Stranger Things creator says turn off “garbage” settings

Post by ajmurmann » Tue, Dec 30, 2025, 9:01 AM UTC

nutjob2 wrote: post #121

greatgib wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a well known issue: https://zvox.com/blogs/news/why-can-t-i-hear-dialogue-on-tv-... I don't find the source anymore but I think that I saw that it was even a kind of small conspiracy on tv streaming so that you set your speakers louder and then the advertisement time arrive you will hear them louder than your movie. Officially it is just that they switch to a better encoding for ads (like mpeg2 to MPEG-4 for DV…

I think the issue is dynamic range rather than a minor conspiracy. Film makers want to preserve dynamic range so they can render sounds both subtle and with a lot of punch, preserving detail, whereas ads just want to be heard as much as possible. Ads will compress sound so it sounds uniform, colorless and as clear and loud as possible for a given volume.

Post by pentaphobe » Tue, Dec 30, 2025, 9:05 AM UTC

sfn42 wrote: post #245

XorNot wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly what I don't get is how this even happened though: it's been I think 10 years with no progress on getting the volume of things to equal out, even with all the fancy software we have. Like I would've thought that 5.1 should be relatively easy to normalize, since the center speech channel is a big obvious "the audience _really_ needs to hear this" channel that should be easy to amplify up in any downmix....ins…

I toyed with the idea of making some kind of app for this but while it may work on desktop it seems less viable for smart tvs which is what I primarily use. Though I have switched to mostly using Plex, so maybe I could look into doing something there.

Post by pentaphobe » Tue, Dec 30, 2025, 9:07 AM UTC

XorNot wrote: post #227

snakeboy wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Makes sense, but how does this explain the fact that this problem seems recent, or at least to have worsened recently ?

Honestly what I don't get is how this even happened though: it's been I think 10 years with no progress on getting the volume of things to equal out, even with all the fancy software we have. Like I would've thought that 5.1 should be relatively easy to normalize, since the center speech channel is a big obvious "the audience _really_ needs to hear this" channel that should be easy to amplify up in any downmix....ins…

Post by Shorel » Tue, Dec 30, 2025, 9:09 AM UTC

echelon wrote: post #125

Shorel wrote: post #109

Anyone who mentions: "the soap opera effect" is someone who used to watch soap operas. The reason they dislike it, is their own bad taste. I like how it looks because it is "high quality videogame effect" for me. 60 hz, 120hz, 144hz, you only get this on a good videogame setup.

Films use cheap set dec and materials. They use lighting and makeup tricks. If you watch at a higher frame rate, the mistakes become obvious rather than melting into the frames. Humans look plastic and fake. The people that are masters of light and photography make intentional choices for a reason. You can cook your steak well done if you like, but that's not how you're supposed to eat it. A steak is not a burger. A…

Post by pvdebbe » Tue, Dec 30, 2025, 9:12 AM UTC

drysart wrote: post #255

UltraSane wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

24fps was not chosen from technical merit but because it was the lowest frame rate that most people didn't see flicker.

That choice was made long before Scorsese made The Godfather; and so has virtually every other movie made over the past century. Real artists understand the limits of the medium they're working in and shape their creations to exist within it. So even if there was no artistic or technical merit in the choice to standardize on 24 FPS, the choice to standardize on 24 FPS shaped the media that came after it. Which means…