I'm really happy with the A1. A little quicker load times is not going to sway me at all. I agree with some of the others that I would much rather invest my money right now in discs and save hardware upgrades for as long as possible.

Ranked by whom? I think you'll find the overwhelming majority of consumers would rather have very good audio and a healthy assortment of extras vs. great audio and no extras.

It makes me wonder if all the BD supporters who so vehemently defend BD for having little to no extras would feel that way if they actually GOT them from the beginning.

But I do think we've gotten off track here a bit.

Many, many people.

Dear lord, Josh, we've danced this dance so many times. People care about extras. YOU may not care about extras, but people do. HD DVD offers it, BD has had a history of stripping them. This is a problem for BD. As for Superman, I'm mad as hell it's missing features. I may not buy it. It's unacceptable on either side.

If BD is having a problem getting a full length feature on BD 25 in MPEG-2 with PCM, why do you think they could get a full length feature in MPEG-2, PLUS extras that could in fact be longer than the movie itself with in MPEG-2 with PCM? No matter which way you cut it, you're looking at two discs. So where's the BD advantage?

And why are you such a proponent of MPEG-2 anyway? It's less efficient, period. Why do you want to create a more expensive hardware solution to a problem that has a currently existing software solution? Can the space hogs. We can get equal or better PQ with less space and equal audio with less space. To argue that it's better to waste space needlessly makes no sense.

And some extras aren't available in HD, to be honest. I'd rather get those Superman documentaries from the 70's/80's with all that rare footage than something brand-spanking new.

I also recently asked about extras and although all have been MPEG2 before, they won't always be in the future. They may take those masters and encode them in VC1 which will mean even LESS space is being used. To be honest, I could care less about watching extras in HD. As long as the movie is on there in HD with great quality, that's all I care about as far as HD is concerned.

Also, extras are mentioned as a key characteristic of Blu-ray on blu-raydisc.com here (under capacity).

I like to have the extras so I'm not losing anything from me SD versions.

HD DVD fan at AVS:
PQ and AQ: 263
Extras: 6

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=728833

PQ and AQ way more important than extras. Just read the posts.

That's a technical board. Some people there spend more money on HT equipment than I make in a year. If you polled people, asking which they would prefer: a format with great PQ/AQ, and extras, or a format with the same PQ/AQ but without extras, how many of them would opt for the second? Also, the poll on AVS supposed that extras simply being present degrade the PQ/AQ, which we know they don't. It's really only an issue for BD, because HD DVD so far has been able to port the extras.

I promise you that neither format will be able to survive for long without prominent and abundant extras.

Yes, I'd expect that a forum with "Audio" and "Video" in its acronymal name would lean more towards audio and video. There's probably a DVDExtrasForum.com out there somewhere that'd have contradictory results.

Pointing to a poll about "Video + Audio > Extras" isn't what I was arguing anyway. I'd put money on the fact that most people buying HD formats are most interested in video quality (read the posts!), and after that:

Of course, I think a format should excel on all accounts, but in the minds of most, I believe most people would rather have a very good DD+ track (and these tracks have been very well-received) and a slew of extras than PCM audio with few or no extras. An extras-loaded HD DVD like Constantine (with IME, TrueHD, and an ungodly number of other bells and whistles) certainly indicates that it's possible to have both.

For what it's worth, from Kris Deering re: Miami Vice:

The guy who came to fix my TV said that he sees more HDMI/DVI connection problems than virtually anything else, and the way 'they' [the industry] is running things is sad, that they need to get together and decide on a technical standard. He said Sony [I think] won't even guarantee their HDMI devices will work with any other device--unless it's a Sony. If it's not, and it doesn't, you're SOL.

From what I know of the A2, it's not a quantum leap over the A1.

Something about that seems fishy to me.

Yup. PQ is probably waaaay above everything else. Sad but true. The majority of HDTVs are currently used without an audio system (TV speakers only).

True. EVEN IF they had audio systems to go along with their HDTVs, most people probably can't distinguish between DD+ and PCM anyway.

This is an old debate, but I totally agree. Most people can't tell the difference when it comes to sound. AQ is going to be the lowest on the list of priorities for most people.

I'm sticking with my A1 until I can get a decent (future) HD-DVD player for under $300. I will be picking up the 360 addon since it will really only be $170 since I intended on buying King Kong anyway.

My god I dont understand how you guys sit here and argue with Josh day after day. His logic is so flawed that it almost borders on comical. Who cares about extras? That is just a rediculous statment. While you may not care about extras there are a ton of people who do and if you cant get past your bias long enough to see that dropping extras is bad period, regardless of your overall take on them, then your just lying to yourself.

Almost every single thread you write is so biased that I cant even get through it without laughing. You try and make HD-DVD look bad at every turn and even doctor quotes to fit your belief like the bandwidth quotes you gave earlier which were clearly very different from what you were quoting.

I usually just ignore your posts as I have seen just how biased you are. Arguing with you is a pointless endeavor. If you want to believe that Sony tried getting everyone to use MPEG2 because it was superior to VC-1 in PQ then so be it. 99% of the people in here know the truth to why Sony pushed MPEG2 over VC-1 and it has nothing to do with PQ. If you want to believe that Sony using both MPEG2 and PCM on a BD25 isnt a problem then again so be it. Again most of the people on here know differently. If you want to believe that extras are meaningless and a title dropping extras because of its use of codecs isnt a problem then once again so be it.

I could go on and on with every single issue at the table right now. Bottom line you cant see 2 inches through the corporate BS that Sony has dished out since day one. You havent been objective with a single issue brought to the table so far. You sound like somebody who works for Sony and again so be it.

My big question isnt even aimed at you but is aimed at everyone else in this forum. Why do you guys even bother continuing to argue with him day after day when it is so positivly clear that he has Blu-Ray branded on his forhead and refuses to look at anything with an open mind? Its just a pointless argument when you have someone that refuses to admit when he is wrong. Sony has refused to admit they were wrong so why would Josh? Until the day comes when Sony does admit they were wrong, which is never going to come, you will never see Josh do it either. My advice to you guys is to do what I usually do, except this rare case, read josh's posts and get a good laugh but just dont bother to reply as it will end up becoming a senseles argument which will go on and on.

PS..

I feel bad for PS, because he has totally missed the point and wrote an essay to boot.

I'm not sure what dreamworld people are living in, but the majority of people who buy HD content fit the demographic of that board. J6P doesn't spend $500 on a DVD player, or $300, or even $200. The people who are buying HD players and HD discs are the ones who want the highest possible video and audio quality. If I can get that on BD, why isn't it available on HD DVD?

You are actually proof of the opposite. You are listening to your BD player through your TV speakers. Even many people on this board with a surround sound system don't have a high end receiver or speakers. Most people are going to put extras above PCM or TrueHD, because in most cases they will barely be able to tell the difference.

I just think of him as playing devil's advocate on things. He is always going to spin things to favor Sony, but that is okay. Everyone knows what he is doing and can see through it. You could guarantee if HD DVD was the one dropping extras he would be all over the format and bragging how BD was better because it had all the extras.

You're not reading what anyone's saying on that damned board nor this one, though. No one is saying they want sub-standard audio. Why you're so insistent on assuming that, I have absolutely no idea.

I am the exception. I live in a condo, so a surround sound system is pointless when I can't crank it up. Though even with my crappy TV speakers (which may be replaced by my Boston Acoustics 2.1 computer speakers) I can hear a difference between DD and PCM.

I am not saying that anyone would. I am saying that sacrificing lossless or PCM audio for extras is a damn shame, on either format. I am not satisfied with "good", I want the "best".

Since I'm the resident A/V Nerd at work and in my circle of friends, I get asked very frequently for HDTV recommendations. Some combination of video quality and price are first, and...always, always, always...the follow-up question is if the built-in speakers are good. I wouldn't think people would drop three grand on a plasma and use the factory speakers, but they do. Every once in a while, someone'll have a cheap home-theater-in-a-box, but as many people as I know with high-def displays, borderline-no-one has floor standing mains, a big sub, etc.

You're just one person, though, and despite your insistence to the contrary, that's not representative of HT enthusiasts as a whole. Yes, everyone, if asked, would want the highest audio quality, but I also think the overwhelming majority of people would take a marginal hit in audio quality to get extras. No one's complaining about the quality of Dolby Digital Plus audio.

To AVS posters. Not to the general public.

Keep in mind, as of right now, outside of a select few IME titles and Universal's Tokyo Drift, there's been nothing "new" in extras. I'd say that Tokyo Drift is truly the only HD disc that does anything new with extras. IME just packages them differently (the content is still there in DVD, just not on the screen simultaneously).

Click's extras on HD don't count because that's a PQ/QA improvement of extras. The content itself (like in IME) is not new.

So... The question of "are extras important?" can't really be answered right now because the studios have not provided anything new. We'll see more about this in a year.

Anyone have any info on why Universal went with AVC for the Interpreter?

Re: the poll that Josh is quoting.

It's a poll about whether PQ/AQ is more important than extras.

Well, no SHIT quality is more important. Hell, even *I* voted for PQ/AQ but that doesn't mean that I'm about to buy a "barebones" HD disc without good reason. And BD's quality ain't good enough to warrant it.

The difference is that HD DVD can get that high quality PLUS all the extras. BD can't. With HD DVD you don't have to choose one or the other. With BD, you do.

This is complete and utter BS. I have a photography studio that has neighbors and am unable to play loud music or watch movies at high volume due to thier request for me to keep it down. I still purchased a reciever and surround sound outfit as even played at normal levels a suround sound system absoltly blows away standard TV speakers. Anybody who thinks that you have to play a surround sound system super loud to get the positive effects from it is in dramland which again you obviously are. Nothing you say makes any sense. Bottom line it doesnt matter if your volume knob is set to 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 20, 30 etc... There is absolutly no comparison between TV speakers and a system set up to a reciever. Just another post by you that defies all logic.

PS..

Cliff Stephenson posted some speculation as to why on AVS.

According to High-Def Digest, the company line looks to be that this was an experiment a la Paramount's Rattle and Hum and isn't indicative of future plans.

Speak for yourself. I care about them and there is NO reason for these new formats to exclude them.

I dont know why they dropped the extras from Superman hd-dvd....odd, but its the only one that I can think of. BD has done it ALOT more.

BD50 would be fine for extras or a second disc. Makes no difference to me. Again, NO reason not to include them.

Josh lives in a condo so he can't crank it up? I have a 6.1 surround system and I live in a complex with 8 apts on every floor. Means nothing.

No your not. I have a second floor apartment. I dont crank it up and I can still hear a huge difference with my surround sound system.

Not a good excuse.

I guess I am more respectful of my neighbors than some.

I'll take the highest possible PQ/AQ any day over extras. BD is delivering that, HD DVD isn't. Doesn't make my purchases any more difficult.

Couldnt agree more and this is a perfect example of Josh's pathetic attempts at twisting the facts. It would be absolutly moronic to think that extras are more important than picture or audio quality especially when refering to the HD formats. With that being said that poll doesnt say anything ragarding the value of extras themselves except to say they are below that of AQ/PQ. If extras werent important then explain to me why the studios have consistantly added more and more to every single release since the format started? Why call 90% of all titles Special Editions and throw a bunch of extra content in if it werent important.

Bottom line is its about value period. People see the words Special Edition and see a bunch of extras and they are thinking they are getting a better value than the titles that arent labeled Special Editions and have no extras. While alot of people never get around to actually even watching the extras, it plays a huge part in what titles are purchased by the consumer. Everything your saying Josh flies against every single fact in the market today, but coming from you this doesnt surprise me in the least.

PQ and AQ are important but if you even think for a millisecond that extras are unimportant then you just dont understand the home video market at all. The entire two disc set was spawned from exactly what I have just described. You used to be able to find one or two 2 disc sets. Now they flood the market. Thats pretty impressive for something that isnt important. Blah, whats the point of even trying to explain this stuff to you. Its pointless.

PS..

That has nothing to do with it. You can still hear great sound and not disrupt your neighbors.

You just dont get it. :rolleyes:

We all want the best possible pq/aq. BUT, there is no reason for them to exclude extras. They can provide them on a separate disc if needed. Just like standard DVD.

You are the most biased person on this board.

BTW - HD-DVD is providing very high quality pq/aq....How you can say BD is and HD-DVD isnt, just shows even more bias.

OMG this just gets funnier and funnier. What is it exactly that HD-DVD isnt delivering? Your now accusing the format that has wiped the floor with BD so far of not delivering. Ok guys I am done. I broke my dont respond to Josh rule and it has getten absolutly nowhere. Again I dont know how you guys do it, its like arguing with a child who would never admit in a hundred years they were wrong. He will continue to twist everything he sees to fit what he is trying to say. Its completly rediculous and I for one am done trying to convince someone of something that is so obvious that it basically smacks you in the head.

PS...

If you don't have a lossless audio track (or PCM) that mirrors the studio master (whether that be 48/16 or 48/24) then the release is being held back. If you don't want to realize that, then that is your personal problem that you have to deal with.

I visit like 5 different HD forums and Josh is without a doubt the single most biased person that I have come across yet. He is in a completly different league than all of the other Pro BD people that I see on the other forums.

as a last comment on this topic, I absolutly love extras especially commentaries and anything to do with the actual making of the movie. I have picked up alot of info from extras that I have incorporated into my own still photography. On a funny note one of the most useful commentaries that I have ever come across was on Charlies Angles as they had the director of Photography on one of the tracks and he went into awsome detail on how he lit the people including giving the actual gel numbers for different lighting tricks. Thats when I started using a 3/4 daylight to tungston conversion Gel for doing architectural portraits. I absolutly love extras and would never settle for what Sony has done so far by releasing bare bones releases. This is supposed to be a step up as a format not a step down and a format is not just PQ but everything that is brought to the table extras included.

PS...

Oh, so using crappy TV speakers now makes you a better person than the rest of us? That's some interesting logic there.

What color is the sky on your planet? Are the clouds made out of cotton candy?

rotfl
Amazing. You have absolutely no idea, and I dare say no one can respect anything you say. You argue about AQ yet use TV speakers?? My god. It's embarrassing to even read this stuff after all the discussion this forum has had on the topic of quality. :eek: Mirrors the master.....that would be such a great one-liner at an all-audiophile comedy club. Every day it gets a little deeper. :crap:

Not using a subwoofer, yeah, that makes me more considerate.

Blue. No.

Studio masters are commonly 48/24, but some films are 48/16. Blu-ray is providing this on multiple fronts, while the best HD DVD has done is 48/16 TrueHD on a few titles.