If you were to receive a WAV file containing the first few seconds of the DVD audio with the correct delay, would you be able to tell us the exact figure to apply?
I can’t see why not – excellent idea! Would likely need to repeat the exercise with ESB and ROTJ as well.
“Properly encoded” is the key phrase here, I think. Then yes.
My bad with the dynamic range comment. What you actually said was that you expected the '85 mix to have a wider stereo image and more low frequency content. Does this ring true?
I can’t see why not – excellent idea! Would likely need to repeat the exercise with ESB and ROTJ as well.
That's strange, since both tracks are from the same source. So in theory, an AC-3 track properly encoded from your PCM audio could sound better than the actual DVD!
“Properly encoded” is the key phrase here, I think. Then yes.
My bad with the dynamic range comment. What you actually said was that you expected the '85 mix to have a wider stereo image and more low frequency content. Does this ring true?
If the 70mm 6-track/’93 mix and the 35mm Dolby Stereo mix were both sourced from the same 4-track master, then it’s clear that left and right channels were panned in about 40% in the case of the latter. Put another way, the left/right elements are noticeably wider in the 70mm/’93 mix than in the 35mm Dolby Stereo.
I HAVE noticed that the ’85 remix has a wider soundstage than the 35mm Dolby Stereo. I have yet to compare it with the ’93 mix to see if they match with regard to stereo imaging. Again, the comment regarding low frequency content escapes me. I’ve always thought of the ’85 as being much closer to the Dolby Stereo in overall spectrum. I will have an opportunity to compare all of this soon when I start synching the ’85 to the GOUT.