Why can't new equipment play old material

[atrocity]

These DVD/BR soundtracks haven't mostly been repurposed to Dolby 5.1 (either AC3 or lossless)?

Some have, many haven't.

Worse, some that actually did have discrete tracks at one point now have 2.0 tracks on Blu-ray that presumably are Dolby Surround encoded. I'm thinking in particular of Jesus Christ Superstar, arguably the most utterly cursed film on video of all time based on all the releases it's had with one or more problems.

And "mostly" isn't enough anyway. I'd have at least some sympathy for Dolby if we were talking about something difficult or expensive to implement, but given the age of the technology and the fact that it was available even in low-end home components way, way back, this just feels like a massive middle finger. It seems like nothing more than "Old is bad, get rid of your old stuff, you're stupid if you still like it!"

I'm suddenly thinking of the scene in Fahrenheit 451 where Linda gives Montag a straight razor because that's the new fashion and throws away a perfectly good electric shaver.

 

[Owen Smith]

These DVD/BR soundtracks haven't mostly been repurposed to Dolby 5.1 (either AC3 or lossless)?

No, not for many run of the mill films that never had any soundtrack other than a 2 channel Dolby Surround encoded soundtrack. There isn't the money to redo the soundtrack for many films.

 

[ssully]

Were those films marketed on DVD as having Dolby Surround-decodable soundtracks? Did they 'trigger' Dolby decoding when played back on compatible hardware?

 

[Owen Smith]

Were those films marketed on DVD as having Dolby Surround-decodable soundtracks? Did they 'trigger' Dolby decoding when played back on compatible hardware?

There was never any automatic trigger for original Dolby Surround decoding that I'm aware of. This started as a consumer format on VHS (or Betamax) remember, so what automatic triggering could there have been? Many of these VHS tapes or DVDs do however had a Double D "Dolby Surround" logo on the disc label or packaging.

Also it started by accident with the videotapes intended to have a stereo soundtrack. Once we had hifi sound on videotape, people found the Dolby Surround encoding was present and could be decoded.

 

[jaybird100]

Sure it will. Get the right stylus for your cartridge and do some simple wiring magic.

No, it won't! It doesn't play anything faster than 45 rpm.

 

[barfle]

How can it be unprofitable? There's nothing to spend on Dolby's part, the existing decoders already exist. Ray Dolby himself came to despise Dolby the company in his old age, and I can see why.

Dolby’s accounting books and engineering documentation aren’t open to me, so based on my general understanding of how manufacturing corporations function, the demand from the public no longer exists in adequate volume to make it profitable to include in products of a certain price point. The functionality of the DSP chips, while vast, is finite, and including that function could mean omitting something users are willing to pay for.

This is not new, as I’ve noted repeatedly.

 

[Owen Smith]

Dolby’s accounting books and engineering documentation aren’t open to me, so based on my general understanding of how manufacturing corporations function, the demand from the public no longer exists in adequate volume to make it profitable to include in products of a certain price point. The functionality of the DSP chips, while vast, is finite, and including that function could mean omitting something users are willing to pay for.

I'm a software engineer by profession. Dolby PL II is not a complex algorithm by modern standards, compared to some of the other things that modern AVRs can do the code for DPL II would not take up much space in Flash.

 

[MidiMagic]

Sure it will. Get the right stylus for your cartridge and do some simple wiring magic.

Not without a 78 rpm speed.

 

[MidiMagic]

The vinyl analogy would be more accurate if the analogy was creating a new version with a slightly different speed. (Not an increase like doubling tape speed to pursue more fidelity. More like a 1% just to be obnoxious for no performance reason but to create a compatibility issue.)

This actually happened, and it took the NAB to hammer it out.l

That little speed dial on acoustic players was there for a reason. Different companies could not agree on a rotation speed. Mainly, Victor records turned at 76 rpm and Columbia records turned at 80 rpm. Radio stations were sick of having to adjust the turntable for each record.

The National Association of Broadcasters created a definition of a "Standard Record".
- 78 rpm speed (average of 76 and 80)
- Outside start (put the needle at the rim, not at the center)
- Electrical recording
- Lateral recording modulation direction
- 250 Hz turnover frequency for bass reduction in recording curve
- 1/8-inch thickness for 10-inch records (9 7/8_inch outside diameter)
- 3/16-inch thickness for 12-inch records (11 7/8-inch outside diameter)
- 5/16-inch center hole
- Lead-in grooves
- Eccentric trip groove (for jukeboxes and record changers)

 

[kfbkfb]

Summary of current options for decoding (original) Dolby Surround:

Hafler/DynaQuad passive speaker matrix (could also build yourself an active line level simple no logic decoder).

Involve Audio Surround Master (QS decode mode).

Prevail upon DTS to include DTS:Stereo (a 30+ year old Dolby Stereo type competing theatrical matrix encode/decode scheme) in the DTS family of decode modes in A/V receivers (I don't know if there was ever a DTS:Stereo "Pro-Logic" type separation enhancement system).

Prevail upon A/V receiver makers to include Hafler "decoding" (no logic) in their family of fake surround sound creation methods (with clever wording saying it will sort of decode Dolby Surround).


Kirk Bayne

 

[atrocity]

No, it won't! It doesn't play anything faster than 45 rpm.

Sorry, I keep forgetting that others don't live in my head! I routinely capture 78s (and 80s and 76.59s, etc.) at 45 and digitally speed them up using SoX, then correct the EQ.

 

[atrocity]

There was never any automatic trigger for original Dolby Surround decoding that I'm aware of.

There's a flag available for DVDs (not sure about the newer disc formats) but, like a lot of features they had available, was never used consistently.

 

[atrocity]

- 5/16-inch center hole

There actually were some oddball hole sizes out there. Years ago a friend showed me some from his collection and I was able to locate a set of plastic adapters for him, though a quick search just now isn't turning up anything like that today.

But I did find these pictures: The 78rpm Home Page - The Spindle Hole

 

[Owen Smith]

There's a flag available for DVDs (not sure about the newer disc formats) but, like a lot of features they had available, was never used consistently.

That's only there if the DVD soundtrack is Dolby Digital 2.0 encoded I believe. If it is LPCM 2.0 or MPEG 2.0 (I have a French DVD of Nikita with MPEG audio) there is nowhere to hold the flag, nor is there anywhere on videotape formats.

Another format with either no flag or an inconsistently used flag is Dolby Digital EX 6.1, with a centre rear channel matrixed into left and right rears. My understanding is despite being held in DD 5.1 and therefore there could have been a flag, there never was. Why? Utter stupidity is the only thing I can think of. Some DVDs didn't even clearly indicate on the packaging when a release was in DD EX 6.1.

My new Arcam AVR31 amp supports DTS ES 6.1 Matrix and Discrete, but does not support DD EX 6.1. DTS 6.1 in either format was always properly flagged making support much more sensible to implement. Another possible reason is Dolby hate all the old matrix formats so much that like DPL II etc they simply won't licence the DD EX 6.1 decoder. Not that I care, unlike DPL II etc where there is a huge catalogue of encoded material out there I really can't lose any sleep over DD EX 6.1 not being properly decodable on new amps.

 

[atrocity]

That's only there if the DVD soundtrack is Dolby Digital 2.0 encoded I believe. If it is LPCM 2.0 or MPEG 2.0 (I have a French DVD of Nikita with MPEG audio) there is nowhere to hold the flag, nor is there anywhere on videotape formats.

There's definitely nowhere to hold the flag on older formats, but back in the days when I was occasionally authoring DVDs and getting deep into the woods with IFOedit, there was a checkbox for surround that I'm pretty sure was format-agnostic. Though it's also possible that it just got ignored for anything other than DD and I never knew.

Another format with either no flag or an inconsistently used flag is Dolby Digital EX 6.1, with a centre rear channel matrixed into left and right rears. My understanding is despite being held in DD 5.1 and therefore there could have been a flag, there never was. Why? Utter stupidity is the only thing I can think of. Some DVDs didn't even clearly indicate on the packaging when a release was in DD EX 6.1.

I'm pretty sure there was a flag because I used to see my old receiver claim EX as the format. But yeah, it was definitely inconsistently used.

As a computer nerd with an annoying tendency to want to set everything correctly, learning the hard way that professional disc authors (or the duplicating houses or whoever) couldn't be bothered to use the helpful tools they were given really bugged me.

I have some cheap exploitation movie around here that's 16:9 enhanced but the flag isn't set, so unless you want it to look horrible you have to manually adjust the TV.

 

[Owen Smith]

There's definitely nowhere to hold the flag on older formats, but back in the days when I was occasionally authoring DVDs and getting deep into the woods with IFOedit, there was a checkbox for surround that I'm pretty sure was format-agnostic. Though it's also possible that it just got ignored for anything other than DD and I never knew.

The flag for surround would have to be in the DD bitstream. When playing over optical, coax or HDMI to an home cinema amp, the amp gets nothing other than the Dolby Digital bitstream. It knows nothing of wider information held elsewhere on the DVD so a Dolby Surround flag there could only possibly work on DVD players with built in decoder(s) for DPL, DPL II etc and there were very few such players (my Arcam DV137 was one).

 

[MidiMagic]

Summary of current options for decoding (original) Dolby Surround:

Hafler/DynaQuad passive speaker matrix (could also build yourself an active line level simple no logic decoder).

Involve Audio Surround Master (QS decode mode).

Prevail upon DTS to include DTS:Stereo (a 30+ year old Dolby Stereo type competing theatrical matrix encode/decode scheme) in the DTS family of decode modes in A/V receivers (I don't know if there was ever a DTS:Stereo "Pro-Logic" type separation enhancement system).

Prevail upon A/V receiver makers to include Hafler "decoding" (no logic) in their family of fake surround sound creation methods (with clever wording saying it will sort of decode Dolby Surround).


Kirk Bayne

What I often see is that a company sees no reason to include anything it has a patent for after the patent expires. Instead, they develop something new they can patent. Business types want this.

Patents are the reason we have so many different incompatible formats and surround systems. Everyone wanted to be receiving royalties instead of paying them.

 

[MidiMagic]

There actually were some oddball hole sizes out there. Years ago a friend showed me some from his collection and I was able to locate a set of plastic adapters for him, though a quick search just now isn't turning up anything like that today.

But I did find these pictures: The 78rpm Home Page - The Spindle Hole

There were a few odd hole sizes. Most were in the times before 1920 and sold by makers of cheap players so you could use them on only those players.

I have two 12-inch 78s with 1/2-inch holes.
I have several home-recorder discs with 1/2-inch holes.

RCA made the 1.5-inch hole to be able to put the entire record dropping mechanism in the spindle (with no side shelf).

Seeburg made its 16-rpm background music discs with 2-inch holes to keep them from being sold to consumers.

 

[Owen Smith]

What I often see is that a company sees no reason to include anything it has a patent for after the patent expires.

How about including it because otherwise the company will be thought of as total arseholes? (UK spelling of assholes).

 

[inspclouseau]

I still use a 23 year old Denon AVR-3300 receiver. It has the analog multichannel inputs, Dolby Pro Logic (not II), as well as Dolby Digital and DTS. It still sounds as great as it did when new; better, in fact, with the SM. There's nothing in a new receiver that does what I want, and this one does. If there are any capacitors that are on their way out, I sure can't hear it. It also has a phono input, which only the most expensive models seem to have anymore. It's built like a tank!

We purchased our Yamaha rx-v2700 new in May, 2007. It Sounds like it's pretty much the same as the Denon AVR 3300. It has been a fantastic receiver and has been played almost every day since new. Never a single hiccup. It plays automatically when the tv is turned on and has been that way for many years too. Cannot imagine the hours on this thing. Sometimes cranked up pretty good over the years too. The wolves and coyotes dig it! Our 5.3 system suits us fine as a living room setup. We will not be adding any more speakers in our front room, so Atmos is over for us and if/when 5.1 physical releases end, we'll be totally done. Close now with DTS 5.1 MA being stepped on via Dolby etc.$$ We will never 'stream' anything here..not city folks at all and available 'services' are way too expensive and lack in quality, reliable bandwidth around here. I am sure even today lots of rural areas are in the same boat. Looks like the streaming format will completely take over the chance of any 'new' physical media, except possibly for a few wonderful outfits like SDE and the like. Fortunately, we own a lot of physical media..I mean a LOT. ( I need to take images of all of this stuff...but will take some time scattered all over several rooms cabinets cases etc.). Your Denon is a tank alright, and I do remember reading about that one back then. Even looked at it a few times in a store then too. Our Yamaha is something of a tank too. Not getting rid of it! Just like not get rid of our Oppo, bdp-93, bdp-103 and udp-203 😊 Quality stuff. ~Mike ..By the way.. practicing typing while drinking coffee. Hope you didn't mind me bogarting your post! All the best Jaybird..as well all on QQ