Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > DVD Discussions > HD Talk
Reload this Page >

Black Hawk Down & Layer Cake BD50 (11/14)

Community
Search
HD Talk The place to discuss Blu-ray, 4K and all other forms and formats of HD and HDTV.

Black Hawk Down & Layer Cake BD50 (11/14)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-26-06 | 12:14 PM
  #76  
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Blu-Ray: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Petition
Yes. Four titles with TrueHD out of the how many released? Yeah, I take issue with that. You don't need bias to see that we, as consumers, are being jipped.
Old 09-26-06 | 12:17 PM
  #77  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Dallas, TX
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Yes. Four titles with TrueHD out of the how many released? Yeah, I take issue with that. You don't need bias to see that we, as consumers, are being jipped.
CJ made a good point about Corpse Bride...he said that since it was their first stop-motion movie, they gave more to the pic bitrate to be cautious. This was WHV's call.

So, there are alot more factors than you think.

You complain about hd-dvd, but you dont even speak of the fact that the BD version didnt include an uncompressed track either!

Oh, we are in a BHD thread....ill stop digressing
Old 09-26-06 | 12:17 PM
  #78  
kvrdave's Avatar
DVD Talk God
 
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 86,231
Received 44 Likes on 26 Posts
From: Pacific NW
And now I have to admit that I really don't care much about TrueHD or any of the other audio formats. My ears are not nearly as good as my eyes, though. I actually think my iPod sounds great.
Old 09-26-06 | 12:18 PM
  #79  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 11,957
Received 17 Likes on 14 Posts
From: Pa
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
Cj just told me that Corpse was pushing the bandwidth on hd-dvd and that the disc size didnt have anything to do with it. He said its probably 80% full.
I wonder what problems they had with bandwidth. The topic has been discussed too much on AVS but I would think the live action movies with TrueHD like Troy/Batman/Superman Returns would take up more bandwidth than Corpse Bride?
Old 09-26-06 | 12:19 PM
  #80  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Dallas, TX
Originally Posted by DthRdrX
I wonder what problems they had with bandwidth. The topic has been discussed too much on AVS but I would think the live action movies with TrueHD like Troy/Batman/Superman Returns would take up more bandwidth than Corpse Bride?
Read my next post and maybe that will answer it.
Old 09-26-06 | 12:20 PM
  #81  
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 15,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: NYC
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
Read my next post and maybe that will answer it.
Your next post?

What was this one? The trailer?
Old 09-26-06 | 12:22 PM
  #82  
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Blu-Ray: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Petition
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
CJ made a good point about Corpse Bride...he said that since it was their first stop-motion movie, they gave more to the pic bitrate to be cautious. This was WHV's call.

So, there are alot more factors than you think.

You complain about hd-dvd, but you dont even speak of the fact that the BD version didnt include an uncompressed track either!

Oh, we are in a BHD thread....ill stop digressing
But I was talking about both formats. I don't know why people keep thinking that TrueHD is a HD DVD only audio codec. Incased you missed the announcement, Dolby said they would have 7.1 TrueHD in the PS3. The TrueHD track would be for both discs! I wouldn't care that the BD disc didn't have an uncompressed track as long as it had a TrueHD track.

Edit: missed your earlier post.
Old 09-26-06 | 12:25 PM
  #83  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 11,957
Received 17 Likes on 14 Posts
From: Pa
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
Read my next post and maybe that will answer it.
I gotcha. Sorry Rock I should read everything before I reply now.

Anyway, I'd prefer better PQ anyway over SQ. I'm just surprised this title was an issue for WB.
Old 09-26-06 | 12:26 PM
  #84  
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Blu-Ray: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Petition
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
Cj just told me that Corpse was pushing the bandwidth on hd-dvd and that the disc size didnt have anything to do with it. He said its probably 80% full.

He said that WHV decided to give more bandwidth to the picture.
Anyways, why arent you complaining about the BD version not having a TrueHD or uncompressed track??
That is pretty insane if they are maxing out bandwidth!!!

Of course, that might be the bandwidth avaiable for VC-1 rather than the HD DVD limits. I don't think this was ever addressed as a potential issue with going with VC-1.
Old 09-26-06 | 12:26 PM
  #85  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Dallas, TX
Originally Posted by joshd2012
But I was talking about both formats. I don't know why people keep thinking that TrueHD is a HD DVD only audio codec. Incased you missed the announcement, Dolby said they would have 7.1 TrueHD in the PS3. The TrueHD track would be for both discs! I wouldn't care that the BD disc didn't have an uncompressed track as long as it had a TrueHD track.

Edit: missed your earlier post.
Ah, I didnt realize that you were speaking of both formats.
Old 09-26-06 | 12:29 PM
  #86  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,830
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Mpls, MN
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
TrueHD is an EXTRA on HD DVD. it's not a requirement, IMHO.
Thank God your HO is not gospel, Freak. Quality audio is not an extra. And IMHO, you should not consider it so. There still hasn't been a disc that would make me drop everything and go buy either format. It's looking like there won't be for some time. Esp considering the discs that do have this are only including 30 year old lossless tech so far.

Rock, Josh,
DD and DD+ can have the same bitrate on anything. DD+ adds better compression to fit more in that bitrate. And it adds 2 channels. That is the only difference between these two codecs. (I should say it adds many channels, limited to 2 more on HDDVD/BD)
Old 09-26-06 | 12:30 PM
  #87  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Dallas, TX
Originally Posted by Spiky
Rock, Josh,
DD and DD+ can have the same bitrate on anything. DD+ adds better compression to fit more in that bitrate. And it adds 2 channels. That is the only difference between these two codecs. (I should say it adds many channels, limited to 2 more on HDDVD/BD)
Excellent...thanks for the info
Old 09-26-06 | 12:53 PM
  #88  
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 15,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: NYC
Originally Posted by Spiky
Thank God your HO is not gospel, Freak. Quality audio is not an extra. And IMHO, you should not consider it so. There still hasn't been a disc that would make me drop everything and go buy either format. It's looking like there won't be for some time. Esp considering the discs that do have this are only including 30 year old lossless tech so far.
Who said that the current audio specs are not "quality?" Certainly not *I*.
Old 09-26-06 | 12:57 PM
  #89  
Adam Tyner's Avatar
DVD Talk Reviewer/ Admin
 
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 31,680
Received 2,789 Likes on 1,854 Posts
From: Greenville, South Cackalack
Originally Posted by joshd2012
That is pretty insane if they are maxing out bandwidth!!!
It really is. I'm curious what would cause this.
Old 09-26-06 | 01:05 PM
  #90  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Dallas, TX
Originally Posted by Adam Tyner
It really is. I'm curious what would cause this.
Well, I dont want to put words in his mouth.

He said to me "pushing the bandwidth" and josh said "maxing out the bandwidth", that may not necessarily mean the same thing.
Old 09-26-06 | 01:06 PM
  #91  
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Blu-Ray: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Petition
Originally Posted by Adam Tyner
It really is. I'm curious what would cause this.
I'm thinking it may be the computational limitations of the hardware. These advanced codecs are much more taxing on system resources than MPEG-2, and they may have hit a limit of what the players can process without drop-outs or skipping. Just a thought. I somehow doubt they are pushing the bandwidth limits of the format, as they are set high for MPEG-2 playback.

I would like to post on AVS and get Amir's take, but I don't want to call out CJ like that and quote him without him posting it.
Old 09-26-06 | 01:12 PM
  #92  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Dallas, TX
Originally Posted by joshd2012
I would like to post on AVS and get Amir's take, but I don't want to call out CJ like that and quote him without him posting it.
Yes, if you do so, please do it generically, id rather not lose CJ's confidence.

I dont think anything he said to me on this subject is really "in confidence", but just in case.
Old 09-26-06 | 01:15 PM
  #93  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,830
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Mpls, MN
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
Who said that the current audio specs are not "quality?" Certainly not *I*.
Me. After I first listened to DVD-Audio and SACD 3.5 years ago. TrueHD is essentially DVD-A. PCM 96/24 is essentially the same, and DTS-HD-MA is at least as good.
Old 09-26-06 | 01:18 PM
  #94  
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Blu-Ray: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Petition
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
Yes, if you do so, please do it generically, id rather not lose CJ's confidence.

I dont think anything he said to me on this subject is really "in confidence", but just in case.
Exactly why I won't be posting anything. It is his information to post, and if he feels he can post it, he will.
Old 09-26-06 | 01:20 PM
  #95  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Dallas, TX
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Exactly why I won't be posting anything. It is his information to post, and if he feels he can post it, he will.
He is a real nice guy....so if you have a specific question, im sure CJ wouldnt mind a pm. I bet he could answer it for you.
Old 09-26-06 | 01:36 PM
  #96  
lizard's Avatar
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 7,944
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
From: the Western Slope, Colorado
Originally Posted by joshd2012
BD has a lot of titles with uncompressed PCM. HD DVD has 4 with TrueHD.
BD also has a lot of titles with poor PQ as well as many with plain old SD DVD sound codecs. All the HD DVD titles I have seen at least have DD+. I would guess that TrueHD will become more common on HD DVD releases going forward.

The good news is that newer BD releases seem to have pretty good PQ and some, at least, have PCM audio. Why Sony refuses to use modern compression codecs for both picture and audio is a mystery to me.

However, I entirely agree with you (and kvrdave) that PQ and AQ are more important than extras. Nevertheless, why not have both? Using modern codecs they could do that, or, at the very least, they could include a second disc for extras. Instead they are releasing substandard discs. I just don't get it.
The Dolby Digital track on BD is the same bitrate as the DD+ track on HD DVD. The difference is that HD DVD limited their DD tracks to 448Kbps (?) and BD did not. So they are both running at 640Kbps. The "+" is just a marketing scheme to make you think you are getting more when you really aren't.
Spiky beat me to it on this one, so I assume that it is now clear that the compression algorithm is much more important than bit rates.

More to the point, I use DD+ and the difference between that and plain old DD (or DTS) is truly stunning. Whether Dolby TrueHD will be a noticeable improvement over DD+ on my system I look forward to checking on when I get my copy of Batman Begins in a couple of weeks.
Old 09-26-06 | 01:46 PM
  #97  
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Blu-Ray: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Petition
Originally Posted by lizard
BD also has a lot of titles with poor PQ as well as many with plain old SD DVD sound codecs. All the HD DVD titles I have seen at least have DD+. I would guess that TrueHD will become more common on HD DVD releases going forward.

The good news is that newer BD releases seem to have pretty good PQ and some, at least, have PCM audio. Why Sony refuses to use modern compression codecs for both picture and audio is a mystery to me.

However, I entirely agree with you (and kvrdave) that PQ and AQ are more important than extras. Nevertheless, why not have both? Using modern codecs they could do that, or, at the very least, they could include a second disc for extras. Instead they are releasing substandard discs. I just don't get it.
Spiky beat me to it on this one, so I assume that it is now clear that the compression algorithm is much more important than bit rates.

More to the point, I use DD+ and the difference between that and plain old DD (or DTS) is truly stunning. Whether Dolby TrueHD will be a noticeable improvement over DD+ on my system I look forward to checking on when I get my copy of Batman Begins in a couple of weeks.
The DD and DD+ streams on BD and HD DVD are exactly the same. You are correct that DD+ compresses better, but that also means that quality can be slightly worse than DD, atleast according to Dolby.
Old 09-26-06 | 01:50 PM
  #98  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,830
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Mpls, MN
Well, DVD-A brings tears of joy to my eyes. And then tears of sadness when I think of it dying. And that's with Klipsch speakers!

Keep in mind that TrueHD and LPCM are still only giving you CD audio at this time on HDDVD/BD. One disc has LPCM 48/24, still not up to spec. Although for most things I rate CD PCM above DD/DTS. They (TrueHD & DD+ as currently used) are probably very comparable.
Old 09-26-06 | 02:00 PM
  #99  
darkside's Avatar
DVD Talk Legend
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 19,879
Received 11 Likes on 8 Posts
From: San Antonio
Originally Posted by joshd2012
The DD and DD+ streams on BD and HD DVD are exactly the same. You are correct that DD+ compresses better, but that also means that quality can be slightly worse than DD, atleast according to Dolby.
I have yet to find a single DD+ track that was anything but superior to the DD track. I definitely wouldn't buy a Blu-ray player that didn't fully decode DD+. DD+ holds up very well to the TrueHD tracks I have heard on Phantom and Troy.

It would be nice if we could get full 96/24 audio, but I doubt they want us to ever have a copy of the movie that close to perfect.

Last edited by darkside; 09-26-06 at 02:05 PM.
Old 09-26-06 | 02:06 PM
  #100  
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Blu-Ray: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Petition
Originally Posted by darkside
I have yet to find a single DD+ track that was anything but superior to the DD track. I definitely wouldn't buy a Blu-ray player that didn't fully decode DD+.
You've compared the DD+ track on HD DVD with DD track on Blu-Ray? Because the standard DD track on HD DVD can't be higher than 448Kbps, which is why they use DD+.


Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.