LOL then I’ll do it again a give it new name that wont say Alien! I guess youtube don’t want allow us to share with the other children. Might be Fox, I heard issues that they’ve gone queer on youtube with The Towering Inferno.
Maybe its your region! As some videos are prohibited to be watched in the UK that have been made in the US!
In my video file the videos show as LIVE!
But if your fearing the difference in audio and don’t want to talk about the politics of audio fine ****. Just kidding.
I’ll do another video, wait a second.
Do you have Alien on DVD laserdisc Bluray? If the answer is yes list the formats that you have on optical disc.
Okay then I did the second video again, listen, to the first video and the third one, again!
Remember! The Audience Is Listening…!
Don’t worry about the low level wining of the sound in the silent parts that’s the pc on the audio input, okay.
I'm struggling to see the point of the exercise here. Are you trying to prove that the original 6 track is superior to digital remastering? That's all well and good, but your second and third videos aren't working (again ), and I doubt this test will have any more benefit via you tube than trying to see which picture is better between SD and HD on you tube.
Back then there was more than one original mix because most theaters weren't set
up for anything but mono sound. The six track mix sounded and worked great for
the 70mm blow up prints but most audiences heard the standard optical mono version.
Like "Star Wars" this was a separate and different mix of the movie.
If you go back the fifties, there were often four mixes for movies like "Around the
World in 80 Days". There was the six track stereo version for the 70mm Todd-AO
prints, then a four track version for the 35mm magnetic stereo prints, a 35mm
Perspecta sound (directional mono) version and finally an optical mono mix. Which
is definitive? Well they all are since they catered the mixes for the theaters that
were playing the film.