I'm so glad you pointed out the problems in the music editing. I'm a composer and poor music editing drives me batshit. The most egregious for me is the moment Wendy discovers Jack's sabotage of the sno-cat. I'm very familiar with both the Penderecki pieces and I cringe every single time. The old mono mix handled the transition much better. Polymorphia enters in such a way that, if you don't know it's a separate piece, you might might not notice. And, of course, there's the hedge maze sequence, which is botched in several places in the new mixes. Despite all the compression and low-end rolloff, the 35mm monaural original is remarkably subtle. I don't know how Penderecki felt about his music's use in the film, but - since he also scored films, himself - I've always wondered what he might have done had Kubrick commissioned him to adapt his own music.
Wow, that mono soundtrack packs a punch! Its claustrophobic nature enhances the experience, in my view! Now I'm off to find that 1999 DVD, thank you for this.
Dont forget to mention that the european version is cutted. You have to buy the 4K US Disc to watch this movie in all of its glory. (The US 4K even contains every language spoken on this planet, also with subtitles, even if its not standing on the backside)
(Incoming nerdy ramble) I believe part of the reason the opening credits are all slightly different is because credits are almost never on the original camera negative. This is common for films shot on 35mm and done in the analog domain. The credits would have likely been optically printed onto the interpositive The ‘99 dvd was obviously taken from a film print, and so those credits either represent the original release or a pre-1999 rerelease. For the ‘01, ‘07, and ‘19 releases they went back and scanned the original camera negative, because that will get you the sharpest possible picture. Not wanting to introduce generational picture quality loss by sticking an old interpositive at the beginning, they scanned the negative and recreated the titles digitally alongside the standard restoration process. It’s why they’re all very slightly different
Thanks for sharing your impressive research. FWIW, here are a few more details: "The Shining" was originally released in noticeably different theatrical cuts in 1980, one (memorably) with a longer version of the Anne Jackson scene, one without. I saw different versions in different theaters -- first run, second run, repertory -- in the early 1980s, before any home video release, and that was jarring the first time I noticed it. Kubrick made changes even during the original theatrical engagement, which began in only 10 theaters in the US. The first European release was reportedly 25 minutes shorter than the American one, so it's difficult (and maybe misleading) to say which of Kubrick's own versions made before his death in 1999 are more "authentic" than the others. And 35mm prints, even those struck from the same original negative, will invariably show some visible differences between them, depending on color/exposure timing and other factors in printing. Digital "prints" can be identical; film reels often vary in color and texture and imperfections. It's just the nature of the medium. In the 1990s, before DVDs were widely available, "Barry Lyndon" was also released on home video (VHS, LaserDisc) in various ostensibly "director-approved" aspect ratios, ranging from "full frame" (1.33:1 or 4:3) to wider formats (probably somewhere between 1.66:1 or 1.85:1, which were the standard formats used in most theaters in the US and Europe at the time, as you describe here). In the 20th Century (before "Jaws" pioneered the wide release in 1975), films used to play exclusive first-run engagements in just a few theaters at first, and Kubrick wanted to make sure they got everything right. I know theater managers and projectionists in the States who got phone calls with explicit directions from Kubrick himself, telling them exactly what aperture plates and screen masking ratios they were supposed to use. He was known to sometimes send operatives to check every aspect of theatrical presentation before the film opened, from screen ratios to lamp brightness and sound levels. He took it all very seriously. Also: Although the opening theme music is credited to Wendy Carlos and Rachel Elkind, the familiar "Dies Irae" melody is from the fifth movement of Hector Berlioz's "Symphonie Fantastique" (1830).
3:49-3:51 Like the 1999 DVD and VHS release, they kept 1973 WCI logo, but Warner decided to replace with 1992 WB Shied. It would be better if they brought back 1973 The Big "W" for 4K Ultra HD and streaming releases.
Nerdy but important. Mono tracks are generally looked down upon as old fashioned. Kubrick had a point about theatres who had bad stereos could still play a mono track well. A lot of quality is lost nowadays using NR and AI. The 4K Citizen Kane lately is a good axample. The sound is overly muffled to make it feel like it has been "cleaned" ... it works yes, but the original uncleaned mono track is superior
Interesting video. Don't think that some of this moments are mistakes, cause there is no original 35 mm print as something to compare. Like some framing or color scheme, cause references not great (stills from relatively new re-release + photos from book, but books also have some sort of mastering and color correction before print). Also negative copies often don't contain titles, so most of the time they recreated by remastering studio with different methods. But difference in soundtrack is really huge. Yep, some thing is okay, cause cleaner sound give opportunity to hear something that was hidden by noise floor, and panoramic effects is intended to be in 5.1 mix, but music editing is wild. Cool to see how complicated music mix was and how it was reached without visual modern audio editing, using only timing as reference.
with headset sounds terrific. from 00:03:24 to 00:03:27 of the runtime we discover a hiding camera, that is that we will see again in eyes wide shut. its is just a theory, but the three last pictures of Stanley are interrelated
The 2001 edition is my favorite because it's closer to the full open-matte but without the print flaws. But as we saw from the trailer at the beginning, none of these are true open-matte. I'd fucking LOVE a true full open-matte boxed set of Kubrick's last 6 films.
i think the first dvd has more grain because it was transferred from a print other than the other two transfers… i dont think the blu ray had any noise reduction applied it was just a better source with less grain… the 4k would be the winner here though… it is the most precise in terms of source and encoding… dont know about the color though…
I feel very mixed on which version/versions I preffer. I deftinitley preffer the aspect ratio of the older releases and the colour seems more natural. While I can definitley see the point in the orginal mono mix in terms of the sequencing, I actually prefer the 5.1. mix in terms of the dynamics and fiedlity. To me (might be due to age of source) the mono mix sounds very muddy and it almost sounds like it glitches during the bear scene, like it repeats the same 2 seconds of effects/soundtrack twice before the zoom in. That's one example of where I think the sequence of the mixing was actually better on the 5.1. mix. If only there was a way to reconstruct the original mono mix as acuratley as possible with modern technology so it sounds much more impactful than the original mono mix but keeps the seqencing as intended.
Wonder which month the Mono mix 1999 versions came out? Kubrick died in March 1999 and I wonder if they release these because of his death later that year. I guess they 'remaster' all older films to fit new ways people consume media. This will inevitably change the grade / mix slightly from its original authentic form. It would be great if they included an original cinema print too with these purchases in the extras menu etc.
I love how this is all summed up. And here I thought I was going crazy that they all seem different. The inter cutting here sure makes it easier to finally see the slight differences all put together in comparison. Which version has the Nosferatu shadow of Wendy from? Something else I kinda never noticed was even on the blu ray, you can still see the helicopter blades throwing smaller shadows on the top of the screen. Surprised they wouldn't remove that. Kinda like, why can't they remove the shakey camera part in 2001 where you see it shake as its inside that big ferris wheel they used to film it.
There wre actually two different versions that could be considered the original theatrical release, as Kubrick released a different version in Europe, or maybe it was only UK.
There were two cuts. yes (if we dont count the very first cut with the hospital scene at the end). As best I understand the long version in north America, the cut version in all of Europe. I would guess the short version was used in all of the rest of the world except north America, but I don't know.
I did not make the video. You can follow the links to the creator in the description.Maybe you can ask the creator for a louder version or ask if you can lounden it up a bit yourself
@@matthewmoore7447 what a smug reply 🙄 it's a UA-cam video, plenty of people might be watching on their laptop or desktop and not their main living room TV. Besides, asking for proper audio mastering on a video is not a tall order, it's the bare minimum. When I turn my computer speakers up loud enough to watch the video, any other sounds like discord or windows notifications will be deafening
considering this is a video about video and audio quality, im a little disappointed how quiet your VO recording is. still a really cool video but i had to turn my speakers way up
You should make a video comparing the releases of The Evil Dead. There's some straight up George Lucas Special Edition stuff going on there, and nobody is talking about it.
I'm so glad you pointed out the problems in the music editing. I'm a composer and poor music editing drives me batshit. The most egregious for me is the moment Wendy discovers Jack's sabotage of the sno-cat. I'm very familiar with both the Penderecki pieces and I cringe every single time. The old mono mix handled the transition much better. Polymorphia enters in such a way that, if you don't know it's a separate piece, you might might not notice. And, of course, there's the hedge maze sequence, which is botched in several places in the new mixes. Despite all the compression and low-end rolloff, the 35mm monaural original is remarkably subtle.
I don't know how Penderecki felt about his music's use in the film, but - since he also scored films, himself - I've always wondered what he might have done had Kubrick commissioned him to adapt his own music.
Odd re-editing of the soundtrack elements.
Thank you for this analysis!
This is why I buy every copy I can get.
Wow, that mono soundtrack packs a punch! Its claustrophobic nature enhances the experience, in my view! Now I'm off to find that 1999 DVD, thank you for this.
totally agree!
Dont forget to mention that the european version is cutted. You have to buy the 4K US Disc to watch this movie in all of its glory. (The US 4K even contains every language spoken on this planet, also with subtitles, even if its not standing on the backside)
Really well done analysis.
I myself really enjoy seeing the different aspect ratios used for home media releases and theatres.
(Incoming nerdy ramble) I believe part of the reason the opening credits are all slightly different is because credits are almost never on the original camera negative. This is common for films shot on 35mm and done in the analog domain. The credits would have likely been optically printed onto the interpositive
The ‘99 dvd was obviously taken from a film print, and so those credits either represent the original release or a pre-1999 rerelease. For the ‘01, ‘07, and ‘19 releases they went back and scanned the original camera negative, because that will get you the sharpest possible picture. Not wanting to introduce generational picture quality loss by sticking an old interpositive at the beginning, they scanned the negative and recreated the titles digitally alongside the standard restoration process. It’s why they’re all very slightly different
an awesome comparison video, I never knew how different The Shining versions were, and now I do ! :) thanks for your effort
Thanks for sharing your impressive research. FWIW, here are a few more details: "The Shining" was originally released in noticeably different theatrical cuts in 1980, one (memorably) with a longer version of the Anne Jackson scene, one without. I saw different versions in different theaters -- first run, second run, repertory -- in the early 1980s, before any home video release, and that was jarring the first time I noticed it. Kubrick made changes even during the original theatrical engagement, which began in only 10 theaters in the US. The first European release was reportedly 25 minutes shorter than the American one, so it's difficult (and maybe misleading) to say which of Kubrick's own versions made before his death in 1999 are more "authentic" than the others. And 35mm prints, even those struck from the same original negative, will invariably show some visible differences between them, depending on color/exposure timing and other factors in printing. Digital "prints" can be identical; film reels often vary in color and texture and imperfections. It's just the nature of the medium.
In the 1990s, before DVDs were widely available, "Barry Lyndon" was also released on home video (VHS, LaserDisc) in various ostensibly "director-approved" aspect ratios, ranging from "full frame" (1.33:1 or 4:3) to wider formats (probably somewhere between 1.66:1 or 1.85:1, which were the standard formats used in most theaters in the US and Europe at the time, as you describe here). In the 20th Century (before "Jaws" pioneered the wide release in 1975), films used to play exclusive first-run engagements in just a few theaters at first, and Kubrick wanted to make sure they got everything right. I know theater managers and projectionists in the States who got phone calls with explicit directions from Kubrick himself, telling them exactly what aperture plates and screen masking ratios they were supposed to use. He was known to sometimes send operatives to check every aspect of theatrical presentation before the film opened, from screen ratios to lamp brightness and sound levels. He took it all very seriously.
Also: Although the opening theme music is credited to Wendy Carlos and Rachel Elkind, the familiar "Dies Irae" melody is from the fifth movement of Hector Berlioz's "Symphonie Fantastique" (1830).
@The Perfect Principle
Do you have a copy of the 35mm scan that circulates online? That is what the theatrical print truly looks and sounds like.
No, never heard of that
But what about the 4K?
It looks really good
It’s the best way to see it
@@lewisjames4268 I suppose the video was made before the 4K came out
It's even worst
3:49-3:51 Like the 1999 DVD and VHS release, they kept 1973 WCI logo, but Warner decided to replace with 1992 WB Shied. It would be better if they brought back 1973 The Big "W" for 4K Ultra HD and streaming releases.
The Ligeti pieces were meant to be played in mono, the later stereo mixes loose everything they were made for, great documentary.
Nerdy but important. Mono tracks are generally looked down upon as old fashioned. Kubrick had a point about theatres who had bad stereos could still play a mono track well. A lot of quality is lost nowadays using NR and AI. The 4K Citizen Kane lately is a good axample. The sound is overly muffled to make it feel like it has been "cleaned" ... it works yes, but the original uncleaned mono track is superior
Damn this dude REALLY dissected the dog sh** out of this movie.
Very informative. I enjoyed the heck out of it
Interesting video. Don't think that some of this moments are mistakes, cause there is no original 35 mm print as something to compare. Like some framing or color scheme, cause references not great (stills from relatively new re-release + photos from book, but books also have some sort of mastering and color correction before print). Also negative copies often don't contain titles, so most of the time they recreated by remastering studio with different methods.
But difference in soundtrack is really huge. Yep, some thing is okay, cause cleaner sound give opportunity to hear something that was hidden by noise floor, and panoramic effects is intended to be in 5.1 mix, but music editing is wild. Cool to see how complicated music mix was and how it was reached without visual modern audio editing, using only timing as reference.
Great video! As a UA-camr I can tell this too a lot of time. I would love a video about comparing this with the 4k included.
with headset sounds terrific. from 00:03:24 to 00:03:27 of the runtime we discover a hiding camera, that is that we will see again in eyes wide shut. its is just a theory, but the three last pictures of Stanley are interrelated
The 2001 edition is my favorite because it's closer to the full open-matte but without the print flaws. But as we saw from the trailer at the beginning, none of these are true open-matte. I'd fucking LOVE a true full open-matte boxed set of Kubrick's last 6 films.
i think the first dvd has more grain because it was transferred from a print other than the other two transfers… i dont think the blu ray had any noise reduction applied it was just a better source with less grain…
the 4k would be the winner here though… it is the most precise in terms of source and encoding… dont know about the color though…
I feel very mixed on which version/versions I preffer. I deftinitley preffer the aspect ratio of the older releases and the colour seems more natural. While I can definitley see the point in the orginal mono mix in terms of the sequencing, I actually prefer the 5.1. mix in terms of the dynamics and fiedlity. To me (might be due to age of source) the mono mix sounds very muddy and it almost sounds like it glitches during the bear scene, like it repeats the same 2 seconds of effects/soundtrack twice before the zoom in. That's one example of where I think the sequence of the mixing was actually better on the 5.1. mix. If only there was a way to reconstruct the original mono mix as acuratley as possible with modern technology so it sounds much more impactful than the original mono mix but keeps the seqencing as intended.
Wonder which month the Mono mix 1999 versions came out? Kubrick died in March 1999 and I wonder if they release these because of his death later that year.
I guess they 'remaster' all older films to fit new ways people consume media. This will inevitably change the grade / mix slightly from its original authentic form. It would be great if they included an original cinema print too with these purchases in the extras menu etc.
the DVD came out in June 29th of 99, 3 months after Kubrick's death.
Right channel empty?
Have an unopened VHS
Of the European version.
The Shining is my favourite Kubrick film.))
I love how this is all summed up. And here I thought I was going crazy that they all seem different. The inter cutting here sure makes it easier to finally see the slight differences all put together in comparison.
Which version has the Nosferatu shadow of Wendy from? Something else I kinda never noticed was even on the blu ray, you can still see the helicopter blades throwing smaller shadows on the top of the screen. Surprised they wouldn't remove that. Kinda like, why can't they remove the shakey camera part in 2001 where you see it shake as its inside that big ferris wheel they used to film it.
There wre actually two different versions that could be considered the original theatrical release, as Kubrick released a different version in Europe, or maybe it was only UK.
There were two cuts. yes (if we dont count the very first cut with the hospital scene at the end). As best I understand the long version in north America, the cut version in all of Europe. I would guess the short version was used in all of the rest of the world except north America, but I don't know.
Your sound output is mixed very low btw, I can only hear anything using headphones.
I did not make the video. You can follow the links to the creator in the description.Maybe you can ask the creator for a louder version or ask if you can lounden it up a bit yourself
@@Mandibil sorry is that not your voice speaking?
@@SEAL341 No
I've read that some of the establishing panoramic footage was also used for the final sequence in 'Blade Runner'? I'd like to see a shots comparison.
nice & thorough
This is great but very hard to hear, just for future reference turn your audio up 😊
I have not tweaked the video at all out of respect for the author. If it is too low, turn up your volume :-)
@@Mandibil i think that was a mistake, some people might be listening on devices without speakers that get super loud
@@matthewmoore7447 what a smug reply 🙄 it's a UA-cam video, plenty of people might be watching on their laptop or desktop and not their main living room TV. Besides, asking for proper audio mastering on a video is not a tall order, it's the bare minimum. When I turn my computer speakers up loud enough to watch the video, any other sounds like discord or windows notifications will be deafening
Great Job👍
considering this is a video about video and audio quality, im a little disappointed how quiet your VO recording is. still a really cool video but i had to turn my speakers way up
It is not my recording, I just uploaded it. I do agree the level is low
You should make a video comparing the releases of The Evil Dead. There's some straight up George Lucas Special Edition stuff going on there, and nobody is talking about it.
There used to be several videos on UA-cam detailing all of the differences, but they're unlisted now.
i don‘t mind the 5.1 mix… it‘s pretty well handled and more involving… if i watch the film i will watch it with the 5.1…
Give me mono, give me grain!
The first piece of music may be an original composition, but it's certainly in debt to Symphonie fantastique by Hector Berlioz.
Dias Irae
Interesting
if there's no grain then it's no main
It's Warner Brothers.
original or not mono sucks