ballmary inetta justyne
Cristoforo Kanoy
I am not saying the volume is perfect yet as I would expect to be able to turn the volume up past the point I am comfortable but it did significantly improve so that Netflix movies and YouTube TV content (including 5.1) is now watchable as I can hear dialog and sound effects at a comfortable level.
They are the best pair of Bluetooth headphones I have ever heard. The design is nice and sleek, not bulky like the AirPods Max, They are lighter than them also. But the fit and finish and sound quality are top notch. The Bose QC Ultra are no where near the quality of the ACE also
With this in mind, I doubt the low volume is a hardware limit on the headphones themselves, and more likely something to do with either the way the Arc sends lossy formats (found on streaming services) out to the headphones, or, perhaps lossy audio formats just generally having less volume information in them. Playing an inbuilt Netflix app movie vs. an Atmos soundtrack from a blu ray showed a massive volume difference. Would be interested to see if others out there find similar.
I believe what your stating to be true. I just used the SONOS ACE with my Xbox Series X and the volume output is exactly what you would expect it seems that different hardware with the combination of different streaming apps produces varying levels of volume output (db). Hopefully they figure out a way to detect the volume/format of any given source and implement a way for the headphones/arc to compensate.
So weird - volume with tidal and Apple Music via Bluetooth.
1. dial volume up with iPhone to max and I barely get 75db.
2. using the media silver slider on the Ace, and it gets very loud.
I was watching "American Graffiti" on Netflix the other day and the sound was almost unbearable. The dialog was badly muffled and I needed to turn up the volume far greater than normal to hear it. But when the musical soundtrack would play, it was very loud requiring me to turn it much lower than normal. I've noticed this or similar problems with other older movies as well. But then some old movies sound great so it's not a rule.
My understanding is that prior to digitization (correct me if I am wrong here), the sound for movies was 'drawn' onto the celluloid off to the side of the images. This made sense because it avoided synchronization issues with the sound and the picture.
Is this just a problem due to sloppy work of the team doing the digitization or is there something fundamental about extracting the analog sound from the film? I would guess that during filming the sound was actually captured separately. Is this related to not having the original tapes for the dialog? Or, if they have those tapes, would remixing the music back in be problematic or legally impossible? It doesn't seem plausible that no one would have noticed this problem when doing the conversion.
NOTE: I found this: Why the discrepancy between the sound levels of dialogue and music in older movies? It kind of helps but it doesn't really seem to address my main issue. I'm not just talking about the volume (although that is part of it) but also the quality of the audio. The dialog in parts was almost indecipherable, even at high-volume, but everything else was more or less crystal clear. It also seems to imply the higher dynamic range means a more cinematic experience but that description does not apply to my experience. The sound (at least for dialog) was just bad.
One thing about any movie for cinema, vs the same movie re-released for home theatre is that the sound levels are expected to be different. The cinema sound is run at a much higher volume than you would at home, unless you have a dedicated [& soundproof] theatre room.
These days there's a volume levelling system called dialnorm which allows the cinema to set the overall volume in order that the dialog is at the correct level.
For the home cinema market, a separate mix of the audio track is usually made, without the huge dynamic range* of the cinema release.In the 70's there was no home cinema market at all - the VHS/Betamax revolution was a decade away, so there was only one mix ever made - the cinema mix.
Add to this that movies were still sometimes in mono at this time, but many were stereo & in fact this one was in quad [2 speakers at the front, 2 at the rear].
All this means that the ambient soundtrack, the music and the dialogue were all sharing the same 'space', whether that was one speaker, two or four [I would imagine for quad, they would only be sharing the front pair, but someone might have gone wild with panning dialog to the rear if there's a character off-screen].
A modern 5.1 [or greater] mix has a centre channel, specifically for the dialog, & in many cases in a modern sound system, you can adjust the volume of that independently.
The problem with someone broadcasting a movie in quad, via a broadcast structure that has no concept of just 4 tracks, means there is bound to be some discrepancy in how a centre channel is perceived or parsed from the broadcast soundtrack. 5.1 sound [& all the way up to Atmos] is actually sent as just two channels, plus a whole lot of metadata telling the sound system how to then spread that over your actual speaker setup. A 'dumb' decoder is quite likely to get confused & start pushing odd out-of phase frequencies from anywhere in the front left & rights into what it thinks should be a centre channel. There's an additional confusion, that when summing stereo to mono it relies on a parameter known as pan law to decide 'how much of what goes where' across a stereo field.
It's not necessary to understand how pan law works.
You can't dictate what they broadcast, and you rarely can get deep enough into the data as received to persuade your home system to parse the channels differently.
Your best bet for an old movie is to set your system to stereo, or even mono [no matter how many channels you can actually handle.]
Some more research on this turns up that the original cinema cut was actually released in mono. The re-release in 78 was in 'Dolby Stereo', though IMDB refers to that as '4-track stereo (Dolby Stereo)' from which all the DVD/BluRay releases were made. There is an upcoming 4k remaster too, but as that's not available until later this month I think we can take that out of the equation. The version linked on YouTube is in 'regular' stereo [so will have no decoding issues at all]. I have no way to examine exactly what the Netflix streaming version is.
Audio for movies made in the 1980s and earlier could only be recorded on analog tape, because digital recording was not available and affordable enough to be used for filmmaking. That alone would not cause a very noticeable change in objective quality, but all audio was edited and mixed on analog tape, which means each transfer during the audio production process was from one generation of analog tape to a further generation. Digital transfers are essentially perfect, while analog transfers introduce more and more noise, reduced dynamic range, and reduced frequency response with every generation.
Again, this would still not be so bad. The final stage of distributing a film is to create prints, in which the images are positive and and the sound is included. American Graffiti (1973) was released at a time when the most likely sound technology for prints was magnetic tape bonded to the film positive. While this apparently provided high quality sound when new, the magnetic tape prints from this era degraded over time. This means that by the time it became possible to transfer a print (or original masters) to a digital format, the source audio would potentially be of a poorer quality than when the movie was released to theaters.
However, not everyone agrees that the sound quality of analog tape audio is "terrible". It is a very different sound quality. It has objectively narrower dynamic range and frequency response. For some film lovers, this is not a problem, it is an aspect of history and character of movies from previous decades. For this reason, many digital transfers are deliberately not restored or enhanced.
90f70e40cf