If you compare the final season of Seinfeld with one of the earlier ones there is a big difference in their voices. It's like they went up a pitch. What's the reason for this?
Why the dif in voice in later seasons?
Nov 22, 2002, 12:48 AM ET15 posts by 9 postersalt.tv.seinfeld
❓ Question
Fans discuss why the voices sound different between early and late seasons, with theories about studio lighting changes, recording equipment upgrades, and one joking claim about helium.
15 posts
"doufus" wrote in message news:3dddc52d$0$[email]...
There's also a difference in studio lighting too. This could be due to lense filtering techniques that changes the "temperature" of the picture. The later seasons have a more cold or brighter feeling.....IMO better. (IOW more blue rather than yellow warm haze.
The sound, could be due to recording equipment change, etc. Or could be placebo due to lighting effects. :0)
"Kubotaeats" wrote in message news:rMID9.104$[email]...
pitch.
it is obviousely from better sound recording equipment...nuff said.
They all look older in Season Nine than they did in earlier episodes, especially those in Season One. Weird.
^^^^^^ "Art is often hailed as the grandest expression of human spirit, but we know now ... that the grandest expression of human spirit is whatever it takes for a man or woman to rush back into a burning building to save more people."
"impending" <shak2themax_no [email]> wrote in message news:arns5e$5pi$[email]...
ones
picture.
be
Actually the higher sonic pitch that that the poster was referring to is in fact due to PAL's 24 frame /sec and 4% reduction in total time....in Australia, with no editing of the frame rate of'course.
The studio was doused with helium during the break between the 8th and 9th seasons.
Is this a syndication observation...or some other ?
The reason I ask is, I know TNT, TBS etc like to use time compression techniques to squeeze '45 minutes into 30 minutes' (exaggerated of course)
kc
Giddyup!
In article , [email] says...
Or maybe this is difference between PAL and NTSC. You know, it's 4%...throws the pitch out of whack :-) Or maybe it's just comedic pitch. They had to try something...
"Noone" wrote in message news:[email]...
or maybe, just maybe...its because of the introduction and use of better recording equipment, and computers, cos then they can "cancel out" the noise, and make the sound generally sound better... :)
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002 20:31:26 +0200, Noone wrote:
Really? Is that true? Which one is faster then?
Tomas Stockholm
In article , [email] says...
Well, PAL is 25 frames per second and NTSC is 29,97 frames per second, so PAL is faster. Everytime a new movie appears, there's someone asking what's have been cut from the original, since it's few minutes shorter and everytime it has to be explained, that it's just the difference between PAL and NTSC format. I guess PAL is better since it's closer to 24 frames/s, as they use in the film. And there's more resolution on PAL picture; 575 lines comparing to 485 NTSC lines, but then there's progressive format and HDTV, so who knows...
Judging by your replies it seems you haven't noticed this voice thing. I live in Australia and we use PAL but that's got nothing do with anything. We get the whole series in syndication but it's only the last 1 or 2 seasons that I notice this voice change.
"Noone" wrote in message news:[email]...
In the UK they speed up Dawson's Creek to fit it in (or inflict as little pain as possible) so they sound like munchkins.
doufus wrote
Do they? From what I've seen, Dawson sounds nothing less than the booming mountain of a man that he is.
Thats what the D Man said once when they were interviewing him on T4
JLoverH wrote