequences such as the Falcon's escape from Mos Eisley, or the section from Ben Kenobi's demise to the dogfight with the sentry ships .

When I downloaded DE 2.5, “Ben's Death and the TIE Fighter Attack” was the first scene I went to in order to check out the revised 5.1 track. This has always been one of my favorite Star Wars audio demo sequences from back in my laserdisc days because it is such a brilliant triumph of editing and sound design.*

The simple fact is, I'm just not as impressed with this sequence in its various post '04 Special Edition incarnations. And this isn't even a sequence that was changed from the original that I can recall. It's still entertaining… it's just that the more limited dynamic range and poor music mixing — and this is a standout cue in the score — severely blunted the impact of a scene that is more dependent upon its sound than most.

But when I watch the DE with hairy_hen's mix, it is as thrilling as it was all those times I was sitting in the theater in the spring of 1981. The dynamic shifts are more striking, music sounds more natural, and the final explosion is much more satisfying. All that makes the scene more effective, and just much more FUN, which, when you come right down to it, all of this boils down to anyway, right?

* — Also a brilliant dramatic beat in the film, giving the audience who are still assimilating the death of a main character an adrenaline jolt to set them up for the finale, but that's another topic entirely.

“That’s impossible, even for a computer!”

“You don't do ‘Star Wars’ in Dobly.”

Author
Time

hairy_hen said:

A better bet would be to use the 1997 version.  Unlike the DVD and Bluray, the first version of the SE used the original mix and added changes on top of it, so it still sounds more like the way it is supposed to, but has many flashy additions in the surrounds.

Although the surrounds aren't the only benefit of the Blu-ray track, with it being lossless and completely discrete.

I don't know about the other language tracks, but at least the German dialogue sounds absolutely stellar - pretty much like a current movie. Obviously they've uncovered the original recordings from back then (which were supposedly lost) and used those, instead of the messed up THX mix.

Author
Time

There are so many changes, additions and different mix balances in the Blu-ray tracks, I'm not sure how much of an advantage the lossless audio and discrete channels would present. It would certainly be very difficult to use as a basis for any sort of restoration.

“That’s impossible, even for a computer!”

“You don't do ‘Star Wars’ in Dobly.”

Author
Time

Well, for dubs, it's your only real hope for a surround mix at all.  But yeah, there's not much hope of even approximating anything original with it.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

This is my first post to a message board/web community ever, so forgive me (and please advise accordingly) if I commit some sort of web faux-pas. I’ve downloaded the most recent AVCHD versions of the films (SW2.7, ESB2.0, ROJ2.5), and according to what I’ve read here, there are several “tracks” associated with each file. I have also taken away from the above discussion that the hairy_hen 5.1 mix is included with all but the Towne32 (v2.7) version. So here are my (I suspect, very dumb) questions:

  1. As the 5.1 is listed as “track 1” in the versions for which it is included, will that be the default track?
    1a) If yes, is there a special setting I need to use/maintain when I run the .m2ts file through my authoring program (making menus etc.) before saving and burning to disk? I want to make sure that I’m maintaining the integrity of the mix.
    1b) If no, how do I isolate the track to act as my default when running through authoring software (as in 1a)?

  2. It doesn’t appear that the 5.1 is included in the Towne32 version. Is there a downloadable version of just the audio to replace the track in that file?

  3. I spent countless hours slowly downloading the AVCHD files as my anti-virus software doesn’t trust any of the FRDs recommended in TUIG. I saw (in other threads) that the MKV versions are superior if I am going to burn to Blu-ray. Are the MKV versions superior enough to justify the hours needed and GB downloaded (we have limits in AK)?

I’m doing this for my husband who is a true die-hard fan and I want to produce the best possible end result for him. I very much appreciate any and all advice offered.

Author
Time

Kids and their dance moves these days…

Author
Time

dedinak said:

This is my first post to a message board/web community ever, so forgive me (and please advise accordingly) if I commit some sort of web faux-pas. I’ve downloaded the most recent AVCHD versions of the films (SW2.7, ESB2.0, ROJ2.5), and according to what I’ve read here, there are several “tracks” associated with each file. I have also taken away from the above discussion that the hairy_hen 5.1 mix is included with all but the Towne32 (v2.7) version. So here are my (I suspect, very dumb) questions:

  1. As the 5.1 is listed as “track 1” in the versions for which it is included, will that be the default track?
    1a) If yes, is there a special setting I need to use/maintain when I run the .m2ts file through my authoring program (making menus etc.) before saving and burning to disk? I want to make sure that I’m maintaining the integrity of the mix.
    1b) If no, how do I isolate the track to act as my default when running through authoring software (as in 1a)?

  2. It doesn’t appear that the 5.1 is included in the Towne32 version. Is there a downloadable version of just the audio to replace the track in that file?

  3. I spent countless hours slowly downloading the AVCHD files as my anti-virus software doesn’t trust any of the FRDs recommended in TUIG. I saw (in other threads) that the MKV versions are superior if I am going to burn to Blu-ray. Are the MKV versions superior enough to justify the hours needed and GB downloaded (we have limits in AK)?

I’m doing this for my husband who is a true die-hard fan and I want to produce the best possible end result for him. I very much appreciate any and all advice offered.

List of tracks on the v2.7 AVCHD.ISO

TRACK 1) 5.1 1977 70mm six track mix @ 640Kbps
TRACK 2) 2.0 1977 stereo mix @ 224Kbps
TRACK 3) 1.0 1977 mono mix @ 128Kbps
TRACK 4) 2.0 Isolated score @ 224Kbps (hairy hen)
TRACK 5) 2.0 1993 LD Audio Commentary @ 192Kbps (silence filled with 1993 LD 2.0)
TRACK 6) 2.0 2004 DVD Audio Commentary @ 192Kbps
TRACK 7) 2.0 2004 starwars.com Audio Commentary @ 192Kbps
TRACK 8) 2.0 2011 BD Archival Interviews Audio Commentary @ 192Kbps

The first track is the 5.1 Mix… is your copy somehow different?

I thought I recognized your foul stench when I entered this forum!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The first track is the 5.1 Mix… is your copy somehow different?

Nope, that’s the one I have. Looks like I just went cross-eyed from all of the new information I was getting. Okay, so that solves that problem, I now know that I have the 5.1 on all three films. The other questions still apply (making sure I’m burning the correct track, and verifying that the 5.1 doesn’t get turned to stereo during the authoring and burning processes, and whether the MKV is sufficiently superior to warrant re-downloading and starting fresh).

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Moth3r said:

That said, when listening to hairy_hen’s purist mix for Harmy’s despecialized ROTJ, I noticed a significant amount of bleeding of dialogue from the centre channel into the front left and rights. I say significant because, if I play the 1993 mix through my receiver in Pro Logic II mode, this bleed is much reduced. I thought that the 5.1 mix was created from a Pro Logic II upmix in software, so this is surprising.

Most FREE DPL decoders in software are of the passive consumer non-steering type :dolby surround: , which are inferior to the PRO PL1 (with primitive allband steering), & obviously all inferior to PL2. I’m guessing he used PL1/DS things.

As of now, there are FREE PL2 things, only one I know of is freesurround (the foobar implementation being easiest to use imo), which should have much less C ch bleed. (hint, use old defaults preset for maximum discreteness)

Author
Time

Supposedly, h_h got access to Pro DPL decoder software for the latest DeEd’s. So ROTJ 2.5 may sound better (or not).

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

CatBus said:

Supposedly, h_h got access to Pro DPL decoder software for the latest DeEd’s. So ROTJ 2.5 may sound better (or not).

Correct. The most recent 5.1 versions for all three films were created using official Dolby software, so they will sound quite close to what comes out of a Prologic II equipped receiver, aside from the minor modifications I made for the handling of low frequency content.

Actually, I’ve given some thought to using the original Prologic for a possible new version, since the surrounds would then be more fully mono, and front-channel crosstalk greatly reduced. This may not be an improvement to everyone’s ears, but it would be a rather more authentic presentation. I’ve done some tests and I like the way it sounds for these movies quite a lot. Combine that with a new approach to the LFE track and it could turn out very well indeed . . . assuming, of course, that I have the time to do it. With a Disney release of the original versions not looking likely any time soon, my motivation to revisit them seems to once again be on the rise (based as much on my annoyance with them as a company as anything).

Author
Time

hairy_hen said:

CatBus said:

Supposedly, h_h got access to Pro DPL decoder software for the latest DeEd’s. So ROTJ 2.5 may sound better (or not).

Correct. The most recent 5.1 versions for all three films were created using official Dolby software, so they will sound quite close to what comes out of a Prologic II equipped receiver, aside from the minor modifications I made for the handling of low frequency content.

Actually, I’ve given some thought to using the original Prologic for a possible new version, since the surrounds would then be more fully mono, and front-channel crosstalk greatly reduced. This may not be an improvement to everyone’s ears, but it would be a rather more authentic presentation. I’ve done some tests and I like the way it sounds for these movies quite a lot. Combine that with a new approach to the LFE track and it could turn out very well indeed . . . assuming, of course, that I have the time to do it. With a Disney release of the original versions not looking likely any time soon, my motivation to revisit them seems to once again be on the rise (based as much on my annoyance with them as a company as anything).

Sounds incredible!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

hairy_hen said:

CatBus said:

Supposedly, h_h got access to Pro DPL decoder software for the latest DeEd’s. So ROTJ 2.5 may sound better (or not).

Correct. The most recent 5.1 versions for all three films were created using official Dolby software, so they will sound quite close to what comes out of a Prologic II equipped receiver, aside from the minor modifications I made for the handling of low frequency content.

Actually, I’ve given some thought to using the original Prologic for a possible new version, since the surrounds would then be more fully mono, and front-channel crosstalk greatly reduced. This may not be an improvement to everyone’s ears, but it would be a rather more authentic presentation. I’ve done some tests and I like the way it sounds for these movies quite a lot. Combine that with a new approach to the LFE track and it could turn out very well indeed . . . assuming, of course, that I have the time to do it. With a Disney release of the original versions not looking likely any time soon, my motivation to revisit them seems to once again be on the rise (based as much on my annoyance with them as a company as anything).

That sounds fantastic hairy hen, looking forward to it!

I read through your audio thread when you were first working on SW, and it was stated then that those with stereo setups should use the stereo track and not downmix the 5.1 track since it’s an upmix. Does that still hold true these days with the latest DTS-HD versions available on the official Despecialized releases? I’m currently using njvc’s fantastic BD ISOs which I believe use the your 5.1 track as the default audio.

The reason I ask is that our living room in our new home does not really allow for proper placement of my surround channels. At least not without the living room being in an unacceptable configuration as far as the old lady is concerned. So when I get a chance to set everything up I’m probably going to be stuck with 3.1 (L,C,R,LFE).

I know I can compare the two to see how they sound myself. I was just curious if, on a technical level, it’s still advisable to use the stereo mix in your latest versions unless you have a full 5.1 setup?

Author
Time

All the original stereo tracks contain matrixed surround channels. If you have 2 speakers (most TV’s), that would be the best option for optimum sound. You should use the right mix for your. The best way to check is to play them and see which one you like best. Which sounds the best to your ears.

Author
Time

Why wouldn’t you use the stereo mix on a stereo setup regardless of whether or not downmixed 5.1 is kosher? Is there some advantage to downmixing a surround mix?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

joefavs said:

Why wouldn’t you use the stereo mix on a stereo setup regardless of whether or not downmixed 5.1 is kosher? Is there some advantage to downmixing a surround mix?

If all I had was a stereo setup then I would most definitely use the 2.0 track as I did before when one was available on a DVD/BD.

In my situation though, it looks like I’m going to be stuck with a 3.1 (L,C,R,LFE) for the foreseeable future. I’d like to have that LFE channel if possible, I’m less concerned about the center channel, but I was curious where the latest versions of the restored 5.1 tracks stand in regards to downmixing. It was mentioned early on that this was not a good idea with these upmixed tracks, which makes perfect sense, but I believe they have been updated since that remark was made so I was curious if anything had changed in this regard.

As far as I’m aware, the only benefit to downmixing 5.1 or 7.1 comes from not having a 2.0 track available on your BD/DVD, and all you have is a stereo setup. Otherwise you’d be missing audio, obviously. 😃

Author
Time

When you downmix, you are at the whim of your hardware. Ideally, the sound coming from the left and right speakers would be the correct mix of left, right, and center channels and it would just dump the surround (I don’t know if any of them rematrix it).

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

When you downmix, you are at the whim of your hardware. Ideally, the sound coming from the left and right speakers would be the correct mix of left, right, and center channels and it would just dump the surround (I don’t know if any of them rematrix it).

I believe that the rear channels are included when downmixing to stereo. If they weren’t, then you would be missing audio that is completely/mostly absent from the front channels in a discrete 5.1 or 7.1 mix, but are intended to be heard.

An example I guess would be something like a plane approaching from behind. You hear the plane approaching in primarily the rear channels first, then it fills all channels, then as it leaves it is mostly in the front channels. If the rears were just dumped entirely, then you would be missing most of the audio from the approach and only really start hearing it at the point that it fills all speakers and then leaves the scene. I’ll stand to be corrected on that though. 😃

I believe that’s where the problem of downmixing the upmixed restorted track comes into play. The upmixed rear channels are being downmixed back into the front channels.

Author
Time

ThePJzer said:
I was just curious if, on a technical level, it’s still advisable to use the stereo mix in your latest versions unless you have a full 5.1 setup?

You have a 3.1 setup and would benefit from the 5.1 even though you do not have the surrounds.