Rich Peet, you wrote,
>My feelings on Surround should have been based as a question.
>This stuff is so mixed with sales hype that to figure out how to work
>with it is really hard.
I'm vitally interested in this subject. I'm in the process of
rewiring my studio for 5.1 production, and I intend to do my first
production attempts in Dolby Digital. I'm not ready yet, but around
the beginning of the year I'll be able to start experimenting.
>I got into trouble reading at:
>http://www.dolby.com/professional/Support/tech.overview.html#DolbyDigital
>
>It appears that you can not have 4 channels of 10khz range birds
>singing at the same time and cover them with full bit depth. That was
>the sparrow comment.
I think full bit depth would drill your brains out. Dolby Digital
mixing is supposed to be calibrated to 83 dB SPL at -20 dBFS.
>The thunder comment is probably workable with
>hours of post. When a signal uses both the areas above and below the
>lfe channel the sums and sides appear to be very hard to work with.
Not sure what you mean by sums. Dolby Digital is five full-range
channels, no matrixing.
>Maybe it can be done with a lot of work. It appears that the rear
>surround channels were put there for sound reinforcement and not to
>be used as full distinct channels.
My understanding is that the audio specifications are the same for
all channels. Perhaps you're confusing it with Dolby Surround, the
earlier matrixed system you'll get on rented VHS movies.
>I will continue to educate myself and work in full 4 channel but
>geeze Dan do you have a magic decoder ring that can tell us if this
>tech will work for us if we want full four channel with high bit
>depth?
I'm determined to find out. The Nature Sounds Society is having a
listening party December 6 where we're going to audition some
multichannel nature recordings. Would you like to send something for
us?
-Dan Dugan
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|