4 ms·

I feel like this is tied to the overall decline in movie and music quality. Maybe I'm just getting old. There is no more "Titanic" or "Nirvana". Lots of people

I feel like this is tied to the overall decline in movie and music quality. Maybe I'm just getting old. There is no more "Titanic" or "Nirvana". Lots of people have noticed the decline in audio mixing in movies as well, which has led to a generation of younger adults who need captions for regular movies. A discrete audio system would probably help with this but for what? How many times are you going to watch latest Avengers?

kyriakos 1y ago
There are 2 problems currently with movie audio. One is that the channel separation is not as good as it used to be. New movies have 5.1 audio the effect is minimal which no longer justifies the expense on the sound system. People online are saying this is because many movies are made for primarily for streaming and that majority of people listen on their TV or sound bar instead of dedicated surround systems. The second issue is what you described, the mixing is just bad, sound effects and music are much louder than dialog making it impossible to comprehend without subtitles.
- gehwartzen 1y ago
  For most people a good 2.1 system vs surround or soundbars is where it’s at these days. As you say most surround mixing is an afterthought now anyway. The physics of moving air to create sound hasn’t really changed in any meaningful ways; the biggest upgrade is usually larger drivers fed with more power. I think most would experience that as much more of a theatre like experience than 7+ tiny underpowered satellites outputting an already bad mix.
  - SoleilAbsolu 1y ago
    I'd say "specific format surround mixing" like 5.1 or 7.1 is mostly an afterthought, but Dolby Atmos (which is "mix once and it automatically folds down properly to the actual number of atmos speakers" has become huge in the audio world according to multiple interviews I've read with pro audio mixers and film/video/TV post folks.
    - gsibble 1y ago
      Be careful about Atmos. Most Atmos discs (I refuse to stream it) are a 5.1 TrueHD main setup with atoms layered in. So it's still 5.1 or 7.1 with some atmos effects. That being said, I have a 7.1.4 Atmost setup and it is on the level of "HOLY SHIT" good.
- amlib 1y ago
  > The second issue is what you described, the mixing is just bad, sound effects and music are much louder than dialog making it impossible to comprehend without subtitles. The trend of mixing sound effects much louder has been in vogue for longer than star wars exists and not a lot of movies drown out everything in super loud music (Christopher Nolan films being exhibit number 1 lol). I think part of the issue stems from the audio not being adapted for home releases. There used to be special sound mixes for VHS, TV shows and even DVDs (as stereo version of the 5.1 track) that lowered the dynamic range and made everything fairly clear even on your 70s CRT TV speakers. Nowadays sound engineers probably marvel at how nice and crisp their work sounds on a studio kitted with 1 million worth of audio gear and call it good enough for playback in all systems. Add some directors wanting more "natural" dialog requesting actors to speak softly and the deal is sealed, only the 0.1% can watch anything without subtitles. I honestly think the solution is for the industry to adopt a standardized audio gain control solution. The only reason we didn't get that in the past was because implementing such things on consumer gear was far too expensive (it was far more cost effective to just pre-process it and deliver the low dynamic range mix right in the medium, with the advantage of the possibility of a custom tuned mix). Today's TVs all have some kind of audio normalization functionality but they are all kinda bad (they alter loudness balance making everything sound tiny, a proper solution requires proper equal loudness contour compensation) and not suited for sudden and constant jumps of volumes like in movie action scenes. It also doesn't helps that every manufacturer does it differently.
- gsibble 1y ago
  I mean, I am an audio/videophile with a proper 7.1.4 Atmos setup at home. I cannot even watch streaming tv or movies on it as it sounds so bad. But I put in a 4K UHD disc and wow. It sounds better than a real movie theater. I just think most people are never exposed to what high end movie audio sounds like anymore. I can tell you that channel separation is as good as ever. It's just most people never realize what's possible at home or don't have a room conducive to the setup. Or frankly don't care. My wife loves good movies and she could care less about the sound quality.
  - timc3 1y ago
    Which is weird, because everyone producing video should know that audio is the most important element in a video. As a point of reference my wife also loves good movies and cares whether she can hear the audio properly but it might be because English is her second language.
TiredOfLife 1y ago
> There is no more "Nirvana" That cacophony was considered quality music?
- lupusreal 1y ago
  Subjectivity aside, I'm pretty sure Nirvana's target audience was teenagers using cheap headphones or their car stereos, not boomers with expensive HiFi setups, so that really is a funny remark.
  - neuroelectron 1y ago
    https://archive.org/details/nirvana-mtv-unplugged-in-new-york-live-1994 https://archive.org/details/nirvana-mtv-unplugged-in-new-yor...
- vile_wretch 1y ago
  Are you 100 years old?
  - neuroelectron 1y ago
    Name one good movie since Titanic
    - vile_wretch 1y ago
      Titanic 2 (I was replying to the person who called Nirvana cacophony/not music)
  - TiredOfLife 1y ago
    No. But I have ears
Disposal8433 1y ago
The whole "4/5 speakers around the room" never made sense to me. It always felt overly complicated for a premium price that no one could afford or cared about. I used to hang out with people who had luxury sound systems but it was way too expensive or complicated for my daily use. For the past 15 years, I have used the same cheap combo of soundbar+subwoofer (Sony but anything goes) and it's perfect for everything I throw at it. The sound is equivalent to what I remember on those expensive sets, it's only $250, and I don't spend my whole time in front of the TV listening to high-quality remasters of classical concerts while smoking a cigar. The high-end brands have failed to recognize that for most people a decent set of cheap speakers is equivalent to a cinema experience. They should have studied that instead of focusing on incomprehensible technical values and numbers. The software industry is guilty of this too.
- morellt 1y ago
  I think this ties in more with the decrease in quality of movie/music sound mixing. There are current movies coming to theaters with mixing so bad that they have to rerelease it with the proper audio (such as Across the Spiderverse). Many, MANY albums that release today have noticeable digital clipping because engineers have now assumed that high gain is always better etc. etc. There used to be a reason to have a 5.1 surround system, because that's how the movies were supposed to be enjoyed. There used to be a reason to engineer your home "soundstage" because that's how the music was mixed and optimally appreciated. I don't think the bar of entry being money is truly the reason, rather that people have become much more passive consumers of media, and the producers have recognized that and absolutely enshittified their products. As for the cheap speakers = cinematic experience, watch Interstellar with 5.1, then with the soundbar and tell me how equal the experience is.
  - j_heffe 1y ago
    I think audio really took a hit in the 90s and early 2000s when home theater became a lot cheaper and a lot more accessible and so too did the quality. Guys would spend their life savings on some crazy Polk or JBLs back in the day, and they were genuinely good quality and expensive. I always thought "Blinded by the light" was a garbage song hearing it on the radio all the time, but after listening to the album on my dad's JBL L100's, I understand why he's such a vintage purist. It changed the sound of the song completely. The speakers picked up things I had literally never heard before. I know nothing about audio engineering, but it does seem like the art has sort of died out or became "more productionized".

kyriakos 1y ago

There are 2 problems currently with movie audio. One is that the channel separation is not as good as it used to be. New movies have 5.1 audio the effect is minimal which no longer justifies the expense on the sound system. People online are saying this is because many movies are made for primarily for streaming and that majority of people listen on their TV or sound bar instead of dedicated surround systems. The second issue is what you described, the mixing is just bad, sound effects and music are much louder than dialog making it impossible to comprehend without subtitles.

gehwartzen 1y ago
For most people a good 2.1 system vs surround or soundbars is where it’s at these days. As you say most surround mixing is an afterthought now anyway. The physics of moving air to create sound hasn’t really changed in any meaningful ways; the biggest upgrade is usually larger drivers fed with more power. I think most would experience that as much more of a theatre like experience than 7+ tiny underpowered satellites outputting an already bad mix.
- SoleilAbsolu 1y ago
  I'd say "specific format surround mixing" like 5.1 or 7.1 is mostly an afterthought, but Dolby Atmos (which is "mix once and it automatically folds down properly to the actual number of atmos speakers" has become huge in the audio world according to multiple interviews I've read with pro audio mixers and film/video/TV post folks.
  - gsibble 1y ago
    Be careful about Atmos. Most Atmos discs (I refuse to stream it) are a 5.1 TrueHD main setup with atoms layered in. So it's still 5.1 or 7.1 with some atmos effects. That being said, I have a 7.1.4 Atmost setup and it is on the level of "HOLY SHIT" good.
amlib 1y ago
> The second issue is what you described, the mixing is just bad, sound effects and music are much louder than dialog making it impossible to comprehend without subtitles. The trend of mixing sound effects much louder has been in vogue for longer than star wars exists and not a lot of movies drown out everything in super loud music (Christopher Nolan films being exhibit number 1 lol). I think part of the issue stems from the audio not being adapted for home releases. There used to be special sound mixes for VHS, TV shows and even DVDs (as stereo version of the 5.1 track) that lowered the dynamic range and made everything fairly clear even on your 70s CRT TV speakers. Nowadays sound engineers probably marvel at how nice and crisp their work sounds on a studio kitted with 1 million worth of audio gear and call it good enough for playback in all systems. Add some directors wanting more "natural" dialog requesting actors to speak softly and the deal is sealed, only the 0.1% can watch anything without subtitles. I honestly think the solution is for the industry to adopt a standardized audio gain control solution. The only reason we didn't get that in the past was because implementing such things on consumer gear was far too expensive (it was far more cost effective to just pre-process it and deliver the low dynamic range mix right in the medium, with the advantage of the possibility of a custom tuned mix). Today's TVs all have some kind of audio normalization functionality but they are all kinda bad (they alter loudness balance making everything sound tiny, a proper solution requires proper equal loudness contour compensation) and not suited for sudden and constant jumps of volumes like in movie action scenes. It also doesn't helps that every manufacturer does it differently.
gsibble 1y ago
I mean, I am an audio/videophile with a proper 7.1.4 Atmos setup at home. I cannot even watch streaming tv or movies on it as it sounds so bad. But I put in a 4K UHD disc and wow. It sounds better than a real movie theater. I just think most people are never exposed to what high end movie audio sounds like anymore. I can tell you that channel separation is as good as ever. It's just most people never realize what's possible at home or don't have a room conducive to the setup. Or frankly don't care. My wife loves good movies and she could care less about the sound quality.
- timc3 1y ago
  Which is weird, because everyone producing video should know that audio is the most important element in a video. As a point of reference my wife also loves good movies and cares whether she can hear the audio properly but it might be because English is her second language.

TiredOfLife 1y ago

> There is no more "Nirvana" That cacophony was considered quality music?

lupusreal 1y ago
Subjectivity aside, I'm pretty sure Nirvana's target audience was teenagers using cheap headphones or their car stereos, not boomers with expensive HiFi setups, so that really is a funny remark.
- neuroelectron 1y ago
  https://archive.org/details/nirvana-mtv-unplugged-in-new-york-live-1994 https://archive.org/details/nirvana-mtv-unplugged-in-new-yor...
vile_wretch 1y ago
Are you 100 years old?
- neuroelectron 1y ago
  Name one good movie since Titanic
  - vile_wretch 1y ago
    Titanic 2 (I was replying to the person who called Nirvana cacophony/not music)
- TiredOfLife 1y ago
  No. But I have ears

Disposal8433 1y ago

The whole "4/5 speakers around the room" never made sense to me. It always felt overly complicated for a premium price that no one could afford or cared about. I used to hang out with people who had luxury sound systems but it was way too expensive or complicated for my daily use. For the past 15 years, I have used the same cheap combo of soundbar+subwoofer (Sony but anything goes) and it's perfect for everything I throw at it. The sound is equivalent to what I remember on those expensive sets, it's only $250, and I don't spend my whole time in front of the TV listening to high-quality remasters of classical concerts while smoking a cigar. The high-end brands have failed to recognize that for most people a decent set of cheap speakers is equivalent to a cinema experience. They should have studied that instead of focusing on incomprehensible technical values and numbers. The software industry is guilty of this too.

morellt 1y ago
I think this ties in more with the decrease in quality of movie/music sound mixing. There are current movies coming to theaters with mixing so bad that they have to rerelease it with the proper audio (such as Across the Spiderverse). Many, MANY albums that release today have noticeable digital clipping because engineers have now assumed that high gain is always better etc. etc. There used to be a reason to have a 5.1 surround system, because that's how the movies were supposed to be enjoyed. There used to be a reason to engineer your home "soundstage" because that's how the music was mixed and optimally appreciated. I don't think the bar of entry being money is truly the reason, rather that people have become much more passive consumers of media, and the producers have recognized that and absolutely enshittified their products. As for the cheap speakers = cinematic experience, watch Interstellar with 5.1, then with the soundbar and tell me how equal the experience is.
- j_heffe 1y ago
  I think audio really took a hit in the 90s and early 2000s when home theater became a lot cheaper and a lot more accessible and so too did the quality. Guys would spend their life savings on some crazy Polk or JBLs back in the day, and they were genuinely good quality and expensive. I always thought "Blinded by the light" was a garbage song hearing it on the radio all the time, but after listening to the album on my dad's JBL L100's, I understand why he's such a vintage purist. It changed the sound of the song completely. The speakers picked up things I had literally never heard before. I know nothing about audio engineering, but it does seem like the art has sort of died out or became "more productionized".