Reel 11
Reader Participation

(Bag of Snail-Mail)

fig0082

Sc. 1 Introduction: Life before the World Wide Web

From the idealistic beginning, any dialogue with readers was to be a fundamental element of the journal’s utility to subscribers. Welcoming readers to the debut issue, Moviesound Newsletter invited active participation:

Every good director knows that half the story is told in sound, but every theater owner doesn’t! We’re going to rally against movie theaters with sloppy sound systems, and we’ll publicly applaud those that do a good job. We’ll share theater sound experiences from all regions of the country, in an ongoing series of reader polls. This is the only periodical where you’ll see upcoming and classic movies, tapes, and laser discs reviewed for their technical and artistic qualities in sound. Our readers understand that sound and dialogue effects are created, not simply recorded for fiction films. It is you readers who will provide the most fertile ground of discussion by writing in with your ideas, questions, gripes, and comments. So, thanks for joining us with our debut issue. Next ish, we’ll begin an informative series with “What is Post-production Sound?”

It took the first four issues to seed enough readership to generate a few letters, and MSNL was elated to see them begin to trickle in. The first letters were published in issue #5, and continued to the end of publication. The selected letters here, with a single exception, are presented chronologically, although most of Hollywood Sound Design and Moviesound Newsletter is constructed by subject, not by timeline. Where readers had asked specific questions or made interesting comments, the journal published them along with an editorial response.

Occasionally, the richest letters seemed to invite MSNL staff to comment in considerable detail, enough to stand as a new article. Such was the case of a 1990 letter, when Keith Johnson, an astute reader from the state of Washington, contributed a number of thoughtful questions that could only be answered in article-sized responses: George Simpson described his home theater’s technical makeup; Larry Blake discussed the Dolby stereo processor’s “steering logic;” and Steve Lee shared an extensive movie sound bibliography with readers, all in response to Mr. Johnson’s letter. The Simpson and Blake pieces are bundled together at the end of this section, following all the other selected letters, which were published from 1989 through 1994. Steve Lee’s informative bibliography is printed in Hollywood Sound Design and Moviesound Newsletter’s Appendix section.

Seen as an aggregate, five years of MSNL’s Letters make up more than just a ragbag of random responses to an amateur publication. 1 Even with its skit-tering distribution to only hundreds, not thousands of readers, MSNL’s Letters exemplify a diversity of purpose. It was at once a place for the voice of fans, a forum for professionals, a central location for information, and a good place to ask questions.

The letters are snapshot artifacts, recording what professionals and consumers were experiencing during the transformative disarray before Digital. Understanding the bigger potential of audio technology in the coming computer age, both indicated keen awareness that they were experiencing sound in a transitional period. These letters, subjective expressions of individuals, make an oral history for the reader. As much about the art history of film sound as about technology, the letters are part of a broader “aural narrative.”

There were gripes and kudos, such as Donald Flick’s (a master sound editor, here in the role of outraged consumer) description of the poorly mastered videotapes of Batman (1989). Two other readers had contrasting impressions of their experiences in a theater audience. One had gushed, “It is such a joy to be able to go to a real movie theater and be able to see and hear everything.” While the other was kvetching, “people talking and stuffing their faces with popcorn … Babies crying … This is fun?” For the first time since Cinerama, the business was incorporating quality sound technology as a promotional selling point for new films, 2 which allowed for astute fans to listen more critically. Exhibition in Dolby Stereo could certainly sell tickets, but any irresponsible theater manager might incur the wrath of disappointed listeners, as in the following complaint:

“It has been my experience, in the Fort Worth area, that if a film is advertised as being in Dolby Stereo, the chances are 50 – 50 at best that it will actually be presented as such.”

Or,

“Here in New York City we have the worst movie sound.”

Another reader reported his apples-and-oranges experience, comparing two extremely different venues:

“Jurassic Park (1993) was just mind-blowing! I saw the film in a small multiplex theater with the worst Dolby I have ever heard. Listening in DTS, it was like a whole new movie.”

High-end movie sound was exhibited in theaters around the world, even if most of the splashier tracks originated in California. Demand for quality had recently become an international phenomenon. Sophisticated audiences understood that practitioners were doing their best to perfect innovative techniques with the analog tools they already had; but it was understood that theater exhibition was often unreliable in quality, as it was in the U.S. One German reader probably spoke for many:

“In Germany we don’t have much 70mm releases … but twice a year I spend my holidays in London, England, where they really have fantastic movie theaters … and show a lot of 70mm features.”

For young audiences, sound craftsmanship had transformed from picture’s textual accessory (Chion’s characterization of film as vococentric) into an independent object of artistic admiration and criticism. A new hobby arose simultaneously for the affluent movie buff: Home Theater. Multi-speaker analog sound would now have to aspire toward perfection as living room entertainment just as Hi-Fi had done for the two channels of stereo.

A Danish reader shared his enthusiasm for the wave of interest in home theater sound, writing to mention his own journal:

“I started Laserdisken in 1984 and was the first to bring surround sound to Denmark, in 1986.”

Change was everywhere.

Sc. 2 On the Bylines

Moviesound Newsletter had never really settled on a consistent title for the Letters section, even as our dialogue with readers had proven to be of critical importance. It was most often called The Mail, but we also ran titles like Letters, Letters to the Editor, Letters to Our Editor, Letters to Ed, The Mail Bag, From Our Mail Bag, an impish Let’s Play Post Office Dep’t., and a pop culture reference stretched beyond recognition to Late Nights with Dave’s Letters, Man!

Responses to letters were signed or initialed by the “usual suspects” (MSNL correspondents), by the publisher Prof. Ament as “VTA,” or by the editor. Articles, notes, and letter responses were variously signed as “DS,” “the editor,” and “— ed.” Any that went unsigned were most likely the product of some informal consensus between any among the group, or just indifference.

With hindsight, it appears that the inconsistency about bylines, as much as about naming the Letters section, showcased MSNL’s dilettante status in journalism.

Sc. 3 The Mail (1989–1994)

The Mail Published in July, 1989 (Vol I #5)

The Mail

Hello from the plains of South Dakota … I am most excited by the prospect of reading MSNL on a regular basis. … Most of my work is done on 16mm. I usually conceive, shoot, edit, write, score (from library music), cut FX, mix, and conform the negative for the productions we do. They’re not theatrical films, but I would like them to have the same sonic completeness as a theatrical. Your newsletter will be a stimulus as well as inform me on current techniques, methods, and equipment. I mix my 16mm tracks on a six-dubber Magnasync interlock system, usually doing premixes as required. Consequently, I hope also to see news and views about the mixing process from time to time. I am pleasantly surprised, filled with anticipation over the arrival of your newsletter on the scene. It will fill a real need for me, both personally and professionally. I certainly wish you every success.

Sincerely,
Dale Johnson, Trailwood Films, Huron, South Dakota
… Thank you Dale, and welcome aboard.

The Mail Published in October, 1989 (Vol I #7)

The Mail

I’m the Supervising Sound Editor for HBO, and I’m faced with the problem of translating wonderful theater sound for TV. So many movies come through HBO, and are so different, that all my audio boys (the staff,) were cheering as they read MSNL! So you can be sure all of us here at HBO will be looking forward to your great newsletter every month. Best of luck!

—John Wiggins. HBO Studios
John, thanks for your support! The editor and publisher of MSNL are great fans of HBO, and hope you’ll keep up the exceptional programming.

The Mail Published in January, 1990 (Vol I #9)

Dear Editor

Your faithful “technical advisor” has some bones to pick with you. (see MSNL #7 “Scoreboard”) First of all, during the post-production of sex, lies, and videotape we indeed did give the music cues the normal formal designations, if only for the “suits” in the legal departments. Thus Garbage was a.k.a. “1M1”. Furthermore, you said that the names of the music cues, as indicated on the album jacket, were all taken from nearby dialogue. This was mostly correct; however. Two of the titles you listed had different beginnings. Sniff the Jacket’s title came from the original script, where Ann indeed sniffed Graham’s jacket while she watched him sleep. Also, the title I’m Gonna Drawl was derived from the director’s suggestion to the composer that he wanted the cue to have the feel of Led Zeppelin’s I’m Gonna Crawl, from that group’s In Through the Out Door album.

—Larry Blake, Hollywood, CA
Mr. Blake also corrected our mistaken use of the medical term Ultra Sound, when we meant Ultra Stereo, the name of the sound reinforcement company.
Sorry, Larry… Guess we got our head caught in our Moviola sprockets once again!

Dear Moviesound Newsletter, I heard of you through the article in EAR magazine.

(Ed note: the July/August ‘89 issue of “Ear Magazine of New Music” featured an article by Richard Kadrey on MSNL publisher Vanessa Ament’s approach to the sound art as a Foley artist for feature films.)

I’m a sound producer myself, as well as a radio producer and all-around inter-media guy. Unfortunately, I’m tucked away in Olympia, Washington and there’s not a lot of film work. I produce SoundViews, an index of artists, composers and explorers who variously work with sound in new contexts of musical expression. The focus of my next series is environmental compositions … submissions welcome. If you’re ever in this part of the Northwest, please give me a call. … I’ve got a painterly set of ears

—Jeffrey Bartone, Olympia, WA
Mr. Bartone produces “SoundViews” at radio station KAOS FM, listener-sponsored community radio in Olympia, Washington.
Hope readers will support non-commercial radio in your community!

Dear Editor,

Batman is a film one either loves or hates. The “thrill” of standing in line to see it was mild compared to the expectation that the video tape was coming out weeks ahead of schedule. Wow! On Wednesday at noon I bought it. But imagine my chagrin when I found I had bought an ill-transferred, mushy-sounding copy of a film that would make an old Roger Corman sound mix seem great:

Audio dropouts occurred literally throughout the tape. Two visual glitches … looked as though they had stopped and re-started the transfer. And the infamous Joker line “Where does he get those wonderful toys?” was clipped. My God! What a disappointment! Added to these flaws was a high-pitched whine … sounded like a stepping motor or something similar … which became very evident during quiet, “sensitive” scenes. Enduring this whine was intolerable. Returning the tape was not!

I discovered that unless one is a member of the store’s roster … someone returning a tape is looked on a bit like a criminal … But after a bit of hassle, the manager looked at the tape, and I finally got a new copy.

Without the whine and visual glitches, my new copy still has that “wonderful toys” line clipped! The best line in the picture … The one they featured in the trailers! Doesn’t anyone inspect these tapes? What ever happened to quality control? Is the lure of making a faster buck so much for a company that it loses all control over its product? If the Batman video had been a car, Ralph Nader would have had it recalled.

Sincerely,
Donald Flick, Van Nuys, CA
A busy sound editor in Hollywood, Don has won a Golden Reel for his work in television sound, and recently worked on “Tremors”.
We think he ought to try returning the tape one more time.

Dear MSNL,

I just received my two sample copies a few weeks ago and I am hooked. I thought you had a very informative publication, one worth supporting by my subscription. … I wish you continued success. I am an avid movie fan and enjoy movies out and at home. I only go to theaters I know in advance are showing the features in stereo. I leave or ask for my money back when I find they are not stereo-equipped.

I look forward to reading your publication in the coming year. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you all. … Have a happy!

Sincerely,
George Kaberline, Forest Park, GA
Thanks for your support. We know there are many moviegoers who demand good sound, and that’s what we’re all about.

Dear Editor,

MSNL is the best! I can’t get enough, and await each issue with interest. In response to Donald Flick’s letter in issue #9, concerning Batman: I purchased the laser disc and the transfer and sound are super, having none of the problems associated with the video cassette … except one; Just as on the tape the Joker’s line is clipped off and begins, “… get those wonderful toys?” leaving off “Where does he …” Hey, Warner Home Video, what’s the deal? Keep up the good work.

Regards,
Jeff Hill, Philadelphia, PA

The Mail Bag Published in July, 1990 (Vol I #13)

The Mail Bag

I have been looking for a forum on this topic for a long time. I will try to communicate with you after I have caught up on your back issues. In the meantime, may I make one suggestion that you may already be doing. If you know of other articles in other publications that address the issue of movie sound, could you please list them in your publication? A continuing bibliography of other articles published on the topic would be most helpful.

Thank you for your time in this matter.

Sincerely,
Keith Johnson, Federal Way, WA.
We will certainly make an effort, Keith, to cite anything we notice in other periodicals. We invite MSNL readers to send us clippings of interest to other film sound fans. —ed.

The Mail Bag Published in October, 1990 (Vol I #15)

The Mail Bag

Hi! MovieSound Newsletter is a revelation! I never expected such a quality “insider” publication from such a tiny classified ad. Please sign me up for a subscription and back issues. And keep up the good work!

—Ron Diamond, Audio Engineer,
WHDH-TV, Boston

Dear MSNL:

Enclosed is one of four letters I’ve mailed to local theatre managers. I have received a reply to only one. A fifth letter went to the president of AMC Theatres—no reply.

What’s more, the THX installation at the UA Hulen 10 in Fort Worth is a joke. Their presentation of Dances with Wolves (35mm) started out barely OK. Volume a little low, soft focus, picture not centered on screen. About two-thirds of the way through the film, there was a projector breakdown of two or three minutes, followed by two more short breakdowns. The film was monaural following the first breakdown. The saddest part of all? No one in the audience seemed to notice or care.

This same theatre seems to do OK with 70mm however, although it has been well over a year since they have advertised a 70mm film.

It has been my experience, in the Fort Worth area, that if a film is advertised as being in Dolby Stereo, the chances are 50 – 50 at best that it will actually be presented as such.

I wish you would print the address of LucasFilm and Dolby Labs (every month!) so that people who care could write and “turn in” the theatres which are destroying all the care that goes into so many of today’s marvelous soundtracks.

Sincerely,
Paul McVey, Fort Worth
PS: I am a LaserSnob and proud of it!
We present Paul’s letter as an example to be emulated by all of us when frustrated with theatre management:

Mr. Bill LeNeveu

AMC Hulen 10 Theatre

6330 Hulen Bend Boulevard

Fort Worth, TX. 76132

Dear Sir:

Yes, there is a difference at AMC—the ads say DOLBY STEREO, but there isn’t any!

Last Friday I attended the 5:25 showing of Alice, noted the walls full of speakers, and expected to hear first-rate sound. What a disappointment. I am returning the AMC Movie Club Card because I think you can improve your attendance more significantly by spending your money on the technical details of your theatre rather than on promotions of this kind. After all, “the show’s the thing,” and the sound is half of it.

Please trust me when I say there was NO stereo. I am not talking about improper channel levels, or just no surround, I am talking zero stereo, and with very poor high-frequency response at that.

I would not be writing this if this were an unusual occurrence. But it is not—it is common. I have Dolby Surround at home and it works just fine, every time. AMC should be able to do as well.

Sincerely,
Paul McVey

MSNL printed the letter as a model to encourage readers to advocate in their own theaters, and wrote at length and in detail about Dolby and THX in our response. But regarding Alice (1990), added the following corrective annotation for better perspective on the case:

It so happens that Alice is an unusual case: Woody Allen has always concentrated on film techniques that make splashy soundtracks seem pretty unimportant. We have it on good authority that, persuaded to make his first stereo film, Allen continued to feel uncomfortable with stereo and rejected the first couple of mixes. … The apparent width of the sonic “stage” seemed to distract from his dramatic concerns. We are used to Woody Allen’s world being in mono. Imagine Manhattan with bus pass-by’s panning across the screen, or bookstore ambiences in stereo. Anyway, the way Alice was released, the sound virtually all comes from the center speaker! Dolby stereo in this case alone was used primarily to insure the highest quality in frequency response and noise level.

The Mail Bag Published in July–August, 1991 (Vol I #19)

The Mail Bag

Dear MSNL,

I am really amazed that such a publication really exists! I was always very interested in film sound (especially the stereophonic systems) and I am collecting all the stereo titles on video tape and laser disc.

In Germany we don’t have much 70mm releases (I love 70mm!,) but twice a year I spend my holidays in London, England, where they really have fantastic movie theaters (especially the THX-equipped Empire 1) and show a lot of 70mm features.

From the movie ads in the Los Angeles Times I know that there is quite a big number of 70mm releases. Since I am not receiving the LA Times anymore, I am not up to date at the moment which new films are released in 70mm, 35mm Dolby Stereo or Ultra Stereo, etc. Wouldn’t it be possible for you to print updated lists of current studio releases in your newsletter (I think there will be about 20 new stereo films each month)? I really would welcome this!

With kind regards,
Volker Hannemann, Germany

The Mail Bag Published in October/November, 1991 (Vol I #20)

The Mail Bag

Dear MSNL,

Rarely go to the movies anymore. Find it very annoying … people talking and stuffing their faces with popcorn … Babies crying. A tall person sits in front of you so you have to change your seat or look between two heads for an opening. This is fun?

I wish I could go to a theater that was completely empty. I would sit in the seat best situated for sound. I’d even count the number of seats in the row to determine exact center for the middle of the screen.

… I’ve done the next best thing: I was into surround sound back in 1968, then it was called Quad (Quadrophonic.) I still use my Technics 4-channel receiver.

With a Sony 2/XBR, a Fosgate 3608 and five speakers including a subwoofer, my theater is at home and the sound is outstanding.

What is Ultra Stereo and how does it differ from Dolby Stereo?

—Gary Cornell, Baldwin, NY
Ultra Stereo is a less-expensive alternative to Dolby stereo four-channel reproduction. (There may still be Dolby noise reduction in the tracks, but the circuitry that matrixes Left, Right, Center, and Surround into two recordable channels is a bit different.) There is less of a license fee, and the dub printmaster session is not overseen by one of those fun-loving Dolby field reps. And stereo or mono … we always try to sit behind empty seats. We notice that people who sit in front of us tend to be giants with large hair. —ed.

Dear Moviesound Newsletter,

When I was in London I got the opportunity to visit the two certified THX cinemas. But one of them (Warner, West End) didn’t run the “THX Leader”. My question is, aren’t the certified THX theaters obliged to run the “leader” before the film starts? I’d be glad if you’d answer that one.

Sincerely,
Ola Nigård, Technical Operator—CD Plant, Skanor, Sweden Judy Rosen at THX told MSNL that THX theaters are supposed to run the leaders before every feature. Occasionally, a print might be temporarily switched to another screen in the same complex, which may not be a THX room. Perhaps that was the case at the London Warner. Ironically, Warner West End #2 is certified, but is currently being demolished! The renovation rising from its ashes will also be THX-certified. — ed.

Dear Editor,

O.K. you got me convinced! … I’m a movie buff from day one and I like to read anything pertaining to movies including the sound.

You guys were a little bit hard on Ben-Hur (MSNL Vol I #15.) It was the filmmakers’ intention to use music for maximum emotional impact and they succeeded. No actor can convey feelings and emotions towards an audience as much as music can. Ask any Max Steiner/Bette Davis fan! Certainly sound effects alone can’t do it. Most films of that era had rather Spartan soundtracks but that should not detract from its visual impact. You might like to catch on the late, late show a little B movie called The Thief, with Ray Milland. It has no dialogue—only sparse music and good Foley effects. Rather surprisingly good for a film made in 1952.

—Herb Norenberg, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
We agree that music is an important part of movie making (Some of us at MSNL are musicians). … However, neither music nor the greatest sound effects in the world are as essential to a movie as good acting, directing, and
(God knows,) a good story! — VTA

Letters to Ed. (You remember Ed.) Published in Fall, 1992 (Vol II #3)

Letters to Ed. (You remember Ed.)

Dear Sirs:

I have been a subscriber to the MSNL for several years now and look forward to each and every issue. I have to admit that I have purchased several laser discs this past year mostly based on your observations of movie content, and I have never been disappointed.

Question: What’s this about Cinema Digital Sound going belly up? Last year it was mentioned that Aliens 3 was supposed to be in digital. I know about the Dolby SR-D, but Cinema Digital Sound was good also. A manager of one of the theaters which installed Cinema Digital Sound told me about it, when I saw Terminator 2. Keep up the good work.

As always,

George J. Kaberline, Panama City, Panama
We don’t know that “Aliens 3” was released in any digital format. If so, it would have to have been among the last of the Cinema Digital releases. It was certainly not in Dolby SR-D. Last year, “Star Trek VI” and “Newsies” were unadvertised test releases in SR-D, followed by “Batman Returns,” which was the first official SR-D release. See our lead story about CDS. — ed.

Dear Sirs:

I’ve often thought that here in New York City we have the worst movie sound, and that many of the theaters “out in the sticks” are actually much better than you might think. Maybe your newsletter will confirm that fact. And maybe tell me how correctable the situation is.

Thanks,
David Hutchison, New York City, NY
While we have fond 1960’s memories of foreign and New Wave films running in classic art houses like the Bleeker St. Cinema (sound was never a priority), MSNL pleads ignorance of the current audio scene on Big Apple screens. We did catch “Rainman” in its 1988 first-run in Manhattan, and it was an absolutely miserable experience for MSNL ears. Too bad, because NYC is our absolutely favorite town to visit!
Is the situation correctable? Only when Manhattan audiences demand audio quality. … When the SR-equipped and THX theaters begin to beat all the others in box office receipts. Do you think there’s a cultural bias against high-tech action films with big-ticket sound tracks in the Apple? Out here under the smog, we sometimes imagine that New Yorkers only go out to see Woody’s latest, and rent everything else on video!
But it shouldn’t be a surprise to see some newer suburban theaters with better acoustics, insulation, and playback systems than those built during the first wave of Monstrous Multiplexes in the ‘Seventies and ‘Eighties. Our experience in L.A is that design and hardware have improved drastically in the newer (‘Nineties) picture palaces. … We will depend on our Gotham subscribers to report further. — ed.

Letters to Our Editor Published in Summer, 1993 (Vol III #1)

Letters to Our Editor

Moviesound Newsletter,

Aside from offering six-channel sound, how does Dolby’s new digital sound format differ from laser disc digital sound? Will the laser discs editions of these films (i.e., Dolby SR-D) use the 6-track or 4-track sound?

—Jonathan Goeldner, Washington, D.C.
Good question. The Dolby Digital (SR-D) system relates strictly to the requirements of film release printing and theater projection. It provides theaters with a stable, compact-disc quality recording right smack on the movie film itself, which can feed amplifiers for Left, Center, Right, Left-surround, Right-surround, and boom or extra channels. Laser disc digital sound provides a way of storing data for audio in a manner somewhat similar to that of a compact disc, ostensibly for two channels. The tricky thing is that, as with all current home video applications, these two channels store (via matrix encoding) information that translates to four channels of playback. The reason for this is that, when stereo for home videotape and early laser disc was newly evolving, it was a logical choice to master audio for these media directly from the same 35mm magnetic film mix from which the labs printed the Dolby Stereo optical negative tracks. It follows then, that, until radically new systems are introduced, home video theaters will continue to be based on four-channel stereo similar to the first generation of 1970’s Dolby Stereo and Ultra Stereo movies.

Letters to the Editor Published in Fall, 1993 (Vol III #2)

Letters to the Editor

Dear MSNL:

One question. I’d really appreciate it if you would respond. I’m hearing of discs encoded with THX sound. I thought THX wasn’t an encoding process, but an improved way of presenting the standard Dolby surround. What’s the story?

—Chris LaCanne, Racine, WI
Right both ways, Chris. We’ve been explaining to people for four years in this journal that THX is a licensed quality-control system for theater payback. Now they’re putting their logo on some disc releases by doing quality-control over the re-mastering of soundtracks for certain releases on disc. THX is interested in a better presentation, not in changing the aesthetic choices that go into the product. — ed.

Dear MSNL,

Love your newsletter! Perhaps you could clear out one of my queries. What exactly is the difference between the analog and digital tracks on the Fantasia laserdisc?

Sincerely,
Ola Nigård, Skanor, Sweden
George Simpson reports:

Aha! Thought you could stump the lasermeister? The analog and the digital tracks on the laser disc do differ. The reason is that the digital track is stereo with wide directional separations. That’s essentially the mix that Terry Porter prepared (the 1991 re-release) for the theaters, as a four-track L-C-R-S mix. The analog track is also stereo, but it has been reduced in range. In other words, there are fewer directional separations, which makes it more compatible with monaural playback. The idea is that anybody who has got their laser disc player hooked up to their TV probably has the analog outputs going into the TV, without using a sophisticated stereo system. Consequently, when the kiddies play it back and the parents aren’t around, they’re not missing any of the sound track. It’s all been compressed for the most effective mono playback.

Dear MSNL,

I wouldn’t want to miss an issue. The Moviesound Newsletter is the only magazine I read from cover to cover.

I’m a LaserDisc enthusiast and I started collecting LaserDiscs 10 years ago before anyone else in Denmark had even heard about it. I started Laserdisken in 1984 and was the first to bring surround sound to Denmark, in 1986.

THX sound equipment is not yet available in Denmark, but I’m anxiously awaiting its arrival, as well as the new high-resolution LCD projectors. Unfortunately, the Danish video distributors see LaserDisc as a competitor to their inferior videotapes, and they actually fight (the progress of) the LaserDisc system. This has gone on for years.

—Hans Kristian Pedersen, Aalborg, Denmark
Mr. Pedersen’s Laserdisken store is Denmark’s only source of disc video, and he imports NTSC discs and players to the European market. He also publishes “VideoMagasinet film & Musik.” (which, for those of you who speak only English, is just what it sounds like.) We are very proud that Mr. Pedersen was one of MSNL’s charter subscribers. — ed.

Letters Published in Summer/Fall, 1994 (Vol IV #2)

Sc. 4 Call and Response: The Johnson Letter

Introduction to Keith Johnson Letter

At the end of 1990, publisher Vanessa T. Ament and the author were typically sleep-deprived and preoccupied with matters other than Moviesound Newsletter: Along with the insecurity of two freelance careers (as a Foley artist and sound editor, respectively) with the noisy Life in L.A. and the usual family bills as distractions, having our then one-month old Bundle of Joy to contend with at home did not make our young lives simpler. Perhaps making a non-commercial journal was not proving to be the best use of our time after all! That cloud of doubt proved fleeting: It vaporized with the appearance of Keith Johnson’s letter. That was a momentous annunciation, proving that MSNL was, as we had hoped, part of a rich new conversation.

Teachers hope for a few happy moments in any long career, when one student’s interest and enthusiasm can breach the wall of apathy in the classroom. The one student’s hand that eagerly reaches for the ceiling can sometimes wake us up professionally. Good questions reinforce our purpose.

The Mail Published in December, 1990 (Vol I #16)

The Mail

Dear MSNL,

After having caught up on your back issues, I thought I would take this opportunity to write again and thank you for your enlightening newsletter. …

I’d like to discuss several topics, or propose ideas for articles or discussions. …

Reviews

I like the previews of summer movies’ sound written in the Kiplinger Washington Letter short writing style. It gives us something to look forward to. I also appreciate the reviews of laserdiscs, but I wish they were not so long. Can you also review videocassettes (I can’t afford laser just yet)?

Theaters

  1. What is the technical difference between Dolby stereo and Ultra stereo?

  2. In your opinion, which sounds better: a 35mm optical stereo print in a THX-equipped theater, or a 70mm 6-track magnetic print in an older non-THX house or multiplex?

    I had a chance to experience the difference recently with Fantasia. I first watched a 70mm mag print at an older house in town, The Egyptian. This is an older 1-screen house, with a main floor and a balcony with wooden (!) chairs. The sound was OK, but slightly tinny and reverberative, with the surround channel (a necklace-type arrangement) not very pronounced. But the film did have a very full dynamic range… with some distortion at volume peaks. (Did they use “No Noise” processing by Sonic Solutions? If not, why not?) I then saw a 35mm optical print at the Alderwood Cinema’s THX house, one of two THX houses in this recently-built 7-screen multiplex. I found the sound richer and fuller, with little reverb, and a much clearer definition of the surround channel. I presume from this example that a 35 optical in a THX room will beat a 70mm mag (in a less desirable room). What do you folks think?

  3. What is the Academy measurement for correct sound pressure levels in movie theaters?

Videos

It is one of the great rumors of Star Wars trivia that the low-priced reissue of Star Wars was remixed, and your interview with Ben Burtt in MSNL #l3 proved and explained it; thank you. This is an intriguing new topic, the remixing of soundtracks specifically for video release. Which soundtrack is most often used for video release, 35 or 70mm? Does the mix on a laserdisc differ from a cassette in any way? When do they make a special video mix, and why?

Bibliographies

Are there other publications which discuss moviesound on a regular basis, perhaps as part of a wider focus on sound? I would appreciate knowing who they are. I want to read your publication and MORE. Where might I go next?

I must now tackle my own suggestion and furnish some articles for your bibliography. Samples of each are enclosed.

  1. Walter Murch, by Jordan Fox, Cinefex #3, Dec. 1980. PO Box 20027, Riverside, CA 92516. THE journal of cinematic illusion devotes about 25 pages to the genius behind the sound of American Graffiti and Apocalypse Now.
  2. Film Sound Today: An anthology of articles from Recording Engineer/Producer, by Larry Blake, Reveille Press, PO Box 288, Hollywood, CA 90078. Your technical editor produces a book chock-full of interesting stuff. Articles on 70mm sound, Dolby stereo, and THX, along with how-they-did-it articles on One From the Heart, Fantasia, and Return of the Jedi.
  3. THX Sound System: Certified Hi-Fi for the Movies by Tomlinson Holman, Audio Magazine, September 1989. The most informative widely-available article on THX ever written (written by Mr. TH for the lay public — ed.) Gives several key details about what makes THX the best sound system for the movies.
  4. Real Hi-Fi at the Movies, “Technical Talk” column by Julian Hirsch, Stereo Review, November 1989. A short article of the author’s impressions of visiting a THX-equipped theater.
  5. Sound Makes A Difference, a look at Lucas film’s Sprocket Systems by Lisa Cowan in The Lucasfilm Fan Club Magazine, #9, 1990, PO Box 111000, Aurora, CO 80011. A detailed look at the Sprocket Systems post-production sound facility at Skywalker Ranch.
  6. Muffling The Neighbors: Ten Tips To Reduce Noise by F. Alton Everest, Audio magazine, November, 1990. Addresses noise reduction techniques for building home theaters in apartments and condos.

If I see others, I will pass them along. Again, thank you for your efforts on behalf of all movie sound fans. Still devouring every word of every issue, I remain…

Sincerely,
Keith Johnson, Federal Way, WA
It’s letters like yours that make our efforts to put this newsletter together worthwhile. Answers to your other, unprinted questions are summarized here, then we’ll try to tackle as many of the printed questions as possible:

Our 1989 movie sound survey could be sent out if you send us an SASE. We would like to do another one soon. About MTS-TV, and VIDEO TRANSFERS; perhaps we’ll hear from pro readers John Wiggins or Marc Wielage. Thanks for your other ideas. We’ll consider your bibliography a “seed” for a more complete one to be printed soon. — ed.

Introduction to Simpson and Blake Responses

George Simpson was completely dedicated to reviewing laser discs and had turned his little West Los Angeles apartment into something of a dedicated listening (and viewing) room. Very few people were then using the freshly minted phrase “home theater,” but that is essentially what he had assembled. Had he lived to enjoy 2016, friends might have called it a “man cave.” A busy sound editor and writer, Simpson might have thought of it as a theater with a bed and a kitchen. The apartment brought to mind a spoof from the 1957 Stan Freberg Radio Show, in which a fanatical Hi-Fi Stereo geek called “Dr. Herman Horn” demanded of other willing audiophiles, “The whole house becomes a speaker. You move into the garage!” The puckish Simpson did not have to be persuaded to write a response to Mr. Johnson. He used it as an opportunity to speak as his alter ego, Professor Discu.

Larry Blake, after having mixed the successful sex, lies, and videotape (1989) for Steven Soderbergh, continued for some time to write technical articles for Mix, Recording Engineer/Producer, for MSNL, and for his own books. His precise explanations made a very good teaching tool for the journal’s readers. By 2016, Blake’s writing output has been somewhat curtailed by a busy mixing schedule and the operation of his own Swelltone Labs in New Orleans. 3 Blake always provided MSNL with much credibility in technical audio matters.

Our Laboratory Reference Living Room Dep’t. Published in December, 1990 (Vol I #16)

Our Laboratory Reference Living Room Dep’t

In analyzing discs for review, MSNL laser editor George Simpson utilizes an ordinary home system, the better to approximate the setup of the average dedicated viewer who wouldn’t make it on Lives of the Rich and Famous. To that end, he maintains in good working order the following complement of components:

A Pioneer SD2600 monitor/receiver, offering a 26” picture, 560 lines of horizontal resolution and trouble-free service. A Pioneer LD838D 12” laser disc-only player with digital sound and 400 lines of resolution. A Pioneer VSX-9500S stereo audio/video receiver with Dolby Pro-Logic Surround. A pair of ADS710 speakers for left/right audio, and three ESS620 speakers for center and surround.

While newer-model disc players have better resolution and tend to fill in the manufacturing imperfections in current pressings, the 838 may actually be better for reviewing video quality because it reveals every stinking blemish. Since our subject is audio, we probably will upgrade just as soon as we get another 1,000 subscribers.

Our recommendation to potential system buyers: select any big name combination player with digital sound and 8x oversampling that you have seen displayed on a high quality monitor and heard through a good surround system. For audio, select a stereo A/V receiver with Dolby Pro-Logic Surround and a separate amp section for the center channel. Speakers are entirely subjective. The left and right should match. The center and surround speakers can be a matched threesome and, since they will utilize only a third as much power, need not be big slam-bang boxes. The center channel carries mostly dialogue from the LCRS Dolby matrix and should never be utilized as a boom box. It’s usually possible to add a sub-woofer off most of these A/V receivers: look for that capability as well.

Some Answers from George Simpson: Published in December, 1990 (Vol I #16)

Some Answers from George Simpson

Dept. of Internal Justifications

We were asked why we review laserdiscs to the exclusion of videotapes. In narrowing the scope of our home video section, we consulted our highly overpaid technical engineer, Professor P. Tadescu Discu, and asked him to run comparison tests in all video formats: laser disc, VHS, S-VHS, Beta, 8mm, and Fisher-Price compact viewer.

After months of exhaustive testing, Professor Discu determined that there was only one high-end home video product delivering better than 400 lines of horizontal resolution with digital sound, that had a catalogue of diverse titles and the support of dedicated consumers, that regularly markets restored versions of popular films in original aspect ratio … and that format was laser discs.

Were we to expand our efforts to deal with all formats, we could not simply review an occasional VHS tape; we would have to cater to the fans of S-VHS, Beta, 8mm, and Fisher-Price, et al. “You vould be doink comparison reviews amonk competink formats, vich iss not ze purpose of MSNL,” said Professor Discu.

Many of the laser disc releases we cover are not available in any other format in the same incarnation (letterboxing does not work well on tape because of the loss of resolution), and laser disc digital audio is definitely superior to VHS Hi-Fi. MSNL is first and foremost an audio periodical, a lone voice in the wilderness of lost decibels, crying out (at 18kHz) for high quality and nothing less. We are not contemptuous of other formats. We simply can’t cover everything. For tape software reviews, we direct readers to the consumer magazines, Video and Video Review. For in-depth reviews of laser discs, we recommend Douglas Pratt’s Laserdisc Newsletter, J&R Frogg’s Pond Scum, Scott Hughes’ LASERviews, and The Perfect Vision. Videotape has one great use for laser-watchers: to preview a film before it is released on disc. That can help in the decision to buy a film in the high-end format. Also, VHS tape makes lovely Christmas ribbon.

— GS

Professor Discu’s laboratory reference system: use your imagination. Since Professor Discu has failed to pay his electricity bill for three weeks, he is currently unable to use his system. We await his restoration to full operating capacity.

Some Answers from Larry Blake: Published in December, 1990 (Vol I #16)

Some Answers from Larry Blake

The second edition of Film Sound Today will be published early next year, along with a separate book that I’m writing on film and video synchronization techniques. Watch for an announcement in MSNL.

“Dolby Stereo,” in the present context, means a 35mm optical print containing two tracks that are encoded with Dolby A-Type noise reduction (the older sibling of the B- and C-Type Dolby noise reduction circuits found on cassette decks.) The two tracks are also matrix encoded: That is, they were originally four discrete tracks at the film mix, and are “decoded” into four tracks again at the theater, feeding the left, right, and center speakers behind the screen, and the mono surround channel that is fed to the theater walls.

“Ultra Stereo” is virtually identical, with the exception that it uses a copy of A-Type noise reduction system that is claimed to be compatible with Dolby A-Type. (But is not licensed by Dolby Labs.) The matrix encoding of the two processes is virtually identical.

Both Dolby Labs and Ultra Stereo manufacture cinema processors for theaters, which will play either Dolby or Ultra Stereo prints. However, lawyers and license agreements determine how a film can be advertised. The only way a film mixed in Dolby Stereo can be advertised as being presented in Dolby Stereo is if the theater has a Dolby Laboratories Cinema Processor. If they have one manufactured by another company, you’ll see in their ads: “This film was mixed in Dolby Stereo, and is being presented with XXXX equipment.” A film mixed in Ultra Stereo cannot be advertised as being in Dolby Stereo if it is playing in a Dolby Labs-equipped theater. You can see why some theater chains say “Presented in Stereo” generically, to save the hassle or figuring the ads out for each film.

As a moviegoer experiences the Dolby Stereo processor, there is virtually no difference between a film mixed in either Ultra- or Dolby Stereo, (assuming that both versions were to be played in a theater aligned to industry standards.) Understand that here I’m talking about the encoding of four tracks to two.

However, the “steering logic” in the decoder is what separates the men from the boys (not to mention the center from the surrounds,) since it has to figure out some pretty complex stuff, in order to accurately place sounds in the four-channel sound field. As far as differences between Dolby Stereo and Ultra Stereo decoders are concerned, I have some strong hunches. … But never having done a carefully controlled A/B test, my lips are sealed.

The Academy (the people who hand out the Oscars®) has nothing to do with sound pressure levels. The current standards for theatrical reproduction are set forth in tech. documents such as the International Standards Organization Bulletin #2969 and SMPTE Recommended Practice 202M. Anyway, the standard level (for 35mm standard stereo optical films and 70mm magnetic films) is 85 dB, measured with “C” weighting and slow-reading response. If it is calibrated against a known reference, the sound pressure level meter sold at Radio Shack stores for about $30 is really quite good, and is used throughout the industry.

Understand that this level represents the SPL of each speaker channel, measured at the mix position (or 2/3 of the way back of the theater,) with pink noise in the monitor at 0 VU on the mix console’s meters. I know this is somewhat technical, but I say it to let you know that it would be a tough matter for you to put pink noise through your own system at said level. I know of no calibration VHS tape that has pink noise at the correct level.

My advice is to turn it up until your neighbors complain or your skull vibrates, then back it down a little.

—LB

As MSNL had promised in response to Keith Johnson, it was time for movie sound fans to share as complete a bibliography as possible, and Steve Lee filled that gap. Long a collector of sound effects folklore, an acolyte of Ben Burtt’s ongoing research efforts in sound effects history (quite an arcane field of interest, then and now) Lee was also amassing clippings and books whenever they turned up, and he was generous with that information. His material had to be divided into three serial entries, divided as Magazine Articles, Newspaper Articles, and Books. Lee’s bibliography appears in the Appendix.

Sc. 5 Concluding Thoughts

Fans

Any journal’s Letters section provides a voice for readers. Sometimes the vox populi department of a local newspaper can give one a fairly depressing portrait of humankind, but there was often a positive tone coming from MSNL readers. True fans of the art of sound typically expressed elation inspired by the better-sounding tracks, quite obviously. But as consumers, their devotion to seeking out high tech was impressive, and hard-core cognoscenti saw the advent of digital movie sound on the horizon. Regarding home video, one wrote, “If it has a digital surround track, I will most likely order it.” Another wrote “I only go to theaters I know in advance are showing the features in stereo.” (To be fair to film history, he must somehow have missed ninety years of classic and foreign films in mono.) While practitioners and audiences may not have been conscious of their participation in a media revolution, a reader who states, “I am a strong supporter of THX, and it’s one of the first things I look for when I decide to see a movie,” is doing exactly that.

Professionals

Here also was a forum for post sound professionals to express, lecture, review, complain, and possibly to teach, by discussing with each other and with fans. In so doing, practitioners sometimes revealed the pressures engulfing all of the entertainment business, to make analog sound more articulate and impressive. A gentleman wrote from HBO, that he was “faced with the problem of translating wonderful theater sound for TV.” A University of Southern California educator, putting out a call for donations of audiotape, noted that the school was making MSNL available to the students, and that faculty and students were following George Simpson’s laser disc reviews. Supervising Sound Editors Paul Carden and Richard Anderson each wrote to express some humor: Carden, whining mischievously about his frequent encounters with young “wannabe sound designers,” said “The worst part of this recurring nightmare, the quicksand for me is Do you think I should come out to Hollywood and get in the business?” And Anderson pretended to be a Luddite fan of 1926-style sound, when he wrote, “Who needs digital when one can sample the subtle analog nuances of a freshly-pressed 78 rpm shellac disk?”

fig0083

The author at the Moviola, working at Hanna-Barbera in 1979. Photo by Mark Mangini.
fig0085

Cutting room as man-cave: Bob Newlan at Bluelight Sound. Photo courtesy of Scott Hecker.
fig0087

Chris Flick working on Joe Dante’s Innerspace. March, 1987.
fig0089

Destiny Borden at her bench. City Slickers II, 1994.
fig0093

Ralph Stuart with ubiquitous trim boxes, demonstrating wave physics.

Notes

1. The term fanzine might have been applied to Moviesound Newsletter whether fairly or unfairly. But, since the principal writers were professional practitioners as well as fans of the art of movie sound design, that definition looks murky.

2. To be more precise, there were plenty of trademarked names for enhanced sound systems, both real and ersatz, before and after Dolby’s success, but none so prominent to the public eye. Students of that technical history will have much to examine well beyond these pages.

3. Besides hearing his mixes in many popular films, such as Traffic (2000) and Ocean’s Eleven (2001), astute observers will witness Blake descending head first from outof-frame as the uncredited “Upside-Down Man” in Airplane! (1980).