Harrison's Reports (1929)

Entered aS secohd-olas& matter Januan^ 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 19T9, Harrison’S Reports Yearly Subscription Rates; United States ....... $10.00 U. S. Insular Possessions 12.08 Canada and Mexico. . 12.00 England and New Zealand 14.60 Other Foreign Countries 16.50 25c. a Copy 1440 BROADWAY New York, N. Y. A Motten Picture Reviewing’ Service by a Former Exhibitor Devoted Exclusively to the Interests of Exhibitors Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. Published Weekly by P. S. HARBiSON Editor and Publisher Estalfiished July 1, 1919 Tel. : Pennsylvania 7649 Cable Address : Harreports (Bentley Code) A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. XI SATURDAY, MARCH 2, 1929 No. 9 SOUND ON FILM OR SOUND ON DISC? As a result of a statement by Sidney R. Kent, General Manager of Paramount Famous Lasky, and by other prominent film men, including Joe Schenck, informing the industry that they would abandon making pictures with the sound recorded on the disc, adopting wholly the sound-on-film system as producing better results and as being more economical, many exhibitors have been led to believe that the sound-on-disc system is doomed ; therefore, they are looking toward installing a talking picture instrument that shows the sound-onfilm kind of talking pictures. Though this paper long ago stated that the soundon-film system is better than the sound-on-disc, and that the sound-on-disc system would eventually be discarded in favor of the sound-on-film, the soundon-disc system is in no immediate danger. And anyone that says that it is is making wild statements. Two are the reasons that make many exhibitors cling to the sound-on-disc system : First, the fact that the quality of the sound-on-disc talking pictures just now is, film for film, better ; and secondly, because the sound-on-disc talking picture devices are ine.xpensive as compared to the devices that use the sound-on-film. A sound-on-film instrument just now cannot be bought for less than five thousand dollars in addition to the cost of installation, which runs up to five hundred dollars or more. On the other hand, a sound-on-disc instrument can he Ixiught anywhere from fifteen hundred dollars to as low as one thousand dollars. .\nd the installation cost is very low. Many exhibitors who have a son that knows something alx)ut radio, or themselves know the workings of radio, are able to make talking picture instruments themselves, even at less than one thousand dollars. The sound-on-disc system is not, as said, in immediate danger. So long as an exhibitor can buy, or make an instrument, at a much lower price than the sound-on-film instrument can be bought for, and so long as he can secure sound-on-disc films of better (or even of equal) quality than the sound-onfilm, that long the souncl-on-disc system will continue to prevail, regardless of what this, that, or the other executive of a film company, no matter how big, may say. One or two or even more persons cannot create economic conditions at order; such conditions are the result of forces over which neither they nor we have control. These conditions must undergo a change naturally. The sound-ondisc system will be abandoned only when the public become educated enough to know the difference between the sound-on-film and the sound-on-disc tone quality. When the sound-on-film pictures are superior in quality to the sound-on-disc, and when the operation of a sound-on-film device is as economical as the operation of the sound-on-disc device, then will the popularity of the sound-on-disc system begin to wane. The statements by Mr. Kent and the others are more political than economical. From the day they were compelled to install talking picture instruments in their theatres, and to contract for Warner Bros, talking pictures, they have been compelled to show advance trailers telling the public that they are going to see “next change of program” a wonderful talking picture, and that this picture had been produced by Warner Brothers., “the pioneers in the talking picture field.” You understand, then, what a bitter pill this has been for Paramount and for the others, and how hard it has been for them to swallow it. The fact that the tenacity of the Warner Brothers, who stuck to it under the most discouraging conditions and saved the entire industry from an inevitable bankruptcy by their eventual success means nothing to them ; gratitude is an unknown virtue in this industry. As for you, you should not allow yourselves to be stampeded. There is no immediate danger to the disc system of sound recording. If your finances permit you to install both systems, do so ; but if they do not. install a disc talking picture instrument, either by buying one, or by making one yourself. There are, as said, instruments that sell from anywhere from fifteen hundred dollars to one thousand dollars that are just as good as their more exjjensive brethren sold by independents. There is no need for you to pay more when you can get one for such a price. If your silent talking picutre business is poor, you should figure out installing a disc talking picture instrument at once. The experimental stage has passed ; now nothing but talking pictures will revive your business, for reports from everywhere prove that in the majority of cases those that installed a talking picture instrument and were able to get film at a reasonable price have profited thereby. Let not the problem of interchangeability trouble you. When you install a talking picture instrument the producers, be it Warner Bros, or any other producer-distributor of talking pictures, will eventually serv'e you ; they cannot afford a loss of revenue from any exhibitor. As for Mr. Kent, when disc instruments are installed in an appreciable number, he will be forced to make pictures with the sound on the disc, either at the time when the picture is produced, or afterwards, by “duping,” just as he did in the case of “Interference,” in which the discs were made from the film. And do not let anyone tell you that talking pictures are bound to die out ; for they are not ; they {Continued on last page)