Katie Bush wrote:I'll take your word on that, but you ought to be here when I land on an HD channel, and believe me, you'd know what I mean.
nuvistor wrote:I don't know about Blue ray but poor sound quality is a problem for some programs.
nuvistor wrote:see https://rts.org.uk/article/sounding-ina ... ong-dramas
This is a recent article from the Royal Television Society. I don't know if it's actors, poor sound mixing and from the article I am not sure the BBC know either.
Cathovisor wrote:When I started in broadcasting in the early 80s it was a common practice - especially in the old Television Music Studio - to route the mix through a typical domestic receiver's loudspeaker to check that an acceptable balance was being achieved, rather than what a pair of hand-built and calibrated loudspeakers were saying. In the RTS article mention is made of doing a "domestic check" using a domestic telly - good for them!
Niall wrote:They could do something about the relative levels, though. You don't have to listen long with a decent system to start thinking about adding a compressor / limiter to it. The problem is the between programme material, whether it's adverts on commercial channels or idents / promos on the BBC, the levels are ridiculously high relative to the surrounding programmes.
raditechman wrote:Plus the youngsters seem to like the sound loud!.
With TV in stereo, or 5.1 the same problems arise.
As there is the possibility with TV broadcasting today to have more than one audio channel with a station, perhaps the broadcaster should provide a full dynamic range stereo or 5.1 audio channel for those who appreciate it, and for the same programme a mono, limited dynamic and frequency range audio channel for those just using the small speakers in a modern TV.
A bit of me thinks though: why should the broadcasters compromise to overcome the shortcomings of modern reproducing equipment?
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 5 guests