Penteo demo DVD now available for download

[PenteoSurround]

I have now posted a .zip'd ISO of the 8/16/06 demo DVD. If you can download a 157MB file without too much grief, unzip it, and can burn a DVD from an .ISO file, you can have the entire DVD.

It's at http://www.penteosurround.com/ftp/Pe..._8-16-2006.zip

It will unzip into an .ISO file, which can be burned to a DVD using any DVD-burning software that supports ISO burning, complete with color bars and menu structure, and Dolby Digital 5.1 surround audio.

The audio and music content on this DVD is owned by its original copyright owners and is provided for audio processing quality evaluation only.

[Opiate]

How many tracks? Are they full length tracks?
At 157Mb, it's quite a tiny DVD.

[PenteoSurround]

There are 5 full-length tracks. First one to name them all wins the prize of being able to claim they were first.

The 157MB is the size of the zip file, which unzips to a 700MB ISO before burning to about a 750MB DVD fileset. (It's that small because the video is only color bars with burned in timecode.)

I could have left out the timecode and made it even smaller....

[scooterdog]

John,

Thanks for the download. I liked the beetles track, very cool as well as the 4th track. I noticed it was Dolby Digital not DVD A MLP, but it still sound pretty good. Interesting is how you were able to create a 5.1 out of the stereo tracks? Did you have access to the original recording?

Scooter

[cappra]

1. Beatles
2. CSN&Y
3. Doors
4. Peggy Lee
5. Not sure of this one, Joe Jackson?

All tracks sounded great except for the Beatles track. Not exactly sure why, just didn't feel right to me. Maybe I'm so used to hearing it one way. I really enjoyed the Peggy Lee and CSN&Y tracks. Way to go!

[PenteoSurround]

Originally Posted by scooterdog

Interesting is how you were able to create a 5.1 out of the stereo tracks? Did you have access to the original recording?

No - these are from the original stereo mixes.. That's what Penteo is - it's my upmixing process that parses the stereo panorama into surround cleanly. What you're hearing is the original stereo panorama spread out cleanly amongst a surround panorama.

Look at your hand - take your fingers and spread them out as far as you can with the thumb and little finger at 90 degrees; --- that's the Stereo conversion to Penteo.

Thanks for your compliments.

[PenteoSurround]

Originally Posted by cappra

5. Not sure of this one, Joe Jackson?

Okay, I snuck that one in. Actually, it's my current favorite band/singer, a guy named Jordon Zadorozny and his former band Blinker the Star. We correspond a lot. I'm sure he'll appreciate the association. He now records out of his parent's basement in Ontario, Canada and has a new band named Abbey.

[PenteoSurround]

Originally Posted by cappra

All tracks sounded great except for the Beatles track. Not exactly sure why, just didn't feel right to me.

You're hearing Geoff Emerick's original mix (1969?). It wasn't recorded on a lot of tracks so it's pretty spread out when it's spread out. Also, the snare was panned hard right in the original stereo mix, so it winds up in the right rear !!!

[lchiu7]

Enjoyed the music also. Very impressed the way the surround channels were created from what was I guess two channel material.

I had no idea who artist 5. was either. I guess whatever prize you were offering, it would have been safe

Larry

[jorgeluiz]

Originally Posted by PenteoSurround

You're hearing Geoff Emerick's original mix (1969?). It wasn't recorded on a lot of tracks so it's pretty spread out when it's spread out. Also, the snare was panned hard right in the original stereo mix, so it winds up in the right rear !!!

i only listen Golden Slumbers/Carry that Weight/The End.
(big Beatles fan here)

yes,"The End",don't need nothing more: it's wonderful

if you excuse me i want to ask: the sound is very clean,better than cd.
of course you did some to get this clean sound.
did you equalize or something like this?

best regards

[PenteoSurround]

Originally Posted by lchiu7

I had no idea who artist 5. was either. I guess whatever prize you were offering, it would have been safe

It's actually listed on the DVD Menu

[PenteoSurround]

Originally Posted by jorgeluiz

if you excuse me i want to ask: the sound is very clean,better than cd.
of course you did some to get this clean sound.
did you equalize or something like this?

best regards

It's part of the stereo preparation for surround parse-out: I do three things: absolute azimuth correction, absolute NAB EQ correction (L/R), digital noise elimination and automated digital EQ normalization at 1/3 octave intervals. It's the same kind of thing that I would do if I were remastering any CD for stereo. If you A/B the stereo original to the stereo prepped master, it sounds 20 years newer.

We can do a lot more now than we could back when these CDs were first mastered.

Thanks for the compliment.

[boondocks]

John,
Very nice indeed. When the first track started I was busy shuffling discs and thought: hmm, 3 channel. After a bit it hit me. 5 channels! -well, could be 6, I didn't have the sub on.
Great voice-in-center, very discrete.
Do your methods carry well with all types of Rock music?
I certainly do not expect you to post any PFloyd, Hendrix, etc., but am very curious, as my conversions tend along those lines.
Thanks much!
I think you have a good thing going here. Hopefully one that will be equally profitable for music buyers as well as yourself.
regards,
boondocks

[PenteoSurround]

Originally Posted by boondocks

Do your methods carry well with all types of Rock music?

It depends entirely on how the original stereo mix was panned. All I'm doing is parsing the panorama. It's really just room-sized stereo.

[hotguy8289]

Originally Posted by PenteoSurround

We can do a lot more now than we could back when these CDs were first mastered.

Thanks for the compliment.

I played selection number one for my friend, an old hippy. He's very familiar with the whole Beatles catalog, but he had to ask me if this was a "cover" by another band. He'd never heard McCartney sound as up close and personal as on your demo disc. I liked it very much as well. Thanks for making it available and how soon before the next one's ready?

[jorgeluiz]

Originally Posted by PenteoSurround

It's part of the stereo preparation for surround parse-out: I do three things: absolute azimuth correction, absolute NAB EQ correction (L/R), digital noise elimination and automated digital EQ normalization at 1/3 octave intervals. It's the same kind of thing that I would do if I were remastering any CD for stereo. If you A/B the stereo original to the stereo prepped master, it sounds 20 years newer.

We can do a lot more now than we could back when these CDs were first mastered.

Thanks for the compliment.

wonderful.
(was not needed any A/B test to hear the quality of the sample, is really better, no doubts)

i was reading the faqs in your site: "How do you intend to market Penteo?"...

then i ask you: how one "single home user" like me can get Penteo?

best regards John!


ps: i forgot..."single home user" and poor like me...... any chance?

[mgpt6]

Looking Forward to my copy of the DVD demo, have good audio system, but older computer with no DVD burner. Was listening and watching The Beatles Antholgy Vol. 7 and 8. They did a very good job remixing many of the songs into 5.1 surround. Used a good sense of "envolpment" One thing which concerns me is that the only widespread media that can accomodate discrete 5 chanels is DVD Video using Dolby or DTS lossy algorthims. DVD-Audio and SACD being niche formats, CD and Vinyl being 2 channel only; and BluRay and HD-DVD still in infancy with sucess not asured yet.

[PenteoSurround]

Originally Posted by jorgeluiz

ps: i forgot..."single home user" and poor like me...... any chance?

Hey JorgeLuiz: Penteo isn't a product for sale (like a box or a piece of software), it's a mastering service that I intended to market to record companies and online services like Rhapsody and iTunes. Unfortunately, surround music is now somewhat out of favor as a revenue source, so I'm still trying to find or put together an online service or a packager to market Penteo discs and/or downloads.

Hopefully we'll find a way, soon.

[mgpt6]

John, a use for Penteo might be for radio stations. WZLX in Boston , a CBS owned FM, is going to broadcast 5.1 surround of classic rock on its HD2 digital signal using the Neural 5.1 codec. The analog and HD1 signal is classic rock. They might want to remaster 60s ,70s and 80s rock tunes into surround using Penteo to increase their playlist for their HD2 channel. Looking forward to DVD demo, adress sent in private email-- mgpt6

[lchiu7]

Originally Posted by PenteoSurround

It's actually listed on the DVD Menu

Well since my HT system has a projector has its display unit, I just popped the disc in and played it. I didn't bother to look at the video since as you noted, it was minimal.

Larry

[Ruin]

I listened to the demo a few times over the weekend. All around, I liked it very much. It DID sound like a new Beatles recording.

Ok, so now get to writting a set of algorythms that will do this on the fly, and that will work with DSPs used AVRs, and we have a winner. Throw Dolby PLII out the window, and in with Penteo.

So can you be hired to remaster an individual CD collection?

Ruin

[PenteoSurround]

Originally Posted by Ruin

I listened to the demo a few times over the weekend. All around, I liked it very much. It DID sound like a new Beatles recording.

Wow, thanks. Unfortunately, it's not an automatic process; a lot of work is done by hand, so it takes 1-2 hours to process a single song, depending on how much damage has been done by time and mastering errors.

I'll keep working on a legitimate marketing plan. Thanks again.

[PenteoSurround]

Originally Posted by mgpt6

John, a use for Penteo might be for radio stations. WZLX in Boston , a CBS owned FM, is going to broadcast 5.1 surround of classic rock on its HD2 digital signal using the Neural 5.1 codec. The analog and HD1 signal is classic rock. They might want to remaster 60s ,70s and 80s rock tunes into surround using Penteo to increase their playlist for their HD2 channel. Looking forward to DVD demo, adress sent in private email-- mgpt6

I actually dropped an email to their Program Director, who said "Telos is handling all that for us." I'm not quite sure what part of it is any surround upconversion.

[jorgeluiz]

Hey JorgeLuiz: Penteo isn't a product for sale (like a box or a piece of software), it's a mastering service that I intended to market to record companies and online services like Rhapsody and iTunes.

very clear John.
no matter where you will use your work the result is fantastic,i'm still impressed with Beatles sample.

(maybe) off topic
this take me to another conclusion for home users(or final users):
my expectation was ....how Penteo could sound in AC3?
as(or if) AC3 is lossy,with Penteo this lossy format sounds better than my original cd that is lossless.
and now? what the aac,flac,wav and other too big format lovers can say against AC3 if the quality(what you hear) is what really matter!...?
you can have lots of AC3 in one single CDR with "Penteo quality" .
(this theme deserve another thread? ...)

regards.

[PenteoSurround]

Originally Posted by jorgeluiz

this take me to another conclusion for home users(or final users):
my expectation was ....how Penteo could sound in AC3?
as(or if) AC3 is lossy,with Penteo this lossy format sounds better than my original cd that is lossless.
and now? what the aac,flac,wav and other too big format lovers can say against AC3 if the quality(what you hear) is what really matter!...?
you can have lots of AC3 in one single CDR with "Penteo quality" .
regards.

As I said in an earlier thread, JorgeLuiz, the way it "sounds" usually has nothing to do with the format that it has been encoded in, it has to do with how well it was encoded. AC3 (and its forerunner AC2) is essentially transparent in its first generation, and professional listeners are hard-pressed (and usually can't tell which is which in controlled studies) to hear any difference between a master tape and the encoded output.

My demo uses no compression, -31db dialog normalization (which makes it as loud as any other format - not that low-level typical DD phenomenon) and no reduction or phase rotation in the rear channels, and no RF overmodulation protection. You have to go into the Dolby Digital encoding parameters very specifically to encode something that way, since it certainly isn't the "default" for Dolby Digital encoding. What I'm essentially using in is "raw" mode, since there's no compression or peak limiting in the software to prevent overload. You have to master it carefully, which is what audio mastering engineers are accustomed to. The audio peaks are actually at -.10 db (-1/10th of a db below all 1's).

Dolby Digital has a lot of built-in "protections" which work great on movies, but makes music encoding sound dull and less dynamic unless the normalization, compression, and protections are disabled. It's called "metadata hell". .

See http://www.dolby.com/assets/pdf/tech...data.Guide.pdf for an example of what I'm talking about.

[jorgeluiz]

...usually has nothing to do with the format that it has been encoded in..

sure, this is what i want to mean too.

i don't like phase rotation too(it's only useful for downmix i think)


i "downmix" the Beatles songs in 5 waves to see the levels and the C channel have more volume than surrounds and (surrounds) more level than L/R(nothing is wrong here)

That demo uses no compression, -31db dialog normalization...You have to go into the Dolby Digital encoding parameters very specifically to encode something that way

(now i'm really scared if my next answer is off topic,please excuse me)
how can i find the level for each channel to apply the dialnorm when encoding AC3 if the new cds are inside the "loudness war" and sounds too loud?
do you have some hint for me?

regards and thanks John

edit: i read your post before you edit it.i know and have this pdf but for musics Dolby.inc parameters are confused. ( lol ) sad but true.
thanks.

[lchiu7]

Originally Posted by PenteoSurround

As I said in an earlier thread, JorgeLuiz, the way it "sounds" usually has nothing to do with the format that it has been encoded in, it has to do with how well it was encoded. AC3 (and its forerunner AC2) is essentially transparent in its first generation, and professional listeners are hard-pressed (and usually can't tell which is which in controlled studies) to hear any difference between a master tape and the encoded output.
..

That's a pretty controversial statement Just witness the raging debate going in the HD DVD forum about the difference between regular DD (AC3) and DD+ at 640Kbs and DD+ at 1.5Kbs. Just to show my colours I am very happy with DD as it is presented on DVD now. I was happy with 384Kbs DD on laserdisc!

Out of interest I presume the DD was coded at 448Kbs as per the DVD spec? I had heard that you can get up to 640Kbs on DVD (as is done in the Pink Floyd Pulse DVD) but that is not strictly within the standards for DVD

Larry

[jorgeluiz]

hi Larry

yes,it's a controversial statement but read the cool post by sdurani http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post8140547

and later(with big patience) this article by Stuart M.Robinson : http://www.homecinemachoice.com/arti...5SoundWars.php

regards.

[Sneezy]

Well, I gave it a try and found it quite entertaining. I wish you good fortune in your endeavor and look forward to more!

[BPWingN]

Thanks very much for posting a link to your endeavour.
I found it wonderfully crisp and clean, and very listenable.

I too wish you much success with this.