or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › The New Master List of BASS in Movies with Frequency Charts
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The New Master List of BASS in Movies with Frequency Charts - Page 125

post #3721 of 16084
the abbot,

So, U:A and T:L both top B:LA? The numbers say yes from 30-40Hz, but not at all below.

Here's U:A


Here's T:L


Note that both of them are one trick ponies. Look at the average graph (the red one). Anytime an effect is needed in these two films, 30Hz it is. In U:A, 30Hz is 10dB above 20Hz, and 15dB above 10Hz. The peak graphs show that occasionally more ULF is used (the ONE 10Hz hit when Sam hits the grid in T:L), but not enough to affect the average graph much.

Now, look at the area under 5-25Hz. That is the overall amount of ULF energy in the film.

Here's Battle:LA


IMO, better use of ULF. Area under the curve from 2-25 is weighted lower, even if it is the same overall area. Look at the area under the curve from 0-20, and Battle:LA wins hands down, IMO. T:L cannot compete from 0-20, but U:A comes close.

Bosso,

my signal chain is:

1. BluRay
2. AVR
3. Soundcard

I am flat to 7Hz, 3dB down at 5Hz, and a very sharp cliff below.

JSS
LL
LL
post #3722 of 16084
I know that there have been a couple blu-ray demo discs available to download and/or traded around. I don't have the ability to burn blu-ray anyway. If anyone has one or two of these demo discs and could burn me a copy I'd appreciate it and pay for the blank disc(s) and shipping.
Thanks,
Steve
post #3723 of 16084
Maxmercy,
My evaluation is based purely on overall viewing enjoyment. I am a bass head, so the more bass the better. I am not on of those guys who is only impressed with ULF graph content. UA might not surpass Battle LA technically, but after watching both movies on my system, I was absolutely blown away by UA. Battle LA was good, but nowhere nearly as entertaining as UA.
post #3724 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by FOH View Post

Whatever film it is, experiencing it with a system that's less capable in the bottom octaves reduces the intended effect,...no getting around it.

Again, "intended effect" - if the monitoring in a dubbing stage doesn't allow you to perceive anything substantial below 20Hz, then how intentional can anything below 20Hz really be? There's simply no way of getting loudness right if the bandwith of the system used in mixing is different from the bandwith of the reproduction setup.
post #3725 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_abbot View Post

Maxmercy,
My evaluation is based purely on overall viewing enjoyment. I am a bass head, so the more bass the better. I am not on of those guys who is only impressed with ULF graph content. UA might not surpass Battle LA technically, but after watching both movies on my system, I was absolutely blown away by UA. Battle LA was good, but nowhere nearly as entertaining as UA.

I also judge a track with my ears and how much enjoyment I get out of it instead of going primarily off a graph...........crazy! That said, Battle LA and Tron Legacy for me are pretty much neck and neck as far as LFE...............if pushed, I would give Tron a slight edge, but its close. Both blow me away in my room.


Just got Underworld in the mail today and looking forward to it! Probably wont get to it tonight since I have to watch the Nuggets beat the Lakers, but maybe tom (or maybe even late tonight which would be fun if we get home early enough).

On a side note, I would just like to send a big thanks to FilmMixer for all his contributions here. We are fortunate to have an insider giving us a glimpse into his world and we should all be appreciative. Not only that, he is one hell of a nice guy.
post #3726 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxmercy View Post


Bosso,

my signal chain is:

1. BluRay
2. AVR
3. Soundcard

I am flat to 7Hz, 3dB down at 5Hz, and a very sharp cliff below.

JSS

I assume the BR is HDMI to the AVR and the AVRs analog SW out, using bass management, goes into the SC?

Which AVR?

Sorry for all the Qs, but if you don't mind it'll help me out a lot.

Bosso
post #3727 of 16084
can someone help me setup speclab on my laptop?
post #3728 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_abbot View Post

Maxmercy,
My evaluation is based purely on overall viewing enjoyment. I am a bass head, so the more bass the better. I am not on of those guys who is only impressed with ULF graph content. UA might not surpass Battle LA technically, but after watching both movies on my system, I was absolutely blown away by UA. Battle LA was good, but nowhere nearly as entertaining as UA.

That's where subjectivity comes in. I thought B:LA was better than U:A, and U:A reminded me of T:L. T:L sucks IMO because of all the clipping. Turns out, the spectrums backed up my hunches. What's the freq response at your LP? That may explain your preference....

JSS
post #3729 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxmercy View Post


That's where subjectivity comes in. I thought B:LA was better than U:A, and U:A reminded me of T:L. T:L sucks IMO because of all the clipping. Turns out, the spectrums backed up my hunches. What's the freq response at your LP? That may explain your preference....

JSS

Was the clipping in tron during the scene where he enters the grid?
post #3730 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post


I also judge a track with my ears and how much enjoyment I get out of it instead of going primarily off a graph...........crazy! That said, Battle LA and Tron Legacy for me are pretty much neck and neck as far as LFE...............if pushed, I would give Tron a slight edge, but its close. Both blow me away in my room.

Just got Underworld in the mail today and looking forward to it! Probably wont get to it tonight since I have to watch the Nuggets beat the Lakers, but maybe tom (or maybe even late tonight which would be fun if we get home early enough).

On a side note, I would just like to send a big thanks to FilmMixer for all his contributions here. We are fortunate to have an insider giving us a glimpse into his world and we should all be appreciative. Not only that, he is one hell of a nice guy.

I listen to a film, THEN get a spectrum if I think it warrants it, or I like it. Not the other way around. I do the graphs to see what is really there, to confirm what my ears were telling me.

I have to run the film in its entirety and set all delays to zero, highpass all channels to the sub, reset levels, stop all room correction and vole EQ, disconnect all speakers, and route the SW OUT to my soundcard. Then I turn on SpecLab and watch the film unfold on the waterfall as well as spectrum screen. Doing this a few times will train your ear to know what 15Hz vs 25Hz feels/sounds like.

I am surprised sometimes, since I cannot monitor under 15Hz cleanly or with authority.


JSS
post #3731 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossobass View Post


I assume the BR is HDMI to the AVR and the AVRs analog SW out, using bass management, goes into the SC?

Which AVR?

Sorry for all the Qs, but if you don't mind it'll help me out a lot.

Bosso

HDMI from BDP to AVR, AVR is Denon 2809CI. I use SW OUT with bass mgmt (all small speakers crossed at 250Hz).

I was underwhelmed by U:A, so I rigged up to measure, seeing as I saw a '5.5' rating thrown out for it.....

JSS
post #3732 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by nube View Post

That is unbelievably condescending. I wonder what your mother would think.


My mother would think that you are one rude and immature wannabee bully.


My posting to Bosso was 100% acurate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Palmer_Cass View Post

15 Hz is infra regardless of your custom definition of ULF!


Your response below is accuate except for the silly and inaccurate last sentence, but that is not the issue that was being discussed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nube View Post

It absolutely is NOT. Infra implies below the range of hearing, yet almost everyone can hear (not merely feel) that frequency, and significantly below it. If you want to challenge that point, we can do it in another thread, or you can get Auditor55 to take up your banner, but please don't spread misinformation.


That is like a stranger who walks up to me, starts screaming at me, kicks me is the shins and tells me that I should respond to you actions elsewhere.

Instead I respond with a prompt punch in the nose, and then you start crying. What a wuss.


The bottom line is that audible frequencies have been defined as the frequencies between 20 to 20,000 Hz. This is not a recent developement.

Infrasonic sounds have been defined as those frequencies that are under 20 Hz. That is not a recent development.

Ultrasonic Sounds have been defined as those frequencies that are over 20,000 Hz. That is not a recent development.


You should not get upset with me just because you think that your subwoofer can not play nubefrasonic frequencies.
post #3733 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by FOH View Post

I couldn't agree more. When I see comments like that, in this environment, it is perplexing. We're examining the minutia of the spectral characteristics of LFE/RB in motion picture releases on BluRay/DVD. We're certainly not the anywhere near the masses.

It's not really that perplexing FOH. I'm not talking about the validity of graphing the spectral content of movies or the nature of people who do so. Certainly those who examine spectral graphs are not the masses and more than likely they have superb sub systems.

But again I ask, is the movie industry only catering to this group of people and those who visit this thread? Are you the target market?

Quote:


Bosso's subwoofer system is relatively modest when compared to many systems that contributors share here at AVS, and elsewhere all over the web. It's the attention to detail, the due diligence in assuring path the signal takes is free from the deleterious effects of accumulative high pass filtration that's an inherent element of electronics design. His system is visually un-obtrusive, and physically takes very little floorspace.

No need to defend bosso's system or contributions. I'm well aware of them. That is not the issue here.

Quote:


This has been explored, that's why he recoils at attempts to diminish the importance of full bandwidth LFE reproduction. Whatever film it is, experiencing it with a system that's less capable in the bottom octaves reduces the intended effect,...no getting around it. Regardless if the sensation is aural, physical, or most likely a blend of the two, if the filmmakers want a floor rippling, wall pulsing, room pressurization flutter effect, then anything less is just that,....less.

Can I clarify something here, is full bandwidth LFE reproduction from 3-120Hz?

Next question, certainly I agree that the goal is to reproduce the intended effect. No dispute there. The question is what is the intended effect? Is it intended to cover the first 3 octaves? FilmMixer has said:

Quote:


We all follow the industry standard spec which sharply drops off at 20Hz on the sub channel..

We aren't hearing all the ULF stuff you guys are talking about.. and it's why I've said in the past that if you suspect stuff is down there, as a mixer, you either filter it if you're concerned about it translating down the line, or leavie it in for later, knowing that some HT's go that low...

As I've said in the past, you guys are monitoring stuff which wasn't heard on a dub stage becuase we have subs that are tuned to a standard which most on this thread are not followiing.

I know you disagree with that spec (and bosso does too). Personally I wish the spec allows them to go lower too. However, the rationale was explained for the spec but bosso and perhaps yourself still don't accept it. So we're just discussing that.

Quote:


I also read comments regarding how financially un-attainable this is, everyone's finances differ, however one of the finest contributors and avid ULF explorer, the late Jordan (aka Krypto), was a contributor of very modest finances. And he managed in solid room response to 5-7 hz with the ubiquitous combo of Fi/EP4K, @ less than approx $1500. He asked questions and got creative. Point being, these positions citing excessive expense for the masses, too much floorspace, etc, really don't apply in my opinion.

Good for Krypto. Again you try to paint a picture that it is easy to attain performance below 10Hz. If it is so easy, why don't we see everyone having such capable systems? Because the fact is that it is not so easy.

Most of these guys are DIY. Many people don't have the time or skill or interest in going DIY. They prefer buying ready made subs and even so, the budget for many people is several hundred. Even that figure of $1500 you mentioned above is above the budget for the "masses". So going back to subs at several hundred dollars, you'll be lucky if it does 20Hz.

I'd like to hear you point of view on "these positions citing excessive expense for the masses, too much floorspace, etc, really don't apply in my opinion."
- What is a reasonable expense for the masses?
- As for excessive floorspace, bosso's stacking solution is very neat I agree. But not many stack like that. At the other end of the scale is notnyt's system which is very imposing. What is your opinion on reasonable floorspace? I'm asking because you see so many comments about people unboxing something like a VTF-15H or FV15HP and saying "it's huge" or they can't get something like that because of WAF and wanted to get a sealed sub.
post #3734 of 16084
U:A easily a 5. Better than T:L imho. Non stop clean bass. Pretty sick movie too

Closing credits song is badd ass in the bass depot as well. Well done!
post #3735 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by jchong View Post

Next question, certainly I agree that the goal is to reproduce the intended effect. No dispute there. The question is what is the intended effect?

I'm fairly certain that your question is not well-defined, and that at least some of the difference of opinion stems from this. As stated, your question presupposes that there is at most one intended effect. It seems to me that there will have to be at least two: that of the sound designer and that of the mixer (and, for the music industry, that of the masterer).

Even if the mixer leaves the signal below the studio cut-off point alone, it is entirely possible that the designer knows what he or she is doing to the point that, when those frequencies *are* reproduced, things work as intended *by the designer*.
post #3736 of 16084
Getting ready to watch the Three Musketeers in a little while....what should I expect???
post #3737 of 16084
is Immortals any good ?
post #3738 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by otk View Post

is Immortals any good ?

Good base and surround. Don't expect another 300 for movie quality though.
post #3739 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by capricorn kid View Post

Getting ready to watch the Three Musketeers in a little while....what should I expect???

Hi capricorn kid, will be watching this also plus The Grey. Heard Three Musketeers has some decent LFE.
post #3740 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post

Just got Underworld in the mail today and looking forward to it! Probably wont get to it tonight since I have to watch the Nuggets beat the Lakers, but maybe tom (or maybe even late tonight which would be fun if we get home early enough).

If you have to wait until the Nuggets beak the Lakers to watch Underworld, then you'd have to wait close to a year because the Nuggets are going to lose tonight...

Sorry, couldn't help but smack talk...
post #3741 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by JChin View Post

Hi capricorn kid, will be watching this also plus The Grey. Heard Three Musketeers has some decent LFE.

Three Musketeers had some EXCELLENT LFE scenes!
post #3742 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxmercy View Post

That's where subjectivity comes in. I thought B:LA was better than U:A, and U:A reminded me of T:L. T:L sucks IMO because of all the clipping. Turns out, the spectrums backed up my hunches. What's the freq response at your LP? That may explain your preference....

JSS

Subjectively I thought U:A was better than B:LA. It's interesting how different people rate the films differently. Perhaps it has to do with the playback system and room.

As for me, at the LP I'm flat to about 13-14Hz. I see you get down to 15Hz. So we should be experiencing more or less the same thing, but yet arrive at different subjective impressions.

Perhaps I need to train my hearing for the stuff between 15-20Hz.
post #3743 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by jchong View Post

Subjectively I thought U:A was better than B:LA. It's interesting how different people rate the films differently. Perhaps it has to do with the playback system and room.

As for me, at the LP I'm flat to about 13-14Hz. I see you get down to 15Hz. So we should be experiencing more or less the same thing, but yet arrive at different subjective impressions.

Perhaps I need to train my hearing for the stuff between 15-20Hz.

I get down to about 12-13hz flat. I also enjoyed UA a lot more.
post #3744 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by jchong View Post

Subjectively I thought U:A was better than B:LA. It's interesting how different people rate the films differently. Perhaps it has to do with the playback system and room.

As for me, at the LP I'm flat to about 13-14Hz. I see you get down to 15Hz. So we should be experiencing more or less the same thing, but yet arrive at different subjective impressions.

Perhaps I need to train my hearing for the stuff between 15-20Hz.

UA was fun. My basement room is pretty tight with cement walls and flooring but my seating starts resonating around 20 hz and the lower the frequency the more violent the seats and riser move. Below that is when the hair on my head starts to twirl. I don't do graphs, but reference scenes that are graphed back up these tactile cues for me. UA did not perform, in my room, as good as B-LA, WOTW, HTTYD, Percy Jackson or even TL. It hit some there but not as violent. Still a great fun track with a lot of seat rumbling and also some nice clean low sounds that my IB loves to replicate and, as mentioned, is a fun 7.1.
post #3745 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by jchong View Post

Subjectively I thought U:A was better than B:LA. It's interesting how different people rate the films differently. Perhaps it has to do with the playback system and room.

As for me, at the LP I'm flat to about 13-14Hz. I see you get down to 15Hz. So we should be experiencing more or less the same thing, but yet arrive at different subjective impressions.

Perhaps I need to train my hearing for the stuff between 15-20Hz.

I am biased, as I am a former Marine. Also, I think a room's resonating structures make a big difference. My main listening couch moves/shakes a lot from 17-23Hz. So of course, a film w/ lots of that will be quite engaging in my room. I also like lots of 'chest thump' or 'slam' Thor did that pretty well. The sub-20Hz stuff is more detected than heard. from 15-17Hz, it is more of a feeling (it will also modulate your voice, instant vibrato), and from 17-25, the couch as well as the walls and ceiling move, creating a 'the room is gonna collapse' feeling. Above 25Hz, we are mainly in hearing as main mode of detection unless at a high enough level to be felt as clothes movement, etc.

I can dial in four different responses at the LP with a switch:


Depending on how much distortion I want to put up with. I choose the one where I'm 3dB down at 15Hz. The next one drives THD up to 10%, and I can tell when it is doing so. I also have a hole at ~70Hz, sucks, right in the 'slam' territory. Some new bass traps will address that.

Don't get me wrong, I like T:L, I bought it. But I always thought something was off, and sure enough, a member at AVS discovered the clipping. I really liked U:A, but not enough to buy. But Battle:LA's scene where they are moving to the FOB in the helos is done VERY well, as well as the rest of the film, at least sound-wise. If they would have cut down on the cheese factor and made it more like Generation:Kill, it would have been awesome. But I guess they needed the PG-13 rating.

JSS
LL
post #3746 of 16084
Tonight's movie was Melancholia. The two planet collision scenes had what sounded like five star LFE, but I had to sit through about 130 minutes of five star boredom to get to them. Going to waterfall those two scenes as soon as the transcoding process is finished, just so I can pretend I didn't waste the last 135 minutes of my life on this one.

Not even going to vote on a star rating for the LFE in general. I'll just waterfall those scenes and send the movie back to the rental place. This movie will never be on my shopping list.
post #3747 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by beezar View Post

If you have to wait until the Nuggets beak the Lakers to watch Underworld, then you'd have to wait close to a year because the Nuggets are going to lose tonight...

Sorry, couldn't help but smack talk...

post #3748 of 16084
Even with the action scenes, Immortals was almost unwatchable. The acting was terrible, but there are a few decent action scenes to offer some eye candy. They are few and far between unfortunately, and the story is cheesy. Not up to par with 300 by any stretch of the imagination.

Quote:
Originally Posted by otk View Post

is Immortals any good ?
post #3749 of 16084
Quote:
Originally Posted by pennynike1 View Post

Even with the action scenes, Immortals was almost unwatchable. The acting was terrible, but there are a few decent action scenes to offer some eye candy. They are few and far between unfortunately, and the story is cheesy. Not up to par with 300 by any stretch of the imagination.

If that film didn't have the bow and the nice god vs fight scenes, I would have shut it off. I am a fan of Greek mythos films, and while it had GREAT potential, if was a let down, esp with the clipping....you would think that would have been caught by someone before release....unless it was intentional.

JSS
post #3750 of 16084
I thought Immortals was more entertaining then 300 by a fair margin.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › The New Master List of BASS in Movies with Frequency Charts