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 215

post #6421 of 16207
cool.gif
Edited by bossobass - 12/9/12 at 8:23am
post #6422 of 16207
Comparison of two waterfall styles of the same scene from what I can tell from teh notations. Time period near 50 min 50 seconds.


BossoDave method. Nice if you like the smeared look that does not clearly show transients.






Oklahoma Wolf method.

post #6423 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by wth718 View Post

The thread linked above answers the questions at the heart of all this debate: what criteria equate to what star ratings? I've just skimmed it, but they have done a great job. They've added objectivity to the ratings of the objective data, which is something that was never done here, on either this or the original thread. The only subjective pieces are Execution and Buy/Rent. Without something like this--consistent, repeatable--it was inevitably going to be subjective opinions. Both resources are useful, IMO.

No doubt. Pick the thread or threads that you want to participate in and quit mucking up the other. Either way and no matter which thread or threads you choose, lets get back to what we all love and have in common...........our love for the low end. cool.gif I like that this thread is a mixture of BOTH subjective and the graphs. If you are looking more for a hard and fast set of rules that eliminates the subjective, the other thread looks like your ticket. Either way, how about we get this thread back on track.

Just watched Batman Begins and am going to watch DK and DKR (if I have time) tonight as well. Should be interesting to watch all 3 back to back and see how I subjectively feel about not only the LFE, but sound in general and how each compare to the others.
post #6424 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Palmer_Cass View Post

Soundtracks that do not have deep extension are not rated as "reference" on AVS even if you are talking the entire soundtrack. Your rating system would be classified as subjective, and that places you in the problem group of posters that you (and others) are complaining about.
I don't recall seeing you post any waterfalls or bass ratings on this thread. However, you do make requests for others to do them for you.
That is the primary reason this thread has gone downhill over the years. Little to no participation by the peanut gallery.
There have only been a hand full of people who have posted waterfalls in the past year. For the most part, even I gave up posting waterfalls some time ago. These days I do look at content to see how a specific movie was mixed on a per channel basis, but no one cares about different mixing styles on this thread.

You have no idea what you're talking about. It's people like that turned this thread to **** bringing up stupid little arguments. I have no idea why you stalked my post and brought it over here.

I have nothing else to say on the matter. Wow.

EDIT-

Good to see you back, bossobass.
post #6425 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklahoma Wolf View Post

Now that you mention it, I was curious about that too. Here you go:


Thanks! Mostly strong mid bass but i liked the way it felt.
post #6426 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by edoggrc51 View Post

Thanks so much! Just what i was looking for! smile.gif


post #6427 of 16207
I'd give Dark Knight RIses a 3.5-4 for bass. After seing it in the local theatre I couldn't think of anything else than trying it out at home. The bat scene is pretty awesome but I expected more ULF. I am missing deep and loud in this movie.

Bourne Legacy is a 2.5-3. Very well made mix, but not many ULF moments except for the cabin explosion and the drones.
post #6428 of 16207
Maybe I speak for others, maybe I don't. But I quit coming to this thread a long time ago because I knew I was one that didn't have the technical knowledge and was made to feel uncomfortable by many of the folks complaining that the thread went to ^%$@. There's been very little tolerance for those that are trying to learn. God forbid we make some subjective comment or don't read a chart right. I know that many don't want this thread to have that element, but surely there was a way to participate peacefully together.

There are parts of my life that are worth the energy. This is not one of them. And it's a shame, because I enjoyed it here.
post #6429 of 16207
I'll chime in as well....


One of the problems with this thread is that the people with systems that can go 5-15hz feel the need to frown upon those of us with much more modest systems that can only go to 30hz or so. Does Cloverfield or WOTW sound as good on my system as it would on someone else's system with a quad sub setup with multiple (PB13U's, or JTR's, or Submersives, etc) ULF capable subs? Of course not. But do I enjoy the bass that is there in those movies? Of course I do. I too will one day have a ULF capable system, but until then I'll still enjoy the plethora of bass (midbass or not) in all the movies out there.


As indicated by the much appreciated charts provided by much more technically capable and advanced people in this forum, I know what movies have fun bass. I know more about HT equipment today than I did yesterday because of avsforum.

The people who are crying about leaving this thread, to them I say good riddance. You guys can continue to lurk and read this thread and be frustrated with the morons and other people who comment on enjoying the less than stellar movies like TDKR, The Avengers, etc....these movies have great bass yo...how condescending...

Just go to your holes and keep re-listening to the same scenes with ULF over and over again.
Edited by quattroatl - 12/8/12 at 7:00am
post #6430 of 16207
Hello,
I am curious, one of the prior posts mentioned that The Amazing Spiderman had more ULF Moments than the TDNR.
Can you be specific and prove this to me with graphs? Or at least tell me the scenes when they occur? I am asking this because it felt like the TDNR, had much better LFE. I do have a sub that digs under -15.
,
post #6431 of 16207
Quote:
One of the problems with this thread is that the people with systems that can go 5-15hz feel the need to frown upon those of us with much more modest systems that can only go to 30hz or so. Does Cloverfield or WOTW sound as good on my system as it would on someone else's system with a quad sub setup with multiple (PB13U's, or JTR's, or Submersives, etc) ULF capable subs? Of course not. But do I enjoy the bass that is there in those movies?

This statement is steeped in subjectivism. First of all, when dealing with 5-15 hz that's a range that's not even audible. That range have more to do with feeling than hearing. Quite honestly it doesn't really belong in a discussion of audio or psychoacoustics. Its more relevant to a discussions like physiology, a science that deal with how that body respond to physical touch, it belongs in that field of discussion and not audio. Having said that, I get where you're going with it, alot what you describe have more to do with some folks trying to out do others when it comes to bass. ULF does not equal good bass, that is a personal opinion or preference.
post #6432 of 16207
posts deleted

we are looking at reports: in the meantime please limit posts to technical issue

PM me any concerns
post #6433 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post

This statement is steeped in subjectivism. First of all, when dealing with 5-15 hz that's a range that's not even audible. That range have more to do with feeling than hearing. Quite honestly it doesn't really belong in a discussion of audio or psychoacoustics. Its more relevant to a discussions like physiology, a science that deal with how that body respond to physical touch, it belongs in that field of discussion and not audio. Having said that, I get where you're going with it, alot what you describe have more to do with some folks trying to out do others when it comes to bass. ULF does not equal good bass, that is a personal opinion or preference.

You make a very good point. I just read a review in HT magazine on the Gallo Nucleus Classico Cl-2 speaker system, which incorporates a10'' 300 watt sub. What surprised me was that it received a top pick despite the fact it's extension below 30hz was far from robust. It's surprisingly clean output during action scenes in movies like War Horse, and it's accuracy with music, gave it a big thumbs up despite it's $699.00 price tag. Personally it wouldn't be my first choice, but for many audiophiles who consider sound quality as their top priority, it is a very good sub.



Ian
post #6434 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by quattroatl View Post

I'll chime in as well....


One of the problems with this thread is that the people with systems that can go 5-15hz feel the need to frown upon those of us with much more modest systems that can only go to 30hz or so. Does Cloverfield or WOTW sound as good on my system as it would on someone else's system with a quad sub setup with multiple (PB13U's, or JTR's, or Submersives, etc) ULF capable subs? Of course not. But do I enjoy the bass that is there in those movies? Of course I do. I too will one day have a ULF capable system, but until then I'll still enjoy the plethora of bass (midbass or not) in all the movies out there.

 

As one of the people with a system that can do very well indeed at 7Hz and even lower on occasion, I'd like to chime in back :)  I would not frown upon you and your system or anyone else's, but would you agree that if someone has a system that can only go down authoritatively to 30Hz, then any subjective comment from the owner of such a system - such as "Wow - the bass in XXXXXX is freakin' awesome" - is pretty meaningless. That person may well enjoy the bass he is getting from his system, but he is also missing a lot of bass between 30Hz and, say, 10Hz. The point about the objective graphs is that the response is there for anyone to see, regardless of his own system's capabilities or his own subjective take on it. So, for example, anyone can look at a graph of The Dark Knight Rises and see there is nothing below 30Hz (except in one brief scene). Similarly, anyone can look at How To Train Your Dragon and see that at one point the movie is asking your system to play a 2 Hz (yes TWO Hz) signal at something like 107dB IIRC. Isn’t this information more useful than "Wow, this bass is awesome"?  Especially when the reader may not know the low end capabilities of the poster's system, the SPL he can achieve, whether he has goosed his sub by 10dB and so on?

 

Subjective opinions are great for the subject who holds them, but they are not transferrable to anyone else. One man's awesome is another man's average. Objective data is useful to everyone. One day you may, and I hope you do, have a system that can get down into single figure bass frequencies, and if you have the graphs you can choose the movies you want to demo your new system, easily. Ging back through a thread and looking for "Wow, the bass in XXXXX is awesome" isn't going to help you, if you have no way of knowing what that commenter's definition of 'awesome' is.

 

 

Quote:
As indicated by the much appreciated charts provided by much more technically capable and advanced people in this forum, I know what movies have fun bass. I know more about HT equipment today than I did yesterday because of avsforum.

The people who are crying about leaving this thread, to them I say good riddance. You guys can continue to lurk and read this thread and be frustrated with the morons and other people who comment on enjoying the less than stellar movies like TDKR, The Avengers, etc....these movies have great bass yo...how condescending...

Just go to your holes and keep re-listening to the same scenes with ULF over and over again.

 

Name calling and just being obnoxious isn't going to help anyone's cause. Nobody is trying to tell anyone what to enjoy. Nobody has said anyone is a 'moron' for enjoying TDKR or Avengers - they are great movies with good sound. But ULF isn't part of that great sound. That is all anyone is saying, and proving it with graphs.

post #6435 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony123 View Post

Maybe I speak for others, maybe I don't. But I quit coming to this thread a long time ago because I knew I was one that didn't have the technical knowledge and was made to feel uncomfortable by many of the folks complaining that the thread went to ^%$@. There's been very little tolerance for those that are trying to learn. God forbid we make some subjective comment or don't read a chart right. I know that many don't want this thread to have that element, but surely there was a way to participate peacefully together.

There are parts of my life that are worth the energy. This is not one of them. And it's a shame, because I enjoyed it here.

 

I sympathise with your position. I too have none of the technical knowledge to make the charts. I came to the thread to learn too. But unlike you, I have never felt uncomfortable or talked down to. But a few subjectivists, who are loud-mouthed and either want to try to make themselves look big by dissing others, or who just want to be able to say "the bass is awesome" without ever being challenged, ruined the thread for me and, like you, I quit bothering with it too. It’s a shame because the thread was terrific at one stage - but driving away (deliberately too it seems to me) the guys who spent the time making the charts and graphs, was never going to improve the quality of the contributions here was it?

post #6436 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

So, for example, anyone can look at a graph of The Dark Knight Rises and see there is nothing below 30Hz (except in one brief scene).

Actually, I've found sub 30Hz in several scenes, at least in the North American release. It's just rather attenuated relative to everything above that mark, except for the plane ride at the beginning of the movie. There, I found high level 18-20Hz material.

My waterfalls are a page back.
post #6437 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklahoma Wolf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

So, for example, anyone can look at a graph of The Dark Knight Rises and see there is nothing below 30Hz (except in one brief scene).

Actually, I've found sub 30Hz in several scenes, at least in the North American release. It's just rather attenuated relative to everything above that mark, except for the plane ride at the beginning of the movie. There, I found high level 18-20Hz material.

My waterfalls are a page back.

 

Sorry, I should have said "anyone can look at the graphs I have seen, and see there......"

post #6438 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

As one of the people with a system that can do very well indeed at 7Hz and even lower on occasion, I'd like to chime in back smile.gif  I would not frown upon you and your system or anyone else's, but would you agree that if someone has a system that can only go down authoritatively to 30Hz, then any subjective comment from the owner of such a system - such as "Wow - the bass in XXXXXX is freakin' awesome" - is pretty meaningless. That person may well enjoy the bass he is getting from his system, but he is also missing a lot of bass between 30Hz and, say, 10Hz. The point about the objective graphs is that the response is there for anyone to see, regardless of his own system's capabilities or his own subjective take on it. So, for example, anyone can look at a graph of The Dark Knight Rises and see there is nothing below 30Hz (except in one brief scene). Similarly, anyone can look at How To Train Your Dragon and see that at one point the movie is asking your system to play a 2 Hz (yes TWO Hz) signal at something like 107dB IIRC. Isn’t this information more useful than "Wow, this bass is awesome"?  Especially when the reader may not know the low end capabilities of the poster's system, the SPL he can achieve, whether he has goosed his sub by 10dB and so on?

Subjective opinions are great for the subject who holds them, but they are not transferrable to anyone else. One man's awesome is another man's average. Objective data is useful to everyone. One day you may, and I hope you do, have a system that can get down into single figure bass frequencies, and if you have the graphs you can choose the movies you want to demo your new system, easily. Ging back through a thread and looking for "Wow, the bass in XXXXX is awesome" isn't going to help you, if you have no way of knowing what that commenter's definition of 'awesome' is.



Name calling and just being obnoxious isn't going to help anyone's cause. Nobody is trying to tell anyone what to enjoy. Nobody has said anyone is a 'moron' for enjoying TDKR or Avengers - they are great movies with good sound. But ULF isn't part of that great sound. That is all anyone is saying, and proving it with graphs.


This thread is over 200 pages long. There is mix of subjective and objective opinions. Some comments are more helpful than others. I am not name calling, but I am merely pointing out that some people find the need to diss others' comments which they disagree with in terms of bass content and the quality. A bit of eliteism is all I'm pointing out.

I choose to find the useful comments and take others with a grain of salt. Others could choose to do the same.
post #6439 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Sorry, I should have said "anyone can look at the graphs I have seen, and see there......"

No problem. Easy to miss stuff in a thread this long and full of off or barely on topic bickering... just didn't want my graphs getting lost in the shuffle.

I look forward to the mods being able to trim the excess soon.
post #6440 of 16207
Well on a lighter note, I just got done watching TDKR and it was a lot of fun, I ran it 2db hot and it shook the hell out of the pictures on my walls and my couch. I do enjoy the waterfalls but hate all the
bs involved with posting them.
I give TDKR a 5 star rating it had strong LFE through the movie and some good ULF at times.
post #6441 of 16207
Resident Evil Retribution gets a solid 4.5/5....maybe even a full 5 stars. So much bass in this one. Gun shots at this time stamp are amazing 0:22:00. Probably better than the Uzi fired in Underworld Awakening. Bass hits hard too.

Movies itself is so so. Good enough to watch. It's like all the other ones.
post #6442 of 16207
Quote:
Subjective opinions are great for the subject who holds them, but they are not transferrable to anyone else. One man's awesome is another man's average. Objective data is useful to everyone. One day you may, and I hope you do, have a system that can get down into single figure bass frequencies, and if you have the graphs you can choose the movies you want to demo your new system, easily

Objective data is good as long as it remains just that, objective. The charts are great, as long as the information they provide stand alone. However, to use charts and or graphs to try to substantiate what is essentially subjective, that is good or inferior bass, isn't useful. If this thread is supposed to about objective measurements only, that's fine, there shouldn't be any or very little bickering if that is understood. A problem might arise when someone, for example, post a graph that shows a movie with LF that only measure in the mid twenties (without any infrasounds) and then conclude that soundtrack, do to a lack of infrasounds, does not contain great bass. There is no way you can use objective measurements to substaniate a subjective opinion or preference. To some, infrasounds does not equate to great bass, to others it does, that is not objective but subjective.

Personally I find the pursuit of infrasound impratical and superflous, however that's just me I'm sure others would strongly disagree. If I used the amount infrasonic content in soundtrack as to what determines superior or inferior bass as criteria for making Blu Ray purchase, the graphs found in this thread would be most useful. I would just do check off of movies lacking infrasonic and scratch them
off my list of possible purchases. Again, that would be just me, my preference.
post #6443 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeffeMusic View Post

Hello,
I am curious, one of the prior posts mentioned that The Amazing Spiderman had more ULF Moments than the TDNR.
Can you be specific and prove this to me with graphs? Or at least tell me the scenes when they occur? I am asking this because it felt like the TDNR, had much better LFE. I do have a sub that digs under -15.
,

There are graphs of TDKR in this thread, and Amazing Spider-Man a few pages back...
post #6444 of 16207
I have a very scientific way of measuring ULF. When the pictures on my walls rattle and you just feel the base then I know its good. Or my daughter yells at me that stuff is falling off her shelves down the hall then I know its a 5 star..................
post #6445 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by wth718 View Post

One of the recent comments is exactly what I mean when I talk about balance. Does a movie that only gets to 30 Hz qualify as a bass movie? Of course it can!! Last I checked 30 Hz is closer to the bottom of the LFE spectrum than the top. Are all movies that only get down that low "bass movies?" Obviously not. But just as a movie that has moments of single digit bass doesn't automatically qualify, the opposite doesn't automatically disqualify a movie.
Hunger Games gets into the single digits. But there a only a few scenes with deep bass, one lasting a few seconds. Does that make it a better bass flick than let's say Avengers? I don't think so at all. No, Avengers doesn't dig low, but there are lots of scenes, lots of bass. It sure excites my room.
I think what we have to realize is that there subjectivity even with objective data. What differentiates a 4 from a 4.5? How loud does it need to get? How low does it need to go? How many scenes does it have to have? People can look at the graphs of 2 movies and come up with different opinions about them. It's the nature of our different perspectives and that every movie is different. Posters who insist that there is no use for sub 20 Hz playback are wrong. People who insist that if a movie doesn't dig below 20 Hz it's not worthy of being called a bass movie are wrong. There are too many variables to dismiss ones that don't meet your SPECIFIC criteria out of hand.
Ok, I'm really done now. lol. It just drives me crazy to see these extreme positions staked out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post

^^^^^^^^^^^^^Great posts wth718!
I very much agree with your philosophy here. AS would never be a 5 in my book even though it has single digit response since it feels lacking in the upper/mid bass area. Avengers will never be a 5 even though it is loaded with LFE up to about 30hz because it lacks the real deep stuff. Both of course are still very good LFE movies IMO, but neither is complete. Combine them and get AS levels up a bit andyou have a 5 star track.
I watched TDKR last night and even though it apparently has largely been filtered below 30hz from what you guys are saying, this is still one excellent LFE film IMO. The movie is just loaded with the stuff and it hits hard! It also hits in all the right spots which is important in my book and one reason why you cant ONLY judge a LFE track by graphs alone......the graphs will never be able to tell the full story which is why it is always important to actually watch the film as well.
I would go 4 or 4.5 on TDKR all things considered. If this track had more of the deep stuff, it would have been a 4.5 or 5 IMO.

After reading the last 4-5 pages (where the ongoing battle continues as to how to define and rate bass in a movie), the two posts cited above hit the proverbial "nail on the head." I also agree with Toe's assessment and rating of TDKR.
post #6446 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by quattroatl View Post


This thread is over 200 pages long. There is mix of subjective and objective opinions. Some comments are more helpful than others. I am not name calling, but I am merely pointing out that some people find the need to diss others' comments which they disagree with in terms of bass content and the quality. A bit of eliteism is all I'm pointing out.

 

Well you did call people 'morons' in your earlier post ("morons and other people who comment on enjoying the less than stellar movies like TDKR, The Avengers, etc.") but let's let it go.

 

Personally I haven't been bothered by any elitism but maybe I am less sensitive to it. 

 

 

Quote:
I choose to find the useful comments and take others with a grain of salt. Others could choose to do the same.

 

I think this is a very good philosophy.

post #6447 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by djoberg View Post

After reading the last 4-5 pages (where the ongoing battle continues as to how to define and rate bass in a movie), the two posts cited above hit the proverbial "nail on the head." I also agree with Toe's assessment and rating of TDKR.

yes I agree with Toe's opinion is right on, nothing replaces the feeling you get when you watch a movie, and compare it too other movies
post #6448 of 16207
I'm a member who appreciates tight clean mid bass as much as ULF. Now my SVS NSD 12/2 cannot reach anything below 16Hz but my four mid bass subs used in conjunction with my SVS gives me a far more enjoyable sound than my local IMAX. I recall seeing TDKR with about 30 friends at IMAX and enjoying the bass, but when watching the Bluray at home in my smallish great room sitting there grinning from ear to ear and its the first movie in awhile where I actually got lost in the movie instead of critiquing how the movies audio could be improved.

Granted the majority of bass in this movie was mid bass when my SVS was active (below 40Hz) it did it with authority. I have been in many home theaters with incredible ULF subs (IB, Seatons etc) and find the real subsonic bass exciting but distracting. I want to get lost in a movie but not be distracted by below 10Hz frequencies that I never hear in real life. Are there better bass heavy movies out there, heck yeah but for overall enjoyment of a good bass movie you can't go wrong with TDKR. After all if it makes you smile than what others think is unimportant. Enjoy what you have.
post #6449 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metalbender View Post

I have a very scientific way of measuring ULF. When the pictures on my walls rattle and you just feel the base then I know its good. Or my daughter yells at me that stuff is falling off her shelves down the hall then I know its a 5 star..................

Hehe, good one Metalbender, I have a similar system in place, when the cops rock up saying the neighbours house 3 doors down is shaking, I know I have a 5 star bass movie! Oops sorry, our humour and bass rating methods may not be appreciated around here, best we leave. smile.gif
post #6450 of 16207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metalbender View Post

I have a very scientific way of measuring ULF. When the pictures on my walls rattle and you just feel the base then I know its good. Or my daughter yells at me that stuff is falling off her shelves down the hall then I know its a 5 star..................

Actually it means you need to EQ.
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