|
Unfortunately, this is becoming the JoshD vs. DVDtalk thread.
|
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
Unfortunately, this is becoming the JoshD vs. DVDtalk thread.
|
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Not using a subwoofer, yeah, that makes me more considerate.
I have a 200w sub (not the greatest) and I dont disrupt my neighbors. |
Alrighty then...In other news...
http://www.hdtvuk.tv/2006/10/brits_may_spend.html Brits may spend more on HD DVD than Blu-ray An online retailer taking pre-orders for high definition disc players and content has claimed that UK consumers are spending more on HD DVD than they are on Blu-ray. Play.com says that pre-orders made on its website favour HD DVD over Blu-ray by 2 to 1, whilst content leads by 3 to 1. Play.com is offering the Toshiba HD-E1 HD DVD player at £450 and the Samsung BD-P1000 Blu-ray player at £950 (£50 below list price). What isn't clear is how many pre-orders have been taken for hardware and discs: unless people have been grossly mis-sold the idea of HD formats, then we have to assume that these are HDTV owning consumers. Play.com also aren't taking into account any pre-orders for the Sony PS3. Whether this should be taken into account is questionable. Yes, it sports Blu-ray but it's also a games console, and that's still the primary reason most people will buy it. Whether the HD DVD crowd can get too excited by this news is another matter, as everything is still operating on a much slower level, it seems, in the UK. Though the PS3 isn't (legally) hitting the UK until March next year, HD DVD may not get that much of an advantage because of it. |
I have a 900w sub and I don't disrupt my sleeping wife directly above it. And our floor is thinner than most apartment buildings. Yet I still feel the bass.
|
Originally Posted by Spiky
I think you mean "vs reality".
He is a pro Sony guy which is okay, up to about 10 years ago everything I owned was made by Sony, but when he has to spin and lie to make Sony and their technologies look good he discredits himself totally. Every once in awhile it looks like he might stop doing it, but next thing you know he is right back at being a mindless fanboy. You have to give Sony credit though. Their fans really go all out to support them. Even beyond reality and common sense. |
I think Josh has finally moved into Blitz territory.
|
Originally Posted by Spiky
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: Yes I use TV speakers at the moment (spending $3K on a 2.1 system is not as important as getting the $3.5K TV I want at the moment), but doesn't mean I have to settle for less now just because I won't take advantage of it today. I bought a 1080p player today that will last me as long as I own the format, not because I own a 1080p TV yet, or that one BD title uses TrueHD right now, but because I plan on using it in the future. Everyone has become to complacent with having "good enough" right now so they can repurchase the material later when it gets better. I want the best right now, and I feel that I am getting that with Blu-ray. |
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Everyone has become to complacent with having "good enough" right now so they can repurchase the material later when it gets better. I want the best right now, and I feel that I am getting that with Blu-ray.
According to YOUR logic, you are sacrificing pq with BD. The difference between you and me?? I want it all. Extras included. |
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
Most reviews show that current BD releases are usually worse picture quality than hd-dvd. Some are at least equal. So, where is your logic??
According to YOUR logic, you are sacrificing pq with BD. |
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Show a review. Name a title. IIRC, every single title on both formats has looked exactly the same of both formats.
"I wasn't expecting to see much difference in video quality between the two formats with 'Rumor Has It...', yet the two discs did bear noticeable differences, with the HD DVD boasting better detail and a more film-like look." http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/rumorhasit.html "In our first head-to-head comparison, we found the HD DVD to be superior, but only slightly. We noticed a few noticeable compression artifacts and an overall darker cast on the Blu-ray, leaving the HD DVD presentation to be more consistently pleasing. " http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/trainingday.html Funny, but now that the WB releases are using VC-1, they are similar to HD-DVD. |
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
Most reviews show that current BD releases are usually worse picture quality than hd-dvd. Some are at least equal. So, where is your logic??
According to YOUR logic, you are sacrificing pq with BD. The difference between you and me?? I want it all. Extras included. And even then, I don't know any reviews that said a BD-only title was equal to HD DVD. |
So the logic is to give up a slight bit of picture quality on an expensive TV to gain a slight bit in audio quality that you don't have equipment to take advantage of?
Wow, just Wow. Also, I would mention all the BD exclusive discs released during the first two waves that had downright awful picture quality. There is no HD DVD to compare them to, but many were not much better than the standard DVD version. Again, I don't see where anyone wanting it all could argue they are getting it all with BD. |
Originally Posted by joshd2012
IIRC, every single title on both formats has looked exactly the same of both formats.
|
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
Here are a couple...
"I wasn't expecting to see much difference in video quality between the two formats with 'Rumor Has It...', yet the two discs did bear noticeable differences, with the HD DVD boasting better detail and a more film-like look." http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/rumorhasit.html "In our first head-to-head comparison, we found the HD DVD to be superior, but only slightly. We noticed a few noticeable compression artifacts and an overall darker cast on the Blu-ray, leaving the HD DVD presentation to be more consistently pleasing. " http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/trainingday.html Funny, but now that the WB releases are using VC-1, they are similar to HD-DVD. Training Day "After much comparison I was hard pressed to see a distinct difference between this MPEG 2 presentation (confirmed by Warner) and their previous HD VC1 presentation on HD DVD." - Home Theater Spot Once you remove the Samsung NR factor, you remove any difference. |
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Training Day
"After much comparison I was hard pressed to see a distinct difference between this MPEG 2 presentation (confirmed by Warner) and their previous HD VC1 presentation on HD DVD." - Home Theater Spot Once you remove the Samsung NR factor, you remove any difference. |
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Once you remove the Samsung NR factor, you remove any difference.
|
Originally Posted by bboisvert
I see you make this assertion often -- even in reference to titles that haven't even been released yet -- but the sites that review the discs seem to find differences. I don't think I've ever seen a site that has said that two titles looked "exactly the same" across formats.
On Tomb Raider: "Comparing this release with the HD DVD revealed little appreciable difference despite an older, less advanced, but more refined codec being used." MI:3: "It’s possibly the most technically perfect, visually stunning high definition presentation we’ve seen from either format yet." Sahara: "This was another one that was virtually too close to call when comparing to the previous HD DVD." Aeon Flux: "I’ve spent the past six hours straight doing back and forth comparisons on several of Paramounts discs. So, I’m starting to get a little punchy. But, I could discern no distinguishable difference between this and the HD DVD using Panasonics new BD player, the XA1, and the VP50 deinterlacing the 1080i feeds from both." 16 Blocks: "Warner did an exceptional job with the HD DVD and this one is equally impressive in sight and sound." There was also an article I posted earlier that I can't find comparing the Paramount releases saying they were both the same. Its in this thread... somewhere. |
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Training Day
"After much comparison I was hard pressed to see a distinct difference between this MPEG 2 presentation (confirmed by Warner) and their previous HD VC1 presentation on HD DVD." - Home Theater Spot Once you remove the Samsung NR factor, you remove any difference. "The HD DVD released a few months ago is one of the finest discs on that format, its popping High Definition imagery so vivid you feel like you could just step into the movie. The Blu-ray isn't quite that good, but it's close. " Of course, Sony's stance?? Blame it on the Samsung player. Funny that this problem wasnt even addressed in the latest firmware. |
Originally Posted by Vipper II
On what do you base that conclusion? Hard data, please. I want a link to a reputable reviewer that states, "The Samsung player was directly responsible for any difference in picture quality in earlier comparisons between the two formats." Just a link and your speculation won't cut it.
Originally Posted by Chad Varnadore
I'm not finished evaluating yet, but so far the only difference I've been able to ascertain with any certainty between the two players (aside from the Panny offering a lot more user adjustments and the promise of TrueHD and DTS-HD), is that the Panny is showing more shadow detail. It looks like the player is affecting the gamma curve. Black level crushing that I was seeing from the Sammy on titles like Stealth appears almost dramatically improved. I was also a little more satisfied with House of Wax and 16 Blocks would probably score a 5 now instead of a 4.5 for video. I need to look at The Great Raid again, as crushed blacks was the only thing really holding it back from a perfect score as well.
Gamma can also impact detail in brightly lit scenes, but it's less appreciable. And increasing the gamma curve has the adverse affect of raising black levels a little, which will be more obvious on digitals than analog displays like CRT. But otherwise, evaluating the players 1080i output, I'm not really seeing a dramatic improvement over the Samsung. And I really didn't expect such, as Warner BDs already looked neck and neck with their HD DVD counterparts and Sony and Disney have put out some great titles already as well. |
I find it funny that the argument is about Blu-Ray looking just as good as HD-DVD when all the promises stated that it would look miles better in the beginning.
|
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
To quote Josh from his Training Day review...
"The HD DVD released a few months ago is one of the finest discs on that format, its popping High Definition imagery so vivid you feel like you could just step into the movie. The Blu-ray isn't quite that good, but it's close. " Of course, Sony's stance?? Blame it on the Samsung player. Funny that this problem wasnt even addressed in the latest firmware. |
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Home Theater Spot:
On Tomb Raider: "Comparing this release with the HD DVD revealed little appreciable difference despite an older, less advanced, but more refined codec being used." MI:3: "It’s possibly the most technically perfect, visually stunning high definition presentation we’ve seen from either format yet." Sahara: "This was another one that was virtually too close to call when comparing to the previous HD DVD." Aeon Flux: "I’ve spent the past six hours straight doing back and forth comparisons on several of Paramounts discs. So, I’m starting to get a little punchy. But, I could discern no distinguishable difference between this and the HD DVD using Panasonics new BD player, the XA1, and the VP50 deinterlacing the 1080i feeds from both." 16 Blocks: "Warner did an exceptional job with the HD DVD and this one is equally impressive in sight and sound." There was also an article I posted earlier that I can't find comparing the Paramount releases saying they were both the same. Its in this thread... somewhere. Also, they have LESS extras included where almost all of the hd-dvd's have at least all the extras from the sd version. Both formats have some lossless tracks (BD has a few more), but your tv speakers cant handle that anyways. ;) Yet, you claim that BD is producing higher quality discs? Someone is jaded. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Not really surprising based on the fact that Samsung puts DNR in all their products. It was a big reason to stay away from their DLPs, but I believe they fixed that with the most recent titles (made it user selective).
|
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
Whats funny is that NO bluray releases have surpassed its HD-DVD counterpart as far as PQ. As ive shown, some were a bit worse.
Also, they have LESS extras included where almost all of the hd-dvd's have at least all the extras from the sd version. Both formats have some lossless tracks (BD has a few more), but your tv speakers cant handle that anyways. ;) Yet, you claim that BD is producing higher quality discs? Someone is jaded. :rolleyes: |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:06 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.