Some audio fun
 

I don't know how I missed this particular document before. It answers a couple questions I had, and many I didn't know I had, about Dolby's 2 new codecs.

1st, something that I was wondering about and had claimed without proof previously: Dolby TrueHD is essentially the same as DVD-Audio, just a slight evolution. It does use MLP, but adds more channel capability. Really, storage space and a bus (HDMI) that could handle the bandwidth were the only reasons DVD-A was only 5.1. Note that "extensions" simply means DD compatibility and more channels, if you read more of the paper. DVD-A did not have built-in DD downrezzing, they had to include DD tracks separately on the discs.
Next, actual details of DD+ (E-AC-3), also just an evolution of DD (AC-3). Nothing spectacular here, other than more channels and better compression. Again, space on disc and HDMI makes it easier. The paper goes on and on about its backward compatibility with DD, that seems to be where they spent the most time. Anyone thrilled with the sound is just appreciating better DACs or better work in-studio, not an inherently better system than what DVD offered. So congrats to Toshiba once again on better than expected hardware. (now, let's see them finish it off with full compatibility)
Now it gets fun. It seems DD+ on HDDVD and BD are different. This is in reference to MPEG2, which we will never see it on HDDVD I'm guessing, due to their [HDDVD creators] own built-in limitations. The other compression schemes can offer far better specs, and I don't just mean storage space. I think VC-1 is the first ever Microsoft product I actually like.
My unanswered question is still....Why are BD releases coming out with DD when DD+ is essentially the same, yet more efficient? All the discussion about space constraints (like in the comparisons of the few releases on both BD & HDDVD) is inherently incorrect since DD+ offers a smaller footprint if they choose. BD holds the audio separately from video, even in the crappy MPEG2 they are currently using; they can do any bitrate, any compression, whatever, at least more easily than HDDVD. I'm assuming this is all another result of that shitty MPEG2 encoder they use, but I haven't researched that, yet.

And, of course, why are they using PCM instead of TrueHD for lossless? Again, space considerations would be easier with the more compact format, which I believe is TrueHD.

Yeah, the current encoder is probably going to make ALL of these discs worth an update. TDB is correct from a marketing standpoint for the timing, but they (Disney or whomever) definitely should only do this if they can get a real encoder.

Is Sony still insisting on encoding all movies themselves?

I don't know where it is done. I seem to remember speculation about that. But the software is the important thing. None of this is done at actual Sony (studio, not hardware) or Warner places, right? Rather, at shops that specialize in transferring to disc?

I LOVE my NHT Super one's which are pretty well regarded. Made when some prominent guy there was still running things supposedly. I have 5 and a NHT center and an AR sub. Came out to over a grand but kicks ass for what it is. On Ebay now super ones are pretty reasonable second hand...



http://cgi.ebay.com/NHT-SUPER-ONE-BO...QQcmdZViewItem

Actually, yes, it is. AFAIK, they insisted that they do everything. I could be wrong so someone is free to prove it.

I couldn't agree more! Time and time again when someone wants to see my system they look up and are impressed by the 94" screen. Unless I know them really well and what they would like to see, I put a DVD on of Eric Clapton. Awesome sound. After about a minute of checking out the great pic they start looking around at the speakers. Almost without exception they start talking about the audio.

The pic may "get you in the door" but IMHO it is the sound that keeps you there and really draws you in. I love it when watching a movie and someone jumps a little because of a loud noise coming from behind them.

We should probably make a poll. As I said before, I have a pretty crappy system (small Yamaha satellites & HK receiver) but when I demo'd HD-DVD to my friend he said he didn't notice any change with the picture but the sound was fantastic.

:shrug:

Well I would argue that having a H/K HT Receiver automatically eliminates you from the "crappy system club".

Good company for receivers, I wouldn't call it crappy, either. Once/if you get the upgrade bug, do the speakers first. Yamaha is much better at receivers and musical instruments and pro equipment than speakers, don't know why. You'd think they'd be great at it if they only spent some time on speakers. Maybe they don't.

First time I fired up surround sound was a Yamaha Pro Logic receiver, Polk sub/sat speakers in front, and my first crappy tower speakers in the rear, from a Magnavox stereo I think. Maybe 1989/90. Played Back to the Future 2 or 3, and the lightning strike (it's in both films) zapped through the room and scared the shit out of the dog, didn't see her for hours afterwards. I was hooked, although I didn't upgrade much until just a couple years ago.

I think thats their problem right now though. I bet Bluray WOULD be releasing Cars and POTC2 this year IF they had their shit together. If BD50 was working and they were properly encoding titles, then HD-DVD would not be in the lead right now. It would at least be neck and neck.

This lead that HD-DVD is getting may allow them to sink BD or at least stay around for a long while.

My main concern is that the quality of discs remains high. HD-DVD obviously is putting out quality discs and delaying releases until they are finished. Sony isnt doing this and its very discomforting. If BD wins, I dont want a mentality of releasing crap just to make money from the studios.

I think Q4 of this year will be very telling. If BD is still limping into 2007, then I bet some studios will start to back HD-DVD.

I agree (and certainly hope so). I can live without Sony titles... I'd love to have stuff like Spider-Man and such in HD, but I'll live with upconverted Superbits. At this point, they probably look better than they would on BD25, MPEG2.

But to get Fox, Disney, Lions Gate on board is key. I'm hoping that we hear some announcements in Q1 07. That being said, is anyone aware of any contract restrictions with these companies? That is, did any of them agree to NOT release HD-DVDs for a certain period of time? (I can't imagine any of them would agree to that, but who knows...)

I haven't heard much lately about those supposed LionsGate rumors of releasing HD DVD.

Lions Gate would be good, but they are an incredibly minor studio compared to the big guys, and a huge studio compared to other independents. Not saying I wouldn't want them on the HD-DVD side, but I'd like to see Buena Vista and Fox move over first. To be frank, Buena Vista would be the reason I get BRD. Lost, Pirates of the Caribbean, etc.

Speaking of Sony blunders...
 

Check this article out First Blu-ray disc drive won’t play Blu-ray movies:

In retrospect, this quote is quite humorous.

From 11/29/05, News.com article:

ROTFLMAO!

Staying with MPEG-2 was for PQ and had nothing to do with the more than 140 patents Sony holds related to MPEG-2. What's really amazing is they apparently convinced studios that MPEG-2 would be good enough as well.


:lies:

I thought it was because no other codec was supported by the authoring software available right now.

Well, why develop authoring software for VC-1 when MPEG-2 gives the best possible PQ as far into the future as we can see?

And why have NO HD DVD movies been release using MPEG-2? According to what I've gathered the studios releasing to HD DVD evaluated multiple codecs and came to the conclusion that VC-1 gave the best results.

Paramount released U2 Rattle & Hum using MPEG4-AVC, but switched to VC-1 exclusively after that.

So it appears that only Sony thinks that MPEG-2 is good enough... and maybe with 50GB discs they could get it to work... who knows? But if they stick to MPEG-2/50GB discs they lose their highly touted capacity advantage. And we can all agree that it is a disaster to stick with MPEG-2/25GB discs.

Who knows, maybe one day a unicorn will gallop into a Sony lab with a 50GB Blu-ray disc on its horn.

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h1...lueKoolAid.jpg

"A View from Space with Heavenly Music" and "Guitarscape Planet" were both MPEG2.

...as well as HDNet's releases, although I guess you could make the argument that none of these are "movies".

And from what I hear, weren't all of those titles great looking?

btw, adam, nice to see you back. :)

Yea, they're generally short and no extras (that's why I specified movies).

For example, Guitarscape Planet is 80 minutes and View From Space With Heavenly Music around 60 minutes.

I don't know about the HDNet releases, but I've heard some bad things about Guitarscape and even more bad things about View From Space.

From this site's reviews on GPS:

I'd expect better from HD DVD than OTA HD.

And on View From Space:

If anything should look good in MPEG-2 it would have to be these short titles with no extras.

As per the Insiders thread on AVS, 80% of BD releases will be single-layer 25gb releases because, apparently, that's good enough.

Well, I hate to DEFEND bluray, but I think the point that was made on that thread was that right now (this year and possibly next), 80% could fit on BD25 (I dont know if I buy that though).

BUT, in the near future, that could completely change (advances in special features/lossless audio) and studios could/would want BD50.

That said, according to Amir, HD-DVD TL45 discs are conceivable for the future also though they will have to go over a couple hurdles (dvd-forum being one of them).

Well, in all honesty, we could fit movies on CD's as well. Doesn't mean the quality will be there ;)

I think the quality of BD discs will get better over time (even on BD25).

Its just sad and inexcusable that they released ANYTHING with MPEG2, poor sources and limited/no special features. Do they actually think we dont notice?? :rolleyes:

I think MI3 will be a great disc to compare the 2 formats. Already, the hd-dvd has the edge with IME.

Yes, that's exactly what they thought.

Problem is, I have a feeling that I am interested in 19 out of the other 20 percent that don't fit on BD25. I tend to watch and like long movies.

Yep, and those titles wont be available any time soon on BD.

Is everyone against 2 disc versions of longer movies? Personally, I dont mind. I know right now, the cost would be too high for BD.

It would be nice to fit on one disc, but longer movies (3+ hours) split across 2 discs is ok with me. Thats probably not a popular opinion though.

Doesn't bother me a bit. Gives me time to go pee when I get up to switch discs.

I think with DVDs we have become accustomed to associating 2 discs (or more) with a better value.

Even when reading the article today about MI3, for just a second, I was thinking, "Damn, the sd version is a 2 disc set! The hd-dvd and bd are only 1 disc". Then, I came to my senses.

Honestly, I'd rather they fit it all (the movie) on one disc. You can put the extras on another. But BD can't even get one shorter movie on one disc and have it look good. Doesn't help the problem at hand right now.

It depends on the movie for me. For something like Gone With the Wind, I don't mind, since it's four hours long, not three. Also, GWTW has a two-act structure with an entr'acte at the beginning of the second part. That makes it much easier to accept a break than a movie like Titanic, which stops and starts fairly abruptly.

Very true....going back to the days of intermissions.

As a kid, I always loved the intermission in Where Eagles Dare.....dont know why.

Robocop has been delayed. wonder if this means all the rest of the MGM titles will be delayed?

from TBB:
just a little Blu-ray-related FYI: Sony has informed us that because the distribution of MGM titles has moved to 20th Century Fox, they'll no longer be releasing the Blu-ray Disc version of RoboCop. It's been pulled from their schedule. Look for it to be rescheduled for release by Fox later this year, once Fox officially announces their first Blu-ray Disc releases.

My guess is it may have something to do with the terrible quality, after reading the review.


I don't mind switching discs. No big deal to me. :shrug: I'd rather not, but it wouldn't turn me off....unless it was 1 hour into a movie like Spiderman or something, or even worse, just to see the last 20 minutes of a movie like that because of the size constraints of BR. That would be stupid.

Since everyone is giving their opinion on this...

I hate discs where you have to switch. I've held off for years in buying certain DVDs because they were flippers simply for this reason. That's why I didn't get the newest version of Titanic.

Needless to say I would not like to see my HD movies split across discs.

The only exceptions being movies with an intermission built in (i.e. Gone With the Wind, Ben Hur). And I did make an exception for LOTR EE editions... but I hope that doesn't carry forward into HD DVD all the same.

Since HD discs (should) have the space, there is no reason to suffer anymore with 2 discs. I hope the industry finds a way to get these movies on one. I waited for years for someone to put out a changer with a quality picture so i could throw both discs in at once and at least save some trouble, but no one has yet and apparently never will. I just watched ROTK again today, it's just annoying to have to swap.

Although, I prefer the high quality video (like the LOTR EEs) and would rather have 2 discs than suffer crap. I have several movies on 2 discs, or flippers.

I'm more concerned with 99% of the movies that are not 3+ hours. Blu-Ray is still having Video and Audio problems with those. :)

I have a feeling the theatrical cuts will be on 1 HD-dvd, while the EE's will continue to use multiple discs with better PQ. I have no problem with either, as long as they don't come out looking like Robocop did. Regardless of how they decide to do it the end result on my display is all I am going to care about.

New Blu-ray Drive Can't Play Commercial Blu-ray Movies

Sony's Blu-ray format has had its fair share of problems recently, with news that the Samsung BD-P1000 player had a chip problem and the first head-to-head comparisons giving HD DVD a slight advantage.

But yesterday, Sony announced a desktop PC Blu-ray drive, the BWU-100A, that can't play commercial Blu-ray movies, according to CNet.

Sony officially announced its BWU-100A product at its "Experience More 2006" event in Sydney yesterday, all the while acknowledging that there's significant room for improvement before the product is viable for integration into media centre PCs.

Vincent Bautista, Sony's product manager for data storage, told CNET.com.au that due to copy protection issues and lagging software development, the drive will only play user-recorded high-definition content from a digital camcorder, and not commercial movies released under the BD format.

Bautista says that one of two reasons for this is the fact that commercial content is encrypted with High-Bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP), which can only be decrypted using a HDCP-compliant graphics card that offers DVI or HDMI connections. Since there are currently no PCs for sale offering graphics chips that support HDCP, this isn't yet possible.
The drive will be available this month, costing $1399 Australian dollars.

Speaking of the format war, a research group has spent time and money determining that consumers will be confused and turned off by multiple HD formats.

Market research analyst Screen Digest also forecast that only $11 billion of the total $39 billion expected to be spent on video discs by 2010 in the United States, Europe and Japan will be generated by the competing high-definition formats, Sony Corp.-backed (6758.T) Blu-ray and Toshiba-supported (6502.T) HD-DVD.

"The net result of the format war and the publicity it has generated will be to dampen consumer appetite for the whole high definition disc category," Screen Digest analyst Ben Keen said.