DSP modes for movies

[Yamahaluver]

<font color='#0000FF'>You can check Yamaha Japan website for the exact reason of running the fabrication plant in that location and the links were for general interest reading for information. I am sure the Japanese are aware of the implications of pollution. As I have said before, Yamaha is owned by Sumitomo Trust and being the second largest bank in the world for a long time, I guess they have all the money they need to do whatever they deem right. Yamaha also uses some of the best quality caps and transistors as well as transformers usualy found in equipment costing way higher. I guess they have the econimic might to do so unlike others.



Info on TFT design unit of Yamaha, the translation is poor but you get an idea.

http://www.wtec.org/loyola/hdmem/c_19.htm

http://www.yamaha.co.jp/english/product/lsi/

Nice info on Yamaha's LSi acheivments over the years.

Some major name movie studios are using Yamaha digital consoles and monitor speakers for movie mixing.

It wasnt meant for Pro Logic or DTS, just some information in general regarding Yamaha.

To you Lexicon is good and to me Yamaha's DSP modes are superb, nothing else comes close.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Quote(Yamahaluver July 05 2003,09:43)
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">To you Lexicon is good and to me Yamaha's DSP modes are superb, nothing else comes close. &nbsp;</td></tr></table>
Nope, it's not me saying &quot;Lexicon is good&quot;, but it's the majority of movie soundstages using Lexicon Equipment to master DVD movies, the majority of the audio press reporting on how great Lexicon prepros are, a webite forum dedicated to Lexicon prepros, and a whole lot of users.

Me, I prefer Meridian's Trifield for music, since music is my main preference, but I may buy a used Lex to try out.

I don't happen to like Yamaha's DSP modes, and they certainly don't compare to the digital sophistication and quality sound of Meridian's Trifield, or Ambisonic, but they do cost less.</font>

 

[Yamahaluver]

<font color='#0000FF'>For music, there is no place for DSP for me. I prefer plain audio 2 channel mode which the Yamaha does a superb job. Yamaha comes alive in their Cinema DSP modes which have little if any competition when it comes to soundfield and envelope.

People like two time Grammy winner Elliot Scheiner use Yamaha digital consoles, mixers and speakers for their work so they have to have some substance.

But as I said, to each his own. It is a matter of personal preference. If we are to go by the logic of what studios use then all of us should be on Yamaha speakers as there are 200,000 NS-10M studio monitors gracing many studios across the world and some wont do with anything else. Also Yamaha Pianos and synths are used by some of the very best names in music, yet there are myriads of speaker manufacturers in this world becase after all music and sound is that personal.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Yamahaluver,
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">For music, there is no place for DSP for me. &nbsp;</td></tr></table>

Meridian's Trifield and Ambisonics implementations are not DSP modes, and I agree with you, I don't like DSP modes on music.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Yamahaluver,

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Yamaha comes alive in their Cinema DSP modes which have little if any competition when it comes to soundfield and envelope.</td></tr></table>
I think most of the serious HT enthusiasts and HT press would disagree with you on this and rank Lexicon's Logic7 the better implementation (including me), but as you said, to each his own.

At the 109th AES Convention (9/2000), in a presentation by chief Scientist Dr. David Griesinger on their latest technology, as reported by Philip Brandes on the SMR website;

&quot;Unlike systems utilizing three stereo pairs to laboriously construct 3D simulations, the 960L uses Lexicon's proprietary 3DPM Perceptual Modeling technology to generates digital surround reverb and ambience effects for up to sixteen 24/96 channels.&quot;

&quot;A live demo of the 960L's 3DPM capabilities generated appropriately realistic environmental reverberations from any designated physical location in selected spaces and acoustically heightened hyperspaces--footsteps echoed convincingly in a variety of rooms, chambers, and halls, while music seamlessly transitioned from dry to ambient. The software incorporates a wide variety of standard industry environments, with provisions for an additional 500 user-definable programs.&quot;

Truly state of the art!!</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>audiouser,

Let us know how the MC-1 aquisition and installation goes. &nbsp;Try to make sure the MC-1 has version 4.0 software.

Interested to hear about your experiences.</font>

 

[Yamahaluver]

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>

Bruce : <font color='#000000'>Truly state of the art!!</font>

<font color='#0000FF'>As I said, to each his own and Yamaha is the State of the Art to me and many like myself would agree to that too.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>IMO, Yamaha is simply not as technologically sophisticated as Lexicon's technology that is designed to actually use consumer grade prepros to encode 7 channels of surround information (Logic7) into a digital output signal that can recorded to a CD/DVD and later played back in 7 channels.

Like I said previously, Yamaha's front effects speakers and Cinema DSP modes are very simple surround parameter manipulations available to everybody who licenses the core code.  You even find the DSP manufacturer now adding their own surround parameter manipulations for custom 7 channel functionality like Cirrus's CS &nbsp;&quot;Cirrus Surround&quot;.

I certainly don't dispute anyone's listening preferences, but market moving technology like Lexicon's Logic7, Meridian's Trifield and MLP (Meridian's MLP is an industry standard)  just doesn't find Yamaha in the same ballpark.</font>

 

[Audioholics]

<font color='#008080'>There. I got the last word in. Feel free to restart this thread in The Steam Vent

</font>

 

[SDDSfan]

For sci-fi films

I was doing a comparison using yamaha cinema dsp I was trying the choose between spectacle and sci-fi dsp soundfield using an old sci-fi teaser trailer mixed for dolby digital.

So far sci-fi adds a sense of depth to sounds emanating within the screen, while spectacle setting seems to shift that space out away from the screen a bit further torward you seeming a bit more virtual and alive with more seperation across the suite spot.

I chose sci-fi because it made the soundfield much more out-there and expansive, more focussed. front and back imaging seemed have much more screen depth. That sound seemed more from within the screen rather than infront of screen.

Sci-fi vs spectacle

Can someone tell me what spectacle is for?

Wouldn't spectacle be better used for films that are sutble, drama, or light on action more music track oriented even for older films no matter the genre.

For instance for science fiction:

Let's say you're watching a film like 2001: A Space Odyssey which is more of
visual film rather than sound oriented film and more heavily based on it's music track with less action and more drama.

Would spectacle be the best setting for this kind of light hearted film in the sci-fi category?

Or how bout' war/epic films

lets say pearl harbor which is heavily based on it's music track as well it's audio track. It is a war film which places it in the adventure dsp but it also is mostly music oriented too, which places it also in the spectacle setting.

Would spectacle be better placed for movie like this in the war category?

 

[tsteves]

I never understood why so many people like DSP added to what comes off the disk. Why don't you guys like to listen to what the sound mixer intended it to sound like?