Blu-ray Review: KNOWING (Summit Entertainment/Escape Artists)

Ron-P

Mike LoManaco wrote: »

Yes, Danz, the sound was great -- save for the dynamic range issues I explained with the dialogue and such.

I just went back and read your paragraph on the audio issue. To me, the audio was fantastic, perfectly balanced and never once did I need to reach for my remote to adjust the volume.

What are the details of your set-up? Receiver, amps, player, display...etc. I read, I thought, somewhere that you cannot decode all the audio formats, yes?

Ron-P

Also Mike, what would make it easier here, if a thread already exists on a movie, just post your review in it. This was there's not multiple threads on one film. Thanks.

Mike LoManaco

Ron-P wrote: »

I just went back and read your paragraph on the audio issue. To me, the audio was fantastic, perfectly balanced and never once did I need to reach for my remote to adjust the volume.

As I hinted at in the review, I had both the DVD AND Blu-ray versions on hand to compare, and even on the DVD's Dolby Digital track, the dynamic impact of the action was severely greater than the dialogue delivery -- my system is calibrated to compensate for dialogue in the center channel by 2 dBs over the main channels; Dialnorm is an issue on almost every Dolby-encoded standard DVD I play. In addition, I found The Dark Knight on BD to be hideously low in dialogue output. Your comment above surprised me, as Nic Cage's dialogue delivery was whisper-quiet in many places on this soundtrack, forcing me to raise the master volume and then retract it quick because of strong transient response (I viewed it kind of late). NO dynamic range compression was on IN ANY OF MY GEAR, as I double checked that, nor were any "Night Modes."

What are the details of your set-up? Receiver, amps, player, display...etc. I read, I thought, somewhere that you cannot decode all the audio formats, yes?

My receiver DOES decode TrueHD and Master Audio (plus Dolby Digital Plus and DTS-HD) but my Blu-ray player DOES NOT support Master Audio AT ALL, and so I have to run the Master Audio tracks at their DTS core mixes, which I probably should have pointed out in the review; but this NEVER has been a problem with any DTS-MA soundtrack so far, in that the DTS core signals sound hefty and weighty. TrueHD cannot be bitstreamed out of my source deck, so those tracks are sent via multichannel PCM, decoded in the player to go out over HDMI to my receiver.

Mike LoManaco

Ron-P wrote: »

Also Mike, what would make it easier here, if a thread already exists on a movie, just post your review in it. This was there's not multiple threads on one film. Thanks.

I've seen this approach many times on different forums, and believe me -- it gets to be a bloody mess after awhile; it is better (as I have discussed this with moderators and will revisit the topic with them) to have separate views on a title from different members, all entitled to the same respect someone else is who may have made their own thread on the title. It's no problem.

kuntasensei

Mike LoManaco wrote: »

I've seen this approach many times on different forums, and believe me -- it gets to be a bloody mess after awhile; it is better (as I have discussed this with moderators and will revisit the topic with them) to have separate views on a title from different members, all entitled to the same respect someone else is who may have made their own thread on the title. It's no problem.

I disagree. The whole point of a review thread is for the members here to share their thoughts on the movie. ALL MEMBERS. There's no need for a separate thread for every review, and if you are writing these "professional" reviews for publication on another site or in print, perhaps the proper etiquette would be for you to simply post a link to the original location in the existing review thread. If you're just writing these reviews for this forum, it seems obvious that you're catering to an audience that doesn't exist here. Not attacking you, so don't get defensive. Just saying... As a writer, you should know your audience and adjust accordingly.

I'm at least glad to see that your name's no longer plastered on the thread titles, as I think that was probably the source of some people's complaints, since it did come across as you trying to be the voice of the Polk forum.

kuntasensei

Mike LoManaco wrote: »

As I hinted at in the review, I had both the DVD AND Blu-ray versions on hand to compare, and even on the DVD's Dolby Digital track, the dynamic impact of the action was severely greater than the dialogue delivery -- my system is calibrated to compensate for dialogue in the center channel by 2 dBs over the main channels; Dialnorm is an issue on almost every Dolby-encoded standard DVD I play. In addition, I found The Dark Knight on BD to be hideously low in dialogue output. Your comment above surprised me, as Nic Cage's dialogue delivery was whisper-quiet in many places on this soundtrack, forcing me to raise the master volume and then retract it quick because of strong transient response (I viewed it kind of late). NO dynamic range compression was on IN ANY OF MY GEAR, as I double checked that, nor were any "Night Modes."

I strongly suspect that you have acoustic issues in your room that are to blame, as the audio on Knowing (and The Dark Knight, for that matter) is VERY well balanced. The center channel should not have to be bumped up 2dB over the main channels, as that alters the intended mix. Recreating the mix intended by the audio engineer is the whole point of balancing the channels to a reference standard, since you're recreating the standards used in the mix studio. My setup is Polk RTi70 mains, CSi40 center, RTi28 surrounds, SVS 20-39CS+ and Buttkicker LFE running off a Samson 1000 amp, Onkyo TX-SR705 receiver. With a very careful run through of Audyssey MultEQ XT and level checking with a SPL meter and RTA, I think my room is about as close to recreating the original mix as it could possibly get. Dialogue levels were spot on in Knowing, and the mix never overshadowed the dialogue. I watched at about -15dB from reference without any issues.

Dialogue normalization (dialnorm) does not alter the intended mix; it simply provides an offset for the AVR against reference level, and it affects ALL CHANNELS EQUALLY - not just the center channel. Dialnorm essentially says "dialogue in this movie averages 3dB higher than in other movies, so apply a -3dB offset to all channels so reference level gives the same average dialogue level." You should not have to compensate the center channel in any way for dialnorm.

Ricardo

kuntasensei wrote: »

I strongly suspect that you have acoustic issues in your room that are to blame

Could be. I would start by trying some different cables.

Pauly

zombie boy 2000 wrote: »

Awesome post cnh. Sincerely.
However... let's put Nick Cage into perspective.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-LYbB8RY1o&feature=PlayList&p=B3678E923BD13302&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=7

Thanks for the reminder of how awful that movie was.

Pauly

kuntasensei

Ricardo wrote: »

Could be. I would start by trying some different cables.

Cables are rarely ever to blame for something like that. Not saying that cables don't matter, but they wouldn't be the first thing I'd look at for his particular issue. It's likely that he has some room-induced reinforcement related to his center channel that is causing the typical frequencies for dialogue to be overshadowed. This would also result in an under-calibration of the center channel, since the SPL meter or auto-calibration would be reading the energy from that room-induced peak.

I see that a lot with people who put their center speaker in an entertainment center, flush against a wall/TV, or don't have it angled up/down toward ear level. You can mitigate it somewhat by avoiding the broadband tones in your AVR and using band-limited tones on a disc like Avia, which tends to keep the calibration tone more in the dialogue range. You'd still have the peak there, but at least dialogue would be at the right level in the mix.

Ultimately, the root cause is probably a placement or room issue, but this is all just supposition without seeing pics of his room. Regardless, there's nothing wrong with this particular mix and dialnorm is a non-issue.

Ron-P

Mike LoManaco wrote: »

I've seen this approach many times on different forums, and believe me -- it gets to be a bloody mess after awhile; it is better (as I have discussed this with moderators and will revisit the topic with them) to have separate views on a title from different members, all entitled to the same respect someone else is who may have made their own thread on the title. It's no problem.

I would also disagree. Keeping one thread per film never has become a "bloody mess" around here, in fact, quite the opposite. It keeps it much simpler to review, talk about and discuss a film when there's only one thread. Give it a try for awhile and post your reviews to existing threads, if they previously exist of course.

The threads on this film is the perfect example of the headache that it causes with more then one thread, I have to bounce back and fourth between the two threads to discuss it. Lets keep it simple and easy, one thread per film.

Thanks for the details about your rig, but I was looking for more. What display (size - rez - brand), what speakers, what amps, what cables, what's your room like. That kind of stuff.

PhantomOG

Ron-P wrote: »

I would also disagree. Keeping one thread per film never has become a "bloody mess" around here, in fact, quite the opposite. It keeps it much simpler to review, talk about and discuss a film when there's only one thread. Give it a try for awhile and post your reviews to existing threads, if they previously exist of course.

+1 Why would we want 5,000 threads on the same movie with each person's individual thoughts?

kuntasensei

Ron-P wrote: »

Thanks for the details about your rig, but I was looking for more. What display (size - rez - brand), what speakers, what amps, what cables, what's your room like. That kind of stuff.

Look at his signature in his first posts on both pg. 1 and 2 of this thread. Doesn't list cables, but lists his other equipment.

Speaking of which, I'm curious about your setup, Mike. A few questions:
1) Do you have your CSi30 angled so that it aims toward ear level at your listening position? On a stand? In a cabinet?

2) Did you run Audyssey 2EQ? If so, did you place the mic on a tripod, at ear level with the mic capsule slightly above the headrests of your seating?

3) If you used Audyssey 2EQ, where did you place the mic for positions 2 and 3?

4) Post-Audyssey, did you re-adjust all crossovers to 80Hz? Onkyo's implementation of Audyssey detects anything that goes below 80Hz as Full Range, though they certainly should NOT be set as such.

5) Did you set LPF of LFE to 120Hz? Any other setting truncates the harmonics above 80Hz in the LFE channel, essentially throwing away audio that the mixer intended to be in that channel. It's a minor niggle, but does have an effect on the perceived tone of low frequency effects and is not something that is set by Audyssey during setup (since there's no detection involved - all subs that aren't designed per THX specs should have this set to 120Hz).

I think your system merits further investigation, as there is absolutely no reason you should have to bump the center up 2dB to get intelligible dialogue. It makes me wonder if you might have your surrounds up so high that they're drowning out the front soundstage.

Ricardo

He's a professional, certified, schooled optical disc reviewer. I would assume he knows how to setup an HT rig.

Plus, he uses Monster Cables (Last in his signature).

kuntasensei

Ricardo wrote: »

He's a professional, certified, schooled optical disc reviewer. I would assume he knows how to setup an HT rig.

Plus, he uses Monster Cables (Last in his signature).

So, we know he likes to throw money away...

And not for nothing, writing about something doesn't mean you're the authority on every aspect of it. But I see what you were doing there, sir.

Ron-P

kuntasensei wrote: »

Look at his signature in his first posts on both pg. 1 and 2 of this thread. Doesn't list cables, but lists his other equipment.

Ha, never even noticed that was there.

shack

kuntasensei wrote:

Look at his signature in his first posts on both pg. 1 and 2 of this thread. Doesn't list cables, but lists his other equipment.

Yeah...but it's probably not his actual gear. If he disclosed what gear he uses or his real name to anyone on this board...he would have to kill them to protect his identity. Being a professional movie reviewer is evidently a dangerous business.

kuntasensei

Well, it's not like his gear is so great you'd have to hide it, and you'd like to think a professional reviewer would have more than an Onkyo 605 AVR and a PSW10 subwoofer. Seems like he spent a lot of money on the rest of his gear and cheaped out on the two most important parts.

messiah

Our review: It was ok, not great, but not bad either. The trailers were the best part, and the ending was weak. It was a movie you watch 1 time, and that's it. We wanted more, but oh well.

messiah

kuntasensei wrote: »

Well, it's not like his gear is so great you'd have to hide it, and you'd like to think a professional reviewer would have more than an Onkyo 605 AVR and a PSW10 subwoofer. Seems like he spent a lot of money on the rest of his gear and cheaped out on the two most important parts.

A "professional" has a f'n psw10 as his sub? Nice work ace.